Do you approve or disaprove of her policies when in power. Do you think she changed the country for the better or worse or made little difference? Was she a great, good or bad PM?

best pm ever. she did wot all governmenst have tried doing and decreased the power of the unions, the downside to this was unfortunately a weak economic structure of boom & bust.

Bad PM she took away decent school dinners and my school Milk...Poor Tony has spent the best part of 8 years trying to put things right!!

The rich got richer when she privatised every public service she could get her hands on...

nasty piece of work....may she rot in her own wee on a trolley in a hospital corridor....:rant:

SlimSid 2000 ,

Whatever your opinion of her politics , I bet you were behind her all the way.

Interesting question. Haven't got time at the moment to write an answer of the length the question deserves, but here are my preliminary thoughts.

I used to go to the Soviet Union quite often when Gorbachev was in power. I couldn't help noticing the disparity between his domestic reputation (very low) and his international reputation (very high). There are parallels with Thatcher here. She tended to be lionised abroad, but was (in many circles at least) hated at home. I think that when she dies, the obituaries will on the whole be kind to her (both for her impact domestically and internationally). She was a change agent and, in many ways, the nearest thing to a political revolutionary in Downing Street we have yet had.

Thatcher's legacy: wholesale destruction of industry, rampant unemployment, huge increase in inflation, a greed is good culture, huge inequality, and the belief that finance is far more important than people.

Oh, and the introduction of a presidential style of government that Blair now enjoys so much.

Top lady

:mad:

She gave birth to that abomination :mad:

I had lunch with Thatcher the Milk snatcher in 1978, the year before she became pm.

I have a great respect for herself as a person but not her politics. I was a convener for AUEW/TASS at Plessey in Northampton, thats how I got close to her.

The broad right policy she projected was everyone for themselves. Now we reap the conscequences., higher crime, latch key children, higher drug use, higher unemployment, murder rate up, etc. etc. and a far far more consumer orientated population.

Did people mug you for your plimsols? NO!!! They mug you for you consumable Nike shoes now. And what do they get, a slap on the wrist.

She did change society, but certainly not for the better.

I admit, I am broad left so maybe I am bias lol.

Gotta say I'm completely in agreement with Greenback here.

Though my dad was involved with the NUM over the 80s so i guess I'm a bit biased growing up on a diet of Old Labour.

I think even now if I voted Tory he'd disown me all down to Marge and her union-bashing.

i fully agree with greenback's comments however as a staunch Thatcherite at the time, she took the country by the scruff & did what was necessary. it was unpleasant for millions however it has paved the way for a slighly better country,better european policies & incredible behind the scenes in divide germany & Russia.
prior to Mrs T the nearest we would have got to development in the USSR would be to start flying the Hammer & sickle on the Town Halls in the UK.

" Destroyed industry " , " created rampant inflation " ?
Whatever else you could accuse Margaret Thatcher of , I don't think it's those two items.
In 1978 , I think at one time inflation was nudging 28 % ; in any case under that Labour government , inflation was at an all-time high.
I 'm sure , and maybe someone can be more informative , that British industry had been losing ground for a long time before M.T. came to power. In fact Callaghan or Healey had to run to the I.M.F. to get instructions on how to run the economy sensibly.
Britain was , economically speaking , the laughing stock of Europe.
By all means , M.T. desrves criticism but not on these childish , simplistic grounds .

One of the best PM’s we ever had along with the likes of Churchill. She told it the way it was and took the unions by the horns that would have destroyed our country!

Instead of focusing on the bad things she done, try to think of the good things like giving you the right to own your own house (at a discount!), the European rebate etc, etc!

None of this lying politics we have today!

Bring Back Maggie!!!

Inflation reached 26.9% in August 1975 (under Harold Wilson). It declined over the next few years to under 10% in 1978 but increased again and by May 1979 was over 10%. It continued to grow until peaking in 1980 at about 20% and then falling back sharply.

The average for the Thatcher government was under 5%.

FarEast, inflation doubled from 10 per cent to over 20 per cent in Thatcher's first year of office, and got back to 10 per cent towards the end of the 80s.

Just a question, no need to answer.

The thoughts on Maggie are dependant on age. I lived thru her regime. I saw it before and after. For goodness sake dont bring her back.

Originally posted by BoppinBruce
... Now we reap the conscequences., higher crime, latch key children, higher drug use, higher unemployment, murder rate up, etc. etc. and a far far more consumer orientated population.

Did people mug you for your plimsols? NO!!! They mug you for you consumable Nike shoes now. And what do they get, a slap on the wrist.

She did change society, but certainly not for the better...

God!! Another loony lefty blaming everything that is bad in the country on a previous Tory government!

Isn't it about time the Labour party accepted responsibility for their actions over these issues! Or will they fudge the stats to make it look like they are miles better AGAIN!!!!

Originally posted by BoppinBruce
Just a question, no need to answer.

The thoughts on Maggie are dependant on age. I lived thru her regime. I saw it before and after. For goodness sake dont bring her back.

You're not my old man in disguise are you Bruce? :D

Originally posted by serapis
God!! Another loony lefty blaming everything that is bad in the country on a previous Tory government!

Isn't it about time the Labour party accepted responsibility for their actions over these issues! Or will they fudge the stats to make it look like they are miles better AGAIN!!!!

Eh? :confused:

It's perfectly reasonable to assert that That Woman caused societal divisions – especially seeing as she famously didn't believe in society – in an ugly haves and haves-not consumerist society that was the 80s.

Re-inflation

When governments take power , the economy doesn't suddenly change overnight-----there's obviously an , "overlap " effect.The Conservatives inherited an economic shambles in 1979.
Again , it's simplistic to think that M.T. was the , "Wicked Witch " of the West.
If the miners had been united and ALL the mining community had joined in the strike , perhaps the mining industry would never have collapsed as it did.
As I said , M.T. did many things that were to the detrimenrt of this country but the , " Yah , Boo " method of arguing against her just sounds laughable and would probably drive her supporters to support her actions even more. Is it really so complicated to acknowledge that politicians have positive and negative aspects to their character and actions ?

Is it not fair to say that she introduced realism into industries that had previously only been kept going through hugh subsidies and gross overmanning?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Is it not fair to say that she introduced realism into industries that had previously only been kept going through hugh subsidies and gross overmanning?

Like farming?

Difference is, there was (is?) plenty of coal left...

*wishes he had never started to post on this thread...*

What do I think of Maggie Thatcher? :suspect:

I think she's look rather off-putting in spandex! :clap:

I didn't agree with her pricipals or policies but admired her strength of character and how she stuck to her guns - literally possibly. She believed in her policies and didn't back down but she made it very difficult for people who weren't so well off.

I hope everyone who didn't like what Thatcher did doesn't get branded a 'loony lefty'!:)

Greenback
I think if you check in a history book , you'll find there were a few , "societal " divisions in the 70's too-----and before that !
In the 70's , to name some of them , the Unions were always falling out with the employers. The people who were in unions were constantly bickering with people who weren't.
The large , "blue collar " workforce were always complaining about the , "white collar " workforce and of course , vice-versa ; "Differentials " was the war cry of thar era.
People who wanted to lead normal lives resented people who went on srike { The Winter of Discontent }. I can't remember a time , ever in Britain , when there were NOT , "Haves " and , "Have Nots "
Were the new home owners of the 80's the new Haves or the Have Nots ? There may have been , "societal" divisions in the Thatcher era but she certainly didn't invent them.

Originally posted by tulip
I didn't agree with her pricipals or policies but admired her strength of character and how she stuck to her guns - literally possibly. She believed in her policies and didn't back down but she made it very difficult for people who weren't so well off.

I hope everyone who didn't like what Thatcher did doesn't get branded a 'loony lefty'!:)

The 'loony lefty' comment was about blaming everything that is bad about this country and its economy on the legacy of the Tory party, not because someone didn't like Thatcher.

It will be a happy day for me when she passes, I'll dig out "Tramp The Dirt Down" by Elvis Costello and "Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead"

Anyone know of other tunes for that good day?


I saw a newspaper picture from the political campaign
A woman was kissing a child, who was obviously in pain
She spills with compassion, as that young child's face in her hands she grips
Can you imagine all that greed and avarice coming down on that child's lips

Well I hope I don't die too soon
I pray the Lord my soul to save
Oh I'll be a good boy, I'm trying so hard to behave
Because there's one thing I know, I'd like to live long enough to savour
That's when they finally put you in the ground
I'll stand on your grave and tramp the dirt down

What about sexbomb?
She is quite fit though dont you think??

:) LMAO

Originally posted by Fareast
Greenback
I think if you check in a history book , you'll find there were a few , "societal " divisions in the 70's too-----and before that !
In the 70's , to name some of them , the Unions were always falling out with the employers. The people who were in unions were constantly bickering with people who weren't.
The large , "blue collar " workforce were always complaining about the , "white collar " workforce and of course , vice-versa ; "Differentials " was the war cry of thar era.
People who wanted to lead normal lives resented people who went on srike { The Winter of Discontent }. I can't remember a time , ever in Britain , when there were NOT , "Haves " and , "Have Nots "
Were the new home owners of the 80's the new Haves or the Have Nots ? There may have been , "societal" divisions in the Thatcher era but she certainly didn't invent them.

Hey, way to patronise.

My post was in response to Serapis, and still stands: it is pefectly legitimate to criticise Thatcher for the dissolution of community without automatically being a Loony Lefty. She may not have invented divisions but she certainly didn't seem keen to remedy them either; the gap between rich and poor undoubtedly widened during her reign (through measures such as indirect taxation, for example, in which the poorest members of society pay the largest percentage of taxes).

Originally posted by Norbert
It will be a happy day for me when she passes, I'll dig out "Tramp The Dirt Down" by Elvis Costello and "Ding Dong The Witch Is Dead"

"The Day that Thatcher Dies" by Hefner (little-known and now defunct indie band of the late 90s).

Sample lyric:

"We will laugh the day that Thatcher dies,
Even though we know it's not right,
We will dance and sing all night"

I hope she has a slow and painful death.

I await her statue to urinate against

may she go down in history as doing more damage to england than adolf ever did,she destroyed whole comunities at the flick of a pen,a meglomaniac who thought she was queen of great britain.

WE ARE A GRANDMOTHER, pretencious bitch

Is slimsid2000 craftily promoting a candidate for the forthcoming Conservative Party leadership contest?

Has serapis fallen for the bait?

Or is this thread - discussing a Tory leader from several decades ago - merely a distraction from discussing the shortcomings of the current wannabee Tory leaders? :hihi:

cant wait till she dies :)

reagans gone, shes next :)

Originally posted by depoix
may she go down in history as doing more damage to england than adolf ever did,she destroyed whole comunities at the flick of a pen,a meglomaniac who thought she was queen of great britain.

