 Show Posts
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 10
|
|
1
|
Football / NUFC / Re: Which Club Would You Buy?
|
on: January 05, 2007, 09:26:08 AM
|
| NUFC but failing that and being a closet NZ based Russian billionaire I'd buy Gateshead. Now look here Beckam for 500k pw you can life in Spain and fly in for training. Yep your mates can come, oh hell I'll buy Real Madrid and they can play for Gateshead. |
|
|
|
|
2
|
Football / NUFC / Re: Oba: Clueless and Naive?
|
on: January 05, 2007, 09:18:51 AM
|
Tudor missed the alternative that Martins ran behindf the defender to make him turn, gain 5 yards and expected Dyer to loft the ball for him to run on too. Perhaps Tudor should be looking more at service to the striker rather than the striker servicing the midfield.
Martins is youg, quick, talented and finding his feet in a new country and new league. To put his performances into context compare Shevshenko, Berbatov etc. |
|
|
|
|
3
|
Football / NUFC / Re: Paul Le Guen Leaves
|
on: January 05, 2007, 09:11:37 AM
|
| Murray is retiring in 2008 and handing over his businesses to his son. There is no money. Its a poison chalice for the next manager. |
|
|
|
|
4
|
General / Chat / Re: Bliar his cronies, the media and their lies, lies and more lies.
|
on: January 05, 2007, 08:54:34 AM
|
Parky, well said.
But the problems go deeper than what you have written.
Prior to WW1 US foreign policy was very limited and America was basically a political isolationist.
After WW1 the American industrial war capacity wasn't required, a series of natural mid west disasters then the Wall street crash plunged the USA into a recession.
Roosveldt and his party pulled America to the brink of recovery and Pearl Harbour / Declaration of War gave the final push. Post war the US had massive industrial capacity which turned in two directions.
1. Development of military technology to counter the Russian threat - Cold War.
2. Expansion of American diplomacy to counter Communism - but a sort of Pax America.
In the far east, because of the changing world order, China developed militarily and gave support to North Korea (with Russia), Indonesia began local colonial expansion, France failed to regain Vietnam.
Some clever dick in the Pentagon came up with the Domino Theory of Communist expansion and America spent decades supporting dictators who were anti communist. That they butchered their own people was not important in the greater scheme of things. Korea was a UN police action, everyone got involved and stalemate.
This encouraged the USA to send advisors to support the Vietnamese and hello another war.
What is important is that the USA lost in Vietnam and retired to give covert support where it best served American interests. But after Korea the rest of the world had enough which, by default left the USA as world police. After Korea the UN proved to be a total waste of time resolving conflict.
Saddam invades a little state and the UN steps in 90% American.
Just the odd skirmish with US involvement thereafter until Serb/Croat genocide and EUROPE stands back. The US eventually goes in with British assistance and token forces from elsewhere. But where are Germany, France - critiscising.
The pattern of US involvement (except covert) since Vietnam had been military prescence only or hands off. Unfortunately one of the areas it has been totally hands off is Israel. Bin Laden and his terrorists are fanatically anti Israel and realising they could put the fear of god into the USA by random acts of martyrdom brought down the World Trade Centre.
Bearing in mind that during the Gulf War Saddam slung a few rockets into Israel and these were known to be biological capable. Because the UN Inspectors were unable to give Iraq the all clear the worst case scenario was accepted by the CIA etc and MI whatever, not to be outdone, added its bits of mis information.
If you consider the politics of the whole instigation of war, I think there are several aspects to consider.
1.Britain is dependant on the USA for upgrade of our submarine missiles - no upgrade just expensive toys.
2. Britain has a large Muslim population. Immigrants usually vote Labour so there was a potential loss of votes if the case for War wasn't good enough.
3. The USA had been attacked and there had to be an enemy that could be destroyed. A President who can't be re elected, ultra right wing born again Christan, resurgence of God in the USA etc etc. All Bush needed, with control of Senate and Congress, was a plausible excuse and a degree of support. No support, no war.
