Another day, another loony Students Union
Cool Mod
Join Date: Apr 1998
Location: 18nm N of LGW
Posts: 6,185
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Calm down guys. Some of your slips are showing!
Resorting to swearing, abuse and slagging shows some weakness. Just keep good honest debate going without it. Then we mods have no need to make a post. Ta!
PPP
Resorting to swearing, abuse and slagging shows some weakness. Just keep good honest debate going without it. Then we mods have no need to make a post. Ta!
PPP
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: Lincolnshire
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pontificating Pious Pr**k!
pp, you're spot on again - all my post did was just reaffirm your lack of legal comprehension and general misguided, misinformed view of the world...
jeez, if you're like this over the internet I can't even imagine how much abuse you must have been on the receiving end of from your 'mates' whilst serving!
jeez, if you're like this over the internet I can't even imagine how much abuse you must have been on the receiving end of from your 'mates' whilst serving!
TAC Int Bloke
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 975
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having just flicked back through a few of PPs posts I'd just like to apologise to fellow PPRuNers for assuming PP wasn't another window licker but now I understand the general tenant of his posts I will merely add
DON’T FEED THE TROLL
DON’T FEED THE TROLL
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Yorkshire
Age: 80
Posts: 429
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't the students want to do anything about Zimbabwe? Why's that, I wonder. Bunch of t*ssers who wouldn't recognise an injustice if they trod in it.
Sorry; got carried away - which is better than being carried out.
Sorry; got carried away - which is better than being carried out.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't the students want to do anything about Zimbabwe? Why's that, I wonder. Bunch of t*ssers who wouldn't recognise an injustice if they trod in it.
Sorry; got carried away - which is better than being carried out.
Sorry; got carried away - which is better than being carried out.
Exactly my point for those too stupid to see it.
Getting rid of the despots is a beneficial side show that takes the heat from the real aim. Do you honestly think that our 'govern'ment gives a **** about the people of afghanistan and iraq when they so obviously don't give a **** about the people of the UK, including service personnel ???
Getting rid of taliban = good thing, yet they'd not attacked the UK
Getting rid of saddam = good thing, yet he'd had 10 years of sanctions and his military capability had increased by magic in that time, as well as commit war crimes with weapons that we'd sold him in the first place.
Anybody wonder why mugabe wasn't fixed years ago ???
Iraq has plenty of oil during a time when stocks are depleting, who's now running the show and getting cheap oil???
Afghanistan is the preferred route for transferring gas from former soviet republics with a new 850km pipeline, incidentally the US is the major player in this. Also the caspian sea has untapped reserves of oil, 2nd in amount to the middle east.
If zimbabwe had any oil, you can bet that mugabe would have been sorted out years ago.
And for all that they had to lie to justify the real aim, therefore it's illegal. the reasons for war were a fabrication and the country, parliament and Queen herself were sold a lie.
Q. Who made the final decision to go to war based on lies ?
A. The Queen
Q. Is the Queen going to summons herself for war crimes ?
A. Is she **** as like you stupid *****.
By all means live with yer heads up your/each others arses, just don't whine when you finally smell the **** you stupid collection of etc etc etc.
who's now running the show and getting cheap oil???
http://octane.nmt.edu/gotech/Marketplace/Prices.aspx
Up $18 in 30 days. It's not cheap.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Absolutely priceless but I wonder if PP will ever reveal to us who in the forces abused him/her to the extent that we now have this out pouring of scorn on all things military....................rather sad to see really 
'Who's running the show and getting cheap oil?'
The Chinese?
Have you seen the price of a barrel of oil now compared to 2002?
No, not illegal for Afghanistan as pointed out in my earlier post. Lying about the real aim is not necessarily illegal either
Also, you might want to get a slightly firmer grasp on the way the British political and legal system operate - for starters, the Queen can't be placed on trial for war crimes, since it'd be Regina versus Regina, which is a constitutional impossibility (and before you say it, while we don't have a written constitution, there is one there, based on custom, precedent and statute).
