Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

A

[LordSlowpoke]

kinda unrelated but americans not having negotiations with bin laden was pretty much what his "strategy" was all about

drag americans into afghanistan and break their back there just like they did the soviets

if somebody just grabbed the terrorists and asked "why you do this m8"

also it's not like france etc. aren't urging the israelis and palestinians to sign a ceasefire and look what's going on with all the urging

[SharpKris]

kinda unrelated but americans not having negotiations with bin laden was pretty much what his "strategy" was all about

drag americans into afghanistan and break their back there just like they did the soviets

if somebody just grabbed the terrorists and asked "why you do this m8"

also it's not like france etc. aren't urging the israelis and palestinians to sign a ceasefire and look what's going on with all the urging

it's always nice having a ceasefire that Hamas respect for exactly 2 minutes

[LordSlowpoke]

i didn't feel that clarifying that the hamas/ukr rebels situation is more or less the same regarding ceasefires was even necessary considering the people in this thread but thank you

[Owlbread]

William Hague, British foreign secretary, steps down in Tory cabinet reshuffle. Hague stepping down is massive - he was practically Cameron's third man after George Osborne. He even led the party in the early 2000s. Other MPs stepping down include the venerable Ken Clarke who was a part of both Margaret Thatcher and John Major's cabinets.

People say the reason for the reshuffle is to replace old Thatcherite stalwarts with younger, female faces and possibly more Scots. Who knows.

My theory for Hague stepping down (which, I reiterate, is massive - it's like John Kerry stepping down) is that he is about to be embroiled in a scandal over child abuse. There is a large inquiry going on into MPs engaging in sexual abuse of children in the 1990s in North Wales in children's homes and one victim claimed a senior Tory MP (who is still alive) abused him viciously for years. This abuse, he also claims, was covered up by William Hague, then-Welsh secretary.

[TD1]

So, if Parliament is trying to give Scotland a bigger representation, isn't that what you were needing? A Scotland with a say?

[Owlbread]

So, if Parliament is trying to give Scotland a bigger representation, isn't that what you were needing? A Scotland with a say?

No. Not only is the "say" that we would gain from a few Tories moving aside for some token Scots utterly miniscule, but there's only one Tory MP in the whole of Scotland and that's David Mundell, representing Dumfries and Galloway. Any "Scottish Tory MPs" moving into the cabinet (e.g. Liam Fox or something) would represent English constituencies.

The British system that I am "needing" is one where Britain is no longer a unitary state. Having more Scots in the cabinet is no substitute. We had plenty in the cabinet during the Brown and Blair years, even to the point that it was described by certain characters in the British media as a "Scottish Mafia".

[LordSlowpoke]

huh, so i guess you won't be joining the european federation after all

that's a shame

[TD1]

Yea, representation would be a big reason to not want to be in the European Union as well. Britain as a country doesn't even have that much representation.

[Owlbread]

huh, so i guess you won't be joining the european federation after all

that's a shame

Of course I wouldn't. The EU as a politico-economic union of convenience is fine, but if it were ever to become some kind of state (without its constituent parts being fully fledged sovereign states with UN representation etc) I would leave in an instant. I think quite a few countries would leave the EU too in a "United States of Europe" scenario.

[Helgoland]

Don't worry, Owlbread. It'll be so slow you won't even notice. And if you try to leave after that, we'll have the Union's army hunt down and kill every kilt-wearer east of Nova Scotia.

[Owlbread]

Don't worry, Owlbread. It'll be so slow you won't even notice. And if you try to leave after that, we'll have the Union's army hunt down and kill every kilt-wearer east of Nova Scotia.

Though we are joking, the speed with which it would move to something like that is quite important. If it's slow enough that I'll still be alive when it happens I doubt it shall happen because there'll be a lot of people my age still in power by then who will remember what independence was like.

[LordSlowpoke]

you know what they say, owlie

change either comes slowly and painlessly or quickly and with a lot of bloodshed involved.

also i bastardized that line one hell of a lot

[Helgoland]

Of course! The whole Union moves by consensus - we need to create a collective identity first, and only then create a true nation! And the creation of identities takes time - just look at the Middle East, where they're just starting to develop national identities. We'll all be long dead before the twelve stars wave from Lissabon to Wladivostok, but maybe we'll see the best parts of the journey.

However, it's sensible to give up certain privileges of nationhood even before amalgamization, such as the right to military force or certain kinds of taxation. Building the Union will be slow too, but progress will be continuous.

[TD1]

*Shudders*

[scriver]

The German Imperialist in a nutshell, people.