WE ARE A GRANDMOTHER, pretencious bitch

She did a hell of a lot of damage to Scotland and Wales as well :(

We're all suffering today from her determination that "there is no such thing as society". What a load of crap that was :rant: So much to put right.....

If only Edward Heath hadn't underestimated her in the first place.....

StarSparkle

as a scientist, her PhD thesis revolved around how to get more air into ice cream....

...speaks volumes IMO.

Obviously a consummate politician and prime minister, and as someone said, the closest thing to a political revolutionary in Downing Street.

But, to echo yet more sentiments, her regime was instrumental in disenfranchising the young and the marginal, she used the military against civilian strikers, and she floated UK PLC and poured the dividends into the pockets of the wealthy.

She used scotland as a legislational test-bed, and the tory situation in scotland reflects this.

But it wasn't all bad - was it?

shes the best:D

Spitting Image just wasn't the same after she left :(

Anyhoo... I'm proud to admit that I had the worst of both worlds - educated under a low-spending Tory government, and employed under a high-taxing Labour government :clap:

Funny how everything works out in the end :suspect:

I'll be having a party the day she dies. Stupid bitch. Ruined the country. New Right politics is just fundamentally wrong.

Previous posts :-

" We will laugh the day that Thatcher dies ,
Even though we know that it's not right ,
We will dance and sing all night ".

and '
" I hope she dies a slow and painfull death.
I await her statue to urinate on "

The first were words from a , "now defunct " pop group [!].
How did they get started in the first place ? You couldn't make it up , could you ? It's like reading something on an Infant's school lavatory wall.
To get back to the Thatcher assessment------perhaps the Thatcher years were low -spending years because of the mess the Labour government had got the country into in the '70's ? There is an overlap effect but how long that lasted , perhaps a proper economist can tell us ?
The gap may have widened between rich and poor , as Greenback suggests but the total and general wealth of the country increased. What's so magic and wonderful about equality anyway ? Has any society achieved it ? The old Soviet Union wasa great experiment in , "equality ". It's strange how popular a place Britain was to live vis-a-vis the old Soviet Union !
If people in general feel that life is getting better , they will keep voting for the government in power-----they were apparently so sick of M.T.'s rule that they kept the Tories in power for 18 years ! Very strange !All that inflation , all that unemployment , all that grinding the faces of the poor into the dirt ! Good heavens , it's a wonder she had any supporters at all !
Obviously some people were not happy under Thatcher and as I said ,I think she made many wrong decisions but some people are always going to ," lose out " under certain governments. When have they not ? Running a complex country is not like running a happy-clappy youth club.
Somehow M.T. managed to convince a large section of the Middle class and a fairly big section of the Working class that life would be better under the Tories.
It doesn't need peurile babyish words from , "pop" songs or comments about p*****g against her statue to tell us she wasn't perfect . We all know that. What SHOULD be interesting is sussing out what were her good and bad points and why people kept voting Tory for 18 years . Is it too complicated ? Shouldn't have thought so , in this world of easy information and communication .

Originally posted by Fareast
Previous posts :-


To get back to the Thatcher assessment------perhaps the Thatcher years were low -spending years because of the mess the Labour government had got the country into in the '70's ? There is an overlap effect but how long that lasted , perhaps a proper economist can tell us ?


Perhaps the labour government running to the IMF was a result of the "Barber Boom" of the Tories 1970 - 74 plus the unprecedented hike in oil prices circa 1975.

She got into power on a downright lie - "labour isn't working" - wasn't that her slogan - in no time at all there were a couple of million more people without a job.

The country did not thrive under the Thatcher Government - certain 'Conservative paying organisations' may have done, but the average employers of working class people did not.

She destroyed the Unions (though her reforms of the trade unions have not been reversed by subsequent labour government)

The only reason she & the conservative party were re-elected is because the country was on a high after the Falklands War.

She was a strong, bloody minded leader - how wonderful it would have been if she'd been a Labour prime minister.

There is an old political maxim which says that opposition parties don't win elections, but governments can lose them.

In 1978 James Callaghan (who had succeeded Wilson as Prime Minister), publicly ruled out an election. There then followed a disasterous period of public service worker strikes - which became known as The Winter of Discontent. This was a gift to Thatcher, who romped to victory in the 1979 general election.

Michael Foot became leader of the Labour Party in 1980, but
divisions within the Labour Party saw the so-called Gang of Four form the SDP. The 1983 Labour Party election manifesto, with heavy left-wing bias, became known as the longest suicide note in history. Although Thatcher's popularity had waned, it was suddenly bolstered by military success in the Falklands. Perceived as a strong leader, Thatcher led the Conservative Party to another sweeping victory in the 1983 general election.

The opposition vote was almost evenly split between the Labour and Alliance (the SDP + Liberal Party had joined together to fight under one banner). The Labour vote fell by over 3 million from 1979, with a national swing of almost 4% towards the Conservatives. The Conservative vote actually fell slightly but the disarray of their opponents gave them a majority of 144.

The 1987 general election was thus fought with both a new leader of the Labour Party, Neil Kinnock, and from the lowest baseline vote the Party had had since 1918. A steep hill to climb. It was also fought after the Thatcher government had defeated Arthur Scargill and the National Union of Mineworkers in a national strike, and subsequently defeated the print unions. The economy was also performing better.

The SDP and Liberal Party renewed their Alliance for the 1987 general election, but Thatcher won a third victory in a row. The Conservative Party lost 42 seats, and Thatcher was returned with 102 seat majority.

But even 3 general election victories in a row was not enough to secure her position as leader of the Conservative Party. Her style of governing, and her opposition to further European integration ("no, no, no") cost her dearly. She was challenged for the leadership, and although she did not lose the first round of voting, she was fatally weakened. The rest, as they say, is history.

Hels '

It seems very strange that the country didn't thrive !
More cars , more foreign holidays , just simply more spending all round.
If M.T. had only managed to appeal to a select few , how come she was elected , time after time ?. Did the Falklands war effect last for 18 years ? Very strange , that Churchill lost the 1945 election , by a landslide 4 months after V.E. day. !
Maybe these effects come and go , for some reason ?
Probably the greatest appeal that she had for people was the sale of council houses. Previous to that , people who lived in council houses were looked down upon as 2nd. class citizens by other people who accused them of living in subsidised housing . Actually , they could never afford to buy a home because a lot of their income was taken up in rent . Sometimes , they couldn't even paint their houses unless the council gave them permission. It was like renting a fairly run-down car -----then suddenly you could buy the , "car" for just a bit more money . I know all about the mortgage , "crisis " in the late '90's but overall and in the long term , people felt happier owning their own home .
Another pollster mentioned the oil crisis. Well , that's true and proves the point I was making that all governments inherit economic conditions from the previous one ; the main point is how long does the effect last ?
Also what about Britain 's labour costs in the '70's ? Didn't that have something to do with our decline too ?
I'm not suggesting for one minute that M.T. was a wise leader or perfect or very pleasant. I think she was a personal and political bully but the reaction of the , "Knee-Jerk" Brigade , every time her name is mentioned is astonishing in this day and age.

Originally posted by redrobbo
Her style of governing, and her opposition to further European integration ("no, no, no") cost her dearly.

...style of governing, europe and, don't forget, the poll tax. Perhaps not that major an issue for those in the tory party who forced her resignation, but most certainly the depth of public antipathy to it gave them the bottle to topple her.

Originally posted by RichF
...style of governing, europe and, don't forget, the poll tax. Perhaps not that major an issue for those in the tory party who forced her resignation, but most certainly the depth of public antipathy to it gave them the bottle to topple her.

Ah yes, the poll tax! How could I have overlooked that! Tested first on the Scots - and they never forgave her!

The Conservative Party in Scotland were wiped out in the 1997 general election, failing to win a single seat (also in Wales). They made a recovery in 2001, winning 1 seat (but only achieving 15.6% of the total vote). In 2005, they still only managed 1 seat, but gained an a 0.2% increase in the total vote.

What a legacy Thatcher left the Tory party in Scotland, and all because of her foolish poll tax policy.

I think RedRobbo makes a very important point ,re--about the opposition.
Whatever the pros and cons of Thatchers rule , her job was made easier for her in some of the ways that RedRobbo mentions.
I think her arrogance and bullying came out worst in her attitude to the mining communities.I don't think she had any idea [or didn't care ! ] that mining villages were a , "one industry " community.Her fight with the miners was made easy for her by the disunity in the miner's ranks and some of the brutal tactics of the strikers , which was televised and turned a fair number of the public against the strike.Anyway , that subject deserves a thread of its own !
She had about 12 or 13 years [?] to achieve things or do a lot of damage . I think she did both -----sometimes on a grand scale !

Margaret Thatcher was one of the best PM's this country has ever had. She crushed the unions for a start. Now although they may have done some good they had become power mad. I lived through the labour years when we had nothing but strikes and powercuts, and it was not an enjoyable time.

The thing that she will be remembered for, unfortunately, is the poll tax. Just hwo dreamed that up I would love to know cos I bet it was not her.

She got this country back on its feet, cut out the waste and gave us a foundation to build upon. Now what do the conservatives have? A group of namby pamby liberals. In fact - is there any difference between labour and the conservatives?

We need another Maggie figurehead.

Dragon

Originally posted by StarSparkle
She did a hell of a lot of damage to Scotland and Wales as well :(

We're all suffering today from her determination that "there is no such thing as society". What a load of crap that was :rant: So much to put right.....

If only Edward Heath hadn't underestimated her in the first place.....

StarSparkle sorry starspankle, i meant to put britain but the bile was rising to fast at the time.i hope she lingers on,watching her life blood ooze away from her,until there is just a shell left,like the comunities she destroyed

Haven't read all the other posts but to me Thatcher was a fantastic PM.

For those who remember the power cuts, the way Trade Unions could hold the country to ransom, the ambulance strike, the binmen strike and the general stench of decay that was running through the nose of the country, it needed a leader with the balls to not only stand up to the power of the trade union movement but to smash it if need be.

Thatcher is rightly admired for having the courage to do what she thought best for her country. The good economic climate that this country finds itself in begun when she was elected PM in 1979.

Away from the likes of Scargill, she looked after British subjects in the Falklands - Blair, however much he admires Thatcher (and he does) would not have had the nerve to send the full force of the army and navy out the way Thatcher did.

Yes, she made some mistakes, all politicians do, but she got more things right than wrong. New Labour embraces the private initiatives that she established (although Labour are too embarrassed to admit it via their Part-Private Initiatives). She gave folk the chance to buy their own (council) houses, had great relations with the US (to which Tony has gone one better) and in all was the right person to run the country at the end of the 1970s.

