Fairy In Boots

11 hours ago, DeadLinesman said:

How in fucks name do they do things like this? We can’t build a 10 bed inpatient unit in 3 years 

Lack of restrictive legislation etc, over hear you have to go through so much red tape speak to the land owner, address the local community etc. 

It sounds great but they probably bulldozed 50 people’s homes to crack on zero fucks given. Plus nick knowles and Billy the sparky are flying out to film a Wuhan special 

1 hour ago, DeadLinesman said:

His arm isn’t trapped. At all. In fact Cerrone is almost grabbing to keep hold of McGregors back. Nobody is that fucking stupid.

the angle on that photo is wrong, it’s the other side watch the tweet conor has Cerrone’s arm by the bicep. 

2 hours ago, Spike said:

Yeah, I saw all three of 'em, saw Cerrone stare right into McGregor's shoulder and beg for them to land onto his chin with zero resistance.

Everyone dives when you dump a truckload of money in front of their house.

Ridiculous comment. Cerrones owner arm is trapped by conor in the clinch. It’s just an enginuituve way to strike from that position. 

Cerrone is a game fighter but in striking Conor is elite he was always going to blow cowboy away

3 hours ago, Stan said:

Going to watch 1917 later with the missus. 

Apparently all scenes shot within one take... 

Yes it is it’s great

1 hour ago, Stan said:

How does us wanting Grealish first equate to Grealish swimming in waters where others would drown? 

You make it sound like Grealish is world class. Get over yourself. He may be better at the moment but don't make out like he's some version of Messi and the others are Sunday league standard. 

I think if you put Maddison, Mount, Barkley in our side they’re not producing as much as Jack

6 minutes ago, Stan said:

Yes cos that's the equivalent of what you said

 

I know his agent your first choice was Jack, it wasn’t happening so you switched to Maddison. That’s the sum amount of your clubs scouting going for Jack first over Maddison Stan. 

We can argue about opinions all day, I’m just telling you what went on. 

21 hours ago, Stan said:

This is a bit of a stretch and I think you know it

Barkley yes. The rest no. Don't be silly.

Nope Grealish was your first choice, he rejected you, Newcastle & Barca to ok the Spurs move. Your second choice was Maddison, I’d not swap you for Maddison plus £30m 

6 hours ago, Stan said:

Grealish moreso but perhaps @Fairy In Boots can enlighten us. I don't think he was a fan of Grealish being shoved out to the left-side when we played them in December.

Grealish’s preference is central. 

He’s s also better than Mount, Ali & Maddison, Barkley in fact he’s the best attacking Midfielder England have. In the worst team and leading the stats, he plays the game in slow motion with the ball on a string it’s just that type of talent that happens once in a generation. 

Ali, Mount, Barkley & Maddison would drown in the waters Jack swims in. 

If we go down he’s going to be sold but if we stay up he’s not going anywhere he’s not going to force a move to go to some club like Spurs or Chelsea. His dream is to play for Villa and win something. If we do go down I’m taking a break from it frankly watching him play for another would break my heart 

https://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/iran-past-the-paranoia/

A 12 year old Peter Hitchens article that I read today. 

21 minutes ago, Michael said:

Yeah, no doubt there is a hell of a lot of propoganda that goes on in Iran. But Trump's statement was ambiguous, probably deliberately so. If it is the media centres that he meant, then that clearly wouldn't be as bad as targeting literal cultural sites.

But generally speaking, if we do see that many US strikes on Iran, then this could perhaps be the start of the end for this Iranian regime. Because the Iranians will not stop retaliating and neither will Trump and there's only realistically going to be one so called winner in all of this and it isn't Iran.

If Trump bombed the ruins of Susa I’d expect strong questions from the UN and politicians across both parties domestically

. Firstly because it’s wrong but also because it’s a horrific waste of resource for absolutely no strategical gain. 

13 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Yeah I’ve got family out there and tbh nobody really cares about Israel other than when they keep building settlements and then they bitch about how it’s bullshit they’re allowed to violate international law yet face no sanctions.

People out there hate Saudis more, as Saudis pose a more imminent threat to Iran with their support of salafi/wahabbi extremists on their borders.

