1

If i were the people, i would just throw her in a ditch in a wooden box and bury it in the earth and then put a rock with her name on it to show where she has been buried.

that's basically what they are doing (but they seem to go for the fancy version)

Votes + Comments
Nice!
-1

This is scary, Xantipius, this way the people become downtroden and depressed.Regardless of whether you are passionate or not, you should have a voice, and opinions. If everybody has this attitude bad people end up running the country, as several times through history, your own (as part of USSR) included.

Not all is so bad with us. People here are not as polite and cultured as e.g. Canadians, but they are very quiet and indifferent. On Russian forums there is a lot of discussions on political situations in Russia and Ukraine, but it's almost impossible to come across a discussion on the life in Belarus.
There is only one problem with us: we drink & booze too much. 1L of vodka costs here ~9.3 USD.

As for Mrs. M. Thatcher: (as it was said above) she was more a problem creator than a problem solver.

0

that's basically what they are doing (but they seem to go for the fancy version)

fancy version is to put her in a wooden box, not card board :)

-1

PS: In general, we (Belarusians) like our paternalistic state, which is based on a kind of dictatorship (of course, this dictatorship is not a dictatorship a la, say, S. Hussein's regime). Also, we like when our problems are being solved by someone else and not by ourselves.

0

Xanti: Do people still pass out drunk and freeze to death? It seems like comfortable way to go but....

An old joke: What is vodka roulette? Answer: 6 Russians go into a room and drink 6 bottls of vodka each - 5 leave the 6th has to figure who is still there.

Many years ago I picked up a couple hitchhikers in downtown Seattle - they had no English, I had no Polish but they made it understood they wanted the nearest licquer store. No problem, I took them back to their ship and they invited me on board. We drank vodka all night - none of this mixed stuff, a juice glass drank at one gulp and the wimps (me) chased it with O.J. They broke out some Polish sausage and gave me a can of their condensed milk to take home. I still have it - it no longer has a can shape, it is now almost round - can you say botulism - it's like living with a live grenade, I should probably throw it away soon. Since we could not speak each other's language, we did a lot of gestures, laughed a lot and said "no problem" a lot. The next day it was reported in the newspapers that 2 of the fisshermen had fled the ship - this was back in the day when there was still an Iron Curtain and no free travel.

Edited by GrimJack

0

Many years ago I picked up a couple hitchhikers in downtown Seattle - they had no English, I had no Polish but they made it understood they wanted the nearest licquer store. No problem, I took them back to their ship and they invited me on board. We drank vodka all night - none of this mixed stuff, a juice glass drank at one gulp and the wimps (me) chased it with O.J. They broke out some Polish sausage and gave me a can of their condensed milk to take home. I still have it - it no longer has a can shape, it is now almost round - can you say botulism - it's like living with a live grenade, I should probably throw it away soon. Since we could not speak each other's language, we did a lot of gestures, laughed a lot and said "no problem" a lot. The next day it was reported in the newspapers that 2 of the fisshermen had fled the ship - this was back in the day when there was still an Iron Curtain and no free travel.

You must have had lots of fun, huh? You shuold probably get rid of the condensed milk though...

1

hmmm ... just read the cost of Thatcher's funeral might build up to an amount of (estimated) over 9 million euro. influential politician or not, what the hell? do they really have nothing better to spend their funds on?

That reminds me of something Frankie Boyle said a few years back when her funeral was estimated to cost £3,000,000. It was something along the lines of "For that amount of money, you could buy everyone in Scotland a shovel and we'd hand-deliver her to Satan personally!"

-2

and the leftist vile hatred of anyone who doesn't agree with their repulsive hate based ideology shows once again...

She didn't start a war with Argentina, she ended it by kicking a dictatorial regime that had invaded her country out of that country.
She kicked ass when she kicked the labour unions out of the stranglehold they'd had on British industry for decades, a stranglehold which had turned that same industry into the laughingstock of Europe, turning out overpriced products which were so poor in quality that people even preferred the Italian and Yugoslavian cars, proverbial for rotting even in the sales brochure, over Rover and Triumph.