To me, an icon and when it comes to the sexes, as a female in politics (ur, a woman in a man's world - sorry) a truly influential figure.

Spitting Image got it spot on with the pin-stripe suit and cigar.

everyone jumps on mrs t re: the poll tax.
this govt are about to increase your council tax for imprving parking on your own driveway, for adding a conservatory & generally improving your home.

isit fairer that someone with a bit of pride should pay more for their home,or say a 3 bed house with 4 wage earning people paying less council tax then a retired professional in abungalow.
i cant understand some peoples logic someotimes.

Margaret Thatcher was a very strong leader, she picked up the pieces after that Buffoon Heath sold us out to europe, she ensured that the union's stranglehold over the economy was broken, she re-established this country on the world stage as a major player rather than a crappy little island blighted by a myriad problems, in short she did more for this country since Churchill.

If todays incumbents had an ounce of the balls Maggie had we'd not be in the state we're in today. God bless the Iron Lady

Originally posted by Swan_Vesta
Margaret Thatcher.......God bless the Iron Lady


May she Rust In Piece.

She was a horrid cow and I yearn for the day. (I think we know which day I mean - it can't be far off).
I personally will take the day off work and drink myself silly.

GGGAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRR RRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH HHHHHHHHHHHHHHH

best PM ever and what thsi country is crying out for now. i no nonsense speaking PM who says what she believes but most importantly doesnt feel as though she ahs to justify herself to teh idots that question TB all teh time ! i mena the tories last election run, they where on TV and some idiot asked him dont u think your being racist by raisign the issue of imigration !!! MT would of laughed in their face or told them to get lost, instead they spent 30mins defendign their point ! bring her back !

I think the obituaries, and indeed history, will be a lot kinder to Thatcher than many of the posters on this forum. She has a number of solid achievements to her credit in the fields of both domestic and foreign policy. In fact, the range of her impact is so wide (far more so than any other modern PM in my view) that I think it best to give separate examples, rather than outline all of her achievements in a single post.

If we take Europe for example, it is Thatcher that we have to thank for the budget rebate from the EU. As a consequence of the complete mess Heath made of the UK;'s entry negotiations into the EU, the UK commited itself to paying vast amounts into the EU budget for little in return from 1973 onwards. Although Wilson and Callaghan tried to renegotiate the budget terms, they were repeatedly stonewalled by the French (in particular) and other EU members. Thatcher was made of sterner stuff, and at the Fountainebelau EU summit in 1984, Thatcher handbagged the lot of them and secured an appreciable reduction in the imbalance between payments and contributions, which continues to this day. She also secured a commitment that this rebate would be in perpetuity, unless the UK agreed otherwise.

She also was strongly opposed to the UK's entry into the exchange rate mechanism and to the single currency project. The first proved to be a disaster for the UK after we joined and the latter is proving to be, if not a complete disaster, something less than the success envisaged by the Europhiles. It is now also generally accepted that it would be a very bad thing for the UK to enter this project anytime soon.

Thatcher also saw clearly how deeply entrenched quasi-federalist thinking was amongst the elites in parts of continental Europe. She strongle opposed this trend throughout her premiership. I think the fate of the so called EU constitution, and the growing acceptance of a Union of sovereign states model of the EU, is showing that far from being out-dated, her views on Europe were if anything ahead of their time.

I've not even touched yet on her achievements in the fields of foreign policy (especially her contribution to ending the cold war) and also her achievements in the field of domestic policy.

Originally posted by Fareast
If people in general feel that life is getting better , they will keep voting for the government in power-----they were apparently so sick of M.T.'s rule that they kept the Tories in power for 18 years ! Very strange !All that inflation , all that unemployment , all that grinding the faces of the poor into the dirt ! Good heavens , it's a wonder she had any supporters at all !
Obviously some people were not happy under Thatcher and as I said ,I think she made many wrong decisions but some people are always going to ," lose out " under certain governments. When have they not ? Running a complex country is not like running a happy-clappy youth club.
Somehow M.T. managed to convince a large section of the Middle class and a fairly big section of the Working class that life would be better under the Tories.


There were two main reasons Thatcher was re-elected and they were

1. The Falklands Factor
2. Bribing the electorate

Without the Falklands War, Thatcher would never have got back into power. Her personal popularity rating and that of the Tories soared after that - she had been deeply unpopular up until then, and there's "nothing like a Good War" to whip up the population behind the government. (Well, hopefully we're more sophisticated nowadays as Mr Blair now realises), but it worked a treat back in the 80s.

The Tories quite simply bribed the voters, with the sale of council houses and low taxation high on the list. Also the lure of large redundancy packages (from all those industries that were decimated) blinded some people with greed for a while, I think, with no thought that once they'd sold their job, there probably wouldn't be another one for them to go to.

I fear, however, LordChaverly is correct in his assessment that History will be quite kind to Margaret Thatcher - the 'warrior' leader who gives way to none is an appealing image. No doubt her feistiness against the French and the Bureaucrats of Brussels will be the view posterity takes of her, and the economic ruin she left in her wake, and all the misery and unhappiness and division she brought about will be conveniently swept under the carpet of history.

But no-one who lived through the economic and social carnage of the 80s and suffered from it will ever forgive her.

StarSparkle

Originally posted by LordChaverly
I think the obituaries, and indeed history, will be a lot kinder to Thatcher than many of the posters on this forum.

That's because the obituary and history writers won't be Yorkshire folk she sh*t on.

Originally posted by Guderian
She was a horrid cow and I yearn for the day. (I think we know which day I mean - it can't be far off).
I personally will take the day off work and drink myself silly.

Funnily enough I think the same, with one minor alteration:

I'm saving myself not for when Maggie goes, but for Arthur Scargill.

That will be one party.

Originally posted by Ousetunes
Funnily enough I think the same, with one minor alteration:

I'm saving myself not for when Maggie goes, but for Arthur Scargill.

That will be one party.

Fancy a drinking partner for that day? :D

I loathe the man, I think he's a grubby little rabble rouser with all the appeal of a woodlouse.

Originally posted by Swan_Vesta
Fancy a drinking partner for that day? :D

I loathe the man, I think he's a grubby little rabble rouser with all the appeal of a woodlouse.

I'll buy:thumbsup:

Whatever people think of her policies or of her as a person I can't help feeling it rather distasteful to talk about celebrating someone's death. I can find a lot wrong with Ted Heath's term of office for example but still tried to find something positive to say of him when he died.

On the policy front, I am not sure all this talk about 'decimating' (which literally means to kill every tenth person) industry is all that acurate. The reality was that the industries that shed most labour in the 1980s such as coal mining and steel production were hugh loss makers that only existed at all because of big subsidies. They were badly overmaned and uncompetative. The only alternative to her approach would have been to carry on subsidising them indefinately. Industry should be run economically and it is not part of the welfare state.

By privatising industry many people became shareholders for the first time and those sensible enough to hold on to their shares saw a good return on their investment. The process of privatisation and (importantly deregulation) increased consumer choice in areas that were previously state monopolies and not very responsive to consumers. The telephone industry would be a good example.

Star sparkle
You seem to have a very strange view of politics and seem to infer that we ought never have gone to war to protect British nationals because it made Margaret Thatcher more popular ! Well , of course it did because people thought it was the right thing to do.
Going to war , does not always bring victory or popularity to someone who was the leader. You , yourself mentioned Tony Blair and the classic example was of course Churchill.Three months after V.E day he ws routed in the 1945 election.
If you don't think voters are idiots , you must see that they support a P.M.or a government for a host of reasons.
What was Thatcher supposed to do about council house sales , which became so popular ? Was she supposed to say , "Oh well , I won't do this as it might make me popular " ?
The whole point about Thatcher was that she acted without shilly-shallying , whether it was going to prove popular or not -----and that is why a lot of people admired her. How would she know if the Falklands war was going to be a success ?
Also , of course , as someone has mentioned , there was her curtailing of the unions. People also seemed to support that after the experience of the late 1970's.
Finally there was her relationship with countries abroad ; all this should be weighed against her unpopular acts. It's far too simplistic to blame her popularity on the war only or her unpopularity on the Poll Tax only.
I don't know why the anti-Thatcherites get into such mouth-froths when she's mentioned e.g. somebody said she , "destroyed the Unions " ! I wonder who those 7 or 8 million people are today , then , who pay their subscriptions to a union. Must be a rip off somewhere !

Originally posted by slimsid2000
By privatising industry many people became shareholders for the first time and those sensible enough to hold on to their shares saw a good return on their investment. The process of privatisation and (importantly deregulation) increased consumer choice in areas that were previously state monopolies and not very responsive to consumers. The telephone industry would be a good example.

The people who bought shares in the privatised industries effectively stole from the rest of us. The nationalised industries belonged to all of us, and the Thatcher government had no right to sell them off, largely to their own cronies.

Mmm, yes, privatisation really has worked a treat for the railways and the water industry, etc hasn't it? The service has SO improved and the costs have really come down, haven't they? :rolleyes: Does Britain have much of a coal mining industry these days?

StarSparkle

PS By the way, I know exactly what 'decimating' means. It doesn't nearly go far enough to describe the wanton destruction Thatcher subjected this country to.

Although some industries shrank others grew, for example the service sector. Would anyone really want to pull down Meadowhall and replace it with a steel works?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Although some industries shrank others grew, for example the service sector. Would anyone really want to pull down Meadowhall and replace it with a steel works?


Can I get back to you on that one?

Originally posted by noseyrosie
I'll be having a party the day she dies. Stupid bitch. Ruined the country. New Right politics is just fundamentally wrong.
As you are far too young to remember the reign of the Iron Lady and indeed the horrendous power struggles that went on between the unions and the establishment I find your post rather aggressive and judgemental. Ruined the country - what kind of statement is that?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Although some industries shrank others grew, for example the service sector. Would anyone really want to pull down Meadowhall and replace it with a steel works?

You're on very shaky ground there!

Do you realise just how many people hate Meadowhell with a great loathing?

StarSparkle :D

Originally posted by StarSparkle
Mmm, yes, privatisation really has worked a treat for the railways and the water industry, etc hasn't it? The service has SO improved and the costs have really come down, haven't they? :rolleyes: Does Britain have much of a coal mining industry these days?



And yet New Labour are happy to keep things privatised and not re-nationalise them again.

Blair is more Tory than the Conservative Party; he just daren't admit it.

