Nineteen Canteen Posted 11 November, 2009 Share Posted 11 November, 2009 To be fair, I think the least we should expect of our PM is the ability to write joined up. If his eyes are that bad he should have the common sense to have his scribbles proof read. Brown is a baffoon, everything he touches turns to ****, I applaud the Sun and that woman for giving the warmongering idiot a kicking. If his eyes? I think you are the idiot. He lost the sight in one eye due to an accident playing rugby and I believe has a detached retina or something equally serious in the other which means he could go blind anytime. If he is baffoon it's because he prefers to carry out his not insignificant responsibilities ensuring the likes of you have a decent country in which to live, than take a lot of time off work to try and repair the sight in his good idea and hopefully ensure he get's to see his kids grow up. I guess 'aint' we can safely assume what option you would take? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 11 November, 2009 Share Posted 11 November, 2009 IMO you are wrong. Leave Afghanistan at our peril. +1 . The Taliban may not be there allegedly and over the border in Pakistan but what happens if the troops move out? Back over the border they will come and until that country is strong enough to stand on it's own two feet and repel the Taliban at its borders it remains a strategic hot spot to ensure terrorism in this form is suppressed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 11 November, 2009 Share Posted 11 November, 2009 I disagree, we have more than done our bit, get out now and let someone else do it. I fully support Nato's mission but how can this be fair... United States - 34,800 United Kingdom - 9,000 Germany - 4,365 France - 3,095 Canada - 2,830 Italy - 2,795 Poland - 1,910 Netherlands - 2,160 Turkey - 720 Australia - 1,350 Romania - 990 Bulgaria - 460 Spain - 1,000 Denmark - 690 Belgium - 530 Norway - 480 Czech Republic - 480 Croatia - 290 Sweden - 430 Hungary - 360 Slovakia - 245 Lithuania - 250 Macedonia - 165 Azerbaijan - 90 New Zealand - 300 Albania - 250 Latvia - 175 Greece - 145 Finland - 165 Estonia - 289 Slovenia - 130 Portugal - 145 United Arab Emirates - 25 Singapore - 9 Ukraine - 10 Luxembourg - 8 Iceland - 2 Ireland - 7 Jordan - 7 Austria - 4 Bosnia and Herzegovina - 10 Georgia - 1 Are you worried about our foreign policy and that of the UN or more concerned about the cost of your next fix? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Draino76 Posted 11 November, 2009 Share Posted 11 November, 2009 Ireland busting a gut for world peace I see. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 11 November, 2009 Share Posted 11 November, 2009 IMO you are wrong. Leave Afghanistan at our peril. Yep. Look what happened to Iraq after desert storm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BadgerBadger Posted 11 November, 2009 Share Posted 11 November, 2009 I disagree, we have more than done our bit, get out now and let someone else do it. I fully support Nato's mission but how can this be fair... United States - 34,800 United Kingdom - 9,000 Germany - 4,365 France - 3,095 Canada - 2,830 Italy - 2,795 Poland - 1,910 Netherlands - 2,160 Turkey - 720 Australia - 1,350 Romania - 990 Bulgaria - 460 Spain - 1,000 Denmark - 690 Belgium - 530 Norway - 480 Czech Republic - 480 Croatia - 290 Sweden - 430 Hungary - 360 Slovakia - 245 Lithuania - 250 Macedonia - 165 Azerbaijan - 90 New Zealand - 300 Albania - 250 Latvia - 175 Greece - 145 Finland - 165 Estonia - 289 Slovenia - 130 Portugal - 145 United Arab Emirates - 25 Singapore - 9 Ukraine - 10 Luxembourg - 8 Iceland - 2 Ireland - 7 Jordan - 7 Austria - 4 Bosnia and Herzegovina - 10 Georgia - 1 Fair play to Germany coming in at no.3 especially considering them being quite reticent in such matters for obvious reasons - Hecker and Koch me up Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swannymere Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 (edited) Fair play to Germany coming in at no.3 especially considering them being quite reticent in such matters for obvious reasons - Hecker and Koch me up Heckler & Koch are British. My Bad, now German again ;-( Edited 12 November, 2009 by swannymere Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 I may have read this wrong. Bit did someone suggest that uk forces are forces to go to afghan?? You may be right in that we follow orders. But even today, recruitment in all 3 services has not been this high for a long long time. And you will be very hard pressed to find someone who did not want to go. I know of loads who have been there and they all wanted it. You don't join th forces and hope you NEVER do anything for real. I was itching to go in 2001 and then two years later in 2003. I would go again but in my line of work, we babe other fish to fry of a nature that would make you gasp. Unfortunately I can't and won't say what that is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 I disagree, we have more than done our bit, get out now and let someone else do it. I fully support Nato's mission but how can this be fair... United States - 34,800 United Kingdom - 9,000 Germany - 4,365 France - 3,095 Canada - 2,830 Italy - 2,795 Poland - 1,910 Netherlands - 2,160 Turkey - 720 Australia - 1,350 Romania - 990 Bulgaria - 460 Spain - 1,000 Denmark - 690 