Second, the Royal Prerogative is exercised by the government on HMQ's behalf, which means that it'd be members of that body, most likely the PM, who would be placed on trial should that eventuality arise. Also, HMQ did not formally declare war (that's done with the Lord Chamberlain reading out a proclamation on the Sovereign's behalf, as per September 1939).
The Chinese?
Have you seen the price of a barrel of oil now compared to 2002?
And for all that they had to lie to justify the real aim, therefore it's illegal. the reasons for war were a fabrication and the country, parliament and Queen herself were sold a lie.
Q. Who made the final decision to go to war based on lies ?
A. The Queen
Q. Is the Queen going to summons herself for war crimes ?
A. Is she **** as like you stupid *****.
Q. Who made the final decision to go to war based on lies ?
A. The Queen
Q. Is the Queen going to summons herself for war crimes ?
A. Is she **** as like you stupid *****.
Also, you might want to get a slightly firmer grasp on the way the British political and legal system operate - for starters, the Queen can't be placed on trial for war crimes, since it'd be Regina versus Regina, which is a constitutional impossibility (and before you say it, while we don't have a written constitution, there is one there, based on custom, precedent and statute).
Second, the Royal Prerogative is exercised by the government on HMQ's behalf, which means that it'd be members of that body, most likely the PM, who would be placed on trial should that eventuality arise. Also, HMQ did not formally declare war (that's done with the Lord Chamberlain reading out a proclamation on the Sovereign's behalf, as per September 1939).
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you think a point made is a question, then it's like banging your head against a brick wall.
Answer the real questions if you want the real answers, don't give me your anal irrelevant bollocks.
Time will tell, if you're that ******* stupid you can't see it already.
Give it 18 months and the Brits will be out of Iraq with a massive bill, hundreds of dead and nothing to show for it again. The spams will take the lot and **** us off.
The same with afghan, but that'll take much longer, if it ever gets sorted.
Hundreds of dead soldiers for energy reserves, it's got nothing to do with iraqs/afghanistans citizens.
All this bollocks propaganda about me being anti-military when the opposite is the truth. I want my mates home because I don't want to see them become victims to the lies of the neo cons and bliar like so many others. So yeah, I'm really anti military you bunch of ******* class 1 dickheads. They can't even supply them with the correct, adequate and safe equipment to carry out their wars based on lies.
I **** the lot of you, crack on with you slander based on BS, it's not like I'd expect anything less from a bunch of internet commandos.
Answer the real questions if you want the real answers, don't give me your anal irrelevant bollocks.
Time will tell, if you're that ******* stupid you can't see it already.
Give it 18 months and the Brits will be out of Iraq with a massive bill, hundreds of dead and nothing to show for it again. The spams will take the lot and **** us off.
The same with afghan, but that'll take much longer, if it ever gets sorted.
Hundreds of dead soldiers for energy reserves, it's got nothing to do with iraqs/afghanistans citizens.
All this bollocks propaganda about me being anti-military when the opposite is the truth. I want my mates home because I don't want to see them become victims to the lies of the neo cons and bliar like so many others. So yeah, I'm really anti military you bunch of ******* class 1 dickheads. They can't even supply them with the correct, adequate and safe equipment to carry out their wars based on lies.
I **** the lot of you, crack on with you slander based on BS, it's not like I'd expect anything less from a bunch of internet commandos.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Lancashire
Age: 48
Posts: 550
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
After the last tirade I am now coming round to the thought that maybe CDT is a good thing as I suspect that is why PP is now EX forces..........
Why would CDT have been a bad thing before the 'tirade'???
You obviously like the taste of other peoples sweetcorn whilst being smacked up to the eyeballs avoiding the big bad CDT team.
You'll be throwing in the acronym pax next, you sad ****er.
Munch munch
PP
Hundreds of dead soldiers for energy reserves, it's got nothing to do with iraqs/afghanistans citizens.
No one can use the 'defending your freedom' argument with any cred. The last terrorist attack in the UK was from within your own borders.