The removal of Saddam had to happen. Perhaps spurred on by genocide on Serbia and Croatia, the attempted genocide of the Kurds the attack on Kuwait. There was no real way to handle the removal well. The UN imposed sanctions and the Iraqi people suffered.
George HW Bush refused to attack Iraq as it (attack) was contrary to the UN resolution - it should have been done and twenty years of Iraqi suffering would have been averted.
Oh, I know there is the question of oil but its rather a red herring.
So there you have it. 50 years of incorrect foreign policy, 50 years of ineffectual UN, 50 years of Western Europe sitting on the fence and a major conflict, which can't be "won", caused by a bunch of disaffected muslim nutters.
Its a viewpoint.
|
|
|
|
|
5
|
General / Chat / Re: ***The Official Ashes 2006/07 Thread - Australia 5 - 0 England (bummed)***
|
on: January 05, 2007, 07:51:49 AM
|
Come over here Garth, we have 50 million sheep and skippy is on restaurant menus. Ive not got a gum but can manage a few black Acasia.
Its quite unfortunate that England lost 5-0 but going to Oz with a crippled team then having a formal dinner to celebrate last years win was tempting fate.
I think Warne summed it up quite nicely - 4 runs and you got a f***ing MBE. Does another 4 get you a f***ing knighthood. |
|
|
|
|
9
|
Football / NUFC / Re: Raiding Chelsea again !!!
|
on: January 04, 2007, 08:04:54 AM
|
| Chelsea does not have a huge squad. If there are no injuries they have two first teams. But currently they have some injuries, losses of form and new players struggling. We'll get nowt from them. |
|
|
|
|
10
|
Football / NUFC / Re: Reo coker to newcastle
|
on: January 04, 2007, 08:02:08 AM
|
| No. He's sulking at W Ham, over rated and playing poorly. We don't need players who are less than 100% professional. |
|
|
|
|
11
|
General / Chat / Re: Smiley of 2006
|
on: January 04, 2007, 07:55:49 AM
|
| The alternate Board has a chainsaw wielding smiley - all action and blood - cute. |
|
|
|
|
12
|
General / Chat / Re: we should adopt a team
|
on: January 04, 2007, 07:53:24 AM
|
Thought I had one with Mochudi Centre Chiefs in the Botswana PL; they play in B&W striped shirts but their forum is just post a comment like BBC.
Keep trying lads. |
|
|
|
|
13
|
General / Chat / Re: ***The Official Ashes 2006/07 Thread - Australia 4 - 0 England***
|
on: January 04, 2007, 07:36:55 AM
|
England just needs more players - 11 is not enough.
Seriously they went into this series underdone, poor selection, psychologically fragile and badly coached.
How any selection panel can pick 5 batsmen and a 6 man tail is beyond me. Get rid of Gravenet (never made it as a player - unlike his father) and join the real world.
The last 6 men in were worth about 10 runs in the first innings so I'd let Warne and McGrath open with Langer to follow. Then off to the beach. |
|
|
|
|
14
|
General / Chat / Re: Hunting with the traditional English longbow.
|
on: January 03, 2007, 08:57:31 AM
|
Well if you can hit a rabit with a traditional longbow you deserve to be able to eat it. I'd have to stand over one and I'd still shoot my foot. Nocks are on the bow tips to hold the string.
Longbows were used throughout Europe but what is referred to as "the English or Welsh" longbow was of a particular length (6'to 6'6"), cut fron heart and sapwood (natural composite) and usually yew but often oak or ash. Pull of modern bows is 50 - 60lbs but Mary Rose reconstructed bows had pulls up to 180lbs. The left arm and right hand of archers (skeletal evidence) was deformed due to the power and practice required. Its written that the British long bowmen were the first machine gunners being able to release 10-20 arrows per minute. |
|
|
|
|
17
|
General / Chat / Re: immigration..a solution ?
|
on: January 03, 2007, 08:27:49 AM
|
Nice one George O. But your not wrong.
