UK British News Megathread - aka CWCissey's news thread

https://news.sky.com/story/row-over-new-greggs-vegan-sausage-rolls-heats-up-11597679 (https://archive.ph/5Ba6o)

A heated row has broken out over a move by Britain's largest bakery chain to launch a vegan sausage roll.

The pastry, which is filled with a meat substitute and encased in 96 pastry layers, is available in 950 Greggs stores across the country.

It was promised after 20,000 people signed a petition calling for the snack to be launched to accommodate plant-based diet eaters.


But the vegan sausage roll's launch has been greeted by a mixed reaction: Some consumers welcomed it, while others voiced their objections.

View image on Twitter


spread happiness@p4leandp1nk
https://twitter.com/p4leandp1nk/status/1080767496569974785

#VEGANsausageroll thanks Greggs
2764.png


7
10:07 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See spread happiness's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


Cook and food poverty campaigner Jack Monroe declared she was "frantically googling to see what time my nearest opens tomorrow morning because I will be outside".

While TV writer Brydie Lee-Kennedy called herself "very pro the Greggs vegan sausage roll because anything that wrenches veganism back from the 'clean eating' wellness folk is a good thing".

One Twitter user wrote that finding vegan sausage rolls missing from a store in Corby had "ruined my morning".

Another said: "My son is allergic to dairy products which means I can't really go to Greggs when he's with me. Now I can. Thank you vegans."

View image on Twitter


pg often@pgofton
https://twitter.com/pgofton/status/1080772793774624768

The hype got me like #Greggs #Veganuary

42
10:28 AM - Jan 3, 2019
See pg often's other Tweets
Twitter Ads info and privacy


TV presenter Piers Morgan led the charge of those outraged by the new roll.

"Nobody was waiting for a vegan bloody sausage, you PC-ravaged clowns," he wrote on Twitter.

Mr Morgan later complained at receiving "howling abuse from vegans", adding: "I get it, you're all hangry. I would be too if I only ate plants and gruel."

Another Twitter user said: "I really struggle to believe that 20,000 vegans are that desperate to eat in a Greggs."

"You don't paint a mustach (sic) on the Mona Lisa and you don't mess with the perfect sausage roll," one quipped.

Journalist Nooruddean Choudry suggested Greggs introduce a halal steak bake to "crank the fume levels right up to 11".

The bakery chain told concerned customers that "change is good" and that there would "always be a classic sausage roll".

It comes on the same day McDonald's launched its first vegetarian "Happy Meal", designed for children.

The new dish comes with a "veggie wrap", instead of the usual chicken or beef option.

It should be noted that Piers Morgan and Greggs share the same PR firm, so I'm thinking this is some serious faux outrage and South Park KKK gambiting here.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
. Same thing applies to Canada, UK, and the EU today.

I've been deep in the Iran news thread today and yet the sentence "We used to be allies with the USSR before they went full commie" is still the most retarded thing I've read all day. Congratulations.
 
Assisted dying bill has been assisted into death

Held up in the Lords and ran out of time in the current Parliament. They're saying they'll try again, but with all the shit flying around Starmer, I'm not sure he has the political capital to re-introduce it in the next session. Not that he won't try, somehow.
The assisted dying bill should never pass because there's maybe 3 quadrospazzed people in the UK who want to kill themselves but can't.

If you've been diagnosed with an aggressive form of Alzheimers then just jump off something really really tall... if you don't forget what you're doing midway through.
 
A man who raped a Sikh woman in her house, on suspicion she was Muslim, has been handed a life sentence. I am pleased to see HM Courts finally take sexual assault seriously and hand out life sentences, however I must ask, why did whitey get a life sentence and pakis get 2 years for rape? Mr Pepperall of Birmingham Crown Court gave the sentence.
Setting out the aggravating factors, the judge says Ashby's drug use, previous offending, using the stick as a weapon and the impact his actions had on the victim staying in her own home are firmly on his mind in his judgement.
He says Ashby's neuro disorders "do not start to even explain these offences" and adds that the court has found "no evidence" of a serious underlying mental illness.
Couldn't even pull the mental helf or druggie card. Damn!

