Bulletguy Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-02-17 6:52 PM Bulletguy - 2019-02-17 4:05 PM pelmetman - 2019-02-17 7:43 AM Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 10:54 PM UK has benefited from huge amounts of EU funding More FAKE NEWS *-) .............. The UK has received a little bit of OUR MONEY back >:-) ............. You're beginning to get as tiresome as your little snowflake friend crying and wailing "fake news" every time you read something you don't like, so its time you began backing up your claims with some evidence. Simply saying "a little bit" is totally meaningless and just idle conjecture. Post up accounts showing all EU funding into UK since membership, businesses, buildings, universities, research etc etc. That should keep you busy for a few weeks. pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:00 AM Bulletguy - 2019-02-16 10:54 PM So far your lunacy has cost the UK £80 billion......£800 million a week every week with an economy you claim as "ticking over nicely" *-) plunging to a loss of 2% GDP. Germany's GDP dropped from 2.2% in 2017 to 1.5% in 2018 Britain's GDP dropped from 1.8% in 2017 to 1.4% in 2018 So if a loss of 2% of GDP is plunging?....... What would you call Germany's?.......... Bombing? >:-) ....... A loss of 0.7% and just 0.2% between theirs and ours. Not bad given the vast amount industry they have compared to ours, most of which has been sold off including huge chunks of our infrastructure now owned by errrr.....well, countries you don't "like" such as Germany, France and Netherlands. This is what you Brexiteers call "taking back control", right? (lol) Are you going to start buying it all back? (lol)(lol) Brian Kirby - 2019-02-17 11:05 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-16 8:19 PM.........…..In 1976 the USSR was commonly known as RUSSIA...... even the Daily Telegraph thought so :D ........... To which there is an eminently simple answer: the Telegraph was wrong. Russia and the USSR were not the same thing, and Ukraine, as I pointed out above was, at that time, the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic. All the Telegraph did was dumb-down the distinction, to assist its average cold war era reader. Had you been on the Leningrad (now once more St Petersberg) trip in October 1966, you would have been to Russia, but you were on the Odessa trip, and you actually went to Ukraine (then the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic), which was part of the Soviet block, but not part of Russia. Claiming Ukraine was, or ever has been, part of Russia, is just geographic illiteracy. Yeah Odessa is miles away from Russia but seeing a Ruski flag on a ship was enough to convince Pelmet he had "been in" [Russia] !! Good job that Navy lark kept him mopping the decks and didn't let him loose with a map! And to think he was let loose driving a bus....it must have been a miracle any passengers got to the right destination! Easy to see why he ended up making puffs and pelmets!! (lol) Damn your thick Bullet 8-) ....... You are so seriously stupid you cant see past your own racist xenophobia (lol) (lol) (lol) ....... I'm afraid none of that silly outburst will ever put Odessa in Russia......no matter how hard you try. You could always print the map out i showed you, take some scissors to cut around Odessa, then stick it over the border of Russia which is clearly marked....if that makes you happy. Have you got working on those figures i asked you to post up or was that yet another example of your nonsensical waffle and conjecture you can't give citation to? Oh, and when do you intend to start buying back all the rail stock owned by Germany, France and Netherlands? Assuming they will sell that is. This "taking back control" isn't going so well is it? Yet another example of something not thought through before making silly soundbites. *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-02-17 8:42 PM I'm afraid none of that silly outburst will ever put Odessa in Russia...... So who was in control of Ukraine/Odessa in 1976? ;-) ....... I'll give you a clue......Its a 6 letter word.....starts with M and ends in W :D ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-02-17 12:54 PM How is shoot ourselves in both feet, shoot Ireland in the bank, and risk resurrecting irish terrorism, all at a stroke, a good solution, for democracy or anything? I have to say this doctrine seems to me self-destructive. Have I misunderstood? See! *-) ....... There you go being all negative again 8-) ........ The numbers are on the Irish side ;-) ....... So any problems will be their problems.......as May has already said the UK wouldn't put up a border >:-) ...