Margaret Thatcher

[Montreal Wanderer]

Monty, the fact that the Falklands earth is rich in mineral is both public and common knowledge. Add to that, that British expats were resident to the Falklands was surely enough reason for a the decisions to be forced. Not to mention that the fact the Argentinean’s made such a public "fxck you were having it" (Sorry for my straight forwardness but that's who I am) It really made Thatcher's mind up for her.

The Falklands were the easy option? I'm sorry Monty, you could not be more mistaken. We were unprepared and our intelligence was found lacking. The Argentineans had a huge strike of luck in the very first week. It was always going to be the case that we would have air superiority. That ended when an attack on one of our Destroyers went astray. The Agries instead hit a carrier hoarding eighteen Chinooks. No that may not have been an attacking plane, but what it meant was that our troop's on the ground were forced to hike to their designations. Not only that, they were cut of from supplies. Rations, clothing, ammunition all was lost in that one accidental hit that went wayward.

Yet throughout all this. after such unnecessary odds, those men gained their victory and retained the islands. This was after a very rare fxck up by The Regiment and sever lack of supplies. This was the army the Thatcher built. This was the World's greatest army.

Help, where's my white flag! I'm not sure you understoof what I said, SOTWA. I said that Galtieri, who needed a distraction, thought that it would be easier to conquer the Falklands than fight Chile over the Beagle Channel. He was wrong. He misjudged Thatcher's reaction, which was resolute, and British military capability which did not depend on numbers and distance. I do disagree with you about air superiority - the Argentinians had more and faster aircraft, although the distance was such that they only had a few minutes over target. They also sunk the Atlantic Conveyor (thinking it was an aircraft carrier though it was a huge container ship) which had 20 Sea Harriers aboard. The ground troops were vastly outnumbered, but there is a difference between a small professional army with high morale and good training and a large number of unhappy conscripts. So the Brits won against seemingly large odds but when it came to fighting it wasn't that close.

I did say that the war was not about uranium - Thatcher reacted to an unprovoked and illegal attack. The entire world admired her for this I think.

[ratbert]

I did say that the war was not about uranium - Thatcher reacted to an unprovoked and illegal attack. The entire world admired her for this I think.

Certainly it turned her fortunes around, given the pre-Falklands strife at home - unemployment, high inflation, recession, worst poll ratings of any PM in history. Then a year later she wins a landslide election victory.

[TANGODANCER]

Without getting too deeply into this, one of thereasons quoted as MT's greatest sins is that we got an awful lot of money from North Sea Oil and she blew most of it on the war with Argentina. Thought someone might have mentioned it since it had such a bitter reaction from a lot of quarters. I mention the point, not any views on it.

[Montreal Wanderer]

Without getting too deeply into this, one of thereasons quoted as MT's greatest sins is that we got an awful lot of money from North Sea Oil and she blew most of it on the war with Argentina. Thought someone might have mentioned it since it had such a bitter reaction from a lot of quarters. I mention the point, not any views on it.

The Falklands were expensive for Britain - not just the war but policing the place afterwards for years.

[Bruce Rioja]

Most of the mines that were closed would now be providing us with coal at a cheaper price per tonnage than we currently import it at.

Quite possibly the biggest pile of shite I've read since Vassell can replace Rooney!

The British Coal Industry was fecked by the very unions that I'm guessing you still pander to. If so, could you possibly explain Scargill's logic behing the Miner's Strike?

"We're going to close your heavily subsidised, un-profitable pit". "Are you? We'll go on strike then"! "Right oh! We'll shut it sooner on the grounds that it'll become unworkable then"!

Genius!!!

[Soldier_Of_The_White_Army]

Without getting too deeply into this, one of thereasons quoted as MT's greatest sins is that we got an awful lot of money from North Sea Oil and she blew most of it on the war with Argentina. Thought someone might have mentioned it since it had such a bitter reaction from a lot of quarters. I mention the point, not any views on it.

The Falklands were expensive for Britain - not just the war but policing the place afterwards for years.

Yet what they spent policing an Island that is rightfully ours, has been a lot cheater then policing Iraq and Afghanistan and the Balkans that have had more beneficial gain to other countries then it does to ours!!

[Montreal Wanderer]

Without getting too deeply into this, one of thereasons quoted as MT's greatest sins is that we got an awful lot of money from North Sea Oil and she blew most of it on the war with Argentina. Thought someone might have mentioned it since it had such a bitter reaction from a lot of quarters. I mention the point, not any views on it.

The Falklands were expensive for Britain - not just the war but policing the place afterwards for years.

Yet what they spent policing an Island that is rightfully ours, has been a lot cheater then policing Iraq and Afghanistan and the Balkans that have had more beneficial gain to other countries then it does to ours!!

Very likely true economically. The Falklands belong to the people who live there and they chose, like the people of Bermuda, to remain with Britain. The war therefore was to protect British citizens and their territory. Involvement in Afghanistan (through the UN) and in the Balkans (through NATO) are matters of treaty obligations and are legal actions (Canada is in both too). Iraq is an illegal action and I presume we went there to curry favour with the US. Canada refused and we have suffered economically for it. I hope the UK can get out of Iraq soon.