We used to be allies with the USSR
We were friendly with the Russian Empire because George and Tsar Nick were cousins (2nd cousins?), as well as the Kaiser. We were never allied with the USSR, we just gave them weapons. Russian soldiers were raping English and American soldiers when they were held in POW camps together.
Interestingly, the people of Coventry consider themselves 'friends of the Russians' due to the siege of Stalingrad (Volgograd), and the similarities between the two cities during WW2- industrial towns, working towns, reduced to ash by the Nazis. They raised money for medical supplies for the Russian citizens with an embroidered tablecloth. Russian soldiers (including Lyudmila Pavlichenko) toured Birmingham and Coventry to consolidate these friendships. The people then considered themselves 'sister-cities', beginning the tradition of twin cities which has now been bastardised beyond all recognition. Coventry later built the garden of International Friendship, not too far from the bombed out church.
 
Honestly the assisted dying thing pisses me off so much because it's like there's a bunch of really wet faggots who want the ability to kill themselves but are more concerned about the pain of killing themselves over the whole "I will be dead forever and feel nothing from that moment onwards". These faggots probably send their MP letters about mundane complaints because they can only ever do anything if it follows the twenty five step legal due process, which is why the thought of just fucking doing it fries their little brains.

Like who cares if the way they die is the most horrific and painful thing they've ever experienced, they'll be dead like 20 seconds later. Do they think they'll respawn as some Japanese underaged catgirl or something? If they can't survive the pain then that's the whole fucking point of dying, right? Or do they want the very concept of death to be as painless as going to the movies or something.

To top it off, there's a good segment of assisted dying fans who are out of shape and in their 60s, they could literally slip on a wet floor and have their reward. The whole thing is bonkers all the way down and the consequences of the bill passing would be staggering. We already have shitshows where DNR requests aren't fulfilled, would you honestly want to see your nan pink juiced because the NHS got the wrong Doreen?
 
I can understand the arguments in favour of assisted dying, but when I see examples from Europe and Canada of fundamentally healthy people choosing to end their lives because of mentall illness I don't think there are enough legislative safeguards in the world to prevent that ultimately happening here.

For people in this situation there are alternatives: going abroad, DIY, doctors over prescribing morphine. If they can't afford the trip to Switzerland set up a charity and ask for donations.

I think it's a Pandora's box of an idea and one that should remain closed.
 
I am pleased to see HM Courts finally take sexual assault seriously and hand out life sentences, however I must ask, why did whitey get a life sentence and pakis get 2 years for rape?
I’m not even mad. Raping them is the worst way to get rid of brown people, in fact it makes the problem worse.
 
Why is the guy saying that the 'far right' part was a joke? That's not a 'just kidding' that is literally what is happening? Those are the violent far right thugs.
Ah you see "far right" means they are white people who were involved in building civilization. If they aren't white people then they can't be "far right", at best they are <error file not found>
 
News time.

Bunch of Labour activists charged with vote rigging.
Four Labour activists have been charged by police after an investigation into claims that a party database was manipulated to help fix a candidate selection.
Joel Bodmer, 40, who stood for selection as Labour's candidate for the Croydon East constituency, has been charged with perverting the court of justice in relation to allegedly altering phone records.
The process to select Labour's candidate for the parliamentary seat was abandoned in November 2023 amid alleged irregularities, and re-run four months later without Bodmer taking part.
Bodmer and three others - Shila Bodmer, 41, former Southend councillor Gabriel Leroy, 24, and former Croydon councillor Carole Bonner, 69 - have been charged with conspiracy to commit an offence under the Criminal Law Act and the Computer Misuse Act.
All four have been suspended from the Labour Party pending the outcome of an investigation.
A Labour Party spokesperson said: "These are incredibly serious charges. When complaints were first raised with the Labour Party we conducted a thorough internal investigation and we referred the matter to the police as soon as potential criminal wrongdoing was identified. We cannot comment further while legal proceedings are ongoing."
Frank Ferguson, head of the Crown Prosecution Service's Special Crime and Counter Terrorism Division, said: "Our prosecutors have worked to establish that there is sufficient evidence to bring this case to court and that it is in the public interest to pursue criminal proceedings.
"We have worked closely with the Metropolitan Police Service as it has carried out its investigation.


"We remind all concerned that criminal proceedings against these defendants are active and that they have the right to a fair trial.
"It is vital that there should be no reporting, commentary or sharing of information online which could in any way prejudice these proceedings."
All four defendants will appear at Westminster Magistrates' Court on 19 May.