Belgium - 530 Norway - 480 Czech Republic - 480 Croatia - 290 Sweden - 430 Hungary - 360 Slovakia - 245 Lithuania - 250 Macedonia - 165 Azerbaijan - 90 New Zealand - 300 Albania - 250 Latvia - 175 Greece - 145 Finland - 165 Estonia - 289 Slovenia - 130 Portugal - 145 United Arab Emirates - 25 Singapore - 9 Ukraine - 10 Luxembourg - 8 Iceland - 2 Ireland - 7 Jordan - 7 Austria - 4 Bosnia and Herzegovina - 10 Georgia - 1 I suggest that we have a professional army that is well trained and with men who will fulfill their duty. We have the will to fight and it is about time the liberals realised that just because we have it soft here you cannot let the Taliban and the arab terrorists have a free reign to train people to cause mayhem in the west. IMO it is a venus fly trap, those real fanatics are being drawn to afghanistan to try and have a pop at the yanks rather than finding their way into europe or USA to cause mayhem. I find it very sad when I see the casualties but if a few hundred deaths over a few years make us lose our will to fight for freedom, what does that tell the terrorists? Modern society (it may have been a good thing) could not stomach the first day of the Somme. We may be losing some very brve soldiers but it is interesting that we are never told how many of the taliban are taken out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 If his eyes? I think you are the idiot. He lost the sight in one eye due to an accident playing rugby and I believe has a detached retina or something equally serious in the other which means he could go blind anytime. If he is baffoon it's because he prefers to carry out his not insignificant responsibilities ensuring the likes of you have a decent country in which to live, than take a lot of time off work to try and repair the sight in his good idea and hopefully ensure he get's to see his kids grow up. I guess 'aint' we can safely assume what option you would take? Blimey calm down, no need to get abusive, we're not in the playground anymore. My point was however bad his eyes are he could have got a proof reader to check through his writing. Fact is some distraught relative was offended by his letter - whoever's fault it is, that is not good. Now if you really insist on replying, take a few deep breaths and try and leave out the insults or I will tell your mum you're being nasty. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
INFLUENCED.COM Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Now if you really insist on replying, take a few deep breaths and try and leave out the insults. Advice that maybe should have been offered to those in receipt of the letter Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 I suggest that we have a professional army that is well trained and with men who will fulfill their duty. We have the will to fight and it is about time the liberals realised that just because we have it soft here you cannot let the Taliban and the arab terrorists have a free reign to train people to cause mayhem in the west. IMO it is a venus fly trap, those real fanatics are being drawn to afghanistan to try and have a pop at the yanks rather than finding their way into europe or USA to cause mayhem. I find it very sad when I see the casualties but if a few hundred deaths over a few years make us lose our will to fight for freedom, what does that tell the terrorists? Modern society (it may have been a good thing) could not stomach the first day of the Somme. We may be losing some very brve soldiers but it is interesting that we are never told how many of the taliban are taken out. I agree, accept that I don't think it's fair that we, or the US have to pay such a high price when it is a Worldwide issue. It's not fair that so many other countries are making such a pathetic token effort. We could easily pull out all our forces and let other countries do their bit. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doublesaint Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 One person's idea of a terrorist is anothers idea of a freedom fighter, and it was not that long ago that the Taliban were part of or aligned with The Mujahadeen, who were fighting the Soviet occupation and supported by Western governments financially and in arms supplies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 One person's idea of a terrorist is anothers idea of a freedom fighter, and it was not that long ago that the Taliban were part of or aligned with The Mujahadeen, who were fighting the Soviet occupation and supported by Western governments financially and in arms supplies. Don't get this point. Just because we helped them say, 30 years ago does not mean we should turn a blind eye to what they do now.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenevaSaint Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 I agree, accept that I don't think it's fair that we, or the US have to pay such a high price when it is a Worldwide issue. It's not fair that so many other countries are making such a pathetic token effort. We could easily pull out all our forces and let other countries do their bit. We could indeed, apart from the from the fact that we're (US & UK) the main targets for these radicals due to our foreign policy decisions. As pointed out above this post, if wasn't so long ago the US were supplying the arms and training to the Afghans to fight the Russians. Lets face it, we say worldwide issue, but when was the last time the Irish, Greeks, Icelandics, Danes, Finns, Swedes etc bombed/attacked by Al Qaeeda? It's primarily a UK/US issue, the Madrid bombings were correct me if I'm designed to get the Spanish to pull out. Anyway, off topic quite alot, the letter issue has been blown out of all proportion by the gutter press scum at the sun. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GenevaSaint Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Don't get this point. Just because we helped them say, 30 years ago does not mean we should turn a blind eye to what they do now.. Double standards TDD, Double standards. We say they're now terrorists but 30 years ago the US were training them to do exactly the same thing to the Russians. Yet more shiite (pardon the pun!) foreign policy decisions by the yanks that come back to haunt them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doublesaint Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Don't get this point. Just because we helped them say, 30 years ago does not mean we should turn a blind eye to what they do now.. It is also nigh on impossible to win a war on terror, as can be highlighted by the resolution of the conflict in Northern Ireland, although even before talks were confirmed to be happening initially under John Major's government, as far back as the 1970's talks were taking place behind the scenes. It may seem harsh to say, but until the goverment or parliamentary leaders stop talking about 'missions', and 'goals', and comes out with the direct statement that British forces have been entered into a war, then maybe people can get a sense of perspective to the deaths of our forces, it is an inescapable fact that some of our soldiers will die. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
aintforever Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 We could indeed, apart from the from the fact that we're (US & UK) the main targets for these radicals due to our foreign policy decisions. As pointed out above this post, if wasn't so long ago the US were supplying the arms and training to the Afghans to fight the Russians. Lets face it, we say worldwide issue, but when was the last time the Irish, Greeks, Icelandics, Danes, Finns, Swedes etc bombed/attacked by Al Qaeeda? It's primarily a UK/US issue, the Madrid bombings were correct me if I'm designed to get the Spanish to pull out. Anyway, off topic quite alot, the letter issue has been blown out of all proportion by the gutter press scum at the sun. You've illustrated my point perfectly, it's about time we stopped acting like the World's Police and sticking our noses into places that should not concern us. Like you said - when was the last time the Irish, Greeks, Icelandics, Danes, Finns, Swedes etc bombed/attacked by Al Qaeeda? We're not a World power any more, we're just a small island a thousand odd miles away, lets stop making ourselves a target. Tell Nato we've done our bit, now it's someone else's turn to have their young men butchered. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Double standards TDD, Double standards. We say they're now terrorists but 30 years ago the US were training them to do exactly the same thing to the Russians. Yet more shiite (pardon the pun!) foreign policy decisions by the yanks that come back to haunt them. Indeed ! At various times they have given aid, sometimes clandestine sometimes overt, to Ho Chi Minh, Saddam Hussein, and General Manuel Noriega, as well as Osama BinBag Laden. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
benjii Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 I may have read this wrong. Bit did someone suggest that uk forces are forces to go to afghan?? You may be right in that we follow orders. But even today, recruitment in all 3 services has not been this high for a long long time. And you will be very hard pressed to find someone who did not want to go. I know of loads who have been there and they all wanted it. You don't join th forces and hope you NEVER do anything for real. I was itching to go in 2001 and then two years later in 2003. I would go again but in my line of work, we babe other fish to fry of a nature that would make you gasp. Unfortunately I can't and won't say what that is. Do you know about the Saints takeover? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Indeed ! At various times they have given aid, sometimes clandestine sometimes overt, to Ho Chi Minh, Saddam Hussein, and General Manuel Noriega, as well as Osama BinBag Laden. dont forget Noraid.I never mourn the death of a kennedy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 You've illustrated my point perfectly, it's about time we stopped acting like the World's Police and sticking our noses into places that should not concern us. Like you said - when was the last time the Irish, Greeks, Icelandics, Danes, Finns, Swedes etc bombed/attacked by Al Qaeeda? We're not a World power any more, we're just a small island a thousand odd miles away, lets stop making ourselves a target. Tell Nato we've done our bit, now it's someone else's turn to have their young men butchered. Perhaps our arms industry and exports come into some of it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Concerning Afghanistan, it's very much a damned if we do and damned if we don't situation. Afghanistan is a failed state, it's a black hole riddled with corruption with the American supported government as corrupt as anyone. Afghanistan is merely a battlefield where the Taliban come out to play after they've been trained up in (a lot of the time) Pakistan. This is where the root of the problem is. