David……..my prose was not “sweeping generalisation”. Far from it.

I could spend many hours and thousands of words putting my argument for Maynard against Milton. But time is tight.

I really don’t understand your argument about the Queen at all.

She has a duty to remain detached from politics however old she is and never show bias.

As far your argument about the old public utilities…….I wonder how many
died this winter because they could not afford the heating bills. That all goes
to pay huge fact cat payments to the utility board’s and shareholder dividends and who fail to invest properly in the future.

Yep that’s the unacceptable face of the free market….people die.

Oh and Bruce
regarding “Thatcherism brought an end to government owned industry, and ushered in the global economy we have today – with all that entails.”
That will be the global economy that crashed world wide in 2008. Bringing the whole of the western world to its economic knees. Which it presently is unable to recover from, indeed might never.

The only difference between now and the 1930’s is that in the 1930’s the western worlds economies crashed in an attempt to save the gold standard. It now all hangs on Government bonds. If that fails……and it might…..its game over.

The only thing that eventually saved world economies following the 1930’s was world war two and that cost 80 million lives.

Next time it will be the planet.

Completely unrestricted free market economics do not work due to excessive greed. Which is why the banks failed.

Thatchers Government released the banks from all restrictions. She let the genie out of the bottle.

Blair and Brown should have tried to put it back in but by then the City was the only industry we had left (thanks Margaret) and they could not afford to do so.

Oh and for the record Ed Balls scares me senseless…………….

Well Charlie…..if you dont read the Mail there is hope !

It was not a rant. It was an expression of a personal point of view.

It hope it is thought provoking.

The point I was trying to make was that the Thatcher Goverment was slashing the Royal Navy.
Had Argentina just waited a couple more months they could have secured the Falklands with no real prospect of them being retaken.

Making any comment here is a bit like sitting in the lounge of the Finchley Conservative club during a Daily Mail appreciation society meeting and suggesting that the Baroness should not be biatified (yes I know she was a Methodist).

However……..

I could write a treatise about the impact of her economic policies. I could call it Milton v. Maynard. About how her Government decimated much of the country outside the South East of England. How her Government decimated peoples lives, stripped this country
of its industry (do you know how much coal we import these days ?). How she gave away the countrys entire utility companies, ensuring everytime you switch on a light you contribute to the French or German GDP.

Del Boy and Harry Enfield nailed it….under the Baroness money was King. Society did not exist remember. It became all about greed, wealth and posessions. nice…..really christian……

Believe me, I could talk for days about how getting rid of all the safeguards in the city eventually resulted in the big crash. How selling off council housing and not building replacements resulted in the housing problems we have now.

Did her Governments build schools, housing, infastructure, hospitals….no.

It was left to other Governments.

So……..just pop those copies of the Daily Mail on the floor for a minute and have a think…..

There are millions of people, yes millions who dispise the Baroness.

Can we agree that

AA/ There are millions who love her.
and
BB/ There are millions who dont.

For goodness sake, the Parliamentry Conservitaive party got rid of her from being PM ! So even her own party eventually had enough of her.

Therefore why are we spending millions of pounds on a national funeral for her.

This lady blighted the lives of millions of ordinary Britains yet she never offered a single ounce of contrition…….not once….ever.

I am a republican.

That said I have (or had) great respect for our Monarch. She has given her life in service to this nation,

She correctly attended Churchills funeral since he lead a Parliament of coilition during the war years.

Did she attend Attlee’s funeral ( lets be honest he changed the nation ), alas not.

Yet she now shows political bias by attending the funeral of a politician who devided the nation.

I would often conceed that the Baroness’s greatest achievment was gaining power. The first women PM and all that.

Did she encourage women to become Conservative MP’s……errrr no. Didnt happen.

Did she support feminism……errrr no.

And now the union question……and why was it always the unions fault?

We presently make cars and export them very successfully. Alas we do it for foreign nations…..so they can enjoy all the profits. This kind of shows that the workforce can successfully manage to build quality products. PROVIDING THEY HAVE THE CORRECT MANAGEMENT.

Why did she never attack the Conservative management structure in the UK which had really caused and been responsible for the failures of British Industry?

Retorical.

Well….because she was unable to attack her own elite. The Eaton, Harrow and Winchester set who along with the Masons control this country…they always have and they always will.

I conceed that the ending of the “closed shop” was correct. I also conceed that the TUC leaders and leaders of the major unions did much to bring about there own demise.
However, in making a political decision to destroy these people she destroyed
the lives of millions of ordinary working people……who will never forget it.

So on Wednesday the Baroness is buried.

It should have been a quiet affair for her family and friends to grieve….and rightly so.

And that is how it should have been left. As a very quiet family event.

A tad disappointed at the side track and lack of comment on post 359.

Yes Lincoln….

But dont forget that the Argentines also had British built ships and aircraft in its invantory. I also believe they dropped British built bombs on British ships.

So perhaps we cannot be too hard on the French (who did provide some assistance to the British during the conflict…..but that is a book in itself).

Had the Argentinians had 5 or 10 more exocet missiles there is a very good chance that this thread would not have been in existance.

Had the Argentinians not invaded the Falklands I think you will find that Hermes would have been retired earlier, our “Through Deck Cruisers” would have been sold as planned and that the Navy would have been much smaller, much earlier.

Thats why the Navy was so keen to go to war…….to try and save itself.

“On 25 February 1982 the Australian government announced after several months of negotiations that it had agreed to buy Invincible for £175 million. The sale was confirmed by the Ministry of Defence. The ship would have replaced the Royal Australian Navy’s HMAS Melbourne and would have been renamed HMAS Australia.”

“Hermes was due to be decommissioned in 1982 after a defence review by the British government, but when the Falklands War broke out, she was made the flagship of the British forces”

Thatcher was unbelievabley luckly that in Galtieri and Scargill she had two of the stupidist opponents the planet has ever seen.

Without those two it is perhaps unlikely that she would have ever got a second term.

Gosh that Champagne tastes good……

Answer from Key

Hello,

We have indeed looked at your complaint and do not believe the post in question violates the code of conduct and the issue is more down to your misinterpretation.

Moggy C certainly had no intention of causing offence and I believe he has clarified that in the thread.

Hope that helps and have a good weekend.

Cheers
Richard

“My idea of an agreeable person is a person who agrees with me”.
Benjamin Disraeli

As Dave Allen used to say

“Goodnight……and May your God go with you”