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted February 17, 2019 Share Posted February 17, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:54 PM Bulletguy - 2019-02-17 8:42 PM I'm afraid none of that silly outburst will ever put Odessa in Russia...... So who was in control of Ukraine/Odessa in 1976? ;-) ....... I'll give you a clue......Its a 6 letter word.....starts with M and ends in W :D ....... And that STILL does NOT put Odessa "in Russia" you clown. It's the equivalent of claiming Sofia to be "in Russia" during the 70's which is what you've been trying to do with Odessa! *-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 teflon2 - 2019-02-17 6:55 PM.............................We were lied to by omission we were deceived by a surreptitious design to build a central federal European government, as is obvious the present EU bears no similarity to the common market we were led to believe was the objective.of the vote. :D Pure paranoia. By the time you had that vote, you had been in the EEC since 1 Jan 1973. Are you really saying that you voted in June 1975 without gaining any understanding of what the EEC was? What stopped you? There was ample information available at the time. The papers were full of analysis of what it was, its history, and its pros and cons. From your comment above, it seems you still haven't looked at it in the round, and have only taken on board selectively misleading reportage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:18 PM....................So the Russian ship that visited Portsmouth at the same time was from the Ukraine? :-S ............. I don't know. What was its home port? Ships get around a bit, don't they? Russia had a navy. It stationed ships in any port, in any satellite state, that it thought to its strategic advantage. It certainly wasn't going to let its satellites have their own navies, was it? Ever heard of Potemkin? Russian ships were highly likely to have been in Odessa. The presence of Russian ships in foreign ports doesn't mean the country involved has been moved to Russia, does it? Were that true, Portsmouth must also have been in Russia. So now we have both Odessa and Portsmouth in Russia. OK Dave, if you say so! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-02-17 9:00 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-17 12:54 PM How is shoot ourselves in both feet, shoot Ireland in the bank, and risk resurrecting irish terrorism, all at a stroke, a good solution, for democracy or anything? I have to say this doctrine seems to me self-destructive. Have I misunderstood? See! *-) ....... There you go being all negative again 8-) ........ The numbers are on the Irish side ;-) ....... So any problems will be their problems.......as May has already said the UK wouldn't put up a border >:-) ...... From the man who feels positive, but has just moved Odessa and Portsmouth to Russia! :-D Now, why would I take your word on Ireland as well, Dave? There are two conditions under which there won't be a hard border between NI and Ireland. 1 We stay in the EU. 2 Ireland re-unifies and the border shifts to the Irish Sea. Anything else is just Odessa/Portsmouth thinking! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 7:55 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:18 PM....................So the Russian ship that visited Portsmouth at the same time was from the Ukraine? :-S ............. I don't know. What was its home port? Ships get around a bit, don't they? Russia had a navy. It stationed ships in any port, in any satellite state, that it thought to its strategic advantage. It certainly wasn't going to let its satellites have their own navies, was it? Ever heard of Potemkin? Russian ships were highly likely to have been in Odessa. The presence of Russian ships in foreign ports doesn't mean the country involved has been moved to Russia, does it? Were that true, Portsmouth must also have been in Russia. So now we have both Odessa and Portsmouth in Russia. OK Dave, if you say so! :-D The purpose of the "coordinated visits" was to foster goodwill with Russia ;-) .......... Not the Ukraine *-) ...... https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-ajaxnetphoto-28th-may1976-portsmouthengland-the-russians-are-coming-134200281.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 8:01 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-17 9:00 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-17 12:54 PM How is shoot ourselves in both feet, shoot Ireland in the bank, and risk resurrecting irish terrorism, all at a stroke, a good solution, for democracy or anything? I have to say this doctrine seems to me self-destructive. Have I misunderstood? See! *-) ....... There you go being all negative again 8-) ........ The numbers are on the Irish side ;-) ....... So any problems will be their problems.......as May has already said the UK wouldn't put up a border >:-) ...... From the man who feels positive, but has just moved Odessa and Portsmouth to Russia! :-D Now, why would I take your word on Ireland as well, Dave? There are two conditions under which there won't be a hard border between NI and Ireland. 1 We stay in the EU. 2 Ireland re-unifies and the border shifts to the Irish Sea. Anything else is just Odessa/Portsmouth thinking! :-D You forgot 3........NI has a referendum and they vote to unite with Ireland ;-) ...........Problem solved >:-) ....... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-02-17 10:28 PM pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:54 PM Bulletguy - 2019-02-17 8:42 PM I'm afraid none of that silly outburst will ever put Odessa in Russia...... So who was in control of Ukraine/Odessa in 1976? ;-) ....... I'll give you a clue......Its a 6 letter word.....starts with M and ends in W :D ....... And that STILL does NOT put Odessa "in Russia" you clown. It's the equivalent of claiming Sofia to be "in Russia" during the 70's which is what you've been trying to do with Odessa! *-) The Ukraine was part of the USSR and controlled from Moscow..........even you should remember that Comrade *-) ............ Odessa was home to the Russian Black Sea Fleet.........Not the Ukrainian navy.......because they didn't have one :D .......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