Ofcause there's no coal mining. Arthur and his pathetic antics put paid to that.

reading starspakles posts means we are obviously full circle now.
mT was voted/bribed to power 'cos the labour gov't charged high tax, paid unsustainable wage, allowed strikes every other day& supported them, supported flying of communist flags & the singing of communist/socialist anthems against the will of the people.

mr blair was given a victory 'cos we no longer had strong PM & his offers looked better on paper. my pay packet feels lighter & doesn't go as far as it did in the 80's.
blair cannot affect the hospitals in 3 terms as pm yet you believe he is the reason for economic stability.
upon his appointment mr brown stated he would build on the policies of the tory governement to provide financial & economic stability - that is on record.

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Would anyone really want to pull down Meadowhall and replace it with a steel works?

Yes please! :clap:

While I think Thatcher did some good things in her time in power, I think she also did some awful things.

If I remember correctly, the mines were closed down (despite there being a good deal of coal still down there!) because Thatcher realised that she could save money by encouraging the use of slave labour (and probably child labour too) overseas.

Another disastrous thing she did was to privatise/deregulate public transport. She completely wrecked what was a very cheap and reliable bus service in Sheffield.

I won't be so distasteful as to celebrate when she passes away, but I certainly celebrated when she lost power! :rant:

I very much doubt that in todays economic climate that even if the coal mining industry had survived Scargill's multi-pronged battering that it'd be able to operate as a profit making concern. Cheap imports from abroad would have eventually scuppered any chance of survival, what happened was merely a swifter version of what would have taken decades had it escaped the power crazed schemes of the NUM.

Here's an alternative for you to ponder: Imagine the whole debacle, miners striking, power shortages, Police on the streets daily, Scargill rallying them into a baying mass and who is the PM who is there to deal with it? Tony Blair. Sorry, but I'll take Maggie every day of the week.

Originally posted by StarSparkle
You're on very shaky ground there!

Do you realise just how many people hate Meadowhell with a great loathing?



Judging by the numbers who go there (especially on a Saturday) quite a lot don't. It is also a much more pleasant environment than the steelworks it replaced.

Margaret Thatcher is a loathsome, vile, disgusting creature who should be placed in a vacuum chamber and allowed to explode into millions of bits of pieces before being thrown to the pirahana's.

Originally posted by Lestat
Margaret Thatcher is a loathsome, vile, disgusting creature who should be placed in a vacuum chamber and allowed to explode into millions of bits of pieces before being thrown to the pirahana's.

I'll put you down as a 'don't know' then.:hihi:

Originally posted by Fareast
Star sparkle
You seem to have a very strange view of politics and seem to infer that we ought never have gone to war to protect British nationals because it made Margaret Thatcher more popular ! Well , of course it did because people thought it was the right thing to do.
Going to war , does not always bring victory or popularity to someone who was the leader. You , yourself mentioned Tony Blair and the classic example was of course Churchill.Three months after V.E day he ws routed in the 1945 election.
If you don't think voters are idiots , you must see that they support a P.M.or a government for a host of reasons.
What was Thatcher supposed to do about council house sales , which became so popular ? Was she supposed to say , "Oh well , I won't do this as it might make me popular " ?
The whole point about Thatcher was that she acted without shilly-shallying , whether it was going to prove popular or not -----and that is why a lot of people admired her. How would she know if the Falklands war was going to be a success ?


There is a school of thought that suggests the Tory government of the early 80s (indirectly) led the Argentinian government to believe that Britain would do nothing to stop Argentina should she try to regain the Falkland Islands. Knowing they were on course to lose the upcoming election, the government let the Falklands situation come about, and then responded with full force to it, knowing, as I said earlier, a 'Good War' tends to rally the populace.

There is NO WAY Thatcher would ever have countenanced us losing the Falklands War - she would have thrown in whatever was necessary to win, even to bombing Buenos Aires. Once that war started, Britain was simply never going to lose it. It was a question of Thatcher's Face.

An interesting historical point: when Labour was in power during the 70s, the Argentines made a lot of noise about the 'Malvinas', and there were rumblings of a possible invasion. Foreign Secretary of the time David Owen immediately increased the UK's military presence in the area, making it very clear Britain would fight to keep the islands.

StarSparkle

Could you please enlighten us who the , "school of thought " was ?
There were perhaps many schools of thought . No-pne could be certain that the Argentines would try to seriously take over the Falklands.
I was under the impression that at one stage the Falklands War was , "touch and go ". I may be wrong about that . Maybe someone with a history book or something can enlighten us ?
Do you seriously imagine that a P.M. who was unpopular , up to that point and had only been in power for such a short time , would have got permission from Parliament and the armed forces to bomb Beunos Aires ? You're the first person who I've come across who has made this suggestion , despite listening to endless rants against M.T. for 24 years ! Maybe you know something we don't know about it all ?
Again , a , "good " war does NOT guarantee anyone popularity because people vote on a package of issues. Was the 2nd. World War not a ,"good " war either.?
People supported M.T. or detested her policies for many different reasons , as has been pointed out on this thread. Of course the Falklands war made her popular but it wasn't the only reason for her popularity. Nor , yet , have I seen any evidence that it was all a dark conspiracy , merely to increase her prestige.
With all the bitter enemies she made , both within and outside the government , I think by now , someone would have well and truly , "blown the whistle " , don't you ?-----not just , "a school of thought ".

As the historian A.J.P Taylor said, wars are very much like road accidents, in that they have both general and particular causes. The immediate and specific cause of the Falklands war was the invasion of the islands by Argentina in 1982. This was precipitated in part by two factors; firstly, the attempts by the Argentinian military junta to seek popularity by seeking to regain the Falklands by force. Secondly, misreading of cues and signs about the likely British response to an invasion. On the latter point, I think it was more cock up than conspiracy on the British side (leading to some resignations). Where Thatcher came into her own was in resolutely refusing to countenance the invasion and in leading the nation in time of war (a war incidentally opposed by one T. Blair).

But Thatcher's greatest claim to fame in the field of foreign policy was her not insignificant role in bringing the cold war to an end. The policies of Thatcher and Reagan played an important role in forcing the Soviets to rethink their external (and indirectly domestic) policies. She also played a key role in establishing and promoting dialogue with Gorbachev from 1985. It is no wonder she is widely admired in Central and Eastern Europe, for the role she played in freeing the peoples of Eastern Europe from Soviet hegemony.

I think in any discussion of British subjects living on remote islands we should remember the fate of the poor people of Diego Garcia who were forcibly removed from their island paradise by the British govt. to provide a strategic military base for the Yanks.

Why were the Falklanders more deserving of our protection than these people who were shipped eventually to the Seychelles to live in squalid poverty ?

Their treatment makes me almost ashamed to be British. :mad:

Originally posted by willman
everyone jumps on mrs t re: the poll tax.
this govt are about to increase your council tax for imprving parking on your own driveway, for adding a conservatory & generally improving your home.

isit fairer that someone with a bit of pride should pay more for their home,or say a 3 bed house with 4 wage earning people paying less council tax then a retired professional in abungalow.
i cant understand some peoples logic someotimes.

So that would be the council tax that Michael Hesletine brought in to replace the hated poll tax then? I wonder if you made your objections to the council tax known to the Major government at the time?

Originally posted by slimsid2000
Although some industries shrank others grew, for example the service sector. Would anyone really want to pull down Meadowhall and replace it with a steel works? If you'd have asked the steel workers who lost their jobs I'm sure you would have heard a resounding 'yes' to that one!;)

Originally posted by tulip
If you'd have asked the steel workers who lost their jobs I'm sure you would have heard a resounding 'yes' to that one!;) hi tulip,did you leave us because of the politics in the uk or was it for love? i wish i could have afforded to emigrate but the way maggie worked it,you had to work to pay for the council house you had just mortgaged,she made sure you were tied to the job whatever the wages were.

peope slag the unions,but without them wanting wage increases for members there would have been no nurses,miners to provide heat in our homes, bus drivers etc. people were working for a pittance but the rich were getting richer on their backs, i received the grand total of £ 8 2/6pence for a full week working down orgrieve pit,would any one else have risked their lives for that? but without us their would have been no heating,no electric power. people forget that,they wouldnt do the job but they thought it was over priced in wages,yet a printer could earn £ 400 / 500 per week, she was a despot,yorkshire earned it and the south spent it,i detest the woman.........end of rant

Originally posted by Fareast
Previous posts :-

" We will laugh the day that Thatcher dies ,
Even though we know that it's not right ,
We will dance and sing all night ".

and '
" I hope she dies a slow and painfull death.
I await her statue to urinate on "

The first were words from a , "now defunct " pop group [!].
How did they get started in the first place ? You couldn't make it up , could you ? It's like reading something on an Infant's school lavatory wall.
To get back to the Thatcher assessment------perhaps the Thatcher years were low -spending years because of the mess the Labour government had got the country into in the '70's ? There is an overlap effect but how long that lasted , perhaps a proper economist can tell us ?
The gap may have widened between rich and poor , as Greenback suggests but the total and general wealth of the country increased. What's so magic and wonderful about equality anyway ? Has any society achieved it ? The old Soviet Union wasa great experiment in , "equality ". It's strange how popular a place Britain was to live vis-a-vis the old Soviet Union !
If people in general feel that life is getting better , they will keep voting for the government in power-----they were apparently so sick of M.T.'s rule that they kept the Tories in power for 18 years ! Very strange !All that inflation , all that unemployment , all that grinding the faces of the poor into the dirt ! Good heavens , it's a wonder she had any supporters at all !
Obviously some people were not happy under Thatcher and as I said ,I think she made many wrong decisions but some people are always going to ," lose out " under certain governments. When have they not ? Running a complex country is not like running a happy-clappy youth club.
Somehow M.T. managed to convince a large section of the Middle class and a fairly big section of the Working class that life would be better under the Tories.
It doesn't need peurile babyish words from , "pop" songs or comments about p*****g against her statue to tell us she wasn't perfect . We all know that. What SHOULD be interesting is sussing out what were her good and bad points and why people kept voting Tory for 18 years . Is it too complicated ? Shouldn't have thought so , in this world of easy information and communication .

oh I'm sorry oh mature and grown up one. I wont comment again as my opinion upsets you. I apologise for expressing my opinion and you not liking it but I saw what she did to this country.

My comments are not purile they are exactly what I want to happen.

Originally posted by robbie
oh I'm sorry oh mature and grown up one. I wont comment again as my opinion upsets you. I apologise for expressing my opinion and you not liking it but I saw what she did to this country.

My comments are not purile they are exactly what I want to happen. calm down mate,the great british public eventually woke up and ousted the tories,but im afraid at the moment we seem to have a tory /labour prime minister,but i have a feeling t wont be for much longer,the truth always comes out,i can see our tony resigning sometime in the near future and taking a new job in the usa

Mrs Thatcher isn't one of my favourite people, in that I come from a mining area. However, I do respect the old battle axe for having the courage of her convictions and making soem changes to the UK that were essential after the debacle of Labour rule in the late 1970s.