Well the Middle East is a Cold War Shi’a Iran axis vs Sunni Saudi Axis and the west back Saudi, Russia and China back Iran. 

Its why the Trump being a Russian shill is so laughable 

2 hours ago, Harry said:

Trump making more threats on Iran.

 

That’s in response to Iran saying 35 US targets are being targeted, he’s upping the ante. 

1 hour ago, Michael said:

Yes, I've just read that myself. So it seems like Trump will actually strike places in Iran now, if Iran retaliates in any sort of way for the killing of Soleimani. The US are really sending a strong message here and it will be interesting to see how Iran responds to this. What I really don't get is the following quote from Trump, in regards to the type of targets that he is intending to potentially hit: "at a very high level & important to Iran & the Iranian culture".

So he is intending to hit places that are important to Iranian culture, does that mean places of cultural importance? Why would he do that? Surely if he were to attack certain sites in Iran, the military bases or the military factories would be the best places to hit. There doesn't seem to be any justification in attacking places of cultural importance, as it will only infuriate many of the local Iranian populace, more so than the Iranian government.

The Iranian Revolutionary Guard has its own cultural sphere of influence it has a tv network etc. 

Its a armed force designed to protect the political system of Iran, it does this militarily via strength of arms and interference in regional politics and internal they have their own culture network where they just pump out propeganda. I wouldn’t be surprised to see their media arm taken out to distabilse Iran. 

I very much doubt Trump wants to drone UNESCO world heritage sites. 

Honestly the hysteria of this  online especially twitter is laughable 

11 minutes ago, Azeem said:

That's why i named it ' The Big Middle Eastern Thread ' we post here any little or major event that happens there. 

Fair enough because you posted it after your initial post of shit getting serious I’ve obviously read too much into that post. 

10 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Nah not really. I can identify with Persians because I’m half-Persian but not because I’m Muslim. And maybe that means I can relate with other cultures in the region better than most. But I think as someone born in England and who grew up there, I mostly identify as English, just with a Persian mum.

Fuck religion and religious people. They’re a big reason the Middle East is so utterly fucked.

Fair enough, have you still got family out there? And what are their views on Israel? 

Most older Iranians I know fled the revolution are are very modern although they do play up their ethnicity when it benefits them. For example my one mate always wrangles a free kebab when he’s pissed up in the early hours from the Persian kebab place in Birmingham (by pagoda island FYI) 

17 minutes ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I’m not Muslim 

Well lapsed or whatever, you would still identify with it in the same way I do Irish Catholic despite me believing the Roman Catholic Church a collection of pedophiles and fraudsters

1 hour ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Quite frankly it’s insane to say you can’t criticise Israel’s governments policies or you hate Jews. There’s Jews in Israel who criticise their government.

But that’s not what has even been claimed here. It’s been claimed that not wanting the West to continue to escalate tensions, so there’s no Iraq-style invasion of a country with a much larger standing army than Iraq ever had (and that’s expected the US to attack since 1979), has bigger cities that are more populated (remember the Iraqi insurgency and how the West struggled to cope with it... and still does). It’d destroy Iran, kill thousands of US soldiers (and soldiers of any country dumb enough to join them).

Not to mention the fact that the last time the US did something like this it sparked a massive refugee crisis. Given that so many of the people that would claim not wanting war with Iran is anti-Jew are the same people who are anti-Muslim... you’d think they’d want to avoid having more Muslims fleeing the Middle East to come west so they don’t have to worry about being blown up.

Well it is because although you may disagree that with Israeli foreign policy the fact is that opposition are all actively engaged in trying to eradicate them. Hezbollah would be next to no different from the SS given the chance. That’s the harsh reality

3 hours ago, Azeem said:

Iran has hoisted the red flag over their grand central mosque !

Shit just got real 

Lol a cyber attack some attacks on consulates and contractors. 

If you watched Game of thrones, American capabilities are Drogon. The raising of a red flag is akin to Cersei staring menacingly from the wall. Looks good but Tehran could become a waste land, it’s not a fair fight. 

3 hours ago, 6666 said:

It's worrying how some people fall for the media narrative so much. It's even more worrying how some people take it to an even dumber level on their own.

See above, the Iranian regime have had an international holocaust cartoon contest ffs. 

