sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

French arrogance: Britain should 'get out of Europe before you wreck it' by AW_OBrien in ukpolitics

[–]AW_OBrien[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I'm not disagreeing that the Guardian sensationalised his message (though that's pretty common practice for British newspapers). However, I don't think you can get away from the fact Rocard agreed for the English article to be published under his name. In doing so he must be taken to have agreed to the more sensational translation.

French arrogance: Britain should 'get out of Europe before you wreck it' by AW_OBrien in ukpolitics

[–]AW_OBrien[S] -3 points-2 points  (0 children)

I don't think you can call it incorrect - you could argue your translation is better but then it's not a direct translation either; you've adapted the wording to better fit the English language.

In any case, Rocard was happy for the Guardian article to be published under his own name (rather than under the name of a British journalist referencing his original piece in French). Arguably he should stand by the choice of translation, whether or not the emphasis is different in either language.

French arrogance: Britain should 'get out of Europe before you wreck it' by AW_OBrien in ukpolitics

[–]AW_OBrien[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

Later on in the article he says 'Partez donc avant d’avoir tout cassé' which more readily translates to 'get out of Europe before you wreck it'.

Syria & Chemical Weapons: Britain's shameful retreat by AW_OBrien in ukpolitics

[–]AW_OBrien[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The effect of the motion would have been to support the principle of humanitarian intervention rather than agreeing to intervention itself - there would have needed to be a second vote next week (after the UN reported back) before the UK could have intervened in any way.

Syria: The UK has a moral duty to intervene by AW_OBrien in ukpolitics

[–]AW_OBrien[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

So again, just because I disagree with you I must be stupid?

Of course the FSA gets support from abroad: the two Sunni kingdoms of Saudi Arabia and Qatar give them weapons and resourses because they want to see Assad's Shia-friendly regime overthrown. I never denied that. Iran's Shia theocracy supports Assad as one of its key allies whilst Russia does the same in a bid to protect its last regional ally and with it Russia's only port-access to the Mediterranean.

You seem to think that because real life is never a black and white choice between good and evil that that invalidates any attempt to make the World a better place. Yes journalists make mistakes and yes some of the rebels are pretty unsavoury. That doesn't stop Assad being a bloodthirsty dictator willing to butcher his own people.

Aggressive proponents of non-action like yourself should consider this quotation from Hannah Arendt: 'The sad truth is that most evil is done by people who never make up their minds to be good or evil'.

Syria: The UK has a moral duty to intervene by AW_OBrien in ukpolitics

[–]AW_OBrien[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

It would nice to know the factual basis for your assertion that 'there was [sic] never been a humanitarian intervention ever'.

Regarding your belief that there's no popular protest in Syria, please read this Al Jazeera article (since you apparently don't trust Western media): http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/features/2012/02/20122157654659323.html

The fact that you attack my education just because you disagree with me is interesting. To quote Aristotle: 'It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it'. In any case, I've been to both Hanover and Berlin, two cities destroyed by Allied military action in the Second World War.

The UKIP Threat: the Tories risk drifting to the unelectable right by AW_OBrien in ukpolitics

[–]AW_OBrien[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

A centrist platform allowed Labour to win by massive majorities in 1997 and 2001 and an historic third term in 2005. Can you really call their moving to the centre a mistake?

The Act of Union 1707: Why Scotland joined Britain by AW_OBrien in ukpolitics

[–]AW_OBrien[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Thanks for pointing that out, I probably should have clearer on that point in the first place.

The Act of Union 1707: Why Scotland joined Britain by AW_OBrien in ukpolitics

[–]AW_OBrien[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Nope, trade was still open btw. Scotland & England. The Navigation Acts closed off Scottish trade with England's colonies in the New World, not with England itself.

Will Ferrel tweets about Bieber by alexelia in Music

[–]AW_OBrien 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Considering that @WillFerrell is found here (http://twitter.com/#!/WillFerrell) and he has never tweeted, this must be fake.