She cleaned up crime ridden cities where leftist "governance" had created a drug fueled free for all where law abiding citizens were afraid of their life (a situation since returned by her leftist successors).

She helped bring about the demise of the Soviet Union and communist repression in eastern Europe.

All of course things leftists don't like, because leftists like crime, corruption, and the oppression of anyone who doesn't agree with them.

She wasn't perfect, nobody is, but she was a lot better than anything else produced by British politics (or indeed European politics as a whole) since Churchill or anyone who came after her.

0

Well said Jwenting, and as to the subject of the cost of the funeral, in particular reference to the cost of 700 military personnel, they get paid anyway, so that can hardly be factored in as part of the cost, and the same for a proportion of the police on duty, although some will have been on overtime, certainly not all. The only ones really that should be totaly ashamed of themselves are the politico's, and the left side of the house, the ones with the loudest whining complaints, will all have claimed their expenses, I bet!

-1

Below an article from RU.net (translation by Google):

Thatcher: farewell to childhood
April 17, 2013

For me personally care Margaret Thatcher - it's like another farewell to
childhood. She became the British Prime Minister, and I just went to the
first class. I've been interested in politics since preschool years, watched
all the news, just go to sleep after watching the program "Time", and in
first class knew about all of the major world leaders.

But as I watched the Soviet news, then my knowledge there were specific.
"Washington hawks", "the Israeli military", "aggressive policy of NATO and
peace-loving policy of the Soviet Union." And of course in my mind, the
Soviet child, Margaret Thatcher had a special sinister place. I was sure
that she spends only anti-people policies.

I, in my nine years of soul sympathized with Bobby Sands, fasted in Block
HLB, then rooting for Argentina in the Falklands War of, empathized with the
miners, who fought for their right to do hard labor, which we in the Soviet
Union was a special honor.

In addition, Thatcher was a close ally of Ronald Reagan, and Reagan then
personified the general all the most terrible and disgusting for the Soviet
people that you can imagine.

How interesting the way the world, after all. I was curious schoolboy, who
zakanifolila brains Soviet television propaganda. But because now we do know
that just as I have in years deplorable ignorance, to Margaret Thatcher
treated and still are her own countrymen!

Hundred thousand crowd burying Bobby Sands'. Miners supported all Britain,
unions were a daily war with the Iron Lady, and strikes and protests were
not an invention of the "Time". When Thatcher had died, people were dancing
in the streets and drank champagne.

They say that great is seen in the distance. But, apparently, the fact that
the greatness of Margaret Thatcher is so great that even today, the distance
is still not enough to see it. It took the country in a deplorable economic
and social condition. And decided on something that will never be solved
most of the politicians concerned about ratings, the desire to please
everyone and get more votes in the election.

She realized that the reforms do not happen without pain. That victims can
not do without. What are millions of disaffected. But after going through
all this, the country will benefit. And Britain has again become a world
power.

But those through whom spent all these changes, it will never be able to
forgive and forget. Something similar happened in our 90's. Only we,
instead, to go ahead and bring it to the end, stopped and went back.

90 years cursed and called dashing. And everyone chose appeasement, sausage
and a guaranteed status of raw materials appendage of the developed
countries. Our Thatcher in Russia was not found.

1

@Xantipius, I too have similar, if opposite, memories.
In my school days the USSR was just a red area on the World Atlas, we knew nothing of what went on there, except that the 'Russian Bear' was to be feared as a warmonger, and not until I moved to Cyprus did I truly realise that the world over, people are people, there are good and bad, left, center and right, political and apolitical, the only real difference being, in a real democracy, they have a voice, a loud voice, in a pseudo democracy, they have a voice, but muted, and in a dictatorship, they have no voice. Poverty and hardship occur in every society, as does wealth and plenty.
I now have many new aquaintances, from russia, belorusia, armenia, poland, czech, australia, new zealand, everywhere, good people mostly, and nearly all trying to improve their quality of life in a 'new world'. I only wish I'd done it sooner. I am English through and through, and I love my country, and my Queen, but I enjoy my life a little better now, and hope to continue doing so for a few more years yet.