Civil resistance activists criminals charged for planning crimes.
Seven people from an activist group calling for higher taxes on the super-rich have been arrested by police on suspicion of conspiracy to steal.
Police confirmed that six women and one man were detained in Salford, Greater Manchester, on Sunday over what they said was a coordinated plan to steal from high-end stores.

Take Back Power, a civil resistance activist group, confirmed its supporters had been arrested. All members of the group remained in police custody for questioning, it said.
Police in Manchester said the group were believed to have been training for a mass shoplifting campaign, intending to steal from high-value stores and supermarkets and redistribute the stolen goods.

“We are taking robust action to disrupt this type of organised criminality, and it will not be tolerated,” said Greater Manchester police’s assistant chief constable, Steph Parker.
Take Back Power describes itself online as a “nonviolent civil resistance group” aiming “to put the 99% in charge” through citizen assemblies. The group is calling for the government to introduce a “house of the people” with powers to tax the super-rich.
A spokesperson said: “The police are arresting people at generic training sessions that simply teach the history and principles of staying nonviolent.
“Today’s raid continues the escalating repression being imposed on nonviolent campaigns. Police have so far shut down five nonviolence sessions held by Take Back Power, in some instances raiding places of worship.”
In March, police in London said that they had arrested 15 people from Take Back Power over alleged plans for mass shoplifting. Nine members of that group were charged on Sunday with offences involving stunts at the Ritz hotel in central London last December, when manure was poured on the floor, and another incident at the Tower of London.

I panicked so I hit her with a sledgehammer
A Palestine Action activist who struck a police officer with a sledgehammer during a protest at an Israeli-linked arms factory acted to protect a co-defendant he believed was being seriously hurt, a court has heard.
Samuel Corner, 23, is accused of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to Sgt Kate Evans during a raid on the Elbit Systems facility, in Filton, near Bristol, on 6 August 2024.

Alongside Charlotte Head, 30, Leona Kamio, 30, Fatema Rajwani, 21, Zoe Rogers, 22, and Jordan Devlin, 31, Corner is also charged with criminal damage, with respect to the destruction of drones, computers and other equipment.
The trial at Woolwich crown court has previously heard that Corner hit Evans in the back with the sledgehammer – while she was on all fours, facing away from him, attempting to arrest Rogers – fracturing the officer’s spine.

On Wednesday, Corner, who is autistic and squeezed an anti-stress toy while giving evidence, said that before he struck Evans he was anxious, scared and panicked, having been sprayed “straight in the face” with Pava spray – similar to pepper spray – and heard his co-defendants screaming.
He said he had also been taken aback by the presence of security guards on the factory floor as he was told beforehand they would not attempt to confront the activists.
Asked by his barrister, Tom Wainwright, why he swung the sledgehammer at Evans, Corner said: “To protect. I heard someone screaming … and I thought she was being seriously hurt by security.”
The barrister asked Corner what he had hoped to achieve in “bringing the sledgehammer down in the way you did”.
In response, he said: “To protect her.”
He added: “I would never want to seriously hurt anyone.”
The former University of Oxford linguistics and philosophy student said he was “very scared, especially for the others”.
Corner, who has been held in prison since being arrested on 6 August 2024, also said he did not realise police officers had arrived as opposed to just security guards. He told the court he had never been arrested, been in a fight nor used violence prior to the incident at the Elbit factory.
Asked by Wainwright what the intention of the action was, Corner said: “We intended to destroy weapons and things needed to make weapons which we believed were going to be used to cause death and destruction. We wanted to shut Elbit down, shut this facility down for as long as possible so they couldn’t make or export weapons from there.”
In cross-examination, the prosecutor Deanna Heer KC asked Corner whether as an “intelligent person” he would know that a sledgehammer was capable of causing “really serious harm”.
He replied in the affirmative, but added: “When I did this I was panicking, I was in pain, I’d just been pepper-sprayed.”
Heer asked him about his reaction when arrested for grievous bodily harm, suggesting it should not have come as a surprise to him. But Corner told the court: “I was shocked and scared because I wasn’t expecting to be arrested for that and I wasn’t trying to cause serious harm to anyone. It wasn’t something I ever saw myself doing or being arrested for or being associated with.”
Corner will resume giving evidence on Thursday after proceedings had to be cut short because he felt unwell.
The defendants deny all the charges. The case continues.
Doubling down on the above because the Guardian article above enraged me, which means it's time for the Flail.
A Palestine Action activist who hit a police officer on the back with a sledgehammer said it 'seemed reasonable to do something' at the time, a court has heard.

