pap

No need to seek. You'll get there in the first series.

Well, only the fact that I've said that Lou is a girl. I was pretty clear on that. Bucks was there too, and we'd had a bit of previous on the PS4/XBOX thread, so there was no reason for us to collectively bullshít. It wouldn't even be an issue if more people had turned up at the Old Farmhouse, but hey, I bet that was a master plan of mine too, and that I've been running the Bucks Saint account as controlled opposition for several years! Seriously UJ, at least when I entertain conspiracy theories I go big.

Correct. I wouldn't have been the first, haven't really changed my mind on any of it, but did start taking much of that discussion to other sites. I even apologised for the timing of the Woolwich thread. Rightly or wrongly, whenever I've discussed conspiracy theories, I've been motivated by my guiding principles, which is generally speaking, to find the answers. In contrast with someone who say, believes the literal word of the Bible, more than any new age crap in particular. The pictures of Boston and Woolwich you saw today, re-introducing everyone to those horrors, were motivated by Tim wanting to get to me. Assuming he has the right of it, is he not using the suffering of others to prosecute a personal vendetta?

Stable in the sense that you had a single point of contact, borders were defined, internal security largely achieved, a member of the UN, bound by international law on pain of international sanction. Iraq, like Libya, was stable, had a coherent command structure and internal security. I know Libya supplied the IRA back in the day, but neither country was a haven for assorted extremists that both devolved into after Western "help". You can line-item atrocities if you want, just as you can with many dictatorships, including some of those that we support. The rest? Strawman stuff not discussed before and not worth discussing now, and further insults. All I'll say is that you devote a lot of time to someone you consider his stupid/ignorant/whatever-it-is-this-lunchtime inferior. Almost all of it, in fact. I'm sure bletch could back that up with paperwork or something.

FWIW, Lou, I lapse into an unofficial amnesty with every poster after a bit, even Tim. That said, if boys wanna play, I can play back. I've stated this time and again.

Your point is that ISIS wasn't enabled by the invasion of the once-stable countries that they make their home in. That it was US support of Saddam that enables ISIS now? Let's roll with that a little, shall we? Would ISIS exist if the US were still supporting Saddam? It was the destruction of Saddam's regime, not support of it, which enabled ISIS. You're not a moron, but you'll continue to look like one if you keep being contrary for contrary's sake.

One of the main reasons I started posting new threads in the Lounge was to dilute Dune's mix of threads about Rhodesia, Gibraltar and/or the particular subset of people he didn't particularly like this week (scousers, gypsies, etc). He was bounced off the site for implied racism, iirc. Alps is still here, and isn't really a troll, more a magnet for unimaginative fúckers with nowt to say suddenly thinking of something after one of his provocatively depressed posts. Gets far more abuse on here than he ever dishes out. Barry was a ceaseless, interminable wind-up - and through simple forum judo, got me a good 'un (I thought he was dune under a new identity. He wasn't). I've never seen a post count accumulate so quickly. Bounced off here unfairly, I reckon. Glasgow was a bit more subtle, but as soon as you knew his MO wasn't worth weighing in on any of the football threads. Most of them began with an innocuous enough question, but he'd end up subtly doing down the Saints, to the collective squeals of the usual suspects who get overly upset about that sort of thing.

I'm not sure where I stand on fat-ist stuff. As a teenage podgster, I know how it feels to be called names such as "big fat jellywobbler", particularly if the person dishing out the abuse cannot easily be quieted with a beating. So yes, I felt bad - but I ate a load of shít back then. It was totally my fault. I know some fat people have genuine medical issues though, so it is a thorny issue. And yes, Bear is correct that many of those attacked will take it out on the tuck shop. I think as long as we clearly state our policy on "who ate all the pies", making it clear that any derision is not meant for the "no fault of their own" camp, fatism would be okay, because its a choice, innit? If someone became a smackhead, looked like a smackhead and had the píss out ripped out of them for being a gaunt motherfúcker, they'd have no cause to complain, would they? Why special rules for iced bun junkies?

So basically, fúcking about in parts of the world they've no business being in? Doesn't sound like much of a "defence" brief.

