One for Des

Heh.

No, no conspiracy theories, no asking why they did it, just saying they
*did*.....

 

I'm quite concerned the Tories cancelled a new train order in the early
eighties. Bastards, people should remember that about them when
eulogising about the good old days.

 

public transport - pah: "any man, having reached the age of 26, who
finds himself a passenger on a bus, must consider himself a failure in
life"

 

You're probably right.

Labour *also* cancelled the STOL transport that was intended to supply
the Harrier in its forward bases, which was another daft move.[/QUOTE]

Sounds emminently sensible to me. I don't think the country had money
to throw around on toys for the boys in the 1970s

 

I thought it was 28?

 

Would you like to borrow a sweeping brush for all that glass...

 

Glad I'm not the only one dropping his 'h's.

Never knock some one because he is better informed than you

The super sonic Harrier was cancelled after it was developed but not
implemented (daft move). The after burning rear nozzles (wot made it go
super sonic) were bought by the US as a 'job lot' off of RR and fitted
to the AV8B. It went super sonic no problems.

 

People who helped build them?
People who hate to see British ideas being thrown away.
People who hate to see governments **** up our aircraft industry then go
cap in hand to the yanks to buy their out dated kit.

 

F1-11 mostly paid for but never delivered.
Phantoms that didn't work properly.

The country didn't have that sort of money to throw away.
Or was it jobs for the boys?

 

I've seen it quoted as 26, 28 and 30.

 

I've got one handy, thanks - regular occurance and all that...

 

Oh, for fucks sake, how can you compare attacking a fucking unarmed
Greenpeace boat and a heavily armed warship in the general area of a
conflict?

And, lets be honest; the Belgrano was flanked by two destroyers *just*
outside the exclusion zone (ok, 30 or so miles); they were there as part
of the conflict and had been 'testing' the British defences and had been
warned.

There is *no* comparison to be made between the Rainbow Warrior and the
General Belgrano beyond the fact that they both floated and eventually
sunk.

 

<applause>

 

spouted the following in

You'd make a shit diplomat.

To stay out of the exclusion zone, yes.

True, there was only one fatality in the sinking of the Rainbow Warrior.

And the Rainbow Warrior was moored up, whereas the Belgrano was steaming
*away* from the exclusion zone it was outside....

Oh but then Maggie managed to make sure that the submarines log was
'lost' didn't she. [1]

[1] The murderous old hag.

 

tallbloke said...

We were at war with Argentina. Fair game in my book.

 

It was a territorial action to regain control of an imperial territory.
Hardly a war. Necessary force yes. Mass murder, no.

IMO It was a warcrime Maggie should still be doing time for.

The Ship did not represent a military threat at the time.
It was a seriously old and slow tub anyway.
It was outside and steaming away from the exclusion zone.
400 hundred lives were needlessly wasted.
It was revenge killing for the exocet hit on the Sheffield.

 

This is my feeling on the matter. There's a point that all's fair in
love and war, but that's a cliche not a truism. There are ways of doing
things, and I don't think that sinking the Belgrano was quite cricket.
The crowing of The Sun was appalling.

 

# Gotcha, you Argie bastard, gotcha, you fucking spik,
# Gotcha, you latin bender, gotcha, you dago prick...

 

I'll never forget the slagging Thatcher got from that housewife on
'Nationwide'. Her attempts to deflect the onslaught just dug her deeper in.

She made sure she didn't have to face questions from the hoi polloi after
that.

 

Champ said...

Ohh sorry, we were involved in a...

<makes quotation marks in the air>

...."conflict"