Samuel Corner told his trial he brought the tool down on Sergeant Kate Evans after he heard 'someone screaming' and feared they were being injured by security guards during a raid at Israel-based defence firm Elbit Systems' site, near Bristol, on August 6, 2024.

On Thursday, Woolwich Crown Court heard Corner had hit the officer after being sprayed with Pava spray, without shouting a warning and the officer had not been able to see him coming.

When asked if he thought striking Sergeant Evans was over the top, the 23-year-old admitted it would have been had he considered the consequences.

Of the officer, prosecutor Deanna Heer KC asked the defendant: 'She posed no threat to you at all, did she?'

'Well no, not to me,' Corner said.

The prosecutor continued: 'Did you hit her because you thought she was a security guard and she was complicit with Elbit?'

'No,' he replied.

'Did you think, Mr Corner, that she was fair game?' she asked.

'No,' the defendant responded.

The prosecutor asked: 'Do you agree that, whatever you may have thought, it was completely unreasonable to hit Sgt Evans with a sledgehammer?'

'I mean it seemed reasonable to do something and I had to act quickly,' Corner responded.

'Do you think it was completely unreasonable, over the top, to hit Sgt Evans on the back with a sledgehammer?' Ms Heer asked.

'Yes, if I'd thought about what that was going to do, then yes,' the defendant said.

Tom Wainwright, defending, asked: 'The prosecution's case is that your actions were unreasonable, what do you say to that?'

'I disagree,' Corner replied.

Jurors heard Corner believed one of his female friends was being 'seriously hurt' and he had acted to 'protect' her.

The defendant said he now accepted Sergeant Evans was not injuring anyone before he struck her.

Corner previously told the court he 'would never want to seriously hurt anyone', and denied it was part of a plan to use violence against people during the raid.

At an earlier hearing, Sergeant Evans told jurors she believed her spine could have been 'shattered' and feared she may have been 'paralysed' after being hit by the activist.

Alongside Corner, Charlotte Head, 30, Leona Kamio, 30, Fatema Rajwani, 21, Zoe Rogers, 22, and Jordan Devlin, 31, are on trial accused of criminal damage over the incident.

Corner, a former linguistics and philosophy student at Oxford University, denies further charge of causing grievous bodily harm with intent to Sergeant Evans.

In a character reference read to jurors by Mr Wainwright, Corner's grandfather described him as a 'gentle soul' who 'cares deeply about the injustices in the world' and 'finds any form of violence abhorrent'.

On Thursday afternoon, Leona Kamio began her evidence and told the court there had been no plan to do anything to the Elbit's security guards other than shout and training provided by Palestine Action on direct action did not include anything about the use of violence.

She said she felt 'terrified' and 'very nervous' before the incident and described Elbit as a 'very evil company'.

Jurors heard the 30-year-old was a nursery teacher at a forest school at the time of the break in and had previously been signed to Island Records as part of the band Salen.

'I still felt like what we were doing was necessary, like I came here to do something, to stop people from suffering,' she added.

'Working with children, I would have put one of their lives before any amount of property and me being tired or anxious doesn't equate to children being blown up.'

Kamio, who is originally from Swansea in Wales and said she was tasered during the incident, described one of the defence company's security guards as seemingly 'up for a fight' and 'psychotic'.

She added of the guards: 'I thought maybe they'd been told to teach us a lesson because we were protesting for Palestine.'

The trial has heard the defendants crashed into shutters outside the factory in a prison van, which was driven by Head and used 'as a battering ram'.

Once inside, they used sledgehammers and crowbars to destroy computers, drones and other equipment, and sprayed the walls and floor with red paint using fire extinguishers, the court heard.

The defendants deny all charges and the trial continues.

On Thursday, the public gallery was almost full with supporters of the defendants, some of whom wore keffiyeh scarves.

Three people were arrested outside the court after conditions were put on a protest due to take place during the hearing, including not to use amplified sound equipment for music or speech and to stay within a specified area, the Metropolitan Police said.

A spokesperson for the force said officers had attended the court that morning ahead of the demonstration, adding: 'A 71-year-old woman and a 37-year-old man were arrested on suspicion of breaching these conditions.

'A 25-year-old man was further arrested on suspicion of criminal damage and inciting racial hatred.