I am not anti military, but I am against pointless wars.
Last edited by Trojan1981; 25th Apr 2008 at 01:42.
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
but I am against pointless wars.
As for the rest of you, I can reveal that PP is in fact really ACM Sir Glenn Torpy, idling away his day baiting ppruners while trying to edit his JPA user's profile so he can book some leave...
you don't actually get to check the "no pointless wars" box while you are still serving.
The universities seem to be trying to save people from being 'duped' into service. Like I said, I am not anti military.
Below the Glidepath - not correcting
Quite agree, like it or not today's "yoof" are tomorrows leaders, if I met a 22 year old College student who agreed with my views on the world I'd be really worried...
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: London
Posts: 2,916
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Students Unions have been spending hours debating resolutions about world affairs - and sending very 'serious' condemnatory resolutions to world leaders - for as long as I can remember.
Radical thinking is a feature of being a student, and it's no coincidence that the most radical and politically active students unions are usually in the good universities which tend to attract the brightest students who've demonstrated a capacity for free thinking rather than simply an ability to pass examinations.
Then, after the luxury of being free of responsibilities (other than graduating before leaving), comes the real world of careers, family commitments, mortgages etc.
Many of the most rebellious of my contemporaries who were going to change the world soon became pillars of the Establishment, and several of the most committed and self-proclaimed socialists, Trots and anti-capitalists went on to very successful (and very lucrative) careers in the City.
As for the anti military aspects of the student resolutions, after more than 30 years, I'm still proud to have been a member of the London UAS when I was a student and retain a strong loyalty to the RAF.
I think it's a great pity that cuts in defence expenditure mean that students no longer have the same opportunities as I was given. Even those of us who didn't go on to military careers were able to take with us into our various fields some knowledge of the services which enabled us to counter some of the ill-informed comments which inevitably arise in discussions about defence/military issues.
kippernipper
With all due respect to your law degree, the summary of the legal aspects by Archimedes at post #46 is more balanced and, FWIW, I think is accurate.
I say FWIW because, although I've followed with interest the conflicting legal arguments before and since the invasion, I have no expertise in international law. However, distinguished lawyers in that field have always been divided about the legality of invading Iraq.
Maple 01
Are you just allowing PP to wind you up or do you really believe that anyone who disagrees with the decision to invade Iraq, or considers it to have been illegal, is a Sadam apologist?
Radical thinking is a feature of being a student, and it's no coincidence that the most radical and politically active students unions are usually in the good universities which tend to attract the brightest students who've demonstrated a capacity for free thinking rather than simply an ability to pass examinations.
Then, after the luxury of being free of responsibilities (other than graduating before leaving), comes the real world of careers, family commitments, mortgages etc.
Many of the most rebellious of my contemporaries who were going to change the world soon became pillars of the Establishment, and several of the most committed and self-proclaimed socialists, Trots and anti-capitalists went on to very successful (and very lucrative) careers in the City.
As for the anti military aspects of the student resolutions, after more than 30 years, I'm still proud to have been a member of the London UAS when I was a student and retain a strong loyalty to the RAF.
I think it's a great pity that cuts in defence expenditure mean that students no longer have the same opportunities as I was given. Even those of us who didn't go on to military careers were able to take with us into our various fields some knowledge of the services which enabled us to counter some of the ill-informed comments which inevitably arise in discussions about defence/military issues.
kippernipper
With all due respect to your law degree, the summary of the legal aspects by Archimedes at post #46 is more balanced and, FWIW, I think is accurate.
I say FWIW because, although I've followed with interest the conflicting legal arguments before and since the invasion, I have no expertise in international law. However, distinguished lawyers in that field have always been divided about the legality of invading Iraq.
Maple 01
Are you just allowing PP to wind you up or do you really believe that anyone who disagrees with the decision to invade Iraq, or considers it to have been illegal, is a Sadam apologist?
Last edited by Flying Lawyer; 25th Apr 2008 at 11:02.