Yes! A 'Flatten Wales' movement sounds like just the thing Tommy needs to occupy his lack of enough to do all day but whine about Brits, Yanks and assorted other never-do-wells. A fitting crusade that fits his abilities and annoys his neighbors.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Yes! A 'Flatten Wales' movement sounds like just the thing Tommy needs to occupy his lack of enough to do all day but whine about Brits, Yanks and assorted other never-do-wells. A fitting crusade that fits his abilities and annoys his neighbors.
Well, the reality is, if the whole thing had been done properly, then no, I wouldn't have had an issue with that.
I was in Pristina during a protest march a year before they gained independence from Serbia, I supported that. I also supported the vote for Montenegro being free, for Chechnya being free, for the Scottish to vote freely in their referendum, for the Basques, Catalans etc having a vote in Spain, for the Corsicans to have a vote for theirs, for Tibet and Xinjiang to be able to be free in China, East Timor being free from Indonesia, etc etc etc.
Some of those places like Scotland for example just can't make it economically without help.
Unless they go to a society of zero social safety nets and complete freedom. It would be fun to see if this could work.
Can't they? Can you prove that? Scotland is doing fine without needing so much help. Wales on the hand is a different matter, but Scotland, nah, it could easily survive on its own.
Not with oil prices where they are.... Their ref failed when prices were ballooned up.
I disagree. I think Scotland struggles with politics being pro-southern England in the UK. If there were a real border, then Edinburgh and Glasgow would then become more centers of trade than they currently are and Scotland would be stronger.
Pro southern?
What is pro southern about sending more subsidy to Scotland than to England, Wales, or NI?
[
Yeah. The Brits did real bad. Look at all those terrible former colonies that are total basket cases these days. Canada. Australia. US. New Zealand. India. South Africa. Unlike the Spanish colonies. Or French. Or Belgian. Or Portuguese.
Canada, Australia, New Zealand took over the land, replaced the people. South Africa kept most of the people but then the Boers took over and well, that went well, didn't it?
The British also made Iraq. How'd that work out? Oh, they put a SAUDI in as king, they hated him, the Ba'ath Party took over, Saddam took over the Ba'ath Party in Iraq.
Afghanistan, went in twice, got kicked out twice.
India. Well, second largest population in the world, not doing very well.
Pakistan. Wellllllllll, I don't see many people thinking Pakistan's doing so well....
Oh, I could go on all day.
The others generally didn't take over and remove the native population, or at least push them as far away as to make them not a problem.
Oh, Britain invented concentration camps in Kenya..... wonderful.
But all of them have been treated like shit.[
Yeah. The Brits did real bad. Look at all those terrible former colonies that are total basket cases these days. Canada. Australia. US. New Zealand. India. South Africa. Unlike the Spanish colonies. Or French. Or Belgian. Or Portuguese.
Canada, Australia, New Zealand took over the land, replaced the people. South Africa kept most of the people but then the Boers took over and well, that went well, didn't it?
The British also made Iraq. How'd that work out? Oh, they put a SAUDI in as king, they hated him, the Ba'ath Party took over, Saddam took over the Ba'ath Party in Iraq.
Afghanistan, went in twice, got kicked out twice.
India. Well, second largest population in the world, not doing very well.
Pakistan. Wellllllllll, I don't see many people thinking Pakistan's doing so well....
Oh, I could go on all day.
The others generally didn't take over and remove the native population, or at least push them as far away as to make them not a problem.
Oh, Britain invented concentration camps in Kenya..... wonderful.
At the end of the day, European countries were always going to colonise the rest of the world. It was a lottery as to who was going to get what. Those that got Britain won the main prize. Native populations in the US, Canada, NZ and Australia are doing a lot better than those colonised by Spain, France, Belgian etc.
But all of them have been treated like shit.
The issue is very simple. Scotland as a nation has never voted tory. Has consistently voted anti trident and pro Europe. Yet they are ruled by a parliament controlled by English MPs. Is that freedom ?Well, the reality is, if the whole thing had been done properly, then no, I wouldn't have had an issue with that.