It’s kill or be exterminated for the Jews in the Middle East now, they’ve been exterminated before in the Middle East. They may be (the Israelis) a bit like apartheid South Africa but their alternative is eradication. 

I find all calls for them to just lay down and let it happen either bizarrely stupid or because of some form of hatred for them or bias. All 3 of you challenging it are Muslim after all.

21 hours ago, Inverted said:

Having an opinion on whether assassinating Soleimani is a good idea is entirely separate from any consideration of his moral standing as a person. 

Kim Jong-Un is a bad guy, I'd even say Xi Jinping is a pretty bad guy - think it's a good idea to kill either of them? 

Killing either is entirely dependent on wether you believe that their removal will lead to a more advantageous future I suppose. You could argue that killing Suleimani will lead to an initial spike in violence but it will lessen over time before a resolution and therefore less violence in the long run. Me or anyone being for or against removal of figures is a case by case basis. 

On this I’m not going to miss this guy, will it be the smart thing to have done? time will tell. 

Personally I’m more happy than concerned about Trump putting his foot down. America are the big dog and in any hierarchy based on strength of arms then you can’t start appeasement it ultimately weakens the leadership. America is a cunt but it’s the cunt that ultimately is the best cunt. 

Would you rather Putin or China was in the driving seat? 

21 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

Soleimani's not some new figure - he's been doing this for decades. The US, UK, and Israel have all had the opportunity to kill him at various times - they've all had restraint. Why? Really think long and hard about why even Israel, who've lost far more Israelis to Hezbollah attacks, would opt for restraint rather than go after this guy. Sun-Tsu once said, "if you're going to surround your enemy, leave them an escape route" - because when you've got someone feeling cornered, they'll react dangerously. I'd argue if Iran aren't cornered now, they're very fucking close to being cornered.

The US-Iran tensions being ratcheted up like this started a few years back with a move from the US that did absolutely nothing for stability in the Middle East and has been consistently stoked by both sides. Both sides keep escalating, but this is an unprecedented move. And it's an option that other world leaders have had the opportunity to act on... but refrained because the risk of blowback from that move is too great.

There's a reason why every world power involved in the Middle East is urging calm from Iran right now, while the orange guy is just saying "DON'T RETALIATE OR WE DO AGAIN" - Iran can't do anything meaningful to hurt the US, but Iran can do a lot to throw the region into even more chaos.

 

Not wanting to go to war with Iran = hating Jews?

In any case, this is bad for any Persian in the world who'd have hoped to see Iran open up to the rest of the world. Because what this ultimately does is tell Iran: get nukes ASAP. Iran only has to look at North Korea to see, a nuclear nation will not be bullied easily.

The reformers in Iran are so badly politically damaged now, some are probably going to be barred from running for office by the Guardians Council. They're seen as the politicians that hurt Iran by sitting to the table to negotiate with the West, while the other side was saying "you can't trust the west, they'll break the deal." Hardliners are vindicated and political support for a nuclear Iran will be at an all time high.

And a nuclear Iran means the Islamic Republic of Iran is here to stay for eternity.

No but it’s Poorly thought out from Corbyn to lament this given Suleimani’s connection with Hezbollah and his own issues with anti Semitism. 

Iran won’t be allowed to get nukes, you can’t have a state that is beholden to the insanity disease that is Islam with nuclear capability. 

18 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

To once again underscore how big of a miscalculation this was... not too long ago you had mass protests of Iranians taking to the streets and denouncing their government.

Today we've got them taking to the streets and denouncing America:

 

I'm sure Pompeo, the fucking warhawk, knew he was spouting off bullshit though. Same as Donald Rumsfeld's "I have no doubt we'll be greeted as liberators." 

I’d disagree anyway because you’re always going to be on a lose lose with invasion and nationalism. Even if the Americans would have gone in as s peacekeepers as part of the UN to stop the Iranians killing their own they would eventually become the oppressors after any kind of regime change. 

This is not an operation to win Iranian hearts and minds, the Yanks don’t really give a fuck about the Middle East long term now. This was far more a line in the sand to say attack our embassies we will fire back. Bo appeasement cash or talks, they’re going to take out serious targets. 

Why do you think we have such a drive for renewable energy? 