With regard to the Falklands, the US were at one point approached by Brazil who were concerned that the UK would launch attacks on the Argentine mainland if the Falklands adventure looked like going wrong.

Reagan informed the Brazillians that they were wrong, but such rumours at diplomatic level start somewhere.

I think it's quite possible that we might have attacked the mainland in soem way had it been necessary. There were a couple of abortive attempts by Special Forces to attack the bases of the Argentine airforce fighters that carried the Exocets, and I can see no reason why the runway busting raids of the Vulcans on Port Stanley could not have been used against the airforce bases on the mainland. I'm sure that this was mentioned after the War - I'll try and find the references if people are interested.

The make up of the Task Force was such that had we lost one of the 'capital ships' it would have been difficult to continue force projection down there, but we would have still been able to use strategic forces such as the Vulcan bombers (resources that are no longer available) to make life on the Falklands difficult for the Argentinians until a further task force, if required, was available.

There are some nice quotes from the folks involved that indicate the way the US helped Thatcher :

"The UK is our closest ally. President Reagan has also ordered that the US should respond positively to the requirements of the British forces for the supply of materials." - Al Haig

"without the Harrier jets and their immense manoeuvrability, equipped as they were with the latest version of the Sidewinder missile, supplied to us by US Defence Minister Caspar Weinberger, we could never have got back the Falklands." - Margaret Thatcher

The French provided assistance with regard to dealing with Excocet missiles, and the Chileans provided intelligence as to when aircraft took off from the mainland of Argentina to attack the Task Force.

The US also provided indirect assistance in terms of Elint gathering - signals intelligence would go through the NSA and GCHQ. It would have been easy for the US to 'turn off' this tap had they wished to.

There were any number of reasons why other Western countries didn't want Thatcher to lose the war and be replaced by a Labour Government. She was lucky enough to be able to call in the markers.

Joe

Where do I start?

Fareast (note I have the courtesy to spell your name correctly) -
I'm surprised you claim I have a 'very strange view of politics' - I hold an honours degree in politics from a very prestigious British university.

With your obvious admiration for Mrs Thatcher and her legacy, I am very surprised that you choose to live abroad rather than stay here to enjoy the fruits of her efforts. Or perhaps the social/economic fallout from that time doesn't appeal to you?

With regard to the Falklands War, I stand by my comments that there is no way on earth Thatcher would have allowed Britain to lose that war. I am convinced she would have had no hesitation in using 'whatever means necessary'. The Task Force may have been under pressure for a while, but that would only have been the beginning. Apart from anything else, the USA was providing the UK with logistical, weapons, intelligence, diplomatic and satellite support. Argentina simply could not have won against all that - it is laughable to suggest the situation was ever 'touch and go'.


LordChaverly - I hear what you say about Thatcher's part in ending the 'Cold War', but I think her being in power when the Soviet Union collapsed was more of a coincidence than anything else. The Soviet Bloc was on its knees economically - it had thrown everything it had into keeping up with the west militarily, and ultimately had run itself into the ground. It could simply no longer carry on its struggle with the USA. It was economically devastated by the late 80s.

As for the people of Eastern Europe being grateful to Thatcher - maybe they were in the immediate aftermath of the ending of the Cold War, but when they found out what rampant capitalism actually means for working people, got disillusioned pretty quickly. Funnily enough, they found they didn't all get a 'Dallas' lifestyle - but instead lost full employment, housing for all, pensions for all, etc.


Meanwhile, here in Britain we are living with the consequences of 'Thatcher's Britain'. Thatcher famously declared 'There is no such thing as society', so everyone is out for themselves and if you're old or sick, to hell with you. Dirty Socialist concepts such as social justice are laughed at; the gap between the haves and have-nots larger than ever and obscene wealth is flaunted. In previous generations, with wealth came social responsibility towards those less fortunate. Now all that matters is Rights, not Responsibilities.

The only currency worth a damn is how much money you've got - and if you've not got much, then God help you, because no-one else will.

I could go ranting on. Suffice it to say, the Thatcher legacy seems to be that we know the cost of everything, but the true value of nothing.

StarSparkle

I can't really be arsed to read the whole of this thread as the "Thatcher" thing comes up again and again.

For what it is worth she destroyed my town. She destroyed families. She destroyed people I know and love. She destroyed people I have never met and never will. She is destroying people now.

She is evil. She had an agnenda against the working classes, and too many ****wits went along with her. The amount of people who voted tory and won't admit it make me sick. My Mam voted Tory. Many working Class people did. Why? Thatcher was clever. She new what to do when it mattered.

Going to lose an election? Sell council housing to the tenants. A quick fix, but look at housing now. It's a mess, Thatcher's fault. Just an example of her ways to win votes.

The only good thing about her is that she will soon be dead. And good riddence you evil EVIL old ****ing goat. I for one will dance the day she is gone.

AND...why the hell is Mark not imprisoned? Oh yeah, it's cos his Mam is a twisted crooked bent old fascist cow.

Anyone who respects Thatcher respects discrimination, abuse, elitism, human torture and disregard for human rights in general.

ooooh, er, yes, rant over. You old ****ing goat Thatcher, raghhh.

Originally posted by JoeP
Mrs Thatcher isn't one of my favourite people, in that I come from a mining area. However, I do respect the old battle axe for having the courage of her convictions and making soem changes to the UK that were essential after the debacle of Labour rule in the late 1970s.

With regard to the Falklands, the US were at one point approached by Brazil who were concerned that the UK would launch attacks on the Argentine mainland if the Falklands adventure looked like going wrong.

Reagan informed the Brazillians that they were wrong, but such rumours at diplomatic level start somewhere.

I think it's quite possible that we might have attacked the mainland in soem way had it been necessary. There were a couple of abortive attempts by Special Forces to attack the bases of the Argentine airforce fighters that carried the Exocets, and I can see no reason why the runway busting raids of the Vulcans on Port Stanley could not have been used against the airforce bases on the mainland. I'm sure that this was mentioned after the War - I'll try and find the references if people are interested.

The make up of the Task Force was such that had we lost one of the 'capital ships' it would have been difficult to continue force projection down there, but we would have still been able to use strategic forces such as the Vulcan bombers (resources that are no longer available) to make life on the Falklands difficult for the Argentinians until a further task force, if required, was available.

There are some nice quotes from the folks involved that indicate the way the US helped Thatcher :

"The UK is our closest ally. President Reagan has also ordered that the US should respond positively to the requirements of the British forces for the supply of materials." - Al Haig

"without the Harrier jets and their immense manoeuvrability, equipped as they were with the latest version of the Sidewinder missile, supplied to us by US Defence Minister Caspar Weinberger, we could never have got back the Falklands." - Margaret Thatcher

The French provided assistance with regard to dealing with Excocet missiles, and the Chileans provided intelligence as to when aircraft took off from the mainland of Argentina to attack the Task Force.

The US also provided indirect assistance in terms of Elint gathering - signals intelligence would go through the NSA and GCHQ. It would have been easy for the US to 'turn off' this tap had they wished to.

There were any number of reasons why other Western countries didn't want Thatcher to lose the war and be replaced by a Labour Government. She was lucky enough to be able to call in the markers.

Joe hang on joe,the sas/sbs did strike the argentine air force on their home ground,destroying many of their planes and as for the french,they actually sold the exocets that sank hms sheffield to israel,who in turn sold them to argentina,the usa provided satallite intelligence from day one,thats how the british fleet was able to recall and equip the task force so quickly,it was the saviour of maggie thatcher as she was quickly losing the confidence of the british public and needed a victory to get back inthe populations good books

Originally posted by boyface

For what it is worth she destroyed my town. She destroyed families. She destroyed people I know and love. She destroyed people I have never met and never will. She is destroying people now.

She is evil. She had an agnenda against the working classes, and too many ****wits went along with her. The amount of people who voted tory and won't admit it make me sick. My Mam voted Tory. Many working Class people did. Why? Thatcher was clever. She new what to do when it mattered.

Going to lose an election? Sell council housing to the tenants. A quick fix, but look at housing now. It's a mess, Thatcher's fault. Just an example of her ways to win votes.

The only good thing about her is that she will soon be dead. And good riddence you evil EVIL old ****ing goat. I for one will dance the day she is gone.

AND...why the hell is Mark not imprisoned? Oh yeah, it's cos his Mam is a twisted crooked bent old fascist cow.

Anyone who respects Thatcher respects discrimination, abuse, elitism, human torture and disregard for human rights in general.

ooooh, er, yes, rant over. You old ****ing goat Thatcher, raghhh.

Ooer...well that's me as put in my place as a torturer, elitist, discrinminator and disregarder of human rights, then.

Of course, the fact that every government does the same but hides it better is beside the point.

With regard to why did working class people vote for her, it had something to do with the mess that this country was in in 1979. Rubbish in the streets, unburied dead, etc. Not a vicious rumour put about by Tories, but true. People were pig sick of Governments that were effectivey held hostage by the unions. I was 18 in 1979 - too young by a couple of months to vote. I don't know who I would have voted for.

The Falklands almost certainly won her the sceond election - but after that it was people feeling they were benefiting. I.e. people were greedy and were able to feed at the trough that Thatcher filled for them.

Housing is a mess today partially because of her policies, but she's been gone for 15 years or so. In that time, why has no other Government seen fit to change anything that she did to public housing?

Other of her policies are lurking around - again, unchanged.

The problem with putting all your hate against Thatcher is that it blinds you to the fact that her policies are still here. When she dies, nothing changes. She did what many other politicians wanted to do. She represented the force of change needed to shift the UK in to the future from the extended 1950s that we'd been in for the previous 20 years.

Joe

and, er, was it just by chance tha when we went to war with the Argies Thatcher needed to boost her public support in order to be re-elected.

Man. Margaret Hilda Roberts, she aint half an evil devious cow.

Originally posted by depoix
hang on joe,the sas/sbs did strike the argentine air force on their home ground,destroying many of their planes and as for the french,they actually sold the exocets that sank hms sheffield to israel,who in turn sold them to argentina,the usa provided satallite intelligence from day one,thats how the british fleet was able to recall and equip the task force so quickly,it was the saviour of maggie thatcher as she was quickly losing the confidence of the british public and needed a victory to get back inthe populations good books

Oooh....wasn't sure about the SAS/SBS business because there was some debate about it. I thought that they'd tried but had problems with the mission. I should go look it up, I guess!

I believe the French actually assisted the UK in terms of defensive techniques against the missiles, and at one point were working to slow down the deployment.