I was in Pristina during a protest march a year before they gained independence from Serbia, I supported that. I also supported the vote for Montenegro being free, for Chechnya being free, for the Scottish to vote freely in their referendum, for the Basques, Catalans etc having a vote in Spain, for the Corsicans to have a vote for theirs, for Tibet and Xinjiang to be able to be free in China, East Timor being free from Indonesia, etc etc etc.
Some of those places like Scotland for example just can't make it economically without help.
Unless they go to a society of zero social safety nets and complete freedom. It would be fun to see if this could work.
Can't they? Can you prove that? Scotland is doing fine without needing so much help. Wales on the hand is a different matter, but Scotland, nah, it could easily survive on its own.
Not with oil prices where they are.... Their ref failed when prices were ballooned up.
I disagree. I think Scotland struggles with politics being pro-southern England in the UK. If there were a real border, then Edinburgh and Glasgow would then become more centers of trade than they currently are and Scotland would be stronger.
Pro southern?
What is pro southern about sending more subsidy to Scotland than to England, Wales, or NI?
Colonization was an unintended consequence of seafaring.At the end of the day, European countries were always going to colonise the rest of the world. It was a lottery as to who was going to get what. Those that got Britain won the main prize. Native populations in the US, Canada, NZ and Australia are doing a lot better than those colonised by Spain, France, Belgian etc.
The issue is very simple. Scotland as a nation has never voted tory. Has consistently voted anti trident and pro Europe. Yet they are ruled by a parliament controlled by English MPs. Is that freedom ?
I vote for India. Great democratic nation. Very trustworthy.The UN is in charge of mediating international conflicts.Whatever India's claim to Kashmir is I am happy with it.Just because they are fighting over the land does not make it a crime.
Is it not a crime to send people to war for pathetic reasons?
I personally think it is. I think people who stir up trouble when they're in government are committing crimes. Problem is there's no one to stick them in front of a court.
UBL was not hiding in Kashmir.
You're happy with it. Are the Kashmiri people happy with it? Where does a government get its legitimacy from in order to hold land and the people who live in it?
My personal view is that Kashmir is not big enough to be an independent state.
And since India is more responsible than Pakistan, give Kashmir to India.
UBL was not hiding in Kashmir or India.
Not big enough?
It's 3 million people.
That would put it 135th in the world, about the same as Armenia. That's out of 195 countries on my list.
Why is Kashmir too small? Personally I think the US, China, India etc are too big.
India is more responsible? You can't just give land and people to a country. That's a ridiculous and arrogant attitude. People should be free to rule themselves. Maybe we should give the US to Mexico. See how you like it.
Those little beet farm countries are not wedged between 2 nuclear superpowers such as India and Pakistan.The UN is in charge of mediating international conflicts.Whatever India's claim to Kashmir is I am happy with it.
UBL was not hiding in Kashmir.
You're happy with it. Are the Kashmiri people happy with it? Where does a government get its legitimacy from in order to hold land and the people who live in it?
My personal view is that Kashmir is not big enough to be an independent state.
And since India is more responsible than Pakistan, give Kashmir to India.
UBL was not hiding in Kashmir or India.
Not big enough?
It's 3 million people.
That would put it 135th in the world, about the same as Armenia. That's out of 195 countries on my list.
Why is Kashmir too small? Personally I think the US, China, India etc are too big.
India is more responsible? You can't just give land and people to a country. That's a ridiculous and arrogant attitude. People should be free to rule themselves. Maybe we should give the US to Mexico. See how you like it.
So you had no problem with Crimean people voting to be Russian when the Ukraine was under a coup?
Well, the reality is, if the whole thing had been done properly, then no, I wouldn't have had an issue with that.
I was in Pristina during a protest march a year before they gained independence from Serbia, I supported that. I also supported the vote for Montenegro being free, for Chechnya being free, for the Scottish to vote freely in their referendum, for the Basques, Catalans etc having a vote in Spain, for the Corsicans to have a vote for theirs, for Tibet and Xinjiang to be able to be free in China, East Timor being free from Indonesia, etc etc etc.
The landscape has changed since then. Every area of Scotland voted to remain. English votes will take them out of the EU. Membership was a big issue during the independence debate. Its worth them taking another look at it as the negotiations unwind.The issue is very simple. Scotland as a nation has never voted tory. Has consistently voted anti trident and pro Europe. Yet they are ruled by a parliament controlled by English MPs. Is that freedom ?