0

because leftists like crime, corruption, and the oppression of anyone who doesn't agree with them

And the rhetoric just goes on and on... It's easy to dismiss anything said by your opponent if you can tar him as an unthinking, ideologically bound lunatic. No normal thinking person likes crime, corruption or oppression and it is irresponsible to suggest that he does. All it does is demonstrate a lack of thinking on your part. I've been guilty of demonizing the right but at least when I do, I do it with examples. It's easy (and lazy) to say Bill O'Reilley (Rush Limbaugh, etc) is an idiot. At least when I say it I follow it up with "because he said...". I expect more from this conversation than mudslinging.

Votes + Comments
Common sense from the Rev...
2

I've got nothing to say about her politics, other than people kept voting her in, and that it wasn't the voters that ousted her. Consider this, if politics is such dog-eat-dog affair, what sort of person must a governmental leader be to become the head honcho to that lot? The people got what they voted for.

The British are a strange bunch of people... a very strange bunch of people. Scratch a little something off their luxuries and you are evidently starving them?

I don't think any leader would be able to please all the Lager Louts, Unionists that don't care what suffering they cause by their gratuitous strikes, fat bankers, and armchair Empire-Builders.

An old lady died recently, and her family are grieving. All of these celebrations that are taking place, what are they doing to this old lady? What is being achieved? What did her grieving family do wrong to deserve experiencing this? Any who are celebrating this death, any with such a mindset, it looks like that in your imaginary revenge on this old lady... she "got" you first and whatever you do now is not affecting her in the slightest... live with it. :-)

-1

As for Mrs. M. Thatcher: (as it was said above) she was more a problem creator than a problem solver.

It was my words, but actually I wanted to say "I can say nothing bad about Mrs. Thatcher."
She took on herself such a responsibility, for UK, for all its traditions. And she won, in the long run.
Those who drank champagne... it's just stupid plebeians. You know, in Russia there are millions of such bozos who spit on Gorbatchev, Kasparov etc. Nothing new under the Sun.

-1

indeed, the armchair socialists who've never had to work a day in their pittiful existences to earn a living yet spit on those who do the actual work that allows them their life of laziness because they "are not giving their fair share", scream for "fair redistribution of wealth" from those who actually keep the world running to themselves so they can live in luxury while those who create what the lazers consume can't afford the products they themselves produce.
The people who decide that plasma televisions are a "human right" for the unemployed, yet fail to realise (or realise but couldn't care less) that those who work in the factories where those televisions are manufactured are incapable of feeding their children, let alone buy those same televisions.

0

A very poignant thought jwenting. Mrs Thatcher once made the comment, "Man's inhumanity to man". She may or may not have been quoting the Bible. But your synopsis captures the problem world leaders can't afford to solve, even if they wanted to.

Please don't think I am patronising you when I say that I admire people that really do think things through. For example, your sig. at the bottom there, a brilliant way of expressing the root cause of many of society's problems, "The bureaucracy must grow to meet the needs of the growing bureaucracy" This explains brilliantly why no president or prime minister will ever master these problems, they can only chip away at them.

0

And what is wrong with fair distribution of wealth (the key word being fair)? In my mind, fair does not mean take all the money from the rich and give it to the poor. We had a popular sport here in Canada at one time. it was called red-baiting. It's a variant of the straw-man. The right likes to tar the left by sarcasticly chanting "make the rich pay, make the rich pay". In fact, a rallying cry of the left has been "make the rich pay their fair share", and I see nothing wrong with that. Henry Ford (in spite of his shortcomings) believed that it was in his best interests to pay his workers a wage that would enable them to buy the very cars that they were building. That type of thinking has gone by the wayside in recent decades. It seems to be the policy now to pay the workers as little as they can get away with. When the 99% can no longer afford to buy your products then you aren't going to be making a whole lot of profit. One of America's infamous Kock brothers was quoted as saying "I only want my fair share, and that's all of it". A sign of the times.