I agreed above that the US provided Elint - they could have stopped it but didn't.

I woudl agree (see my other posting above) that the Falklands War saved her, but the wr was in turn, I believe, saved by luck and some input from our allies. Especially luck. But having said that, Waterloo falls into the same category!

Joe

Originally posted by JoeP
Oooh....wasn't sure about the SAS/SBS business because there was some debate about it. I thought that they'd tried but had problems with the mission. I should go look it up, I guess!

I believe the French actually assisted the UK in terms of defensive techniques against the missiles, and at one point were working to slow down the deployment.

I agreed above that the US provided Elint - they could have stopped it but didn't.

I woudl agree (see my other posting above) that the Falklands War saved her, but the wr was in turn, I believe, saved by luck and some input from our allies. Especially luck. But having said that, Waterloo falls into the same category!

Joe the sas / sbs action took place on pebble island,it saved the british fleet from further bombings by the argentines french supplied planes,it wasnt luck that won the war,it was pure british guts and determination,and a sheffield made bayonet that won the day,that and several hundred 17 to 30 year old servicemen and women

Originally posted by JoeP
Ooer...well that's me as put in my place as a torturer, elitist, discrinminator and disregarder of human rights, then.

Of course, the fact that every government does the same but hides it better is beside the point.

With regard to why did working class people vote for her, it had something to do with the mess that this country was in in 1979. Rubbish in the streets, unburied dead, etc. Not a vicious rumour put about by Tories, but true. People were pig sick of Governments that were effectivey held hostage by the unions. I was 18 in 1979 - too young by a couple of months to vote. I don't know who I would have voted for.

The Falklands almost certainly won her the sceond election - but after that it was people feeling they were benefiting. I.e. people were greedy and were able to feed at the trough that Thatcher filled for them.

Housing is a mess today partially because of her policies, but she's been gone for 15 years or so. In that time, why has no other Government seen fit to change anything that she did to public housing?

Other of her policies are lurking around - again, unchanged.

The problem with putting all your hate against Thatcher is that it blinds you to the fact that her policies are still here. When she dies, nothing changes. She did what many other politicians wanted to do. She represented the force of change needed to shift the UK in to the future from the extended 1950s that we'd been in for the previous 20 years.

Joe

oooh, sorry ,read this after I posted again.

ok. Rubbish in the treets, unburied dead. Please. It was not true and you know it. It happened on a small scale and its way blown out of all proportion (and not in the areas of those of put it in the public domain) Tell me that's not ture? And tell me that the people who suffered the most didnt support it...hang on, was it the the media who reported it so.....

Housing. She may have been gone for 15 years but the tory policies and her aftermath is still here. You cant change things overnight. Especially when a tory government is in charge as it were for many years.

As to her policies still remaining , I am fully aware of that. My hate towards her reamins because it was her that carried out everything I feel is evil in my communtiy.

And as for putting you in your place as x, y or b, sorry to **** on your stream, but I handn't even read your comments. If you want to take what I say as aimed at you, that's your self importance, but I sincerely didn't aim it at you.

I lived in an environment controlled by the Thatcher government. I watched a community desolve. I watced people lose their dignity, have nothing, crumble. I watched families struggle and scrape to survive. I've seen grown men cry, kids go to school with nothing, people hold out for what they believe despite living on the bones of their arse. And it stil goes one because of her government.

And I blame Thatcher. Every ****ing time.

The Falklands absolutely guaranteed Thatcher the next election. It was all 'put the Great back in Great Britain' - all the usual foreign gung-ho that governments use to distract from economic chaos at home. And it worked like a charm. It revived memories of World War II when Britain was held in high esteem by the rest of the world, and made people think that Britain 'kicked ass' again. "Hey, our economy's a mess, but the French have been forced to respect us again." "Hey, I haven't got a job to go to anymore, but we've shown the Argies who's boss".

Without the Falklands, I don't believe Thatcher would have got back in again - we can only dream what that would have been like. Sigh.

StarSparkle

SEXY!

Originally posted by StarSparkle
The Falklands absolutely guaranteed Thatcher the next election. It was all 'put the Great back in Great Britain' - all the usual foreign gung-ho that governments use to distract from economic chaos at home. And it worked like a charm. It revived memories of World War II when Britain was held in high esteem by the rest of the world, and made people think that Britain 'kicked ass' again. "Hey, our economy's a mess, but the French have been forced to respect us again." "Hey, I haven't got a job to go to anymore, but we've shown the Argies who's boss".

Without the Falklands, I don't believe Thatcher would have got back in again - we can only dream what that would have been like. Sigh.

StarSparkle

Starsparkle, I really couldn't agree more if I tried.

Originally posted by boyface
oooh, sorry ,read this after I posted again.

ok. Rubbish in the treets, unburied dead. Please. It was not true and you know it. It happened on a small scale and its way blown out of all proportion (and not in the areas of those of put it in the public domain) Tell me that's not ture? And tell me that the people who suffered the most didnt support it...hang on, was it the the media who reported it so.....

Housing. She may have been gone for 15 years but the tory policies and her aftermath is still here. You cant change things overnight. Especially when a tory government is in charge as it were for many years.

As to her policies still remaining , I am fully aware of that. My hate towards her reamins because it was her that carried out everything I feel is evil in my communtiy.

And as for putting you in your place as x, y or b, sorry to **** on your stream, but I handn't even read your comments. If you want to take what I say as aimed at you, that's your self importance, but I sincerely didn't aim it at you.

I lived in an environment controlled by the Thatcher government. I watched a community desolve. I watced people lose their dignity, have nothing, crumble. I watched families struggle and scrape to survive. I've seen grown men cry, kids go to school with nothing, people hold out for what they believe despite living on the bones of their arse. And it stil goes one because of her government.

And I blame Thatcher. Every ****ing time.

Boyface,

Rubbish in the street happened, as did unburied dead. I didn't need the media - I saw it myself. As for blown out of all proportion - I hope you never have to wait for permission from some representative of a public service before you can bury a loved one. I'm not such a moron to believe in what I read in the press.

Housing - changing things overnight? OK. Tories for the first 8 years. Then we've had Labour since 1997. We fought and won the Second World War in less time. If a Government is determined to change things, it can. If it doesn't, it either doesn't care or doesn't want to change things.

My own home town was ravaged by Thatcher. I've seen exactly the same as you did, from a mining perspective. You're not the only one who has seen these things happen. I had the added advantage of seeing the community turn on itself, with my family being on the wrong end of the police and authorities because they dared to stay on strike in the Minder's dispute of the 1980s. So you don't need to lay it on thick about the suffering. My family struggled and scraped when I was a kid even without Thatcher; it happens.

I experienced the 70s as well as Thatcher's years; do you remember the three day weeks in the 70s? When you couldn't rely on having electricity of an evening? You did your schoolwork by candlelight, basically. In the 70s a combination of weak Labour and Tory Governments found it impossible to govern because the Trades Unions used the strike as a political weapon rather than as a means of supporting their members' rights.

People were VERY keen to get rid of that - and governments since Thatcher have been keen to keep the changes made.

Joe

Joe

I don't mean this to sound rude, but I've just had some kinda harsh news on the phone and I'll respond to your reply in the morning

sorry, thats not a kop out.

Im sure Ill still call Thatcher an evil cow tho' ;)

Originally posted by depoix
calm down mate,the great british public eventually woke up and ousted the tories,but im afraid at the moment we seem to have a tory /labour prime minister,but i have a feeling t wont be for much longer,the truth always comes out,i can see our tony resigning sometime in the near future and taking a new job in the usa

Sorry depoix, you've got it all wrong, how can dear Tone possibly begin to think about resigning at any time in the near future to take up a new job in the States because he thinks we are the 53rd State. :heyhey:

Originally posted by wendygs
Sorry depoix, you've got it all wrong, how can dear Tone possibly begin to think about resigning at any time in the near future to take up a new job in the States because he thinks we are the 53rd State. :heyhey:

There are only 50 states, not 52 (for some reason a common misapprehension).

when they finnely put her in the ground ............i'll stand on her grave and tramp the dirt down.................Elvis costello..........................and so will i

Originally posted by boyface
Joe

I don't mean this to sound rude, but I've just had some kinda harsh news on the phone and I'll respond to your reply in the morning

sorry, thats not a kop out.

Im sure Ill still call Thatcher an evil cow tho' ;)

Hope it's nothing too bad.

The real world insists on intruding!

Joe

my opinion of thatcher is this

although, in her favour, she was strong, and stood up for her beliefs and policies,

on the negative side, (IMO) she was a warmongering, milk-snatching old cow, who shafted this city, and the steel and coal industries, and railways, as she did the working man generally.

she, (IMO) was a con artist, who sold back to us, what we owned, already (the steel and coal and rail indistries, and gas), and harboured and encouraged a climate of greed, greed, greed.

I, for one, certainly will not be sorrowful in any way shape or form, when she goes.

PT

StarSparkle ,
If you read what I said about Mrs T. , I did not say that I admired her . In fact , I said that she was a political and personal bully ----but maybe you missed that bit. There is a world of difference in admiring someone and admiring their technical or professional techniques in achieving particular ends. The main theme of my thread was in trying to suss out , firstly , what made M.T. , so popular with the majority of voters , for so long , which of her policies were "good " or , "bad " for Britain and I did hint that I admired one or two of her policies e.g. housing and the curbing of union power.
It amazes me that if you take another Hate figure ,like Hitler , one can mention that he was a brilliant orator , that he was determined and stuck by his principles , that in the beginning he did this or that for Germany .....and no one bats an eye-lid. However , if you mention Margaret Thatcher , from a lot of people , there spews forth a torrent of abuse often childish and simplistic , which blames her for everything that's gone wrong in Britain since 1979.
If that were true , we must have the most stupid , evil , incompetent electorate and government of all time and if THAT'S true , there's not much hope for us anyway. Maybe , this one woman was so influentialand in advance with her evil ideas that she is controlling us 13 years into the future !
People talk about her ruining the country and so forth and yet when Labour came to power ,Mr. Brown stated that he wouldn't make any big changes as the system in place was the correct one !When you look round Britain today , you see various problems but not a lot of ruination .
As for working abroad , well , what can one say to a comment like that ? Nothing , really.
Personally ,I think the best summing -up of M.T. is to describe her as a political tornado . She swept aside much that needed to be swept aside and caused a hell of a lot of damage . To think of her as the font of all evil is , I think not only politically immature but it lets everyone else off the hook too. " Oh , X is not my fault . I did it under the influence of Thatcher ".