[Albert Tatlock's Dad]

I think any comparison with Pinochet's Chile is simply foolish rhetoric.

I disagree with this (I would, wouldn't I!).

They were both heavily influenced by the same economist (who's name escapes me at the moment - no it doesn't, Milton Firedman and the Chicago Boys!). He believed in the free market above all else. In Chile, it caused starvation in some quarters. Over here, it caused the worst unemployment since the 1920s.

I'm sorry but the destruction of communities and livlihoods, families being torn apart to help fund an economic boom that ballooned and then popped, was not worth it. When Thatcher left, nearly every economic indicator was the same or worse than when she took office in 1979. When she took office, inflation was about 10%, when she left in 1990, it had crept back up to 10%.GDP growth in 1979 was 5%, in 1990 it was -2%. The list goes on.

As someone else pointed out, the economic 'miracle' of the 1980s was built on North Sea Oil. When we should have been building hospitals and new schools and generally improving the infrastructure for all, tax cuts were given which benefited the wealthiest.

In defence of the current govenment, whatever you think of the the PFI structure to finance them, more new hospitals have been built in the last 9 years than in all the preceding 30 years before it. We wouldn't need such dodgy initiatives as the PFI scheme if the North Sea Oil had been used properly to allow the whole of the UK to benefit.

[Albert Tatlock's Dad]

Most of the mines that were closed would now be providing us with coal at a cheaper price per tonnage than we currently import it at.

Quite possibly the biggest pile of shite I've read since Vassell can replace Rooney!

The British Coal Industry was fecked by the very unions that I'm guessing you still pander to. If so, could you possibly explain Scargill's logic behing the Miner's Strike?

"We're going to close your heavily subsidised, un-profitable pit". "Are you? We'll go on strike then"! "Right oh! We'll shut it sooner on the grounds that it'll become unworkable then"!

Genius!!!

I haven't written in support of Scargill at all. In fact, with a different leader the result might well have been different. The problem became polarised. Scargill (who I detest with a passion only slightly less than Thatcher) was in charge of the Yorkshire miners in the early 70s and, effectively (and wrongly) brought down the Heath government. Those in the Tory leadership never forgot or forgave the miners for that.

So when Thatcher came to power, Scargill tried to do it again - and failed.

The losers were the miners. Now it might have been their own faults that they had elected Scargill as the head of the NUM, but the destruction on the communities that followed was both wide ranging and deeply damaging. Did anyone feel proud seeing Mounted Policeman charge striking miners? I didn't.

But that doesn't change the fact that we could still be producing coal from these 'uneconomic pits' cheaper than we are currently importing it. Since North Sea Oil and Gas are beginning to run out, it seems that we've missed a trick somewhere along the way.

[Montreal Wanderer]

I think any comparison with Pinochet's Chile is simply foolish rhetoric.

I disagree with this (I would, wouldn't I!).

They were both heavily influenced by the same economist (who's name escapes me at the moment - no it doesn't, Milton Firedman and the Chicago Boys!). He believed in the free market above all else. In Chile, it caused starvation in some quarters. Over here, it caused the worst unemployment since the 1920s.

Your argument was more than economic since you used the term "paid up Nazi" - it became political as well. South American dictators generally do not respect human rights or the rule of law. There is a difference between losing your job (in a welfare state) and losing your life. Pinochet was a fascist, Thatcher was not - she was elected and re-elected democratically and showed a healthy respect for the rule of law and democratic institutions (she might not have been quite a strong on human rights, but was streets ahead of the Pinochet's of this world).

[Albert Tatlock's Dad]

I think any comparison with Pinochet's Chile is simply foolish rhetoric.

I disagree with this (I would, wouldn't I!).

They were both heavily influenced by the same economist (who's name escapes me at the moment - no it doesn't, Milton Firedman and the Chicago Boys!). He believed in the free market above all else. In Chile, it caused starvation in some quarters. Over here, it caused the worst unemployment since the 1920s.

Your argument was more than economic since you used the term "paid up Nazi" - it became political as well. South American dictators generally do not respect human rights or the rule of law. There is a difference between losing your job (in a welfare state) and losing your life. Pinochet was a fascist, Thatcher was not - she was elected and re-elected democratically and showed a healthy respect for the rule of law and democratic institutions (she might not have been quite a strong on human rights, but was streets ahead of the Pinochet's of this world).

To be pendantic, I only introduced Chile as an example in a different posting to the earlier rant. When I mentioned Pinochet, you'll see that I was talking about his ecomonic policy and not his human rights record (which, to be fair, his economic policy influenced). So the point still stands

[Bench]

She put a huge amount of people on the dole with the coal situation, but when you look at the fact that we had only twenty five years of coal left a change needed to be taken. It would have been so easy for her to see out her term and pass the buck with this issue to the next PM who would most probably do the same until it was to late. This however was not her style, she wasn’t called the ‘Iron Lady’ for nothing. Think of her as you will, but dodge an issue she did not!!