'They remain in custody as inquiries continue.'
I am deeply relieved I'd not been called up to jury duty for these trials because I would Uncle Ruckus quality behaviour about every last one of these "protestors."

We're not antisemitic but some of those Jews had it coming. Polanski explaining the nuance behind the Hamas supporters he is pandering to.
Zack Polanski has called on politicians to treat antisemitism with “consideration, care and nuance” as he accused Keir Starmer of trying to play political games with the issue.
The Green leader’s comments come after the prime minister accused him of playing down recent antisemitic incidents. Polanski’s party is facing increasing scrutiny over recent comments by some candidates and members.

Some Green members and officials have expressed concern to the Guardian about what they say is the recent arrival of members who are vehemently anti-Israel to an extent that crosses into antisemitism, and the difficulties of countering this in a highly decentralised party.
Speaking on a visit to a synagogue, Starmer labelled Polanski “disgraceful” for saying it was important to distinguish between an actual threat to the Jewish community in the UK after recent arson attacks and the “perception of unsafety”.

Labour have also criticised Polanski for saying in another interview that he had been wrong to previously criticise Jeremy Corbyn for not properly dealing with antisemitism as Labour leader, and that the issue had been weaponised at the time.
Asked about the latter remarks on a campaign visit to Glasgow on Friday, Polanski – who leads the Greens in England and Wales but was helping the Scottish Greens’ campaign – said: “In terms of the weaponisation, it’s important to have absolute clarity that antisemitism definitely exists, and sometimes people will say things that are antisemitic.
“At the same time, I’ve seen reports in the press of things that people have supposedly said that are antisemitic that absolutely aren’t antisemitic. They are pro-Palestinian. And they are very, very different things.”
Polanski added: “When people create false allegations of antisemitism, or blur the lines between challenging the Israeli government and antisemitism, as a Jewish person, that makes me feel a lot less safe. That makes me feel like I’m being held accountable for a country that I don’t believe has anything to do with my Jewish identity.”
He accused Starmer of “playing silly games with a really serious issue”, adding: “It’s incumbent on all politicians, particularly the prime minister at this point, to treat antisemitism with the consideration and care and nuance that a really serious issue requires.”
He added: “We’ve got into a bizarre situation in this country where a non-Jewish prime minister is attacking the one Jewish leader on a case of antisemitism.”
On reports about comments by Green candidates, Polanski stressed the need for “perspective” over what he called a “handful” of accusations among 4,500 people standing for the party in local elections across England and Wales.
He added: “That being said, we know that there’s a worrying rise of antisemitism in this country as, by the way, there is a rise of Islamophobia and hate crime generally. And so it’s really important for anyone who’s in public life, and certainly a leader of political party, so they take that seriously.”
Polanski’s comments about Labour under Corbyn have prompted accusations of complacency in the Greens about antisemitism within the party. The number of members has almost quadrupled since he became leader in September.
Many of the accusations centre on Gaza. Several Green candidates have posted comments that appear to sympathise with the Hamas attack on Israel, question the right of Israel to exist, or raise tropes about the supposed global influence of Israel and Jewish people more generally.
Some Green officials concede that the party’s highly decentralised structure can make it difficult to keep control of what members say. Vetting is still carried out by local parties, and there is at least one example of someone suspended as a general election candidate reappearing on the list for the elections on 7 May.
There is a similar lack of central control over policy motions submitted to the party’s conferences, including one put forward to the most recent event in March, which proposed that “Zionism is racism”.
One senior Green member said the sheer size of the party made its existing structures, based on direct member participation, open to abuse. “You can’t have direct democracy with 220,000 members,” they said. “The new members are a real mix, but some of them are very clearly single-issue Palestine activists who want to push an anti-Israel agenda to the exclusion of anything else.”
The party says that internal procedures are being beefed up, with a particular focus on antisemitism. “There are people meeting on a daily basis discussing this issue. It is not being ignored,” one official said. “But we have expanded so quickly, and we are fielding a record number of candidates, and so are catching up to an extent.”
The “Zionism is racism” motion was blocked at the March event, but is due to be debated at the conference in autumn.
Asked about the motion, Polanski said: “The way our members can vote on policy is a really important democratic principle. I also think the motion is a distraction [from what is going on in Gaza].”
Strange how the Guardian finds nuance when it comes to discussing the words of the Greens but seems unable to for other parties. Almost like they have a bias or something.
 
