Thatcher has been checked into hospital...

[NJS 4030]

I'm just pointing out a lot of what is claimed is a load of .

 

Like deliberately sinking the Belgrano to scupper the US peace deal?

 

War is war, you don't start one then claim foul.

 

 

The captain of the Belgrano admits they were awaiting weather changes to then support further air attacks, and Argentina has admitted it was a perfectly legal act of war (a bit of an oxymoron, but then that is war).

 

So yes, even more it seems.

 

So why did the bitch lie about it and allow herself to get so bothered when put on the spot?

 

Another convenient opportunity.

[Fop 1]

and was certainly a leader of conviction that often punched well above her weight in world affairs.

 

The great euro-sceptic who signed Maastricht?

 

She played the Euro game like the French and Germans did and still do.

 

Yes but they were honest - they didn't denounce the concepts for the benefit of Mail and Sun readers and then sign the single European act.

 

She is still hailed as a "heroine" for gaining the rebate - why didn't she rather do what Ireland have done so well and make the EU work to transform their country? - which is better "sticking it to the Krauts/Frogs" or working for your people?

 

The French honest in their EU dealings?

 

They and the Germans play the EU game very well, its just that largely the general interest of the German-Frano block was best served by moving together and moving the rest of the EU in particular directions.

 

However any time it has not (which has occurred more and more in recent years, especially with expansion) they have simply ignored or stopped those things occurring.

 

What they do however do is vigorously and ruthlessly look after their own interests within Europe at almost any cost, much like Thatcher did.

[NJS 4030]

What they do however do is vigorously and ruthlessly look after their own interests within Europe at almost any cost, much like Thatcher did.

 

Not saying they don't but they don't decry the institution and make remarks about "going off to battle" like she did.

[Fop 1]

I'm just pointing out a lot of what is claimed is a load of .

 

Like deliberately sinking the Belgrano to scupper the US peace deal?

 

War is war, you don't start one then claim foul.

 

 

The captain of the Belgrano admits they were awaiting weather changes to then support further air attacks, and Argentina has admitted it was a perfectly legal act of war (a bit of an oxymoron, but then that is war).

 

So yes, even more it seems.

 

So why did the bitch lie about it and allow herself to get so bothered when put on the spot?

 

Another convenient opportunity.

 

The BBC interview? Ambushed and put on the spot (although where did she lie?), Blair would have just smiled and changed the subject, but he lived in a different age.

 

But again no matter how much of your I prove to BE utter , you just come up with yet another spurious angle that proves nothing, which is the crux and glory of every conspiracy theory.

 

 

And surely IF she had been part of this conspiracy, then she'd have rehearsed and got her story straight? (she was a politician after all)

 

Although as I said as the sinking of the Belgrano was a perfectly "acceptable" act of war (as much as any war is "acceptable") I don't really see what your trying to build your aspersions on?

[Fop 1]

What they do however do is vigorously and ruthlessly look after their own interests within Europe at almost any cost, much like Thatcher did.

 

Not saying they don't but they don't decry the institution and make remarks about "going off to battle" like she did.

 

It largely wouldn't have served their interest to do so (historically anyway), although rhetoric like that has occurred on occasion when it has (look at the yes and no campaigns from their constitution vote).

 

Although if you actually look at they way French politicians often behave within France (which isn't necessarily the was we see them behave from UK and US based media perspective), you'd be forgiven for thinking that Thatcher would have fit right in there.

[NJS 4030]

And surely IF she had been part of this conspiracy, then she'd have rehearsed and got her story straight? (she was a politician after all)

 

Although as I said as the sinking of the Belgrano was a perfectly "acceptable" act of war (as much as any war is "acceptable") I don't really see what your trying to build your aspersions on?

 

She was that arrogant it didn't occur to her to expect straight questions.

 

The sinking on the surface looks like an act of war (despite being outside the exclusion zone) but in the context of her being under pressure from Reagan to accept Schultz's deal it seems a tad too convenient to me. That feeling becomes a bit firmer in light of the question avoiding.

 

Even then if the Falklands were the main charge against her then I could accept it makes a good argument - though your charges of bullshit could be countered by one of naivity - however she was guilty of many, many more crimes and a "glorious victory" against a third world country does not negate them.

[Fop 1]

And surely IF she had been part of this conspiracy, then she'd have rehearsed and got her story straight? (she was a politician after all)

 

Although as I said as the sinking of the Belgrano was a perfectly "acceptable" act of war (as much as any war is "acceptable") I don't really see what your trying to build your aspersions on?

 

She was that arrogant it didn't occur to her to expect straight questions.

 

The sinking on the surface looks like an act of war (despite being outside the exclusion zone) but in the context of her being under pressure from Reagan to accept Schultz's deal it seems a tad too convenient to me. That feeling becomes a bit firmer in light of the question avoiding.

 

Even then if the Falklands were the main charge against her then I could accept it makes a good argument - though your charges of bullshit could be countered by one of naivity - however she was guilty of many, many more crimes and a "glorious victory" against a third world country does not negate them.

 

 

Don't mistake my hatred of to equal a love of Thatcher, it's not not.

 

 

But still you're basically just throwing untrue shit and thinking that is the same as having a point, it isn't.

 

The exclusion zone is not a legal definition of war (it's for neutral vessels), and the rules of engagement were officially changed before the attack anyway. As both the Captain of the Belgrano and the Argentine government have said (testified even) the attack was utterly legitimate (and that the Belgrano was still operating as an offensive vessel - it was scheduled to turn back towards the island as soon as the weather cleared and allowed air support).

 

I don't understand your point about Reagan's deal either, Reagan had given up on his pressure and had fully backed the UK by the time of the Peruvian plan which was published just 14 hours before the attack, although again the Peruvian plan was basically what Thatcher had largely given Reagan a verbal handbagging over previously, with basically withdraw of all forces and a "peacekeeping" force and overview group of nations to help decide what would happen to the islands.

 

Even IF the British Government were fully aware of it in the rather short 14 hours in between, they still have every right to ignored it and more importantly take any measures necessary to defend sovereign territory.

 

As Thatcher says in her handbagging would the USA have accepted that if they USSR had invaded Alaska? Not in 1,000,000 years (as long as they thought they could win anyway). Or the French or any other country for that matter.

 

 

 

So basically the only real issue with the Belgrano was and is a red herring used by people implacably opposed to the (any) war at the time and those with an axe to grind for other reasons still.

[Guest alex]

Remember the headline of The Sun after we sank the Belgrano? "Gotcha"

[sweetleftpeg 0]

She not fuckin dead yet. I left a bottle of wine chilling in my fridge this morning for my Grandad when I heard the news this morning. Hopefully I'll be opening it at some point this week.