This point always inerests me - the number of miners 'she put on the dole'. Again, the way I understand it was that she stopped other areas of British business subsidising British mining, and it wasn't efficient it enough to carry on in its own right. If there is a discussion to be had about the miners' lives that were ruined after being 'thrown on the scrapheap' in their 40s and 50s, aren't the people who put them in that artificially propped-up position in the first place, saddling the country with a ball and chain that couldn't be carried around forever, equally as culpable?

You're close to stepping into territory of which you know nothing about. I lived through the Miners strikes, and my wife did more than that being a coalminers daughter. Your 'understanding' is flawed in that, being a young Torie, you believe the hype and and theories that have been touted as to why the Coal Mining industry was effectively put out of business. A fair few mines were unprofitable - fair do's. However, there were more than a fair few that were profitable and were summarilly shut down simply because certain 'betters' had decided that there was no future in it - these betters were led by Mrs T and her Tory government. Blue chip industries would shortly be on the rise, but not at the expense of coal and the two could have quite happily co-existed. Not according to Mrs T though.

As for SOTWA's assertion that there was only 25 years of coal left, I would challenge anyone to present any shred of evidence to support this. And even if you could, I could do the same to demonstrate the opposite. If you recall, thirty years ago apparently we only 40 years of oil left in the North Sea, and yet we still pump the stuff out regardless. Hey - there must only be about ten years of the stuff left down there, why don't we just shut up shop eh? '25 years of coal left' are little myths that are bounded about my the media and all of a sudden people start believing the hype as fact. Its true - you ask any none-Bolton fan about our style of play.....

The level of intimidation, corruption and zeal that went into closing down the British mining industry was staggering. As for the way in which you put 'the number of miners 'she put on the dole' - facts is facts. The mining industry was systematically shut down and unemployment soared in areas which thrived on that industry. Simple economics.

And then there was the Poll Tax....another bit of ingenius politicking......

[plodder]

She had a chance to protect and re-instate what the Labur government of the 70's allowed to decline.

Instead she allowed the boom and bust era of the yuppies to occur without control.

To me her greatest contribution to the country is this..........



I think Warty was right. Politics should be controlled with an iron rod on forums.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

You're close to stepping into territory of which you know nothing about. I lived through the Miners strikes, and my wife did more than that being a coalminers daughter. Your 'understanding' is flawed in that, being a young Torie, you believe the hype and and theories that have been touted as to why the Coal Mining industry was effectively put out of business. A fair few mines were unprofitable - fair do's. However, there were more than a fair few that were profitable and were summarilly shut down simply because certain 'betters' had decided that there was no future in it - these betters were led by Mrs T and her Tory government. Blue chip industries would shortly be on the rise, but not at the expense of coal and the two could have quite happily co-existed. Not according to Mrs T though.

I'll concede the bit in bold because I have never had chance to study properly what went on. That's kind of the point of the thread to be honest.

And Plodder, I take your point about what Warthog used to say, but I have found this thread to be good-spirited and informative.

So anyway, back to the bit I have quoted from Bench...

When you say 'summarily shut down' - what exactly do you mean? Coalmining wasn't made illegal as a commercial activity - it was just decided that their gross inefficiency wasn't going to be subsidised anymore - right? If that amounted to a constructive shutting down, then that was just a painful necessity for the long term health of the economy, wasn't it? That is to say, the economics of 'comparative advantage' (help me out here Athers) meant that continuing coal-mining was a bad idea.

[mummywhycantieatcrayons]

Just one more thing before I go to bed - I remember last time there was some discussion of Thatcher, the old-chestnut about there being 'no such thing as society' came up.

The actual quotation was:

"[People constantly requesting government intervention] are casting their problems at society. And, you know, there's no such thing as society. There are individual men and women and there are families. And no government can do anything except through people, and people must look after themselves first. It is our duty to look after ourselves and then, also, to look after our neighbours."

It doesn't seem all that cold, unfeeling, and bordering on evil to me.

[ratbert]

But I think that people looked after themselves first in the 80s and not their neighbours, which is why the gap between haves and have-nots widened. And if there is no such thing as society... well my dictionary says different.

Some government intervention is needed for those who cannot help themselves (only some, not total state dependency), because other people are not going help them. It's a failing of modern society that Thatcher started, whether she intended it or not.

We do have a responsibility to others. Ignoring them strikes me as cold and unfeeling - "I'm alright Jack"

[mofgimmers]

I can't be bothered reading all this yet... but I'll chuck me two penneth in anyway.

I don't like Thatcher because she's a Tory.

The End.

[david lee's bald patch]

Margaret Thatcher was a f*#kin arsehole.
Yuppie creating working class hating tw*t.

Only thing worse than her is wankas like you holding her up as the builder of modern prosperous Britain!! All Bollox, if Britain is doing alright it's in spite of her not because of her.

[TANGODANCER]

"SMOKELESS ZONES"......anyone?

[david lee's bald patch]

Are they her fault aswell?!?!

I'm not with you there pal