Him insulting us, trying to threaten to hand over the Falklands to Argentina (wasn't even a country when we settled it) and fucking having a go at Prince Harry and saying he, Trump, speaks for England.
Controlling territories requires you have a strong military and power. You have a larger cost of living crisis than the US. The UK is punishing free speech of its own native people in favor of illiterate Paki Islamic migrants and trying to enforce it over the US. Is that your position? no, but you can't fault the world for smelling blood in the water because your leaders are retarded and invited the turd world to shit up your country and refuse to do anything about it. Venezuela and Iran were powerful once upon a time and could still deter the US until mismanagement, corruption and failed economic doctrine made them impotent. Thats the pattern.

King Charles may not be able to deport every migrant today, but he can certainly speak out and raise the issue. The apolitical policy of Elizabeth Regina doesn't work when you have religious fundamentalists with bronze age thinking increasing in power and population.

Could the UK afford a war now, financially, politically? Could it find enough people who are willing to die only to be taxed to death for migrants gibs? Maybe, but the chances of that now are lower than 15 years ago.

Russia taught the world the truth of banal platitudes, that strong men are going to be the power holders and you better beef up your defenses and grow some spines if you want to deter them or make them back off. If you can't keep your shit tight, then its your own damn fault if you get pushed around.
Iran cannot hurt the USA militarily.
Theres lots of US bases in the Gulf states.
He's our idiot to have a go at. Not Trump's.
Your idiot decided to move to the US and grift in LA. He's fair game.
 
Controlling territories requires you have a strong military and power. You have a larger cost of living crisis than the US. The UK is punishing free speech of its own native people in favor of illiterate Paki Islamic migrants and trying to enforce it over the US. Is that your position? no, but you can't fault the world for smelling blood in the water because your leaders are retarded and invited the turd world to shit up your country and refuse to do anything about it. Venezuela and Iran were powerful once upon a time and could still deter the US until mismanagement, corruption and failed economic doctrine made them impotent. Thats the pattern.

This is all silly bullshit designed to appeal to jingoistic retards and distract from the mess Trump has got himself into with Iran. Its clearly working.

The US policy on Falklands sovereignty has been one of neutrality. It has been this way for at least 50 years, the same as it was before, during and after the Falklands war. Nothing about that has changed.

In 1982 the UK had based around 60 soldiers on the Falkland islands, and the feeling was that it was soon to be sharing or handing over sovereignty to Argentina through diplomatic channels.

Argentina jumped the gun, misjudged the mood and used their relatively competent military of the time to launch an invasion of the islands to further domestic political goals. They were swiftly taken, but they had misjudged Britain's resolve to take them back.

Since then fighter jets, anti air missiles and around 2,000 soldiers have been permanently based on the islands. Had they been there prior to 1982, Argentina could not have achieved even their limited success of the time.

Now? Argentina's military is fucked. They have no amphibious assault craft. Britain spends approximately 85 times as much on its defence budget as they do..

The UK is the world's fifth largest economy. Yes we have too many immigrants but guess what, so does the US and every other prosperous western country. Any problems with the UK's armed forces are a political one, not some structural failure of the military industrial complex. They could be quickly solved with the right political will - political will that would rapidly emerge should there be any substance to these vague social media threats.

Could Argentina one day have the diplomatic and/or military means to force the UK to hand over the Falklands? Who the fuck knows, but none of us will be alive to see it happen. Could the USA decide to military intervene, launch an attack against a nominal Western ally and kill British soldiers to give some islands in the South Atlantic to Argentina? Sure - but will it? Of course it fucking wont. If we're going to get into silly what ifs we might as well say that any attack would result in nukes dropping on Buenos Aires.


And remember in 1982 when a country launched an unprovoked attack on a NATO member state, did the leader of that state spend weeks whining about NATO failing to respond on its behalf? Of course it fucking didn't, because Thatcher could read.

Could the UK afford a war now, financially, politically?

Can the USA afford a ground war in Iran now, politically? Could it politically afford a war to defend Guam from a Chinese invasion?

Russia taught the world the truth of banal platitudes, that strong men are going to be the power holders

You think the last four years of fighting in Ukraine has left Russia more powerful than before? In what way?
 