So that we’re not going to have to be involved with the sectarian clusterfuck that is the Middle East, China will move in eventually as they have in Africa. The west will leave the Middle East to its fate. 

18 hours ago, RandoEFC said:

And here was me thinking I'd find this thread full of people trying to point-score against Donald Trump .

I'm not very knowledgeable about the Middle East so I've been reading and listening up on this today before passing comment. It sounds like none of us should be upset about this bloke being removed. It also seems highly likely that the timing of this compared to the election in the US isn't a coincidence. The same could easily be said about Bin Laden and Obama. It's cynical but it's also how politics works and how people work.

You just have to hope things don't get too explosive. It sounds like Iran will retaliate by proxy rather than 'taking on' the US which would clearly be suicidal. My major hope apart from that is that our country thinks better of it and stays out of it. Dominic Raab has already called for de-escalation on all sides and I also think Boris Johnson is a bit more keen to distance himself from Trump given how little joint fanfare there was when he came over for the G7/NATO(?) summit just before the election.

We won’t get involved we want our shipping lanes open and access to the black stuff. 

1 hour ago, Azeem said:

Two rockets hit the US Consulate in Baghdad's green zone. Three rockets hit the US base in Balad, Iraq.

This was happening periodically anyway, you’re just presenting it to show an escalation in the region. 

Lol I’m not anti Jewish 

9 hours ago, Michael said:

Yes, you were alluding to the fact that Soleimani's power and what type of man he is, right? As for Trump, he is going on the offensive and in most people's opinions he has probably gome too far. Not for any sympathy towards Soleimani, but because of him upping the anti against Iran. The attack on the US Embassy didn't really warrant murdering a major public figure of the Iranian regime, as chaotic as it was. 

There won't be a WW3, but Iran will use its influence in the region to form attacks on Americans in the Middle East or on others such as the Saudis and the Israelis. The Iranians are likely to intensify such efforts and cause more strife in the region. 

I don’t know if he’s gone too far it’s an intangible thing so far as we’re effectively in new territory here. America was too soft under Bush and Obama on Iran and Iran continued to take the piss as both’s consolatory efforts have been a failure in the face of Iranian expansion. 

4 hours ago, Dr. Gonzo said:

I think Trump might invade Iran because no wartime president has ever lost an election tbh.

No think this has far more to do with this guy orchestrating attacks on American embassies, he’s responsible for American deaths. How many time do people expect the bear to keep getting poked before it bites? Suleimani has poked the US time and time again now the school yard bully isn’t afraid to chuck his weight around. As much as this demands a response from Iran this also demonstrates to North Korea/ other middle eastern characters/ China and Russia Trump will pull the trigger. 

Think Russia taking out people on British soil there’s a bigger game of chess here, the US administration are very much saying “fuck you we’ll hit back” it’s a significant line in the sand. 

Also it’s scary how when you truly think of it, how much global politics is similar to a game of civilisation on the PC

22 minutes ago, Michael said:

Of course Soleimani wasn't a sympathy piece, if you know anything about Middle Eastern Politics, you will know that Soleimani was infamous, the man was a brute! Abu Mahdi was similarly a nasty piece of work. But that is not the point, the point here is that by killing Soleimani, one of the significant figures in the Iranian regime, the US has really gone close to instigating something very serious with Iran. The Iranians are not going to take Soleimani's death lightly and the consequences could be far reaching.

 

Think you misunderstood my point regarding a sympathy piece. It’s not a sympathetic article it clearly lets you know who he is and what sort of strings he was pulling. It “sympathy piece” remark was because in lieu of the events you usually get counter pieces from folk who’re more concerned with attacking Trump than giving facts. 

Case in point, you have #ww3 trending and people calling Trump a warmonger & posts about distractions from impeachment. 

That’s farcial the Americans won’t tolerate attacks on their embassies, they consider it their soil and any attack upon it gives them a green light  to take “defensive” action (bit 1984). Iran will respond but that won’t be for some time the snake has had its head cut off and it’s immediate focus will be who fills the military power vacuum left within the regime. Then it’s responses will be proxy wars by sponsoring insurgents and terror offences against US interests throughout the Middle East. Pretty much the status quo as is within the Middle East anyway, US is backing the Saudis they always will

There’s no threat of WW3 because militarily nobody can compete with US drone capabilities. 