Originally posted by depoix
hi tulip,did you leave us because of the politics in the uk or was it for love? i wish i could have afforded to emigrate but the way maggie worked it,you had to work to pay for the council house you had just mortgaged,she made sure you were tied to the job whatever the wages were.

peope slag the unions,but without them wanting wage increases for members there would have been no nurses,miners to provide heat in our homes, bus drivers etc. people were working for a pittance but the rich were getting richer on their backs, i received the grand total of £ 8 2/6pence for a full week working down orgrieve pit,would any one else have risked their lives for that? but without us their would have been no heating,no electric power. people forget that,they wouldnt do the job but they thought it was over priced in wages,yet a printer could earn £ 400 / 500 per week, she was a despot,yorkshire earned it and the south spent it,i detest the woman.........end of rant I suppose you could say the reason I left was a bit of both. Firstly my husband was forced to take redundancy from his job (he's a U.S citizen) his company merged with another company, like they do, the cost of living in the U.K was too much. Idaho has a lot to offer and it is way cheaper to live here!

If I could have left the country when Thatcher was in power I would have done! I left school after she had made sure there were only low paid exploitative jobs to go to. I managed to find work in dreadful jobs that paid little more than the dole. I worked in a horrible factory with really bad safety conditions and a sexually harassing boss who groped all the females. I left and was forced onto a stupid YTS scheme - just more exploitation!

Thatcher was not a friend to working class people. I know England is supposed to be a classless society but I think with Thatcher in power we knew we were working class because there wasn't much work to go to :)

Originally posted by Fareast
Do you seriously imagine that a P.M. who was unpopular , up to that point and had only been in power for such a short time , would have got permission from Parliament and the armed forces to bomb Beunos Aires ? You're the first person who I've come across who has made this suggestion , despite listening to endless rants against M.T. for 24 years !

I've had a good, long think about this and I really cannot remember now from where I formed the opinion that Thatcher might potentially have bombed Buenos Aires. I think I maybe got it confused with rumours about possible bombing of military installations on the Argentine mainland.

So I sincerely apologise if I've misled anyone with my comments about Buenos Aires. It was a genuine mistake.

StarSparkle

people who "suffered" under maragaret thatcher, as i did too should give themselves a pat on the back.
we survived the biggect depression in decades & paved the way for massive global improvements & significant national improvements.
the removal of nationalised industry simply proved that as a "going concern" none of them were financially viable or they would have survived regardless.
why were they receiving state subsidies all the time?
just to keep people in jobs.
yet as a nation we complain about all the others countries who are providing state/eu subsidies to their workers.

Originally posted by willman
people who "suffered" under maragaret thatcher, as i did too should give themselves a pat on the back.
we survived the biggect depression in decades.....

Thanks for reminding be about Margaret Thatcher's economic policies, and especially one of her Chancellors...... Nigel Lawson. I too can pat myself on the back for surviving depression, high inflation, record high unemployment, lengthening dole queues (longer than her famous 'Britain Isn't Working' election poster of 1979), and let's not forget negative equity too.

The boom and bust years - don't you just miss them eh?:thumbsup: :wink:

Originally posted by redrobbo
Thanks for reminding be about Margaret Thatcher's economic policies, and especially one of her Chancellors...... Nigel Lawson. I too can pat myself on the back for surviving depression, high inflation, record high unemployment, lengthening dole queues (longer than her famous 'Britain Isn't Working' election poster of 1979), and let's not forget negative equity too.

The boom and bust years - don't you just miss them eh?:thumbsup: :wink:

Redrobbo, speaking of bust years, I have often wondered if your username is a laudatory iconic reference to Derek Robinson, the notorious wrecker of the Birmingham car industry (and, with others of his ilk, through this of the British economy) in the 1970s.

I had assumed that the egregious and unlamented red robbo had been deservedly consigned to the dustbin of history together with other follies of the 1970s, such as the winter of discontent, 20% plus inflation., tripartism, beer and sandwiches at number 10, platform shoes, clackers and flares. For those who don’t (or who are too young) remember him, red robbo was a communist shop steward and union convener at BL’s Longbridge assembly plant in Birmingham in the 1970s. He bore an uncanny resemblance to the communist shop steward Fred Kite played by Peter Sellers in ‘I’m All Right Jack’, although without the humour or redeeming features and with far more destructive consequences. He was a malign influence on British industrial relations throughout the 1970s, particularly within the Birmingham based car industry. He is thought to have been the principal motive force behind no less than 523 strikes at the Longbridge plant between 1978 and 79 alone, leading to over £200 million in lost production. His modus operandi was the intimidatory, manipulative and inflammatory car park vote in favour of immediate strike action, even calling people out on wildcat strikes before they had voted (by a show of hands, not by secret ballot). At a time when the global car industry was becoming ever more competitive, red robbo’s sole aim seemed to have been to disrupt production at BL, to prevent the company from producing anything. His political views seemed to have been an unreformed mixture of Stalinist ‘democratic centralism’ and of anarcho syndicalism. This shop floor lord of misrule ( a kind of proto Scargill, but with even less hair or judgement) was a thoroughly destructive force and was so hated and feared by ordinary workers at Longbridge that they were demonstrably relieved to see the back of him and his menacing, robotic drawl. When he was rightly sacked in 1978 for inveterate troublemaking and gross irresponsibility, the Longbridge workers voted by over 14000 votes to 600 against moves to reinstate him. They wanted to work to earn a living, not to be pawns in his class war. He was a thoroughly nasty piece of work and hardly worthy of commemoration in an avatar or of elevation to iconic status. Now Watt Tyler would make an excellent alternative – he had the street cred of martyrdom and a just cause. Red robbo? Nooooooooo! The dustheap, beckons for him, accompanied by the clatter of over 14,000 spades and the smiling ghost of the British car industry.

Originally posted by LordChaverly
Redrobbo, speaking of bust years, I have often wondered if your username is a laudatory iconic reference to Derek Robinson, the notorious wrecker of the Birmingham car industry (and, with others of his ilk, through this of the British economy) in the 1970s.



Pure coincidence LordChaverly.

From a thread discussing user names......

Originally posted by redrobbo
redrobbo. The red is in two parts. Firstly, red hair occurred in the family, and although I was blackhaired, when I grew a beard it did have bits of red hair in it (no, please, do not try and imagine this, it will bring on a headache!). Secondly, red because of my political leanings. robbo is a long-standing nick-name, being a corruption of my surname. Hence redrobbo.

From a thread discussing avaters......

Originally posted by redrobbo


It's a red rose, goes with my forum name of redrobbo, and like JohnJParr indicates my voting behaviour (though a different party!).



I am old enough to remember the other Red Robbo. He was indeed a notorious shop steward in the car industry. There is no similarity between us, except for our nicknames, and I still have my own head of hair as proof! :hihi:

Just a general point in connection with the above Lord Chaverly comments re-RedRobbo and the unions ....etc.....in the seventies.
Those on the Left who demonize Margaret Thatcher , don't seem to realise how easy it was for her to do what she did as a lot of it was a reaction to the union activities of the Seventies.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of her rule , the Left had already plyed into her hands.
At one stage in the Seventies , it was being suggested that each board of directors should be forced to have a Worker's representative on it . When people saw how the likes of RedRobbo were behaving , they put two and two together and became extremely concerned about union power.How soon would it be that the country would be run by rabble-rousers and Soviets ?
Why bother having a democracy , if the country was really run by the unions ? That's what many people were thinking. As I mentioned previously , we were , economically speaking, the Laughing Stock of Europe. You couldn't blame oil prices for that ; every country had to pay more for oil. The reason for a lot our problems was our high labour costs , unreliability and lack of investment , over many years.
When it came to "taking on " the Miners , M.T. 's job was made that much easier , politically and practically , by people's memories of the 'sick seventies'.

Originally posted by Fareast
Just a general point in connection with the above Lord Chaverly comments re-RedRobbo and the unions ....etc.....in the seventies.
Those on the Left who demonize Margaret Thatcher , don't seem to realise how easy it was for her to do what she did as a lot of it was a reaction to the union activities of the Seventies.
Whatever the rights and wrongs of her rule , the Left had already plyed into her hands.


I'd agree with your analysis Fareast. As I mentioned in an earlier post, the Winter of Discontent during James Callaghan's premiership almost certainly helped Margaret Thatcher to win her first general election.

Disclaimer: I am redrobbo. The other guy, Derek Robinson, was nicknamed Red Robbo.

I can sum her up in one word "Narcissistic"


http://www.mentalhealth.com/dis1/p21-pe07.html

Originally posted by StarSparkle
I've had a good, long think about this and I really cannot remember now from where I formed the opinion that Thatcher might potentially have bombed Buenos Aires. I think I maybe got it confused with rumours about possible bombing of military installations on the Argentine mainland.

So I sincerely apologise if I've misled anyone with my comments about Buenos Aires. It was a genuine mistake.

StarSparkle

Starsparkle, your formation of this opinion is actually very understandable given the passage of time. The idea of bombing Buenos Aires (presumably meaning bombing strategic targets rather than carpet bombing as in WW2) was indeed discussed at the time in the media as a possible policy optiion. In 1982, there was considerable hostility in the UK towards Argentina, whose people suddenly became transmuted into 'Argies' and our sworn enemies (even though shortly before most British people had probably never given either Argentina or the Falklands a second's thought). The idea that' 'if they want war, we'll give 'em a war' was promoted in certain sections of the tabloid media (notably the Sun) at the time. Moreover, media pundits, usually retired military personnel, discussed a range of strategic opinions, including bombing Buenos Aires if the war escalated beyond a certain point. The Falklands war was an example of a limited war, in that both sides did not use the full range of their military capabilities. Limited wars though sometimes have a tendency to escalate into full scale, no holds barred, conflicts. Fortunately, the Falklands War - which was described by someone (not necessarily accurately) as rather like two bald men fighting over a comb - ended before this happened.

Originally posted by LordChaverly
Starsparkle, your formation of this opinion is actually very understandable given the passage of time. The idea of bombing Buenos Aires (presumably meaning bombing strategic targets rather than carpet bombing as in WW2) was indeed discussed at the time in the media as a possible policy optiion. In 1982, there was considerable hostility in the UK towards Argentina, whose people suddenly became transmuted into 'Argies' and our sworn enemies (even though shortly before most British people had probably never given either Argentina or the Falklands a second's thought). The idea that' 'if they want war, we'll give 'em a war' was promoted in certain sections of the tabloid media (notably the Sun) at the time. Moreover, media pundits, usually retired military personnel, discussed a range of strategic opinions, including bombing Buenos Aires if the war escalated beyond a certain point. The Falklands war was an example of a limited war, in that both sides did not use the full range of their military capabilites. Limited wars though sometimes have a tendency to escalate into full scale, no holds barred, conflicts. Fortunately, the Falklands War - which was described by someone (not necessarily accurately) as rather like two bald men fighting over a comb - ended before this happened.

