Navy Net - Royal Navy Community

Register a free account today to join our community
Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site, connect with other members through your own private inbox and will receive smaller adverts!

A New Home Secretary?

Who, given the chance, would you vote for as Home Secretary?


  • Total voters
    796
whitemouse said:
NozzyNozzer said:
whitemouse said:
Never mind a new Home Sec - what about a new government ?

This lot have to be the worst ever.... !!

I can see you don't remember what a shambles Major's government was: a perfect example of where lax, inconsistent discipline is deadly. If you make a threat, carry it out, but whatever you do, don't appease the rebels.

As for Charles Clarke, I expect he will resign on Friday. His position is untenable.

Hi Nozzy,

Actually I can remember, even though I was working overseas at the time.
The point is what this current mob were / and are accusing the previous lot of, 'sleaze / dishonesty etc .
But what is happening now ? - sleaze / lies / more lies / unearned pay & pension awards / flogging honours/ misuse of public property (bonking ones mistress / lover boy / rent boy / provision of public travel warrants etc come to mind perhaps ?) and disgraced Ministers being returned to office to transgress yet again - the list is probably more than has so far been revealed.

The Tories may not have been actually squeeky clean or even effective in some cases, but can anyone recall what this mob do or do not do effectively (apart from spending untold billions of taxpayers money) which is the relevant question?

Perhaps you may recall that when the Tories came into power, the Forces actually received payrises - but what of the times, thankfully few, that the the other lot came in - not many payrises that I can recall?

Nuff said as this is not a political forum really.
Perhaps there ought be one - Moderator ??

Hi Whitemouse,

The problem is that all oppositions promise one thing in opposition and diverge when they hold office. Both Labour & the Tories promised to curtail the power of central government and return power to the people via decentralisation. When in power both have done the opposite. As for sleaze and broken promises, there is nothing new in political hypocrisy. Under the Tories rather a lot of Honours went to businessmen who just happened to aid the Tory Party, though it is perfectly possible, as with Labour, that this is purely coincidental.

Yes service pay did increase much more under the Tories, but it was not all rosy for the Forces. A particularly bad taste is left by the Falklands Campaign which could have been avoided had Mrs.T acted in the same decisive way as her predecessor in No.10. Then there was the Victory Parade when servicemen who were badly wounded/maimed were seated well out of public view and away from the cameras: that parade was more about political presentation rather than honouring those who fought in the Campaign! I feel angry remembering that! The forces were political canon fodder.

As you said, though, perhaps we need a seperate area for political discussion.
 
Skunkmiester said:
I see it as basicly 2 choices.

If you like the armed forces and want to see them prosper and looked after then vote Tory.

If you want to see the Armed Forces cut and rot away then vote labour.

Oh and anyone that thinks that the BNP arent racsist obviously don't have enough brains to vote.

Labour are warmongers, just how many wars/conflicts has Tony sent us into?? 7 I think.

At least Maggie was defending our soil, not fighting for oil like this little lying turd.








All I can say about new lav is that between them they have not got one new idea, they copy Maggie in a way that makes you sick (ignore what they like), get the armed services to do dirty work for them and then kick them in the nuts and are Still blaming the last Tory government for that is wrong.
Anyone remember 77? Looks like it is all happening again, someone strong will have to clear up the mess again and get us back on the straight and narrow
 
Skunkmeister,im amazed about how little you know and how little you understand,such an arrogant attitude if no one agrees with you,the falklands was all about Our Soil,was it really?You should read your history books, i agree with nozzer,was it not her that withdrew the Endurance,i lost a lot of friends down there ,i for one will never forgive her,and you can read into that what you like.
 
Hig the Falklands war was about the UK owning or having the rights to the Falkland Islands since way back .

The problems started when the Argentinian 'President' objected to us ejecting a Argie team of scrapmen working in South Georgia .dismantling the old Whaling station without a 'please can we do it' pass note.

Bootnecks were still stationed there and Endurance was still on station but she scarpered to safety after the invasion . Only thing other than that that used to be in that area was the old South Africa /South America Frigate that had been scrubbed years previously.

Yes lots of guys got killed and maimed. However it was a legit UK war to recover her possessions

At the moment-------------there is a lot more dead and the high chances of more dying in Iraq and the problem was not ours --- same as Afghanistan
WTF are we doing over there!
 
Well greenie it was not a war ,it was a campaign, nothing was more sickening to me than seeing Margaret Thatcher on tv when it was over,saying,rejoice,rejoice,and you will find that the endurance was withdrawn, i suppose at the end of the day,its how you interpret what you hear.
 
As for Maggie on the Telly and the rejoice message I think its probably the first time she'd been able to sleep for months with the state of the 'Task Force' that went out there.

They were lucky----- the Argie airforce nearly decimated them but screwed up dropping the bombs below the set altitude and the fuses didn't arm. The Exocet missiles they had no effective weapon against them.
The Vulcan long range bomber saga . No AEW aircraft for long range air cover. Overalls and Number eights that melted in heat .
As for the motley ships they sent out what a collection -the next best thing to scrap yard challenge.
However as Brits--we over came and did the biz.
 
higthepig said:
Skunkmeister,im amazed about how little you know and how little you understand,such an arrogant attitude if no one agrees with you,the falklands was all about Our Soil,was it really?You should read your history books, i agree with nozzer,was it not her that withdrew the Endurance,i lost a lot of friends down there ,i for one will never forgive her,and you can read into that what you like.