What a load of crap. Sectarian divisions were stoked up by the occupying forces following the invasion. I know you've made a few propaganda films for the SAS and the British government. Did you ever do the one where two SAS members were caught by Iraqi coppers, dressed as Arabs, driving a car with a load of bombs in the back? It's a shame if not. The tale has a rousing conclusion, with the valiant British forces rolling over an Iraqi police station to get their faux-insurrectionists back. http://johnpilger.com/articles/return-of-the-death-squads-iraqs-hidden-news

Can you rate all the -ists in the order they should be sorted out, please?

Funny. Didn't realise anywhere in Europe was at war, or that any European countries had led wars. What are Europe's battles, exactly?

I recognise that some Germans are very uncomfortable about militarisation given their relatively recent past. It's also worth pointing out that Germany has been leading efforts to try to halt further escalation of conflict in Ukraine. However, it's equally important to recognise that history didn't begin in 1945. While Germany itself is a relatively new entity (I'm speaking of initial formation, not "reunification"), those people have been kicking arse for centuries. Their modern day equivalents know how to graft and at some point, maybe not in our lifetimes, the Germans won't feel stigmatised about having armed forces.

The German army was limited to 100,000 men after 1918. Before then, it was arguably the most impressive army the world had ever seen. History shows us that the Germans are capable of re-militarising, if push comes to shove.

Of course it's America's fault. ISIS operate on formerly stable territory, "freed" from that stability by Western-led intervention, such as Iraq or Libya. They wouldn't get to operate in those countries if either Saddam Hussein or Gadaffi were in power, and certainly wouldn't be able to flog Iraqi oil on black markets. Fair play, the UK and France mostly acted bi-laterally on Libya, but general US policy in the region was the enabler. I doubt we'll ever find out full details of various countries' involvement with ISIS, but a simple answer to the OP is "yes". It is America's fault, because no other country is pursuing a foreign policy which involves invading countries on the other side of the world, and no other country has been as much of an enabler for what ISIS now has.

I've mostly been reading non-fiction for the past year or so. I'm reading "Now It Can Be Told" by Philip Gibbs, the post-war memoir by a journalist that was seriously hampered during hostilities. Excellent book. Going to look at a German perspective next.

Ah cool. For a moment there I felt a mild disturbance in the Force, as if a few attention seekers suddenly cried out in vain. Thanks for setting me straight.

I have no idea why you think the idea of a German-led* army being used as a bulwark against Russia might be a bad idea * Just extrapolating current German EU dominance, somewhat provocatively.

I quite like the idea that a group of you convene to discuss new threats that may come onto SaintsWeb. Presumably one of these is hypo, right? It's a bit like when the old optimates used to get together to discuss potential tyrants. But not much.

That's probably what the Romans thought millennia ago. How far civilised thinking has progressed!

Have you seen what "The Bad Thing" is yet?

The wondrous EU project continues to state objectives. Jean-Claude Juncker has called for the establishment of an EU army. He reckons it would help the EU to show Moscow that it is serious about defending its values. http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/mar/08/jean-claude-juncker-calls-for-eu-army-european-commission-miltary We can laugh at his rationale all we like, particularly the part about EU values. For me though, the establishment of super-state institutions like this are the most worrying thing about the EU, as I believe that they have the potential to get the UK into all kinds of bother it wouldn't normally attract. Also, if these armed forces follow the command structure of other armies, it is likely the executive that'll have power on when, where and who they fight. This'll be the unelected EU executive. Fortunately, this is a step too far for Cameron and co. They've ruled any British contribution to an EU army out for now, but these things have a habit of being knocked back a bit before making their way back onto the agenda. Continent-wide army controlled by unelected foreigners. Is it for EU?

Anyone that doesn't have to stump up transfer fees and can afford it on that basis, presumably. Agent talk, innit?

Well, it pleases anyone (and I'm sure it will do) Henderson has just rejected an 80K p.w. offer with Liverpool, with his agents claiming that he could get twice that sum elsewhere. What goes around....

I knew that they tunnelled for trenches. The Germans' trenches were particularly well dug out. But as a means to get to the other side, nope.