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Double standards TDD, Double standards. We say they're now terrorists but 30 years ago the US were training them to do exactly the same thing to the Russians. Yet more shiite (pardon the pun!) foreign policy decisions by the yanks that come back to haunt them. LOL Rambo in Rambo 3 would be THE number 1 most wanted terrorist if he was around today. (and was real) :wink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Viking Warrior Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Some good Points made nineteen "SoI hope this backfires on that odious newpaper and Mrs James (sic) who IMO have sullied the memory of every other brave servicemen and women who have paid the ultimate price and those who grieve their loss with a hell of a lot more class and dignity. Those brave men and women knew what they could be exposing themselves to when they joined up just like their loved ones so what makes Mrs Janes so special" I was saddened by what she was saying, I too thought she was being disrespectful to all those service personnel who have lost their lifes or were injured. Yes shes angry, But she seemed to have an answer for everything , Lack of equipment. She hadto buy her son boots. Well sorry what ever boots he was wearing would not of prevented the hideous injuries her late son sustained. Then theres the Helicopters. There were other casualties in that incident that took her son, While there may have been a lack of helicopters to get her son out , It is a very hospitable place to try and land a chopper in. Not only are the taliban lying in wait to ambush but there will have been other hidden IED's. Oh and dont't forget the legacy of the russians who have left un marked land minds A couple of years ago some lands were badly injuried and a couple died due to Russian land mines. When the chinnook came in its downdraft triggered even more terrible injuries. Initially it was one soldier that lost a leg not several Mrs janes would be wise to be a little more discreet about the comments she makes re her son As for the injuries, they sound horrendous and the MERT on the seen would have done their best to keep him a life, even if he had been flown back to Bastion there was probably little chance of him surviving, If you don't get to the severed femoral artery in time there is little hope. Its a shame and shes entitled to her angst at loosing her son. she needs to be more dignified in remembering her son and remember there are many more families who have lost sons and daughters or now have seriously disabled sons and daughters. We will remember them Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldNick Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Concerning Afghanistan, it's very much a damned if we do and damned if we don't situation. Afghanistan is a failed state, it's a black hole riddled with corruption with the American supported government as corrupt as anyone. Afghanistan is merely a battlefield where the Taliban come out to play after they've been trained up in (a lot of the time) Pakistan. This is where the root of the problem is. Any regime who are prepared to destroy 1000 year old heritage does not deserve to govern. The taliban did so Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Did anybody see this ? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6875376.ece Basically the Italians were patrolling a 'quiet' area, which they handed over to the French, who promptly got stamped on and had 10 soldiers killed in an ambush. Turns out, the reason it was quiet for the eyeties was that they were paying the Talebannies to not shoot at them. So much for allies ! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Lungs Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Did anybody see this ? http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/Afghanistan/article6875376.ece Basically the Italians were patrolling a 'quiet' area, which they handed over to the French, who promptly got stamped on and had 10 soldiers killed in an ambush. Turns out, the reason it was quiet for the eyeties was that they were paying the Talebannies to not shoot at them. So much for allies ! That is absolutely disgusting - what kind of country does a greasy, underhand thing like that? Fack that, at least we know the Brits or Yanks wouldn't have stood for that ****e and just wiped them out. Feel for the Frenchies there :-( ****ing hell, pandering to the enemy with bribes. Fack that. It's like paying off the school bully. Absolute b0llocks/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JackFrost Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 (edited) That is absolutely disgusting - what kind of country does a greasy, underhand thing like that? Fack that, at least we know the Brits or Yanks wouldn't have stood for that ****e and just wiped them out. Feel for the Frenchies there :-( ****ing hell, pandering to the enemy with bribes. Fack that. It's like paying off the school bully. Absolute b0llocks/ I wouldn't mind betting a lot of the Afghan tribes change sides as soon as they get a bigger pay packet. Just shows how deep the corruption is. Edited 12 November, 2009 by JackFrost Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hatch Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 That is absolutely disgusting - what kind of country does a greasy, underhand thing like that? Without even reading anything else on this thread, I would have answered that question with 'italians'. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Without even reading anything else on this thread, I would have answered that question with 'italians'. As a half Italian I reckon it's pretty clever on their part Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jeff leopard Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 That is absolutely disgusting - what kind of country does a greasy, underhand thing like that? Fack that, at least we know the Brits or Yanks wouldn't have stood for that ****e and just wiped them out. Feel for the Frenchies there :-( ****ing hell, pandering to the enemy with bribes. Fack that. It's like paying off the school bully. Absolute b0llocks/ slightly off topic, but the top US brass have admitted the main reason Iraq has calmed recently isn't the much heralded troop surge, but because the American's are paying various militias millions of dollars not to have a civil war or kill US troops. that's modern warfare (although it woudn't make such a good video game or war film). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 war is war...you dominate an opponent by any means..if that means is by the dollar bill or a bullet the aim is there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 12 November, 2009 Author Share Posted 12 November, 2009 (edited) 9,000 troops... not exactly a massive war. Wasn't it 60,000 died in one day at the somme during World War 1? But I guess that is the effect of the media! Edited 12 November, 2009 by Saintandy666 affect to effect Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hypochondriac Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 war is war...you dominate an opponent by any means..if that means is by the dollar bill or a bullet the aim is there Plus if it's saving lives then it's probably worth it. The French are just ****ed that they didn't think of it first. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 9,000 troops... not exactly a massive war. Wasn't it 60,000 died in one day at the somme during World War 1? But I guess that is the affect of the media! not many at all...and to think...a 3rd of those will be the combat element..so a drop in the ocean really.. up until recently (dont know about now) for every loss of a british serviceman there would have been 100 taliban dead... hard facts, in a hard world.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krissyboy31 Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 up until recently (dont know about now) for every loss of a british serviceman there would have been 100 taliban dead... hard facts, in a hard world.. You see, that needs to be conveyed to the British public because they seem to be ignorant to the facts that the losses (and not belittling them, because all are very, very sad) are negligible, compared to that of the enemy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yate Saint Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Chap at work is on question time tonight asking a question about this letter. Sounds like he will be chosen to ask it. I think the question is along the lines of the Sun using it as an excuse to have a go at the government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Blimey calm down, no need to get abusive, we're not in the playground anymore. My point was however bad his eyes are he could have got a proof reader to check through his writing. Fact is some distraught relative was offended by his letter - whoever's fault it is, that is not good. Now if you really insist on replying, take a few deep breaths and try and leave out the insults or I will tell your mum you're being nasty. Maybe not but is it any better to take your story to a paper and seek a bit of monetary gain and IMO muddy at best the memory of your son and show a complete lack of disrespect for all those other families who have received letters from Brown and have just accepted them for what they are. A heartfelt thank you, recognition and sincere condolences. There is only one of us in the playground and it's the one who doesn't know some basic facts about this country's PM and that having lost the sight in one eye he could lose the sight in his other. Ironic the Sun are positioning themselves as the mistake free grammar police. How many lawsuits have they settled in thier time I wonder? I don't hear myself being abusive all I hear is the sound of you back pedalling faster than Murdoch and his media empire. Still at least we get to watch the Ashes on Freeview and perhaps for the time being Cameron's landslide has been reversed on a sea of empathy for Brown. It will be good to see that unholy trinity of alliances, Murdoch, The Seedy Sun and Cameron have a little sweat for a while. Cameron's fawning over the war dead memorial yesterday was just as shameless and pathetically over the top - was he trying to smell the poppies as they are as plastic as his motives at the moment and its disgusting how our war dead are being manipulated to his considered political advantage. They have got it so, so wrong. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nineteen Canteen Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Chap at work is on question time tonight asking a question about this letter. Sounds like he will be chosen to ask it. I think the question is along the lines of the Sun using it as an excuse to have a go at the government. You mean the Sun, Tory alliance a marriage made in hell. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Thedelldays Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 You see, that needs to be conveyed to the British public because they seem to be ignorant to the facts that the losses (and not belittling them, because all are very, very sad) are negligible, compared to that of the enemy. the british public these days do not want to hear such stories... it was the norm in the 'war' but the yoghurt knitters would not like it one bit if we boasted about the hundred we kill out there Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
toofarnorth Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 I think brown is sometimes guilty of caring a bit too much and often getting overly involved. The woman wasn't happy but in most peoples opinion he had done enough. Making the phonecall to her was always only going to lead to this story running for longer as whatever he said they would have found something to pull him up on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 I don't know what all the fuss is about, because only a matter of weeks ago senior Labour politicans were telling us the Sun doesn't matter anymore and nobody reads it. The attacks on Major when the Sun switched sides last time were equally as viscious and I don't remember Mandelson (who orchestrated many of the attacks on Major) complaining then. The Sun are out of order on this letter, but the PM is a legitimate target (considering his track record) and there are plenty of other issues to highlight in order to bring him down. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
badgerx16 Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 The Sun are out of order on this letter, but the PM is a legitimate target (considering his track record) and there are plenty of other issues to highlight in order to bring him down. But how many others would be understood by their target readership ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestSaint Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 My personal opinion on this matter is that when writing a letter of condolence to parents on the death of their son, it is important that not only should a primeminister spell their name correcty but that the letter should be sincere. I am sure that Browns letter was sincere but unfortunately by allowing it to be sent with so many crossings out and errors it was disrespectful Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 But how many others would be understood by their target readership ? Quite a few I would guess, here's a starter for ten: Worst recession since WW2? (I bet unemployment dispropotionately affects Sun readers). The Sun has gone overboard on the letter issue which is at best distasteful and at worst disrespectful. Rather than focusing on the PM's spelling and grammar (and using the death of a soldier to make a point), how about focusing on his complete lack of basic economic knowledge and the fact that the country is in severely deep ****. I am almost starting to think that this whole thing is a Mandelson setup. Get the story into the media, sell it to the Sun (who would fall for it) thus creating a situation where everyone comes out feeling sorry for the Clown and the Sun not looking too good. Quite a clever way of punishing the Sun for their 'treason', and I wouldn't put it past the dark lord. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bridge too far Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 My personal opinion on this matter is that when writing a letter of condolence to parents on the death of their son, it is important that not only should a primeminister spell their name correcty but that the letter should be sincere. I am sure that Browns letter was sincere but unfortunately by allowing it to be sent with so many crossings out and errors it was disrespectful It's so easy to make basic mistakes, isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Johnny Bognor Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 It's so easy to make basic mistakes, isn't it? ... but he's not running the country, to be fair. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
WestSaint Posted 12 November, 2009 Share Posted 12 November, 2009 It's so easy to make basic mistakes, isn't it? It certainly is - but there again, I am writing on an internet forum not sending a letter to a grieving mother whose son has died Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Saintandy666 Posted 12 November, 2009 Author Share Posted 12 November, 2009 Well... the sun just got seriously bashed on question time just there. Restores my faith alot Though the conservative lady on the panel tonight didn't really say any against it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now