-1

I can't recall exactly what was Mrs. Thatcher for Soviet ppl in 80s.
My personal impression was/is: an extra-clever politician of the 20th century (ranked right below Sir Winston Churchill)
We, in Russia etc, are fed up with leftistic ideas. But you know... the current generation here is abs stupid - they drink the beer, in their 15-17 ys.
It was an enormous plus of the USSR: it never allowed any forms of dissoluteness.
In general, we lived under comm. regime not bad - all was abs free - medicine, education etc.
"I love tomorrow" (c)

0

We, in Russia etc, are fed up with leftistic ideas.

Any ideology when taken to an extreme is bad. Look at the Tea Party in the US. That's the problem when you don't temper your ideology with reality.

-1

And what is wrong with fair distribution of wealth (the key word being fair)?

It's be definition not fair to steal from someone who works hard for what he has and give it to some lazy SOB who can't be bothered.
It's now got to the point where less than 50% of the population pays more than half their income in taxes in order to pay for the largesse that keeps the other 50% in their designer clothes and large screen televisions, while they themselves can no longer afford those.
Yet the unproductive 50%+ scream they're not getting enough, that it's "not fair" that anyone has a higher income than them.

That's your "fair redistribution", leeching the lifeblood out of society to buy the votes of lazy buggers.
Is it fair that my father paid so much in taxes that we as a family could not afford to go on vacation some years, while a family on social security flew out to Spain or Italy 3 times a year for a 2-3 week stay in a luxury resort?
Is it fair that I as a kid was wearing clothes my mom made herself out of whatever scraps of material she could get cheap from stores, while kids from parents on minimum wages could afford designer jeans from all the subsidies they got for child support?
That's "fair redistribution of wealth" at work.

Fairness would have people decide where to spend their money, not have it forced from them and given to those who're too lazy to earn a living of their own.
I'm all for having a safety net for those who due to no fault of their own can't work (lose their jobs, become disabled, etc.), but that shouldn't extend to making those people more wealthy than those who pay the taxes that enable that lifestyle.
I was out of work a while last year, couldn't get unemployment benefits because I had a savings account, was told I had to spend all that money first and how long I had to live on it before I would be allowed to ask for the unemployment benefits I'd paid premiums for for well over a decade... Is that "fair"?

0

It's be definition not fair to steal from someone who works hard for what he has and give it to some lazy SOB who can't be bothered.

So when a CEO who is already pulling in 10 million or more a year increases his take by laying off workers and slashing the wages of the rest, this is fair? When a hedge fund manager who makes more in one hour that you do in 21 years by insider trading, then gets taxed at half the rate that you are, this is fair? I'm not saying that the money should go to some slob who can't be bothered to work, but how about using it to pay for a few more teachers or to hire back the police and fire fighters who were laid off because of budget shortfalls caused by giving yet more tax cuts to those CEOs and corporations who are making billions yet (in some cases) get money back from the government?

we as a family could not afford to go on vacation some years, while a family on social security flew out to Spain or Italy 3 times a year for a 2-3 week stay in a luxury resort?

Got a source for that?

I was out of work a while last year, couldn't get unemployment benefits because I had a savings account, was told I had to spend all that money first and how long I had to live on it before I would be allowed to ask for the unemployment benefits I'd paid premiums for for well over a decade... Is that "fair"?

In Canada we have unemployment benefits that are not tied to your existing savings. That is more fair. I believe in a hand up, not a hand out.

2

we as a family could not afford to go on vacation some years, while a family on social security flew out to Spain or Italy 3 times a year for a 2-3 week stay in a luxury resort?

So what? Maybe that person on social security wanted intil he/she was 65+ years old in order to afford taking that vacation. Don't you think he/she disserved it? I'm on social security and I resent your impression that we old people have not worked for 50+ years to get where we are today.

There are a few people drawing social security who don't need it, the really wealthy such as Senitor John McCain. I think congress will eventually stop that for wealthy people.

0

The fact of the matter is, she was a mother and grandmother.