But they voted to stay. Their call. Not Westminster's...
Right now they mostly and usually get it (legitimacy) from the U.N.Whatever India's claim to Kashmir is I am happy with it.Just because they are fighting over the land does not make it a crime.Is that a crime ??
Depends on how you want to define a crime. Kashmir certainly is.
Is it not a crime to send people to war for pathetic reasons?
I personally think it is. I think people who stir up trouble when they're in government are committing crimes. Problem is there's no one to stick them in front of a court.
UBL was not hiding in Kashmir.
You're happy with it. Are the Kashmiri people happy with it? Where does a government get its legitimacy from in order to hold land and the people who live in it?
Your claims against the British are false.Name some genocides.Britain was probably the best coloniser of the lot...
Yeah, they were Great.
Great at genocide, Great at stealing, Great at killing....
It would help if you justified your radical interpretations as you went along.
But in this case I am happy with a footnote.
Go on ... .
Well, against the Australian peoples.
Report details crimes against Aborigines - World Socialist Web Site
"The genocidal practices perpetrated against Australian Aborigines were the outcome of policies adopted and implemented by all Australian governments from British settlement in 1788 until the present."
British Genocides - New British Empire
Here's a whole website.
NORTH AMERICA: Using Smallpox to Eradicate the Natives
NORTH AMERICA: Biological Warfare against Soldiers and Civilians
AUSTRALIA: Barbarism in Tasmania
KENYA: The Mau Mau Uprising
BENGAL, INDIA: Bengal Famine
And more.......
As for it would help to show stuff. Maybe, however my experience is you don't bother because half the people on here won't read past the first sentence. So until you find who you're dealing with, you keep it short and don't waste time proving things that will go unnoticed.
The issue is very simple. Scotland as a nation has never voted tory. Has consistently voted anti trident and pro Europe. Yet they are ruled by a parliament controlled by English MPs. Is that freedom ?Some of those places like Scotland for example just can't make it economically without help.
Unless they go to a society of zero social safety nets and complete freedom. It would be fun to see if this could work.
Can't they? Can you prove that? Scotland is doing fine without needing so much help. Wales on the hand is a different matter, but Scotland, nah, it could easily survive on its own.
Not with oil prices where they are.... Their ref failed when prices were ballooned up.
I disagree. I think Scotland struggles with politics being pro-southern England in the UK. If there were a real border, then Edinburgh and Glasgow would then become more centers of trade than they currently are and Scotland would be stronger.
Pro southern?
What is pro southern about sending more subsidy to Scotland than to England, Wales, or NI?
[
Yeah. The Brits did real bad. Look at all those terrible former colonies that are total basket cases these days. Canada. Australia. US. New Zealand. India. South Africa. Unlike the Spanish colonies. Or French. Or Belgian. Or Portuguese.
Canada, Australia, New Zealand took over the land, replaced the people. South Africa kept most of the people but then the Boers took over and well, that went well, didn't it?
The British also made Iraq. How'd that work out? Oh, they put a SAUDI in as king, they hated him, the Ba'ath Party took over, Saddam took over the Ba'ath Party in Iraq.
Afghanistan, went in twice, got kicked out twice.
India. Well, second largest population in the world, not doing very well.
Pakistan. Wellllllllll, I don't see many people thinking Pakistan's doing so well....
Oh, I could go on all day.
The others generally didn't take over and remove the native population, or at least push them as far away as to make them not a problem.
Oh, Britain invented concentration camps in Kenya..... wonderful.
At the end of the day, European countries were always going to colonise the rest of the world. It was a lottery as to who was going to get what. Those that got Britain won the main prize. Native populations in the US, Canada, NZ and Australia are doing a lot better than those colonised by Spain, France, Belgian etc.
Your claims against the British are false.Name some genocides.Britain was probably the best coloniser of the lot...
Yeah, they were Great.
Great at genocide, Great at stealing, Great at killing....
It would help if you justified your radical interpretations as you went along.
But in this case I am happy with a footnote.
Go on ... .
Well, against the Australian peoples.
