It's not nearly two decades after the event. It ended this decade and the direct repercussions are still being felt internationally. That's basic shit.
Given that we are in 2019 I thought the result didn't need pointing out.
Firstly I picked the Iraq war because as we've all seen the sheer mention of it(All I did was post 1 picture) makes you piss your pants. Secondly as the last couple of pages have shown its a good example(Although there are plenty more examples)of the outcome of Britain punching above its weight.
You've literally offered nothing but nostalgia for a time that never existed.
What feck does any of this mean ?
these things don't happen in a vaccum, 2 seconds of google will give you this about the example you choose, showing the anti-gay movements started as a result of colonisation not because it was an existing cultural fact, the more recent extreme anti-gay laws also have some roots in American evangelism
it doesn't matter which way history forked in those countries, lasting damage was done by the colonisers
be specific for once for fecks sake no one has any idea what you're talking about
I meant local customs as they are now, not more than a century ago. Views on sexuality have changed almost everywhere in that time. In countries like Uganda, the change has been towards less permissiveness. The tilt towards zero tolerance occurred many years after they gained independence, in the 80s and 90s. Therefore, a better explanation might be the osmosis of American Evangelism, not colonialism. These countries were more tolerant in the immediate post colonial days than they are now.
Like I said, I’m not going to argue about Iraq again. My point is wider one, and the context is Brexit- here and now - not Iraq, where the decision was made nearly 20 years ago. Perhaps you need to reminded about that.
You seem quite angry. Been a rough day?
it's always all of the above, I don't know if western chritisian theology would have this particular impact without colonialism - would those american evangelists had the same effect on the country if anti-gay sentiments didn't get planted in the region? idk maybe, maybe not, but what we do know is that the British empire planted the anti-gay sentiments to begin with
British role in helping to set up nato: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_NATO
what that's it, pacts almost a century ago? and this waning influence is because of brexit, are you taking the piss?
the UK will rejoin the SM and CU not long after it leaves because it's the only workable NI solution, so trade deals will happen through the EU in the future. it's just a matter of if boris has the balls to destroy the economy because he over promised on no deal
The reason the UK could be influential in the UN and Bretton Woods is because it wasn't a "medium-sized economy" at that time, it was the biggest empire in world history. NATO happened just a few years after that. Hard to be provincial when the province extends as far as South-East Asia (where Britain would soon militarily intervene to keep its rule, another example of outward-looking leadership!).
Do you actually think Boris understands the consequences of what he is doing? It would take understanding for it to need balls. I believe he thinks no deal will be as easy and glorious as he says it will be.
My that’s a keen understanding of world economics there.
I don't eat carbs.
So did Africa have a liberal attitude toward gays before colonialism?
I think the problem with this conversation is that we’re projecting modern understandings of concepts such as homosexuality on to pre-modern societies. The little reading I’ve done on this, in the Middle Eastern context anyway, suggests that homosexuality as a concept or as the individual identity we are familiar with today didn’t really exist in pre-modern societies. What we would today describe as homosexual relations were generally tolerated behind closed doors in societies where strict gender segregation was the norm. And in certain exclusive sections of society they could even be celebrated. But this doesn’t mean there was general public toleration for homosexual acts or lifestyles (what Putin might refer to as gay propaganda).
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
yeah he does he's not that stupid
No, but I think you are. You implied I was trying to defend our colonial legacy, based on nothing I'd actually said. I said, no, there were other legacies worth defending. You asked me for some examples. I gave some - our role in shaping the rules based international order for one. So stop moving the goalposts, I've answered your question.
You have more confidence in him than I do. I don't think you can repeat lies for years and years and not start believing in them to some extent. Add to that the fact he rubbishes any expert opinion that doesn't fit his narrative and I can really picture him thinking no deal won't be that bad.
That could be 20-30 years and I wouldn't be optimistic there will be a UK at all by then.
He doesn't do that out of high levels stupidity though, he's a bullshit artist who has gone through life cheating and lying and only ever getting rewarded for it. He knows what happens if we leave with no deal, he's just arrogant enough to think the EU will blink and will have to decide if he has the balls to go through with his bluff.
the examples you choose were a result of empire and wealth, we're not going to get to that level without fecking up a few countries and we're not strong enough anymore
Tweet
— Twitter API (@user) date
Sort of what I expected coming from someone of irish peasantry.
Shes worth boning I'd say
She's a complete bitch, it wouldn't surprise me if she has done 'stuff' to get where she is.
Even after farrage has splaffed his slime there?
When it comes to trade deals, what is it exactly that we have to trade?
Britain still has a big aerospace sector, automotive industry and pharmaceuticals (If we are talking actual physical goods, not banking or software). It's also the center for a lot of niches, a lot of F1 teams for instance are located in the UK.
Ok thank you.
