Many troops on London streets

a reply to: BigfootNZ

Russia likes the legal side of things to be correct. It is fairly obvious at the moment this is a policing operation. If the Donbas becomes Russian. It will be all on if anyone strikes the region. They will just obliterate Kyiv and take out the government.
Nato will have to have a long hard think.

a reply to: LABTECH767

Liz Truss is a truly awful woman and her policies are going to be devastating for the vast majority of ordinary, everyday British people.
But the UK is NOT on the verge of martial law - not yet anyway.

I doubt Truss would hesitate in trying to use our Armed Forces as some sort of private police force....but would our Armed Forces allow themselves to be used in such a way?

Hopefully we'll never find out.

a reply to: Freeborn

I vaguely recall reading that there was concern in the 1970s that the troops might be used in policing roles in the UK, during the confrontation between Scargill and the British state.

Please advise if I am mistaken.

Cheers

a reply to: Freeborn

its not her its the back benches who are causing the issue as they promised that if someone (anyone) attacks sterling, they would force an election or replace her with Sunak..

we have no chance of avoiding a depression and incoming sectarian violence with parliament siding with everyone who wants to harm the UK..

they'll create the very ground work for another Cromwell..

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

the military wanted to replace the gov and we look to be following down that same path with a parliament that is as broken as this one is..

I posted a vid earlier in the thread that was seen at the time as the military's first shot across parliaments bows when thew deployed unannounced to Heathrow with full armour... operation Marmion.

this was said to be part of clockwork orange that forwarded Mountbatten as a coup leader and military installed PM, so the allegations on the Mountbatten assassination fell more on US and UK secret services to rid themselves of a trouble maker.

We could repeat that as we inhabit the same space but where we see coups or military deployed to disperse protests with arms appears a matter of when not if.

a reply to: nickyw

She's in charge.
She very openly and brazenly announced exactly what she was going to do. She was warned not to and quelle #ing surprise, look what's happened.
Only an absolute moron couldn't see something like this happening.

There is only one purpose to her policies; create more wealth for the already wealthy.
She can spin it as much as she wants but trickle down economics does not work, it never has and it never will.
But time and time again we get it forced on us....and we let them get away with it.

She's Prime Minister, they are HER policies....she bears the responsibility.

Cromwell was a complete twat, he betrayed those he fought with and the British people.
He certainly didn't believe in concepts such as freeborn rights, universal suffrage, religious tolerance, freedom of speech or equality before the law.

But I digress.

I don't know what the future holds....but the army aren't on the streets, yet.

a reply to: Freeborn

she is in charge which is the issue for the Sunak crowd who can't accept losing in the same way the corbynites have been for starmer and would be doing this to Starmer if he was the PM, none of them give a f*ck about the country or its people thats the only reason Cromwell ended in the position he did or Mountbatten would have if they followed through with the 70s coup.. he'd have been another Cromwell..

This is all down to a broken parliament that has become ungovernable, the coming implosion sits on them all.. there is no escape the ouutcome, its why I tend to repeat that I see either sectarian troubles or a reformation point.. either way military involved on the streets or not we're f*cked for a generation.

a reply to: nickyw

As I stated in another thread, I'm too long in the tooth now to unduly worry over things.
I intend to enjoy what's left of my life the best I can - I've enjoyed what's gone before as well but that's another story.

Of course I'll try my best to help force positive change.....but you only get one chance at life.

What is going to happen is going to happen.

What we are seeing happen to the pound etc isn't Sunak's revenge; its the way of the world, the financial market.
They are vultures, scavengers.
Truss's hell bent desire to feed the wealth of the wealthy at any expense is going to play havoc with this country.
As I said before; trickle down economics does not work.

And its just morally WRONG.

Are we on the verge of something; possibly.

One thing is certain; our political system is broken.
The party political model is no longer fit-for-purpose and we need urgent and radical reform.

originally posted by: F2d5thCavv2
a reply to: Freeborn

I vaguely recall reading that there was concern in the 1970s that the troops might be used in policing roles in the UK, during the confrontation between Scargill and the British state.

