Thatcher is dead

I don't think anyone in the world thinks the holocaust is acceptable
 
When did I compare her political decisions to the holocaust? If you re-read my comment I said they were not as extreme? What I am trying to portray is that, if someone does things you do not agree with in their lifetime then when they die I am not suddenly going to feel remorse or sadness, my feelings haven't changed and my anger hasn't changed suddenly.
I do not see her as a mother or grandma but as a politician who took responsibility for her actions.

Not as extreme? They are so far away from the holocaust its unbelievable.
She didn't massacre millions of people. I understand the mentality of celebrating the death of Hitler and the Nazis but the death of Margeret Thatcher? Feel nothing, feel sadness, feel happiness, don't dance in the street and get pissed.
Not saying you personally have done that.

I know it's very far from the holocaust - I guess how you feel may depend on your political views as some people will think what she did was terrible and some think is was more acceptable. It's different for everyone.

Bahaha no street party for me!

I am just so baffled by the party! I mean, do it when she loses power yes. But shes been unable to affect anyones lives for the last 23 years!
I don't understand people anymore :haha:
 
I don't think anyone in the world thinks the holocaust is acceptable

Nobody has said this. At all.
xsadiex used it as a point of relevance and i disagreed.

But there are a fair few people who think the Holocaust was okay. Sickeningly.
 
How is it closure when the affects of her 'reign' are going to live on and on and on?

True, it's probably a little childish to feel like that. Maybe they feel like it's revenge?

I guess because people, understandably, took her choices very personally that perhaps they do relish in bad things happening in her personal life- such as death! Few politicians have that affect, many of us disliked Gordon Brown but I don’t think any of us would be happy if he died in 30 years time (nor ‘sad’ perse)? But it’s just all pointless, but I suppose it’s unavoidable, we all knew it was coming.
 
When did I compare her political decisions to the holocaust? If you re-read my comment I said they were not as extreme? What I am trying to portray is that, if someone does things you do not agree with in their lifetime then when they die I am not suddenly going to feel remorse or sadness, my feelings haven't changed and my anger hasn't changed suddenly.
I do not see her as a mother or grandma but as a politician who took responsibility for her actions.

Not as extreme? They are so far away from the holocaust its unbelievable.
She didn't massacre millions of people. I understand the mentality of celebrating the death of Hitler and the Nazis but the death of Margeret Thatcher? Feel nothing, feel sadness, feel happiness, don't dance in the street and get pissed.
Not saying you personally have done that.

No but she made it absolutely insufferable for many. We really shouldn't underestimate the effect she had.

I agree that celebrating is poor taste, I don't really understand why people are happy she's dead, but my dad said yesterday that whatever suffering she may have experienced at the end, you can bet that it was a thousandth of a thousandth of a thousandth of the suffering she caused when she was in power. People will never forgive her and I guess, rightly or wrongly, people see this as some kind of comeuppance.
 
How is it closure when the affects of her 'reign' are going to live on and on and on?

I don't know, but if it does provide closure for them somehow then it does. Just because we don't understand it doesn't make it any less real for them.


And I do think its somewhat fair to compare her to other evil people that died that no one has a problem with celebrating their death, because she was evil - anyone who supported Pinochet and considered him to be a close personal friend is evil. She essentially supported murder and torture in her support of him. That is evil and for that, even with her own political career aside, I can understand anyone celebrating.
 
Could someone explain the whole Nelson Mandela thing
 
Nelson Mandela did take part in terrorist activity, there is no denying it.
 
Could someone explain the whole Nelson Mandela thing

https://mg.co.za/article/2013-04-10-did-margaret-thatcher-help-prolong-apartheid

I don't know much about it admittedly. If you know the basic structure of Apartheid, this article seems to explain it but some of the comments are angry so it seems to be something that is still debated.
 
Also found this on Yahoo Answers which answers the terrorist thing more directly:

Nelson Mandela was one of the founding leaders of a political group known as the African National Congress. He was devoted to peaceful demonstrations, but eventually turned to violence. The ANC and MK (Guerrilla forces) planned to sabotage key strategic locations and civilian buildings in their "fight for freedom". Basically Mandela can be defined as a modern-day terrorist. In fact, Margaret Thatcher the British Prime Minister, issued this statement during 1987. "The ANC is a typical terrorist organisation. Anyone who thinks they will rule South Africa is living in cloud-cuckoo land". So, Nelson was convicted of treason (trying to derail the government), and he was sentenced to life imprisonment.
 
How is it closure when the affects of her 'reign' are going to live on and on and on?

I don't know, but if it does provide closure for them somehow then it does. Just because we don't understand it doesn't make it any less real for them.


And I do think its somewhat fair to compare her to other evil people that died that no one has a problem with celebrating their death, because she was evil - anyone who supported Pinochet and considered him to be a close personal friend is evil. She essentially supported murder and torture in her support of him. That is evil and for that, even with her own political career aside, I can understand anyone celebrating.

Who's Pinochet?x
 
Army general and dictator of Chile.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Pinochet
 
Army general and dictator of Chile.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Pinochet

Thank you. I will have a look.

I'm going to start reading Thatcher and Sons of anyone has heard of it? Not sure how balanced it is, I think the author is a Thatcher fan but is apparently quite critical of her in the book, I just want something balanced.
 
Army general and dictator of Chile.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Augusto_Pinochet

Thank you. I will have a look.

I'm going to start reading Thatcher and Sons of anyone has heard of it? Not sure how balanced it is, I think the author is a Thatcher fan but is apparently quite critical of her in the book, I just want something balanced.

I want to read something balanced as well, I am getting a bit confused
 
Also found this on Yahoo Answers which answers the terrorist thing more directly:

Nelson Mandela was one of the founding leaders of a political group known as the African National Congress. He was devoted to peaceful demonstrations, but eventually turned to violence. The ANC and MK (Guerrilla forces) planned to sabotage key strategic locations and civilian buildings in their "fight for freedom". Basically Mandela can be defined as a modern-day terrorist. In fact, Margaret Thatcher the British Prime Minister, issued this statement during 1987. "The ANC is a typical terrorist organisation. Anyone who thinks they will rule South Africa is living in cloud-cuckoo land". So, Nelson was convicted of treason (trying to derail the government), and he was sentenced to life imprisonment.

The ANC are still the ruling party in SA to this day :winkwink:
 
I can understand why the ANC would use violence to oppose apartheid. Nelson has the Nobel peace prize! x
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Members online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,650,281
Messages
27,143,548
Members
255,745
Latest member
mnmorrison79
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "c48fb0faa520c8dfff8c4deab485d3d2"
<-- Admiral -->