Last edited:
King Charles may not be able to deport every migrant today, but he can certainly speak out and raise the issue. The apolitical policy of Elizabeth Regina doesn't work when you have religious fundamentalists with bronze age thinking increasing in power and population.
King Charles is a relatively unpopular monarch compared to his mother. If he decided to make overt political statements then he would seriously undermine the existence of the monarchy. Brown religious fundamentalists tend to be supported by communist, "anti-racist", anti-royalist types, who would love to see the end of the Royal family.
 
This is all silly bullshit designed to appeal to jingoistic retards and distract from the mess Trump has got himself into with Iran. Its clearly working.
Huh? This is a cope. These issues were plaguing the UK and were true even before we ever invaded Iran.
Now? Argentina's military is fucked. They have no amphibious assault craft. Britain spends approximately 85 times as much on its defence budget as they do..
We got buttfucked by tribal Afghanis, Russia is stumbling over Ukraine going into 4+ years, Iran tried to overwhelm our defenses with cheap drones. Warfare isn't what it used to be but that cuts both ways.
Can the USA afford a ground war in Iran now, politically? Could it politically afford a war to defend Guam from a Chinese invasion?
No, but heres the catch, the US spent years refining its air power capabilities so we don't have to and has enough Patriots and THAADs to yeet without skipping a beat. We may be low on them but we can ramp up production. The US was able to create a weapon specifically to hit Fordow after autistically studying the site for 10+ years. The UK's manufacturing sector has slipped out of the top 10 since the 1980s and represents a fraction of GDP compared to a few decades ago. US manufacturing has declined too , but Orange man is trying to bring it back, we also have scale on our side since the US is so big, smaller countries don't have the luxury of letting their guard down.

The chances of China invading Guam or even Taiwan now are comically low, Xi would be drawn into a messy prolonged conflict like Russia and likely lose his head due to the Chinese political system. The same cannot be said for the Falklands. The UK has Keir Starmer and King Charles as a leaders, not Thatcher or Queen Elizabeth II.

My gripe with Brits is they fundamentally don't understand how fucked they are and think that because the US suffers from the same problems they're somehow not as bad off. When the US catches a cold, the world gets the flu.

You think the last four years of fighting in Ukraine has left Russia more powerful than before? In what way?
I mispoke, Russia has lost Syria and VZ, more accurate is "Sovereignty is for those who can defend it"
 
Last edited:
King Charles is a relatively unpopular monarch compared to his mother. If he decided to make overt political statements then he would seriously undermine the existence of the monarchy. Brown religious fundamentalists tend to be supported by communist, "anti-racist", anti-royalist types, who would love to see the end of the Royal family.

King Charles is too professional to make any overt political statements like that, but if there were some sequence of events that pitted the monarchy against immigrants and their Polanski/Corbynite supporters you could expect to see that relative unpopularity go the other way extremely quickly. Nothing would polarise the public more.

This is something the USA doesn't get about the UK - they mistake lack of noise for apathy. British people are happy to live and let live and not to make a fuss. Sometimes this is a good thing, sometimes it isn't.
 
Huh? This is a cope. These issues were plaguing the UK and were true even before we ever invaded Iran.
No the sovereignty of the Falklands islands is not an "issue" that is "plaguing the UK".

No, but heres the catch, the US spent years refining its air power capabilities so we don't have to and has enough Patriots and THAADs to yeet without skipping a beat.

And the UK has spent decades beefing up its forces in the Falklands to more than match any threat Argentina represents without skipping a beat. Unless you're suggesting China or America are going to do the job on behalf of Argentina, there is literally nothing they can do.

The chances of China invading Guam or even Taiwan now are comically low,

So the same as the chance of Argentina attempting to invade the Falklands.

The UK has Keir Starmer and King Charles as a leaders,

King Charles does not lead the UK.

My gripe with Brits is they fundamentally don't understand how fucked they are and think that because the US suffers from the same problems they're somehow not as bad off. When the US catches a cold, the world gets the flu.

Your "gripe with the brits" started the moment Trump began whining about it.

I dont think my point about the USA politically affording to attack Iran or defending Guam landed home: the point is that I have no doubt that defending Guam from an aggressive act would carry a great deal of political support. A ground invasion of Iran? No, it wouldn't. That's one of the many reasons why it hasn't happened. Any military action by Argentina against the Falklands would be more like China invading Hawaii. There would be overwhelming public and political support to take any and all action necessary to repel it. Assuming that British public disinterest in supporting America's botched attack of Iran is the same as how the public would feel about an invasion of the Falklands is just ignorant.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top Bottom