20 years ago NZ 's main exports were farming based and subsidised. Govt got rid of subsidies and we now have the most efficient farming industry (primary produce) in the world. Hell we can put butter on USA supermarket shelves at lower prices than the USA can produce ex farm. But they won't let us without restrictions.
At the same time Govt decided to privatise every govt dept that was loss making or turn them into commercial govt owned operations. Result 4-5 billion pa profits going offshore and (govt companies like electricity) consumer costs quadruple in 5 years.
To make NZ industry more competative we removed import restrictions so we could compete on a level playing field with the likes of China, India, Indonesia etc. Of course they didn't remove their import restrictions. We lost at least 50% of our industry.
Admittedly unemployment is about 3% at present and we are running up credit card debt like there is no tomorrow but interest rates (housing) 7.55%, commercial 10% and NZ dollar 20% over valued.
Stuff globalism. Lets go back to ÿou scratch my back and I'll scratch yours".
Immigration - every country needs skilled immigrants and should accept those in peril in their own country by way of refugees. But there must be controlls otherwise the host nation suffers. However it is a two way street. Most immigrants go to a totally new culture and must meet that culture part way. Its not racist to insist on this - its called integration. Imposing minority values on teachers to wear head scarfs etc is not acceptable. The answer is temporary, say 5 years, residency then back where you came from if you don't fit in. No its not. Education and generation x generation change will result in an evolving society. Britain has been doing this for 3000 years. Its just happening quicker and with greater numbers. Get used too it. |
|
|
|
|
18
|
Football / NUFC / Re: Fergies kind words after the game
|
on: January 03, 2007, 07:17:06 AM
|
Praise indeed particularly as he recognised our injury problems and conceeded that while Manure did not play as well as they should it was because we would not let them.
Wenger whines - thats it. Arsenal were always hard done by.
Didn't know Mourinho did that. Thought he was an arrogant prat. Which if you read his bio you'll find he has two personas - public and private. |
|
|
|
|
19
|
General / Chat / Re: Is Israel the real danger to world peace?
|
on: January 03, 2007, 04:42:42 AM
|
Politacally Arafat was the stumbling block to peace as he had a power base he wanted to retasin but which was unlikely with free elections.
Now the old fool is dead we are stuck with a legacy of dissatisfaction wherein the likes of Hamas see the successors to Arafat as more of the same. Yet they themselves, bolstered by years of frustration, cannot achieve peace as within their ranks are fanatics.
The thread however is Israel as a threat to world peace and no Israel is not. It may be a major contributor to continued terrorism, it is certainly one of two sources of middle east tension but even if Israel shut down its armed forces tomorrow the dissafected fundamentalists would continue their war.
Israel has to bear a great deal of the blame for the problems in their region for the last 50/60 years. Palestine must bear a proportion too as must Britain for the Balfour Declaration which partitioned Palestine - and for what, so the Jews could have a homeland. They had been in Palestine for 3000 years - a homeland existed, could have been resettled, assisted to develop. But no, the Zionist wanted more and they had the support to achieve it.
Currently Israel has still captured land under its control but instead of making a point they continue to occupy and settle the land as if it were theirs. They leave the Palestinians less and less.
The world will do nothing but by default promote another generation of disaffected, homeless Arabs.
This is potentially a minor problem compared with Russian political resurgance bolstered by state controlled energy suppliers such as Gazprom. The expansion of Gazprom and development of oil fields the size of Saudi Arabias under the control of a resurgent KGB/Communist cadre is of concern.
In 20 years Russia will have revitalised its forces and will have the power to blackmail the west. Could be interesting. |
|
|
|
|
20
|
General / Chat / Re: immigration..a solution ?
|
on: January 03, 2007, 04:18:57 AM
|
Nice one happy face. Let everyone who wants live in the UK. Then shove taxes up to 90% to pay their dole as there are not enough jobs or ask the EU for 50 billion so we can take in Afghanistan.
Global communities are comming but hopefully at a pace infrastructure can handle, untill then NO. |
|
|
|
|
|
