Discussion in 'Current Events' started by Robbo, Jun 19, 2011.
How old is she there?
My age radar is waaaayyy off.
I don't know why the 'Malvinas' has become a leftist cause. Argentina's claim and the reasons behind it centre around nationalist/populist bullshit. If anything, the left should be more comfortable with Britain's position, as it is based around protecting peoples' way of life and right to self determination.
I would then and I would now. Her daughter Florencia (on the right) takes after her.
Spoiler (Move your mouse to the spoiler area to reveal the content)
The Moustache girls!
Naomi "Blood Diamonds" Campbell?
It's nothing else. It's primarily, in its current configuration, an air defence destroyer that can track and engage hundreds of airborne targets, aircraft and missiles. Apart from the helicopter(s) it carries, it has no real capability of engaging other naval ships, certainly not those capable of ship to ship warfare. I think the term used is "for but not with", in that it has been designed and constructed to take ship to ship missiles and tomahawk land attack missiles, but those systems were never fitted during construction to lower costs, and it probably will not get those systems until it's due for refit. It can't really protect shipping at this time, it's basically a ship that was built to protect a fleet from airborne attack, yet it's sent there with no other ships to protect.
This isn't going to be another Californian pole vaulter thread is it?
Based on that information, it does seem like pointless posturing.
Wow. Two whole continents dissed in one short sentence. Economical.
I'd guess that since the last invasion was due to a lack of cock waving they want to make sure it doesn't happen again even if the chances are remote.
economical and racist
I am sure their feelings are hurt.
For all the problems of Africa, South America is the last holdout of anything approaching radical socialism across the board as evidenced by the likes of Hugo Charvez, Evo Morales, Rafael Correa etc.
We haven't had a new war for a while, so I say lets attack the Argies! Every time we hit one of those latin bastards we can get Ray Wilkins go ' you've been tangoed!'.
Get your violin out, there is nothing wrong in being compared with Africa when it is justified - Brazil is just about dragging South America forward by itself.
They don't fit your idea of a neocon utopia so they're suddenly these horrible 'radical socialist' states?
what the feck does that mean? and how it makes you think you can talk in that way about africa and south america?
So I am the only person alive who has noted South America's big swing to the left in recent times, dramatically so in the likes of Peru or Bolivia? Right then.
Talk what way? You have reacted to my saying that South America makes Africa look progressive at times as if I had said things about your mother.
not at all, but you are the only idiot to use that swing to the left to offend and act like a cnut
even though i think that you are an idiot, i still cant believe that you dont realize how insulting it is
go feck youself, cnut
I always find it amazing how you get really mad on issues, start swearing, and will then declare that you don't care about the subject.
Who am I trying to offend exactly? If I was trying to offend I would not be subtle about it.
i dont care about the falklands you prick. but i do care when a fecking snob like you come all cocky to insult
You are the only person to condemn 2 whole continents based on your dislike of a couple of countries' politics. I'd say the financial crisis, brought about by the UK, US and Eurozone countries irresponsible behavior has had far greater worldwide effects than Hugo Chavez ever could yet I'd be surprised if any reasonable person would dismiss the whole of North America and Europe based on this basis. To do so would be stupid and, at best, disrespectful. At worst bigotry based on a stereotype.
I also thought that much of South America was experiencing something of an economic boom? Which complicates such a simplistic view.
Touched a raw nerve?
No you're clearly not but its hardly surprising considering the brutal right-wing governments that have preceded them, along with regional imperialist policy that had often nurtured them.
But to suggest that Latin America is becoming increasingly less progressive because of their shift to the left is typical right-wing lunacy. Ironically those three leaders you mentioned have all been democratically elected. Would you rather Latin American be returned into the hands of your heroes such as Pinochet and Batista who would indefinitely 'progress' it more with their neoliberal, anti-communist stances, probably murdering a few hundred thousand people in the process.
Using Africa as an example depicting a lack of progress is also pathetically ignorant too considering the colonial hardships the continent has suffered.
Did I condemn two whole continents? No I didn't - if you cannot say that South America makes Africa look progressive without people losing the plot then something has gone badly wrong somewhere.
Your brand of right wing, Land of Hope and Glory on the White Cliffs of Dover attitude is the sort of rubbish that made me want to leave the UK.
I'll take your point, to an extent, regarding previous regimes in that part of the world. Why you think Batista and Pinochet are heroes of mine I don't know, I haven't got high regard for any politicians left or right out of Latin America down the years.
With regard to Africa, the point I was making is that despite all the problems that it has, it doesn't feel the need to go all Marxist as a bloc.
naaah, don't act surprised now
what you said didnt come from a normal poster, no sir
it came from you, the same idiot that said it was ok to nuke buenos aires, that said that the best 20th century invention was the A Bomb, that said argentina was dumb for attacking a nuclear power, as if being a nuclear power make you automatically right about everything
you know what you said and why you said it
It's inevitable that developing countries will look to China as a model for economic growth.
I do, but you do not.
A reasonable response, however we could spend forever and a day determining what philosophy underpins Chinese economic thought.
Essentially it is neither socialist or capitalist, basing itself heavily on ancient Chinese principles that cannot really be copied elsewhere.
Thats up to the people themselves, not us. Chavez, Correa and Morales are in power because they were put there, not by violence, but via a ballot vote. You might not like their politics but you haven't endured a peasant's lifestyles in a Caracas slum or Quechuan farmer in Ecuador.
It seems your problem is that you refuse to accept that shifting to the left can be a progressive course of action, regardless of how democratic of a transition it is, simply because of your ideological objections. The likes of Reagan thought similarly and hence tried to 'humanise' the region leading to the deaths of hundreds of thousands. And to this day they've been trying to clean up the mess, pretty ironic huh?
i do, and you do too
you are a cnut that think you can tell other person how to think and how to act based on your "superior being"
What isn't progressive is that report after report criticises dismantling of human rights protections, South American leaders like to hit on the media as well so it would appear.
As I understand it, the Chinese economy is a type of state capitalism, or command economy administered through a series of hierarchical planning structures.
Assuming such reports are genuine, current leftist regimes of Latin America are still heaps more humanitarian than the right-wing dictatorships that had preceded them. To also be suddenly concerned with human rights in Latin America would also be hypocritical considering the West's unquestionable support for the violent anti-communist governments and militias in the 50s-80s.
And I thought PeterStorey was one for going off on a tangent, you are setting new precedents here.
You are not noticing the hypocracy here, I never 'tell other person how to think' - I offer my opinions, I defend them if necessary, and accept the position of any opposing individual. You alternatively claim I have some 'superiority' complex yet you shout, rant, rave and swear in support of your views very quickly after disagreement is established.
So tell me, who is trying to force whose views down whose throat here?
Separate names with a comma.