malc d Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 8:01 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-17 9:00 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-17 12:54 PM How is shoot ourselves in both feet, shoot Ireland in the bank, and risk resurrecting irish terrorism, all at a stroke, a good solution, for democracy or anything? I have to say this doctrine seems to me self-destructive. Have I misunderstood? See! *-) ....... There you go being all negative again 8-) ........ The numbers are on the Irish side ;-) ....... So any problems will be their problems.......as May has already said the UK wouldn't put up a border >:-) ...... From the man who feels positive, but has just moved Odessa and Portsmouth to Russia! :-D Now, why would I take your word on Ireland as well, Dave? There are two conditions under which there won't be a hard border between NI and Ireland. 1 We stay in the EU. 2 Ireland re-unifies and the border shifts to the Irish Sea. Anything else is just Odessa/Portsmouth thinking! :-D This discussion reminds me of the days of the British Empire when India was in England. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-02-18 9:00 AM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 7:55 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:18 PM....................So the Russian ship that visited Portsmouth at the same time was from the Ukraine? :-S ............. I don't know. What was its home port? Ships get around a bit, don't they? Russia had a navy. It stationed ships in any port, in any satellite state, that it thought to its strategic advantage. It certainly wasn't going to let its satellites have their own navies, was it? Ever heard of Potemkin? Russian ships were highly likely to have been in Odessa. The presence of Russian ships in foreign ports doesn't mean the country involved has been moved to Russia, does it? Were that true, Portsmouth must also have been in Russia. So now we have both Odessa and Portsmouth in Russia. OK Dave, if you say so! :-D The purpose of the "coordinated visits" was to foster goodwill with Russia ;-) .......... Not the Ukraine *-) ...... https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-ajaxnetphoto-28th-may1976-portsmouthengland-the-russians-are-coming-134200281.html Quite, but it still left Odessa in Ukraine (a country) and not in Russia (a different country). Political gestures do not alter physical geography. It was goodwill at a safe distance, in someone else's back yard. I note they didn't invite you to Severomorsk - can't imagine why! :-D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 10:10 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-18 9:00 AM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 7:55 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:18 PM....................So the Russian ship that visited Portsmouth at the same time was from the Ukraine? :-S ............. I don't know. What was its home port? Ships get around a bit, don't they? Russia had a navy. It stationed ships in any port, in any satellite state, that it thought to its strategic advantage. It certainly wasn't going to let its satellites have their own navies, was it? Ever heard of Potemkin? Russian ships were highly likely to have been in Odessa. The presence of Russian ships in foreign ports doesn't mean the country involved has been moved to Russia, does it? Were that true, Portsmouth must also have been in Russia. So now we have both Odessa and Portsmouth in Russia. OK Dave, if you say so! :-D The purpose of the "coordinated visits" was to foster goodwill with Russia ;-) .......... Not the Ukraine *-) ...... https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-ajaxnetphoto-28th-may1976-portsmouthengland-the-russians-are-coming-134200281.html Quite, but it still left Odessa in Ukraine (a country) and not in Russia (a different country). Political gestures do not alter physical geography. It was goodwill at a safe distance, in someone else's back yard. I note they didn't invite you to Severomorsk - can't imagine why! :-D The geography is irrelevant as Ukraine was part of the USSR which as you can see from the news reports at the time was commonly referred to as RUSSIA :D .......... Using your argument if the Russian ship had visited Rosyth instead, it would have been on a goodwill visit to Scotland ......Not Britain *-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 malc d - 2019-02-18 9:44 AM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 8:01 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-17 9:00 PM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-17 12:54 PM How is shoot ourselves in both feet, shoot Ireland in the bank, and risk resurrecting irish terrorism, all at a stroke, a good solution, for democracy or anything? I have to say this doctrine seems to me self-destructive. Have I misunderstood? See! *-) ....... There you go being all negative again 8-) ........ The numbers are on the Irish side ;-) ....... So any problems will be their problems.......as May has already said the UK wouldn't put up a border >:-) ...... From the man who feels positive, but has just moved Odessa and Portsmouth to Russia! :-D Now, why would I take your word on Ireland as well, Dave? There are two conditions under which there won't be a hard border between NI and Ireland. 1 We stay in the EU. 2 Ireland re-unifies and the border shifts to the Irish Sea. Anything else is just Odessa/Portsmouth thinking! :-D This discussion reminds me of the days of the British Empire when India was in England. ;-) If you went to Brick Lane in London you could be forgiven for thinking it still is :D ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Brick Lane has a Bangladeshi community Dave. You're understanding of geography appears to be pre-1947 which is strange given your time as a matelot. ;-) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ageingandrew Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Hello Brian, Teresa May is responsible for the deal that was presented to Parliament. She managed the negotiating team, she presented the deal to Parliament. It's her deal. The migration aspect was only a flag to demonstrate how far we had gone from being a sovereign state, it demonstrated that Blair/Major etc had given away so much sovereignty that (for example) the PM of Bulgaria had more influence in how we controlled our borders that had the UK PM. I can only answer for myself, and those I know, but on that basis, your belief is wrong. Our vote was in favour of membership, because we believe, based on the evidence provided, that remain represents the best overall outcome for the UK. What has emerged since the referendum has only served to reinforce that view, which is that Brexit, if it happens, will prove damaging to the UK economy, resulting in growing demands for government spending alongside falling tax revenues that, together, will result in increasing public borrowing and/or growing hardship for those whose livelihoods are affected by Brexit. I'm sorry Brian, no evidence whatsoever was provided. Instead gossip, rumours and good old 'Groupthink' presented by project fear abounded and still does, none of it having any real basis of fact. Take for example the statements that the NHS will run short of drugs post-Brexit. In France today some pharmacies are running short of drugs. Not because of Brexit but because they import more than 60% of their drugs from the US and China, drugs which are priced on the open market and it is their rising prices that are leading to shortages in France. We also import around 60% of our drugs from the US and China, but no doubt the remain camp will blame Brexit for any shortages. Look at our economic numbers for the past 2 years; UK employment has never been higher; the economy continues to grow. The UK stock market continues to improve following the US-China tariff disputes that disrupted it late last year. You use the words 'belief' and 'believe'. Belief without any factual basis is nothing more than silly superstition. How anyone can believe that membership of a political union based on subsidised prices and protectionism is essential for our countries prosperity is beyond me. However, the impact on the economy from Brexit will make realising those policies more difficult, because they will inevitably require substantial spending, and the money for that spending will not be there. What impact on the economy? We continually hear 'Despite Brexit' and 'impact on the economy' yet where are the figures. No facts are presented for us to analyse. Once again I put all statements like 'impact on the economy' down to poorly informed 'groupthink' as there are no facts. Then I fail to understand how, recognising that impact, and presumably in the knowledge of the Belfast Agreement requirements, plus those of the Common Travel Area, plus the EU's normal requirement for security of its external border, you can reach the following conclusion. There is only one option now on the table that does not subvert democracy and that is to head towards the 29th March without a deal and then negotiate other deals with France, with Spain afterwards. A better slogan is "Deliver Brexit and then fix the UK". Regards Andrew Were we to do that, we could not subsequently negotiate such trade deals with France, Spain, etc - because they are in the EU - so the only way to get those deals will be to negotiate them with the EU. We would also, by common consensus, inflict on ourselves the largest economic hit of all yet identified versions of Brexit. How is shoot ourselves in both feet, shoot Ireland in the bank, and risk resurrecting irish terrorism, all at a stroke, a good solution, for democracy or anything? I have to say this doctrine seems to me self-destructive. Have I misunderstood? The Irish border is an