UK Amazon Kindle Forum discussion
General Chat - anything Goes
>
The 'Take it Outside' thread This thread will no longer be moderated ***
We've got some wonderful shots of all sorts of animals, including a pride that followed us round the Serengeti for three days.Unfortunately, it was pre-digital camera. Must get the photos scanned one day.
AbsolutelyBut one question people should ask themselves, 'what is a natural death of a lion like?'
One reason for culling older animals in the UK is that natural death tends to involve slow starvation (probably aggravated by teeth falling out etc) and disease. In the end their weakened immune system means that their parasite/worm burden gets them.
So a lion (or anything) that's shot properly gets a pretty good deal
wait are we talking animals or the fate of OAPS in the UK here Jim?
Animals who live long enough to be OAPs are just dying more slowly :-(
Will wrote: "Apropos of bugger all, I have received a personal invitation to join the Institute of Directors, a snip at £ 605 plus VAT (Incl joining fee).I never knew that passionate socialists were allowed in."
Right, that's my membership cancelled.
Part of the reasons behind the lack of money in Zimbabwe is not because tourist profits are low, it's because of sanctions. Those sanctions are in place because of the country's poor human rights record and its regime.As a result of the above, the only way they can raise funds is by having hunters come into the country and hunt.
Until there is regime change in Zimbabwe, then nothing will change for the people or the animals. Even then, if you read about Mugabe's successor, then there is little chance of anything getting any better.
Too true GeoffAnd is regime change worth British lads dying for? (edited to say that this isn't a rhetorical question, it's one I don't know the answer to. My gut feeling is that anybody who says yes has to be willing to go)
I completely agree with that discussion point, Jim.Only suicidal people should attend wars.
Geoff (G. Robbins) (The noisy passionfruit) wrote: Right, that's my subscription cancelledPlace must be going to the dogs, inviting me, Geoff...
Sanctions were, I suppose, tried in order to force a regime change without a war.Does anyone know of an instance where they have worked?
Patti (baconater) wrote: "I completely agree with that discussion point, Jim.Only suicidal people should attend wars."
The problem is that people have been known to turn up on your doorstep with one and just shooing them away doesn't seem to work :-(
But travelling to them does show undue enthusiasm
And nine times out of ten...or more like 99 out of 100, I expect, the war mongers are male.Just saying.
Will wrote: "Sanctions were, I suppose, tried in order to force a regime change without a war.Does anyone know of an instance where they have worked?"
Cuba?
Patti (baconater) wrote: "And nine times out of ten...or more like 99 out of 100, I expect, the war mongers are male.Just saying."
Tell that to Boudicca, Margaret Thatcher, Golda Meir, or Indira Gandhi :-)
But yes, it's mostly men who die
Patti (baconater) wrote: "Will wrote: "Sanctions were, I suppose, tried in order to force a regime change without a war.Does anyone know of an instance where they have worked?"
Cuba?"
The Soviet Union?
Depends what you mean by 'worked'.It's relatively easy to see how direct intervention has forced regime change, but the after shocks of that can be felt for decades afterwards. We were still seeing the aftermath of WWI in the 1990s for example.
The current sanctions on Russia have bit down on them hard but because there's no marching armies to report on, it's very tricky to see if 'we' are winning or not.
Human history is littered with violence, wars, pillaging, genocide, and rape... the vast majority of which has been carried out by men at the behest of men, often with the excuse that it's what the Big Man in the Sky told them to do.
Will wrote: "Sanctions were, I suppose, tried in order to force a regime change without a war.Does anyone know of an instance where they have worked?"
Yes, but carefully, with the USSR. The US initiated a arms race that they knew the Kremlin couldn't keep up with.
They are doing something with Russia currently. Putin gambled on being a gas/oil/mineral economy. They didn't count on the oil price tanking and China overbuying minerals.
The oil wells they have are all old Soviet-era ones that are coming to the end of their life and there is a race to see if they will run dry before the equipment stops functioning. No new wells are being explored currently, since they double-crossed the oil companies some years ago.
2017 is predicted as the year of real troubles for Russia.
Michael Cargill wrote: "Human history is littered with violence, wars, pillaging, genocide, and rape... the vast majority of which has been carried out by men at the behest of men, often with the excuse that it's what the Big Man in the Sky told them to do."Ah, the old My Imaginary Friend is better than your Imaginary Friend.
My Flying Spaghetti Monster is better than your's.
That's the Israeli-Arab war in a nutshell.
The Israeli-Arab was is mainly about territory and water. When two groups of people with totally different cultures are promised the same land it isn't going to end well.
The cultural difference between the Jews who came in after the war and the Jews who were already there was probably larger than the difference between local Jews and Arabs
you could argue that US sanctions made conditions in Nicaragua so hard that the Sandinista subsequently lost the democratic election and then unusually for a Marxist Party, handed back power according to the democratic mandate. Regime change through sanctions, though right-wing death squads introduced a military element too
Saw this on the BBC News site. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/technology-...
As you can probably guess, I'm on the privacy side of the fence.
Ban advanced encryption? You may as well try to ban the tides from knocking over sandcastles.I'm not convinced that this is just mere ignorance, it's tedious poloticing as well. No-one ever lost an election because they said they were going to crack down on crime and terrorism.
Michael Cargill wrote: "Ban advanced encryption? You may as well try to ban the tides from knocking over sandcastles.I'm not convinced that this is just mere ignorance, it's tedious poloticing as well. No-one ever los..."
I hate the politics that treats you as an idiot.
Oh wait, that is the definition of politics.
