|
Pissflaps posted:Nice little vote winner this. Well done Jeremy. e: 100 years ago on the 24th of January a poo poo load of British soldiers had been evacuated from Gallipoli a couple of weeks ago and loads of them are chilling in hospitals missing various parts of their body. Seaside Loafer fucked around with this message at 10:33 on Jan 24, 2016 |
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:23
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:02 |
|
|
Seems a bit poo poo to suggest that Argentina should have control over the Falklands and the people who live on them (who are almost unanimously in favor of British rule) because they really want them. Otherwise by that logic we should annex Benidorm.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:29
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:While I agree with you that its politically bad because the xenophobes will react with outrage is it actually bad idea in of of itself, what do you think? I think it's a bad idea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:31
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:I think it's a bad idea.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:34
|
|
|
Jose posted:MP's are finding they have an unusually high rate of interaction with the general public This is pretty much the definition of a self selecting sample so I think that extrapolating it to the entire population of MPs is not valid.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:35
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:Why is that then. Because it rides roughshod over the democratically, overwhelmingly expressed wishes of the Falkland Islanders to solve a problem that doesn't exist to nobody's benefit other than the Argentinians.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:37
|
|
|
Lord of the Llamas posted:This is pretty much the definition of a self selecting sample so I think that extrapolating it to the entire population of MPs is not valid. I'd be pretty interested to read the breakdown of the results by political stance.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:37
|
|
|
What's the word for when you accuse somebody else of doing exactly what you're doing?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:39
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:I'd be pretty interested to read the breakdown of the results by political stance. I bet one of them was Lucy Allan lol
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:44
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:What's the word for when you accuse somebody else of doing exactly what you're doing? Errr, tu quoque? Projection?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:45
|
|
|
Cerebral Bore posted:What's the word for when you accuse somebody else of doing exactly what you're doing? Hypocrisy. OwlFancier posted:Errr, tu quoque? No, that's the fallacy of claiming that being a hypocrite voids your ability to make criticisms of others. Renaissance Robot fucked around with this message at 10:50 on Jan 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:47
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Because it rides roughshod over the democratically, overwhelmingly expressed wishes of the Falkland Islanders to solve a problem that doesn't exist to nobody's benefit other than the Argentinians.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:49
|
|
|
Not really since if you once give Argentina any legal authority over the islands that's a wonderful pretext to gently caress with them in a thousand different ways in order to entice them to leave.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:51
|
|
|
quote:the last time the same seats were contested in England, in 2012, represented a “high-water mark” for Labour under Ed Miliband in the aftermath of George Osborne’s “omnishambles” budget, and that Labour cannot realistically expect to improve on those results. This is sort of obviously correct - Labour lost significant ground after 2012, which probably hasn't been regained since. But it's bizarre to claim that understanding that means 'raising the white flag' - people aren't going to stop campaigning because some losses are likely! Also, anonymous shadow cabinet sources are the worst kind of traitorous bastard. Seems Dugher wasn't the only one.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:51
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:So why not. Because the people who live there don't want it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:53
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Not really since if you once give Argentina any legal authority over the islands that's a wonderful pretext to gently caress with them in a thousand different ways in order to entice them to leave.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:54
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:See first sentence. I think you're very naive.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:54
|
|
|
That's a kind way of putting it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:55
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Because the people who live there don't want it.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:56
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:If the fantasy agreement where nothing changes is explained to them they might not give a gently caress. Yeah this definitely might happen.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:57
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Not really since if you once give Argentina any legal authority over the islands that's a wonderful pretext to gently caress with them in a thousand different ways in order to entice them to leave. Why do you think Argentina wants them to leave? Also, on a spuriously related note: it doesn't really get pointed out enough here, but the Argentinian government isn't the same one it was in 1982.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:57
|
|
|
OvineYeast posted:Why do you think Argentina wants them to leave? Argentina wants the islands.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:58
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Argentina wants the islands. Yes, but not for much more than (potential) resource rights in the surrounding waters (and populist nationalist dick-waving). I really don't think they give a poo poo about expelling the islanders.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 10:59
|
|
|
OvineYeast posted:Yes, but not for much more than (potential) resource rights in the surrounding waters (and populist nationalist dick-waving). I really don't think they give a poo poo about expelling the islanders.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:01
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:Argentina wants the islands.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:02
|
|
|
Is there not a legal loophole whereby Britain cedes their claim on the Antarctic to Argentina, which thereby makes Argentina unable to claim the Falklands?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:03
|
|
|
forkboy84 posted:I don't think hitting MPs with a brick is very appropriate. Even Tories. The Tories are only complaining about being abused and killed because they don't like being treated like children.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:They could give a toss about the islands they want control of the territory for resource extraction, im failing to see why the UK and Argentina cant divvy it up reasonably
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:07
|
|
|
Oil exploration around the Falklands is a new development that hasn't amounted to anything so far. I don't think the position of the UK or Argentina is driven by possible oil extraction. That's just lazy reasoning.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:09
|
|
|
Guavanaut posted:Is there not a legal loophole whereby Britain cedes their claim on the Antarctic to Argentina, which thereby makes Argentina unable to claim the Falklands? Argentina is currently unable to claim the Falklands any more than they could lay claim to any other random set of islands.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:11
|
|
|
OwlFancier posted:Seems a bit poo poo to suggest that Argentina should have control over the Falklands and the people who live on them (who are almost unanimously in favor of British rule) because they really want them. Having been there, I thought we already had.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:14
|
|
|
Oberleutnant posted:That's an extremely simplistic, incomplete and shortsighted analysis of the role the Falklands play in Argentina's political and public discourse. e: as in if fantasy agreement happens, the residents become duel Argentina/UK citizens, nothing changes for them, trade agreement, shared use of resources and territory and Argentina gets to say to we won a massive victory to its people while nothing actually changed Seaside Loafer fucked around with this message at 11:23 on Jan 24, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:17
|
|
|
IceAgeComing posted:im pretty sure the person who attacked an mp with a samurai sword must be a goon or a redditor Seaside Loafer posted:While I agree with you that its politically bad because the xenophobes will react with outrage is it actually a bad idea in of of itself, what do you think? yes because redrawing borders (on paper or in reality) solely because someone says "i want more land" is a thing that ended after the world wars i mean except i/p but that is a problem of its own
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:28
|
|
I CANNOT EJACULATE WITHOUT SEEING NATIVE AMERICANS BRUTALISED!
|
blowfish posted:yes because redrawing borders (on paper or in reality) solely because someone says "i want more land" is a thing that ended after the world wars have you seen what china are doing with the south china sea?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:28
|
|
|
Jose posted:have you seen what china are doing with the south china sea? yeah and i've also seen everyone agree that china is in the right there~
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:30
|
|
|
basically china is acting like argentina in that situation except they have an actual military you can't just ignore
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:31
|
|
|
Pissflaps posted:Argentina is currently unable to claim the Falklands any more than they could lay claim to any other random set of islands.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:31
|
|
|
blowfish posted:basically china is acting like argentina in that situation except they have an actual military you can't just ignore also they're artificially building islands rather than claiming that existing islands are theirs
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:32
|
|
|
Seaside Loafer posted:I can only say that im well aware that Argentina nationalism plays a big part in this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:32
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 16:02 |
|
|
blowfish posted:yeah and i've also seen everyone agree that china is in the right there~ By everyone who do you mean exactly, or does my sarcasm detector need a good kicking?
|
|
#
?
Jan 24, 2016 11:37
|
|