interesting subject. UK negotiators have repeatedly stated that customs checks will be made miles from the border without the need for border infrastructure. The EU has repeatedly poo-pood these ideas. It is not the resurgence of Irish terrorism, car bombs on the streets of Belfast, Omagh and Armagh that frightens the EU; no, it is the loss of integrity of the single market that really scares them. They will not open the market to cheaper wines, beef etc. The threats of Irish terrorism is a disgraceful and truly shocking scare tactic which will only happen in the EU insists on building their wall where there doesn't need to be a wall. On the subject of trade deals. No one needs a trade deal to trade. We trade with the US without a deal, we trade with Chile without a deal, JC, we even trade with North Korea without a deal. We will not need a trade deal to buy French wine or German cars. This posting started off titled 'The demise of Democracy' and I felt angered by what I read and felt that I had to reply to the OP. However, I've slowly come round to his way of thinking, that democracy in this country is in decline; it is so easily corrupted and polluted by vested interests able to scare the living daylights out of citizens into voting for something that is not in their interest. We see project fear doing this every day with their 'impact on the economy', 'resurgence of Irish terrorism', 'despite Brexit', 'far-right populists','Brits can't travel to Europe' and numerous other unsubstantiated and downright incorrect statements and stories. We see vested interests telling us that we have to hoard food because we're all going to starve, that there will be no-one left to care for us when all the EU migrants return home. All of these stories are just that - stories. Brexit was always going to be very hard for us. The EU does not want Brexit to be a success, the UE will lose €20Bn a year in income; EU influence in the world is reduced, the EU outlook on the world is more myopic and they will become more protectionist. The EU cannot let us go with a good deal and encourage others' to Exit, EU flags were burned in Paris on Saturday. If we leave with no-deal on the 29th March, I have no doubt Junker et al will be heading to London in the following days to agree a trade deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brian Kirby Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-02-18 10:45 AM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 10:10 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-18 9:00 AM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 7:55 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:18 PM....................So the Russian ship that visited Portsmouth at the same time was from the Ukraine? :-S ............. I don't know. What was its home port? Ships get around a bit, don't they? Russia had a navy. It stationed ships in any port, in any satellite state, that it thought to its strategic advantage. It certainly wasn't going to let its satellites have their own navies, was it? Ever heard of Potemkin? Russian ships were highly likely to have been in Odessa. The presence of Russian ships in foreign ports doesn't mean the country involved has been moved to Russia, does it? Were that true, Portsmouth must also have been in Russia. So now we have both Odessa and Portsmouth in Russia. OK Dave, if you say so! :-D The purpose of the "coordinated visits" was to foster goodwill with Russia ;-) .......... Not the Ukraine *-) ...... https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-ajaxnetphoto-28th-may1976-portsmouthengland-the-russians-are-coming-134200281.html Quite, but it still left Odessa in Ukraine (a country) and not in Russia (a different country). Political gestures do not alter physical geography. It was goodwill at a safe distance, in someone else's back yard. I note they didn't invite you to Severomorsk - can't imagine why! :-D The geography is irrelevant as Ukraine was part of the USSR which as you can see from the news reports at the time was commonly referred to as RUSSIA :D .......... Using your argument if the Russian ship had visited Rosyth instead, it would have been on a goodwill visit to Scotland ......Not Britain *-) ......... You are using "Russia" generically, Dave, not geographically. A "Hoover" is a vacuum cleaner, but not all vacuum cleaners are Hoovers. A Biro is a ball point pen, but not all ball point pens are Biros, and so on. The USSR was commonly called "Russia", but not all of the USSR was "Russia". So geography is relevant and, using my argument, had a ship of the Russian navy visited Rosyth it would have visited both Scotland and Great Britain, but would not have visited The United Kingdom, or England. What you actually visited was Odessa (presumably under an Intourist escort), which was in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which was an administrative part of the USSR, but was not in Russia, so your claim to have visited Russia is, both factually and geographically, incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Violet1956 - 2019-02-18 11:07 AM Brick Lane has a Bangladeshi community Dave. You're understanding of geography appears to be pre-1947 