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/09/30/the-shadow-commander

great article on Suleimani from 2013 so not a sympathy piece. The Yanks have took a big scalp here, I thought of this guy as a little finger type, pulling strings without getting his own hands dirty

In a game in which we were fucked again they overruled a good goal and took 3 fucking minutes to do it. 

Then they never intervened when this challenge wasn’t dealt with properly, suspected ACL injury to absolute joke VAR is

11 hours ago, 6666 said:

I talked about the people that are worse off than the working class which means I didn't confuse them for the working class... You should try reading and then understanding.

no you definitely said working class, now your saying worse off than the working class. 

It seems painfully obvious that you just like being in a position where you can look down on people. You're actually envious of people who don't have jobs and need financial aid because they don't have money... you should trade places with them if you actually think they have it so good. And it is supposed to be the state's job to wipe the arse of the whole country and to make society function and take care of the needy rather than to take care of the wealthy and comfortable. It's why governments exist.

lol no I wouldn’t trade places, I actually said that being drip fed benefits keeps the poor docile and a poor quality of life ensues. I think you’ve missed that point. 

And it's interesting that you're telling me to fuck off with the "Rich vs. Poor" stuff when you actually tried to claim SirBalon was too rich to be in touch with the working class. You're running away from that and now claiming it's the poor that can't relate to the working class. The working class that don't hate the poor or the different types can't even relate to the "real" working class right...?

No I’ve not said that either about poor being unable to relate to the working class. Nor did I address Balon in my last post, I’m not running away from it at all, look at the history of this thread it’s 50% Balon alone and he’s woefully read the mood of the country. He’s been that arrogant over Brexit he’s become the forums Jo Swinson. It’s a shame he was a great member but obviously this topic got under his skin and made him rabid. 

One thing is clear, if you're blaming the powerless for problems in this country and in the whole world and are praising the powerful people responsible, then you're either a piece of shit or you're a fucking idiot that gets easily manipulated.

"Look at our flag, isn't it great? You're great, I'm great. The people that aren't like you or me are a problem". Works on insecure morons all over the world. Don't blush but you're Hitler's dream.

The last point . 

Think it’s fairly obvious that you either don’t understand my point of view or you are so biased against it that you take liberty with it and start painting me as some kind of Hitler youth ffs. 

My opinon is fairly simple, I prefer less reliance on the state and more individual responsibility for my own life for which I’m a fan of less taxation so more cash but also less state services. 

Quite how that comes to praising powerful and lambasting the poor I don’t know. I actually said above that poverty or adversity drives hunger to succeed. 

2 hours ago, The Artful Dodger said:

Well we are all biased, aren't we, by our views aren't we? 

I do have a good friend who votes Conservative, we disagree massively but I believe he has good intentions. You seem to only want the tories to win because it is upsets other people. 

Yes we are all biased, the news sources we gravitate to affirm our confirmation bias. It’s why discourse has broken down on social media. 

I’m not pro Tory because I want to troll (although I do so here because of the bias) I vote Tory because it’s more aligned with my principles of more personal economic freedom and less reliance on the state. 

My family are ex civil servants I view the civil service as woefully inefficient and expensive shite by and large. That’s why I vote Tory plus I think that the various poor communities are effectively battery farmed voters in some instances. Drip fed benefits so they never have to work and a poor quality of life ensues. 

I’m a great believer in hunger and desire to succeed being tempered by adversity. I’ve seen too many examples of it from where I grew up to not heed its power, successful ones vote Tory those still doing nothing vote labour, funny that.  

1 hour ago, 6666 said:

I don't think it's a case of him not knowing what they want but more a case of he doesn't agree with what they want. Because he's not a lunatic. Anymore.

What's actually hilarious is you painting SirBalon as being too rich to be in touch with the working class while thinking the Tories give a flying fuck about the working class. Governments that prioritise the wants of rich people always seem to be successful in convincing a large portion of the working class that the people that are actually worse off than the working class are the problem and more tax breaks for the rich will help the working man. Have no idea how anyone falls for that shit.

Lol you changed my post awe. 