I have been trying to delete this, as it merely repeats what I say above, but for some reason it won't delete. So please ignore it.

Lord Chaverly ,

You say that the bombing of certain strategic targets in Beunos Aires was considered as an option , in the Falklands War. Well , no doubt a lot of options were considered by the Sun......et al ....
However , this is a long way from StarSparkle's original suggestion that M.T. would have , "bombed Beunes Aires " , to save her face .
I think it's just one more example , used a lot by the Left , of hysterical anti-Thatcherism. Surely she had enough genuine faults to criticize , without inventing things .

Originally posted by Fareast
Lord Chaverly ,

You say that the bombing of certain strategic targets in Beunos Aires was considered as an option , in the Falklands War. Well , no doubt a lot of options were considered by the Sun......et al ....
However , this is a long way from StarSparkle's original suggestion that M.T. would have , "bombed Beunes Aires " , to save her face .
I think it's just one more example , used a lot by the Left , of hysterical anti-Thatcherism. Surely she had enough genuine faults to criticize , without inventing things .

Fareast,

Yes, I agree that there is no evidence that Thatcher was contemplating bombing Buenos Aires for face saving reasons. At the time there were many ideas emanating from the left about Thatcher's ulterior motives and machinations relating to the Falklands war. Probably the most well known concerns the sinking of the Belgrano, and the suggestion that Thatcher ordered this deliberately in order to scupper peace negotiations. I think its now been conclusively proven that the attack on the Belgrano was a military decision (approved by Thatcher) taken for military reasons (i.e. to protect the vulnerable task force) - although no doubt there are still a few Belgrano bores and conspiracy theorists about. I can see that the loathing, almost pathological hatred, of Thatcher by the left has not abated with time. It is in my view still clouding their judgement about her record and legacy.

Yes , I agree , Lord Chaverly , the hatred does seem to cloud clear thinking about the Thatcher years and before and after.
I mentioned in a previous comment , about how such a classical Hate Figures, like Hitler , usually had SOMETHING positive said about him , even by the Left. [e,g. he was charismatic , he was a brilliant mesmerising orator , he stuck [only too well !] by his World View ......etc...]
The Left in Gerrmany recognised only too well what a technically , "good " opponent they faced ; many underestimated him till it was too late.
But with Thatcher , the curious thing is , is a lot of people on the left can barely utter her name , without frothing at the mouth.
I find it a very interesting phenominum [sp. ?] Maybe most of her critics on S.F are thirty-five years or under ----in which case , they won't have been adults in the pre-Thatcher years. I think the way she conned and generally treated the Miners was very bad but , as YOU said [I think ] , a lot of car-workers lost their livelihoods too in the seventies , due to the mindless activities of various unionists. The Miners numbered about a million in ninteen forty five. Was Thatcher responsible for roughly halving that by nineteen seventy -nine ?
I wonder what causes all this as regards Thatcher ? Is it , maybe a S.Yorks . thing ? Is it because a lot of people can't bring themselves to hate anyone but a Tory ?
A fairly small and almost forgotten point is that the Miner's strike had nothing legally to do with Thatcher at all . It was a battle between the N.U.M. and the Coal Board. Thatcher was only watching on the side-lines ------legally !

Originally posted by Fareast
Lord Chaverly ,

You say that the bombing of certain strategic targets in Beunos Aires was considered as an option , in the Falklands War. Well , no doubt a lot of options were considered by the Sun......et al ....
However , this is a long way from StarSparkle's original suggestion that M.T. would have , "bombed Beunes Aires " , to save her face .


I thought I had clearly explained earlier in this thread that I can no longer remember from where I formed the opinion that Thatcher was potentially prepared to bomb Buenos Aires.

As I cannot recall my source, (although Lord Chaverly's posts suggest I may NOT have been mistaken in my opinion), I stated I had made a genuine mistake, and in doing so, I believed I had made it clear that I'd retracted what I'd earlier said about Buenos Aires.

Please do not refer to it again. In case it's still not clear, I HAVE RETRACTED WHAT I SAID.

StarSparkle :rant:

Originally posted by Fareast
Yes , I agree , Lord Chaverly , the hatred does seem to cloud clear thinking about the Thatcher years and before and after.
I mentioned in a previous comment , about how such a classical Hate Figures, like Hitler , usually had SOMETHING positive said about him , even by the Left. [e,g. he was charismatic , he was a brilliant mesmerising orator , he stuck [only too well !] by his World View ......etc...]
The Left in Gerrmany recognised only too well what a technically , "good " opponent they faced ; many underestimated him till it was too late.
But with Thatcher , the curious thing is , is a lot of people on the left can barely utter her name , without frothing at the mouth.
I find it a very interesting phenominum [sp. ?] Maybe most of her critics on S.F are thirty-five years or under ----in which case , they won't have been adults in the pre-Thatcher years. I think the way she conned and generally treated the Miners was very bad but , as YOU said [I think ] , a lot of car-workers lost their livelihoods too in the seventies , due to the mindless activities of various unionists. The Miners numbered about a million in ninteen forty five. Was Thatcher responsible for roughly halving that by nineteen seventy -nine ?
I wonder what causes all this as regards Thatcher ? Is it , maybe a S.Yorks . thing ? Is it because a lot of people can't bring themselves to hate anyone but a Tory ?
A fairly small and almost forgotten point is that the Miner's strike had nothing legally to do with Thatcher at all . It was a battle between the N.U.M. and the Coal Board. Thatcher was only watching on the side-lines ------legally !

what?

One Thatcher had many good points to her character. Strong, determined, couurage of her conviction etc)

But in my opinion she was ruinous and wrong headed.

I have little or no sympathy for the miners.

our current selfish, self-obsessed, culture of people feeling that they ahve the right to to anything and lack of community all stem from her era. She encouraged people to risk all and buy , buy , buy and start your own business then the mismanaged economy destroyed countless people's lives. By privaitising our resourses we are now in a much worse state.

oh, and in my opinion most unionists are scum.

Very curious how Thatcher was not only capable of affecting events thirteen years AFTER she lost power but how wonderful and selfless people were BEFORE she came to power ! What a remarkable woman she must have been to invent the , "Me ME ' society !
In point of fact , there was a tremendous amount of greed and selfishness around before Thatcher.
The unions were always accusing the managerial class and owners of businesses of taking fat salaries and only being concerned about shareholders. Meanwhile , the managerial class and bosses were always accusing the unions and workers in general of being greedy , selfish and idle.
Often unions accused each other of being greedy and , "rocking the boat " and no-one seemed to worry that their , "walk out " , official or not , might well cost someone else his or her job.
Perhaps they were all mistaken and all these people weren't , "Me.Me.Me." Maybe they were secretly sending it all to charity ?
Certainly people were greedy in the Thatcher era but she didn't invent it . Maybe a DIFFERENT group of people got rich but the tensions and selfishness in society had been there for a long time. No doubt if we examine the situation in twenty years time , we will still have greed and selfishness-------but I suppose we can always , conveniently blame Thatcher for our own weaknesses. After all , she did have our arms up our backs , didn't she ?

Anyone what stopped free milk at school for kids should have been whipped with barbed wire and boiled in oil, but thats me:clap: :clap:

Originally posted by Fareast
After all , she did have our arms up our backs , didn't she ?

I object strongly to that comment. I certainly never voted for her or knew anyone who did.

I felt then and now that her policies were morally bankrupt, and wished to have nothing to do with them. They offended my sense of right and wrong, and I didn't lower myself to benefit from them.

I tried to be tainted as little as possible by the grossly selfish, stupid and unkind 'society' she tried so hard to nurture.

StarSparkle

come on, she wasn't that bad!! I mean, she did all right for the miners..... No wait... I'm thinking of Arthur scargill. :confused:

I always get those two mixed up - it the eyebrows

Saw the damage she did to families, communities and the country.

She was, in my opinion, quite simply the most evil woman in Britain.

Margaret Thatcher was just what this country needed at the time,she changed the whole work ethic from one of hey lets go on strike again to hell why strike when it will lose jobs.
She did a lot to give this country back its self respect and although she did make mistakes we as a nation are indebted to her for the courage she showed in grasping the issues head on.

Cmon Roy, she was not nice at all....sent be Satan himself she was...

Well Roy


I would say that , domestically , she did a mixture of positive and negative things but I would say that she DID give Britain confidence , internationally.
Internationally , both the Left [Gorbachov ] and the Right [ Reagan] seemed to listen to and respect her views.It's quite possible [probable ?] that she was seen as an ' honest broker ' between the Superpowers by Gorbachov and that she somehow convinced Gorbachov that it would be pointless to try to , "outspend " the Americans ; maybe that gave Gorbachov the confidence to end the Cold War. ?
She certainly was firmer with Europe than anyone before or since has seemed to be .Before 1979 , other countries had got to the stage , where , economically ,we were called , "the Sick Man of Europe " ! How long it could have all gone along under Callaghan and the Unions is anyone's guess . We had already had to go to the I.M.F. , cap in hand , as it were.
I'd give M.T. , about 50% on Domestics and about 80 % on Foreign policy ; a turbulent and very complex time for us all .

Originally posted by willman
best pm ever. she did wot all governmenst have tried doing and decreased the power of the unions, the downside to this was unfortunately a weak economic structure of boom & bust.

?????

Hate the cow!

She was good at damaging the working and middle classes.

Iron Lady, more like twisted Iron.

she pulled off the biggest political masterstroke I've ever seen. Right to Buy on council houses. How do you get the working class on your side? Let them buy their own houses for bugger all and make them feel middle class.

Venger ,

The middle class and the working class must be perverse in this country .
Despite Thatcher 's terrible treatment of them , they kept re-electing her !! God , so , that's what's wrong with democracy !
I don't think the working class got much out of council houses.
They'd already been paying for the things for X number of years. They were sold on a sliding scale ; the longer you'd be paying rent , the cheaper it was . Also , how did people know , for certain , that houses would increase in value ? They bought them because people could then improve their homes without having to run to the Council all the time .
It was obviously a good move by Thatcher . She was giving people what they wanted ----pride of ownership----ordinary , working people , not bloated capitalists.So do you sit back and do nothing in case people accuse you of bribery ? What about when nationalised industries got pay rises ? Was that bribery ?
It's ridiculous to think that politicians don't do popular things. If they believe they are also doing good , well , that is a different subject.
I get the impression that WHATEVER Mrs. T. did was absolutely and totally evil to some people.
Obviously , millions of people of ALL classes , , for 13 years thought otherwise .