which is strange given your time as a matelot. ;-) Another knit picker *-) ........... Before Independent India, 1947 both Pakistan and East Bengal (now Bangladesh) were the part of Indian Princely States. Bangladesh emerged as an independent nation in 1971 after achieving independence from Pakistan in the Bangladesh Liberation War. So to be technically correct the Bangladeshi residents of Brick lane are of Indian Heritage ;-) ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 11:47 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-18 10:45 AM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 10:10 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-18 9:00 AM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 7:55 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:18 PM....................So the Russian ship that visited Portsmouth at the same time was from the Ukraine? :-S ............. I don't know. What was its home port? Ships get around a bit, don't they? Russia had a navy. It stationed ships in any port, in any satellite state, that it thought to its strategic advantage. It certainly wasn't going to let its satellites have their own navies, was it? Ever heard of Potemkin? Russian ships were highly likely to have been in Odessa. The presence of Russian ships in foreign ports doesn't mean the country involved has been moved to Russia, does it? Were that true, Portsmouth must also have been in Russia. So now we have both Odessa and Portsmouth in Russia. OK Dave, if you say so! :-D The purpose of the "coordinated visits" was to foster goodwill with Russia ;-) .......... Not the Ukraine *-) ...... https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-ajaxnetphoto-28th-may1976-portsmouthengland-the-russians-are-coming-134200281.html Quite, but it still left Odessa in Ukraine (a country) and not in Russia (a different country). Political gestures do not alter physical geography. It was goodwill at a safe distance, in someone else's back yard. I note they didn't invite you to Severomorsk - can't imagine why! :-D The geography is irrelevant as Ukraine was part of the USSR which as you can see from the news reports at the time was commonly referred to as RUSSIA :D .......... Using your argument if the Russian ship had visited Rosyth instead, it would have been on a goodwill visit to Scotland ......Not Britain *-) ......... You are using "Russia" generically, Dave, not geographically. A "Hoover" is a vacuum cleaner, but not all vacuum cleaners are Hoovers. A Biro is a ball point pen, but not all ball point pens are Biros, and so on. The USSR was commonly called "Russia", but not all of the USSR was "Russia". So geography is relevant and, using my argument, had a ship of the Russian navy visited Rosyth it would have visited both Scotland and Great Britain, but would not have visited The United Kingdom, or England. What you actually visited was Odessa (presumably under an Intourist escort), which was in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which was an administrative part of the USSR, but was not in Russia, so your claim to have visited Russia is, both factually and geographically, incorrect. But generically correct........as the Ukraine was under the control of the Kremlin in 1976 :D ........ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bulletguy Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 11:47 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-18 10:45 AM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 10:10 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-18 9:00 AM Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 7:55 AM pelmetman - 2019-02-17 8:18 PM....................So the Russian ship that visited Portsmouth at the same time was from the Ukraine? :-S ............. I don't know. What was its home port? Ships get around a bit, don't they? Russia had a navy. It stationed ships in any port, in any satellite state, that it thought to its strategic advantage. It certainly wasn't going to let its satellites have their own navies, was it? Ever heard of Potemkin? Russian ships were highly likely to have been in Odessa. The presence of Russian ships in foreign ports doesn't mean the country involved has been moved to Russia, does it? Were that true, Portsmouth must also have been in Russia. So now we have both Odessa and Portsmouth in Russia. OK Dave, if you say so! :-D The purpose of the "coordinated visits" was to foster goodwill with Russia ;-) .......... Not the Ukraine *-) ...... https://www.alamy.com/stock-photo-ajaxnetphoto-28th-may1976-portsmouthengland-the-russians-are-coming-134200281.html Quite, but it still left Odessa in Ukraine (a country) and not in Russia (a different country). Political gestures do not alter physical geography. It was goodwill at a safe distance, in someone else's back yard. I note they didn't invite you to Severomorsk - can't imagine why! :-D The geography is irrelevant as Ukraine was part of the USSR which as you can see from the news reports at the time was commonly referred to as RUSSIA :D .......... Using your argument if the Russian ship had visited Rosyth instead, it would have been on a goodwill visit to Scotland ......Not Britain *-) ......... You are using "Russia" generically, Dave, not geographically. A "Hoover" is a vacuum cleaner, but not all vacuum cleaners are Hoovers. A Biro is a ball point pen, but not all ball point pens are Biros, and so on. The USSR was commonly called "Russia", but not all of the USSR was "Russia". So geography is relevant and, using my argument, had a ship of the Russian navy visited Rosyth it would have visited both Scotland and Great Britain, but would not have visited The United Kingdom, or England. What you actually visited was Odessa (presumably under an Intourist escort), which was in the Ukrainian Soviet Socialist Republic, which was an administrative part of the USSR, but was not in Russia, so your claim to have visited Russia is, both factually and geographically, incorrect. Good illustrative comparisons Brian though i doubt it will ever sink in! For someone who claims to have "sailed the world" (seriously!!), he has a very poor grasp of geographical locations. Good job they never let him loose with any charts and kept him well away from the bridge!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest pelmetman Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Bulletguy - 2019-02-18 12:29 PM Good job they never let him loose with any charts and kept him well away from the bridge!! Actually I'm qualified as a Navigators Yeoman.........So it was my job to correct the charts :D ......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 pelmetman - 2019-02-18 12:26 PM Violet1956 - 2019-02-18 11:07 AM Brick Lane has a Bangladeshi community Dave. You're understanding of geography appears to be pre-1947 which is strange given your time as a matelot. ;-) Another knit picker *-) ........... Before Independent India, 1947 both Pakistan and East Bengal (now Bangladesh) were the part of Indian Princely States. Bangladesh emerged as an independent nation in 1971 after achieving independence from Pakistan in the Bangladesh Liberation War. So to be technically correct the Bangladeshi residents of Brick lane are of Indian Heritage ;-) ......... *nitpicker* (lol) I was just following the geographical theme for a bit of fun Dave. We could move on to spelling ...and as person who makes her own gaffs on that and other fronts I expect you to be merciless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tracker Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Violet1956 - 2019-02-18 12:41 PM and as person who makes her own gaffs on that and other fronts I expect you to be merciless. A gaff is either a bit on a boat or a bit of kit used by fishermen - a gaffe is what we all make from time to time!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Violet1956 Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Violet1956 - 2019-02-18 12:41 PM pelmetman - 2019-02-18 12:26 PM Violet1956 - 2019-02-18 11:07 AM Brick Lane has a Bangladeshi community Dave. You're understanding of geography appears to be pre-1947 which is strange given your time as a matelot. ;-) Another knit picker *-) ........... Before Independent India, 1947 both Pakistan and East Bengal (now Bangladesh) were the part of Indian Princely States. Bangladesh emerged as an independent nation in 1971 after achieving independence from Pakistan in the Bangladesh Liberation War. So to be technically correct the Bangladeshi residents of Brick lane are of Indian Heritage ;-) ......... *nitpicker* (lol) I was just following the geographical theme for a bit of fun Dave. We could move on to spelling ...and as person who makes her own gaffs on that and other fronts I expect you to be merciless. I mean "gaffes" (lol) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
teflon2 Posted February 18, 2019 Share Posted February 18, 2019 Brian Kirby - 2019-02-18 7:41 AM teflon2 - 2019-02-17 6:55 PM.............................We were lied to by omission we were deceived by a surreptitious design to build a central federal European government, as is obvious the present EU bears no similarity to the common market we were led to believe was the objective.of the vote. :D Pure paranoia. By the time you had that vote, you had been in the EEC since 1 Jan 1973. Are you really saying that you voted in June 1975 without gaining any understanding of what the EEC was? What stopped you? There was ample information available at the time. The papers were full of analysis of what it was, its history, and its pros and cons. From your comment above, it seems you still haven't looked at it in the round, and have only taken on board selectively misleading reportage. Paranoid or not you seem to have dropped the we were not lied to comment. As I said Brian the information we were fed was meant to deceive and like a fool I was one who was deceived. I've 40+ years to watch where the EU is going but I didn't need that it was obvious within the 1st few that the only countries to benefit were to be the mainland Europe ones Ask yourself why did Greenland leave the EU in 1985 if not to protect their fish stocks from over-fishing by the mainland EU countries ? Now we need to follow them and regain our sovereignty. Just look all EU associated countries are now called states. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.