Geoff (G. Robbins) (The noisy passionfruit) wrote: "I hate the politics that treats you as an idiot.
Oh wait, that is the definition of politics. ..."
Have I quoted Plato before?
"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors."
Jim wrote: "Geoff (G. Robbins) (The noisy passionfruit) wrote: "I hate the politics that treats you as an idiot.
Oh wait, that is the definition of politics. ..."
Have I quoted Plato before?
"One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors."
You have, but it doesn't make it any less valid.
More valid. I paid attention to him this time.
Try this:https://www.facebook.com/JeremyCorbyn...
Corbyn is a moderate left of centre (Shut up Will, he really is a moderate)politician.
He normally travels around by public transport, regularly is at the bottom of the table of MP's expenses (Last year he only claimed for one printer ink cartridge) and talks from his core principles and beliefs, even if they are considered unpopular/untrendy.
As such he is considered to be unelectable....
I confess I'm rather warming to the man.
Will wrote: "Try this:https://www.facebook.com/JeremyCorbyn...
Corbyn is a moderate left of centre (Shut up Will, he really is a moderate) politician."
Well, if he's a moderate, the Labour Party must be doomed as it will be rife with people more disengaged from reality.
I can never, ever, forgive someone who invitied Gerry Adams and Martin McGuinness to the House of Commons in the immediate aftermath of the Brighton bombing.
Let me guess - is that a topic dug up by the Telegraph?
That's a very odd thing to hate Corbyn for.During the 1980s, the Thatcher government were giving out the "We don't negotiate with terrorists" line whilst they carried out negotiations with said terrorists in secret.
It doesn't really matter, 3 wholly uninspiring candidates and one unelectable one.
Michael Cargill wrote: "That's a very odd thing to hate Corbyn for.During the 1980s, the Thatcher government were giving out the "We don't negotiate with terrorists" line whilst they carried out negotiations with said t..."
It's always been the standard British way. You make a few concessions, you allow them some sort of power and position, you ensure they're salaried and drawing from the public purse.
Then you quietly say to them, "We know where you live, we know where your children go to school, but for you, the bad news, the really bad news, is that the wild roaring boys you used to lead also know that. And they now hate you as traitors far more than they hate us. I suggest you do something about them old chap."
Perhaps its because of my particular strong religious convictions, Geoff, that i can understand where Corbyn comes from on the IRA and hamas. The only way to a lasting peace is understanding and reconciliation, and that means talking, even at difficult times. I held that view both before and after being in Manchester City centre (I was walking on High Street at the time) when the IRA blew the city centre apart
Generally, why do people think Corbyn is a wild eyed far left politician, 'divorced from reality' to pick up Geoff's phrase?He argues economics from a soundly based Keynsian point of view, with support from leading economists. He wants to renationalise the railways, electricity companies and water companies. These policies have broad public support, and arguably it is foolish to leave control of our major infrastructure in foreign hands anyway... and that's it. Oh, and a 50% tax rate on the top income slice.
It's not terribly revolutionary, is it?
it isn't Will, but this country is by temperament conservative with a small 'c'. They don't want anything that might scare the horses in the street...
Can't recall who now, but didn't someone famously say that politics was about the art of presentation? A saying our current crop of leaders on all sides seem to have taken so seriously that there is now more presentation than substance.I've seen it said that Corbyn is unelectable because he doesn't look groomed enough. Have we really sunk so low?
I agree with Will (MJ). Corbyn is saying things that a lot of people like hearing, not just on the railways, utilities and taxation, but also on Trident and Europe. He is coming across as an honest, straightforward man - which makes a pleasant change.If nothing else, he is at least forcing Labour to address the issues seriously.
Will wrote: "Can't recall who now, but didn't someone famously say that politics was about the art of presentation? A saying our current crop of leaders on all sides seem to have taken so seriously that there ..."yes, look at how they went for Miliband because he couldn't eat a bacon sarnie decorously. Or the number of kitchens he had. Or his late father being a Marxist etc
I'm prepared to warm slightly towards Liz Kendall after hearing that she told a Mail journalist to "Fuck Off" after the journalist asked about her weight.
B J wrote: "Let me guess - is that a topic dug up by the Telegraph?"No BJ, this was a topic that came from the heart. I lost two friends in the Birmingham bombing. They were just kids, they'd just left school and were, like me, starting work.
The IRA and the UDA committed atrocities in Northern Ireland, the Irish Republic and the UK mainland. The fact that Jeremy Corbyn invited these people within a few weeks of the Brighton bombing, gives you some idea of how politically and morally incompetent the man is.
Anyone that thinks that the British people would vote Labour with him as the leader is living in a pipedream.
I believe and have said before, that landslide victories are very dangerous for democracy in the UK, so anything that makes either of the major parties unelectable I am against.
as a matter of interest did you cavil when Thatcher cosied up to Pinochet & protected him for as long as possible once he had lost power? Politicians sup with the devil though of course they can demonstrate a moment of principle & refuse.That's what politics is, an endless set of decisions around compromise. Which is why we supported the remnants of the Khmer Rouge because we were cosying up to China who hated the Vietnamese who had moved into Cambodia to kick the Khmer Rouge out of power and were occupying the country. Can't get more craven & morally corrupt than to be allied with the Khmer Rouge
UK Amazon Kindle Forum
Books mentioned in this topic
The Beiderbecke Affair (other topics)The Grain Market in the Roman Empire: A Social, Political and Economic Study (other topics)
The Peasants Are Revolting (other topics)
How to Lie with Statistics (other topics)
That Old Ace in the Hole (other topics)
More...
That's the sort of picture you can be proud of.