So Hig, I take it that anyone that has a different point of view to yourself knows nothing about the subject, is arrogant and understands nothing? Funny cause as I understand it every bloke that came back from that campaign speaks with pride as to what he did and utmost pride when talking about those that didnt make it back. I also remember pretty much all of the country getting behind the government as to what they were doing and why they did it and that it was only the scroaty little socialists that wanted us to put our tail between our legs and give up the islands without a fight.

You talk about the Falkland Islands as if it was a mistake and that we shouldn't have pulled off one of the most impressive military acts in a long time. One that did surprise the world a) That we actually bothered, and b) that we actually pulled it off (although it was touch and go at times).

I'm pretty sure that there are more than a few people that were actually there that would take issue with your views.
 
BBC is a bit late to update its website on this, but Charles Clark has just put forward a plan to the effect that "Foreign nationals convicted of any offence can EXPECT to be deported". Obviously a lot of problems with some countries - the Human Rights Court would come down on the UK like a ton of bricks if we sent people back to Somalia, Iraq, Iran, Sudan etc - but definitely a move in the right direction. It will apparently include EU nationals, previously untouchable. "Horse bolted" and "Stable door" come to mind, but it has to be the right way forward. Tories will probably back it. If the LibDems don't then they will lose a lot of votes. It also eases the path to ID Cards, though. End of argument, I think.

Payrises in the Navy.... I noted a posting about it never happening under Labour, but 1970 saw the most dramatic pay changes the services ever had..... (as well as getting rid of the Tot). It introduced a huge percentage payrise but, quite sensibly, got people to pay for their food and accommodation when ashore and gave us the choice. Labour Govt - Wilson as PM, Healey as Defence Sec. There was another decent payrise in 1979 - before Thatcher. Two major naval defence cuts were definitely Labour - cancellation of a CVA in 1967 and reduction of Polaris fleet from 5 to 4 boats in 68, both - IMHO - the right move at the time. It's difficult to pick out who did what anyway - the MOD plods on at its own pace whatever the Govt of the day.

And (from another posting) what are those "seven" wars that Labour have 'got us into'? The First Gulf War and the Bosnia thing were under the Tories, leaving us with Iraq and..... what? Sierra Leone?
 
Interesting to see Minge Campbell's view that Prescott's situation is an entirely private matter. I don't agree simply because Fat Boy is on film preaching morality during the Major years. If he'd kept his mouth shut I would be wishing him well for being able to hoodwink anybody other than his wife into a relationship. Back to Minge - is he doing some preparatory damage control?
 
come_the_day said:
Interesting to see Minge Campbell's view that Prescott's situation is an entirely private matter. I don't agree simply because Fat Boy is on film preaching morality during the Major years. If he'd kept his mouth shut I would be wishing him well for being able to hoodwink anybody other than his wife into a relationship. Back to Minge - is he doing some preparatory damage control?

Crazy innit? Prescott's the Deputy Prime Minister fer gawd's sake..... yet he shows a complete lack of judgement, lack of morals and lack of sense! It's not as if he's even competent in his Environment role - his Office - "ODPM" - recently approved planning permission in Brighton for a football ground and yet the local opposition has made legal mincemeat of and the whole issue is back in the courts - after 6 years!
 
They managed to impeach a US President for less (blowjob). Yet this runt of a deputy PM thinks that it is private business and that we should turn a blind eye.

There is only one act of terrorism that I would condone, and that is if some sneaky bugger managed to blow up 10 Downing street during a cabinet meeting....whilst Cherie was sitting on the bog.

Now that would be an act of 'bloody good effort'.


Shame the real terrorists only attack innocent people. If they had managed to kill Blair and his Cabinet then at least no innocent life would have been lost.
 
Geoff_Wessex said:
come_the_day said:
Interesting to see Minge Campbell's view that Prescott's situation is an entirely private matter. I don't agree simply because Fat Boy is on film preaching morality during the Major years. If he'd kept his mouth shut I would be wishing him well for being able to hoodwink anybody other than his wife into a relationship. Back to Minge - is he doing some preparatory damage control?

Crazy innit? Prescott's the Deputy Prime Minister fer gawd's sake..... yet he shows a complete lack of judgement, lack of morals and lack of sense! It's not as if he's even competent in his Environment role - his Office - "ODPM" - recently approved planning permission in Brighton for a football ground and yet the local opposition has made legal mincemeat of and the whole issue is back in the courts - after 6 years!

Two Jags (Two Sh*gs has bee suggested as more appropriate) main job is to protect TB from internal flack so the fact he screws up the rest of his job is perhaps not that surprising. If he had not brayed so much for Tory blood when one of their lot had been found out for trouser snake trouble I would not be that bothered but personally I cannot stand that level of hypocrassy, if it was good for the Tories then it must be good for Nu Labor. Prescott must go and in as much disgrace as possible.

Peter
 
I have no argument at all of those who have a different point of view to mine,ilost very close friends down the falklands,pissing up oppos,and whose families my wife and i are still in touch with today,Yes i dont deny victory was ours and im very proud of the boys that went,but in my view it could have been prevented,some american senator said it was two bald men fighting over a comb,but without their help would we have won?Thats debatable, it just seems to me that we should change our point of view,rejoice rejoice sickened me ,perhaps some world leader in the future will have the guts to say, It is with great sadness that i have to say we won the war,rejoice over the carnage and death that went on i think not. And as Oscar Wilde once said, someday they will declare a war and nobody will turn up.
 

Latest Threads

Top