I couldn't care less what her politics were like, everyone is entitled with an opinion.

But she was human, a dead human. Nomatter who you are or who she was, everyone should give the dead respect. Maybe I dont agree with something YOU do or say, but I would not be so heartless as to dance on your grave.

Humanity should be discusted.

1

Nomatter who you are or who she was, everyone should give the dead respect.

There is a fine line between respecting the departed for the sake of their family and loved ones, and creating an unfairly glorified picture of a person just because they passed away. At any point in the last decade, you could have asked me what I thought about Thatcher and I would probably say her policies were absolutely terrible and destructive for the UK, and that she was probably one of the worst prime ministers to take office. And now that she passed away, am I supposed to have a different opinion? No, my answer is the same.

I couldn't care less that she passed away, I didn't know her personally, and her death doesn't affect me in any way. However, because she passed away, she's in the news and people are talking about her more than usual. And because of that, people with unflattering opinions of her will express those opinions more than they usually do just because they're talking about her more than usual. This is not "dancing on her grave". It's just honest people giving their honest opinion, which hasn't changed just because she died, why would it?

I much prefer that kind of honesty to people who try to somehow cobble together a massive silver lining and say only nice things out of "respect" (either don't say anything or give your honest opinion), or even worse, those who use this as a way to form a revisionist view of recent history. For example, because news anchors and reporters are forced to show some reserve and respect for the departed, many people use that opportunity to "look back" on Thatcher's legacy in a bright light and somehow brush under the rug the tremendous amount of hatred and disapproval that many people have always had towards her. And this usually goes both ways, when Fidel Castro died it was a resounding "good riddance" throughout the medias and they largely made it sound like the devil was dead, of course, largely ignoring the good things he did and the wide-spread support (not unanimous, of course) he had in Cuba and over many parts of Latin America. The point is that the point of death can be an opportunity to "close a chapter in history", but it's more often used as an opportunity to put a big "this was evil" or "this was great" label on it, when usually neither are deserved and both often serve a rhetorical purpose (e.g., "Fidel = devil --> communism/socialism = all evil things", or "Thatcher the Great --> neo-conservatism / trickle-down is the best thing ever"), and, well, only a Sith deals in absolutes.

1

everyone should give the dead respect

No one should get respect unless it is earned. You don't get respect because you are a teacher, a parent or whatever. You earn respect for being a good teacher or a good parent. You get respect because of the person you are and the character you show. You don't automatically get it because you had the misfortune to die.

0

There is a fine line between respecting the departed for the sake of their family and loved ones, and creating an unfairly glorified picture of a person just because they passed away.

Tony Blair was interviewed on CNN a day or so after Margret Thatcher died, he couldn't say enough good things about her. But he looked as if he wanted to bite his toung off when saying some of those things.

Edited by Ancient Dragon

-1

One point of view, from Russia:
I respected her enormously (don't know why - just intuitevly).
And my mom liked her very much

1

It strikes me as odd that so many people on this thread have such strong opinions about Margaret Thatcher, but never had to live under her shadow. Unless you had to live with the devastation that she caused, you can't belittle the views of those who actually did suffer. What did you see? Sanitised TV interviews? What did you read? I can guess...

In my area of South Wales, she wiped out the steel and coal industries. Other than hill farming, we had nothing else. She decided to close the lot, with no alternative economy or even a promise of new opportunities. Thousands upon thousands were thrown on to the scrap heap. Unemployment in South Wales is horrendous and has been since the 80's. I fear that we will take another 30 years to recover from her hasty decisions.

Ask anybody down here and they'll say that Scargill was an idiot, but Thatcher was on a mission. In order to show the unions she meant business, she placed half of my country on the breadline. She will never, never be forgotten. We have many past PMs to shake our fist at, including Churchill, the cowardly swine, but not even his actions come close to those of Thatcher.

Her death gives me no comfort, although I hope she rots in hell all the same. What she did in life will leave its scars for generations to come.

This topic has been dead for over six months. Start a new discussion instead.
Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.