Report details crimes against Aborigines - World Socialist Web Site
"The genocidal practices perpetrated against Australian Aborigines were the outcome of policies adopted and implemented by all Australian governments from British settlement in 1788 until the present."
British Genocides - New British Empire
Here's a whole website.
NORTH AMERICA: Using Smallpox to Eradicate the Natives
NORTH AMERICA: Biological Warfare against Soldiers and Civilians
AUSTRALIA: Barbarism in Tasmania
KENYA: The Mau Mau Uprising
BENGAL, INDIA: Bengal Famine
And more.......
As for it would help to show stuff. Maybe, however my experience is you don't bother because half the people on here won't read past the first sentence. So until you find who you're dealing with, you keep it short and don't waste time proving things that will go unnoticed.
I should mute you right now by putting you on the ignore list.
I vote for India. Great democratic nation. Very trustworthy.The UN is in charge of mediating international conflicts.Whatever India's claim to Kashmir is I am happy with it.Is it not a crime to send people to war for pathetic reasons?
I personally think it is. I think people who stir up trouble when they're in government are committing crimes. Problem is there's no one to stick them in front of a court.
UBL was not hiding in Kashmir.
You're happy with it. Are the Kashmiri people happy with it? Where does a government get its legitimacy from in order to hold land and the people who live in it?
My personal view is that Kashmir is not big enough to be an independent state.
And since India is more responsible than Pakistan, give Kashmir to India.
UBL was not hiding in Kashmir or India.
Not big enough?
It's 3 million people.
That would put it 135th in the world, about the same as Armenia. That's out of 195 countries on my list.
Why is Kashmir too small? Personally I think the US, China, India etc are too big.
India is more responsible? You can't just give land and people to a country. That's a ridiculous and arrogant attitude. People should be free to rule themselves. Maybe we should give the US to Mexico. See how you like it.
And UBL was not hiding there right under the government's noses.
The issue is very simple. Scotland as a nation has never voted tory. Has consistently voted anti trident and pro Europe. Yet they are ruled by a parliament controlled by English MPs. Is that freedom ?Can't they? Can you prove that? Scotland is doing fine without needing so much help. Wales on the hand is a different matter, but Scotland, nah, it could easily survive on its own.
Not with oil prices where they are.... Their ref failed when prices were ballooned up.
I disagree. I think Scotland struggles with politics being pro-southern England in the UK. If there were a real border, then Edinburgh and Glasgow would then become more centers of trade than they currently are and Scotland would be stronger.
Pro southern?
What is pro southern about sending more subsidy to Scotland than to England, Wales, or NI?
Who forced them to become a part of, then continue on as, part of the UK ?
You might remember that they had a Referendum ? How did that turn out ?
Those little beet farm countries are not wedged between 2 nuclear superpowers such as India and Pakistan.The UN is in charge of mediating international conflicts.You're happy with it. Are the Kashmiri people happy with it? Where does a government get its legitimacy from in order to hold land and the people who live in it?
My personal view is that Kashmir is not big enough to be an independent state.
And since India is more responsible than Pakistan, give Kashmir to India.
UBL was not hiding in Kashmir or India.
Not big enough?
It's 3 million people.
That would put it 135th in the world, about the same as Armenia. That's out of 195 countries on my list.
Why is Kashmir too small? Personally I think the US, China, India etc are too big.
India is more responsible? You can't just give land and people to a country. That's a ridiculous and arrogant attitude. People should be free to rule themselves. Maybe we should give the US to Mexico. See how you like it.
So you had no problem with Crimean people voting to be Russian when the Ukraine was under a coup?
Well, the reality is, if the whole thing had been done properly, then no, I wouldn't have had an issue with that.
I was in Pristina during a protest march a year before they gained independence from Serbia, I supported that. I also supported the vote for Montenegro being free, for Chechnya being free, for the Scottish to vote freely in their referendum, for the Basques, Catalans etc having a vote in Spain, for the Corsicans to have a vote for theirs, for Tibet and Xinjiang to be able to be free in China, East Timor being free from Indonesia, etc etc etc.
They can grow their sugar beets until hell freezes over and it would make no difference because the Serbs being Russian Orthodox have already murdered all the Muslim Bosniaks and Croats.
Russia, France, and England are the nearest superpowers and far away.