11 days in we’re up to our genitalia in chlorinated chicken and the Yanks are policing the car parks of their newly privatised NHS Hospitals with drones. 

Except we’re not are we just fuck off with your rich vs poor shite. It’s like you’re not aware that Labour are the party that increase taxation and the Tories promised no tax hikes on Incomes, NI or VAT for the next parliament.

or by working class do you mean the “none” working class so scrounging fuckers basically? Unless you’re a genuinely ill person or a direct care giver for a person like this then benefits is only to help you get back on your feet. 

If your income is supplemented by it it’s because your net output in life is shite and your life choices so far have been shite. Why do so many believe it’s the states role to wipe their arse? 

As a rule of thumb if your annual salary is lower than your age you’ve done shit so far. 

9 hours ago, The Artful Dodger said:

Not sure you can generalise your own experience. I am working class, nearly all my closet friends are, differing levels of income, property, relationship etc but none voted tory and don't see much positive that they offer. Its about values and worldview, obviously mine are very different to yours. 

'politics of envy' is nonsense. Just as 'politics of selfishness' is. 

 

 

Circles of friends yours based in Liverpool I’d assume? It’s hardly the most unbiased city in the UK. It will go red regardless of who represents them. 

Mine are spread between Stoke Hull, Bristol & Ipswich so basically the  middle of the country. I’m on the road for work socially it’s midlands dominated but I have work and somewhat social relationships with people all over this part of the country. It’s tory down south, Labour up North so it’s why I feel I get a good grasp of how the winds blowing. 

9 hours ago, RandoEFC said:

Has anyone heard from or checked on @SirBalon since the election?

Lol hilarious probably contemplating what the bigots have done with an expensive glass of wine while nibbling a rare cheese on an exclusive med Island. I mean why couldn’t he grasp what the working man want? It’s just baffling how he wasn’t in touch. 

On 16/12/2019 at 14:45, The Artful Dodger said:

It doesn't matter where they're from or what gender, but I think the next Labour leader needs to be definitively working class. This is the party of Bevan, the greatest political figure in British history, we need to get to old Labour values and aggressive counterattacking the Tories. Corbyn, for all I agreed with him, was meek and mild, often letting others speak for him and insults fly by without riposte.

This and other posts like it on this thread post GE sums up most of your problem tbh. Focusing on class when in reality you should focus on basic competence. 

I’m working class all my social circle are, most of the people I know that voted Tory are working class why? Because of competence (or perceived competence anyway) and a plan over Brexit. 

Think most working class people don’t give a shit about “us” and “them” anymore think it’s tired and it doesn’t resonate anymore apart from 18-30 year olds who’re idealistic fresh out of education and haven’t spent a decade in the real world yet.  Aged 30-40 you start thinking about building your life and you want opportunity so you’re not flogging yourself in your 50’s. You dont want to be welfare farming off the state hence the political pendulum swings. Those that don’t follow this trend or are detached from it (eg not in the private sector) become embittered and hateful like Corbyn/ McDonnell etc their was a blatant dislike of those they had perceived done well. The politics of envy is dead in the 21st century. 

Three elections on the bounce should show this but instead Labour and momentum appear to be doubling down again. Political oblivion awaits. 

Also I’d give Sturgeon her ref post Brexit and tell her hard border, no £ no trade deal let her try it see how she sells it to the Scots. She will be fucked and so she should I get there’s nationalistic feeling but I’d let the Scots sign their own death warrant if they like I’m tired of their sabre rattling shite. 

2 hours ago, 6666 said:

"Every Muslim is brainwashed" isn't a bigoted point of view apparently... 

Also hilarious seeing right wingers pretend they all of a sudden care about Jews. Obviously not a case of Tory supporters only pretending to care in order to make sure the smear campaign goes to plan.

Fighters against bigotry and so "for the people" that they voted in an actually bigoted PM (which they probably love) that is in charge of a government that will fuck over people in the country (something which they don't realise isn't limited to the differenty ones).

Lol a Muslim is a practitioner of faith. That faith like pretty much all faiths is bs, saying that it’s followers are brainwashed isn’t that bigoted. Look at the literacy rates in the Arab world it’s Litterally the very definition of brainwashing. 

Anyway lovely from the PM today “lefty tossers”