Please advise if I am mistaken.

Cheers

I think there was a lot of discusseion about it (potentially a plot by David Stirling who formed the SAS).

The last time the military were involved in policing UK protests/riots was US troops/MPs at the Battle of Bamber Bridge during WW2 where locals and UK troops rioted against US MPs and officers trying to enforce racial segregation/aparthied in the UK.

US MPs/Officers tried to force the local pubs to use 'colour bar' orders so only the white troops could drink there; they responded with 'black troops only' signs. Locals and UK troops took up arms alongside US black troops againt US white MPs when they openned fire on the pub for treating black people as human beings.

a reply to: Freeborn

as i've mentioned I nearly died last year and like you was at school in the 70s, i was taught to expect to live 70(ish years) working, i'm near 20 years from that mark but our advances and the things I've learnt in my recovery means I know I'm back to looking at 70 ish more years.. its a bit scary to ponder how long we have now but we're not too long in the tooth, certainly to old to ape the rage of youth but not too old to care or participate.

We can agree the party system is broken I've only ever voted on the person which has meant I've only voted as few times and probably won't be voting again..

a reply to: bastion

bastion,

There is more to the events at Bamber Bridge than you're depicting here. Regardless, it is off topic. My comment was in regards to soldiers of the British crown acting in a policing role within the UK. And I think the use of the armed forces in Northern Ireland was at least as late as the 1980s IIRC.

Cheers

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

Op Marmion in 74 played its part in turning the PM into a conspiracy theorist..



the current budget causing the issues is the biggest tax cuts since 72 so arguments can be made at following a similar trajectory..

a reply to: nickyw

What did ordinary Brits think, at the time, about the use of troops in Northern Ireland?

From the outside view, I had the impression that most Britons thought the use of troops there justified.

Cheers

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

to be honest in the early 70s i' wasn't old enough to go to school :0 but later on living in the South and working in London even as a roman catholic its hard not to make judgements when you or loved ones are nearly turned into red mist, no where was safe not even getting a fast food burger, that kind of personal threat level doesn't craft a positive or sympathetic response, I'm sure many felt the same of the Basques..

my fear is that is our world is heading back to that space as all the various (and more) divisions come to the fore again.. time will tell but the west is broken with no fix in sight.. so in all honesty i'm not sure where (which country) the first domino will fall, it could be the UK, or any where in Europe or the US, and at this point if it happened I'm not sure who the various military leaderships would be loyal to or where it would lead bar somewhere none of us really want to go..

a reply to: nickyw

Yeah, someone could come along and set everything all Reich.

Cheers

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2

haha.. nice play on words, lucky for us we don't have any serious orators..

a reply to: F2d5thCavv2
Well, the I.R.A. was supposed to be at war with us at the time. They were introduced in the first place because it was necessary to keep order between two antagonistic communities, and the local civilian forces were felt not to be neutral enough.

a reply to: DISRAELI

Remember also the IRA were NOT a government, they raised (Like the UDF Actually) most of there funding from protection rackets (As they were far more like the Mafia but with a political agenda and hatred of people they had never met) and from the US via fund raising organizations over there, they were also best of friends despite there differences with some Islamist terrorists and Islamic governments not friendly to the UK such as Libya were they trained extensively so most of that money raised for the IRA in the USA ended up funding Islamic terrorism later on.

There war on us was not a state war so they were definitely NOT at war with us though they claimed they were, instead they were intent on blowing up little kids in town centres such as Warrington (kids' whose ancestors were probably at least part Irish as well) and people in Pub's on the off chance a soldier may have been drinking in them.

Basically horrible evil people (So were there opposite number though and if I had my way I would take those lunatics whom call for one another's blood find a empty island and strand them both on it and leave them to rot they caused so much suffering on both sides of that divide they are not fit to be called human being's).

So though they claimed to be at war with us they were out to kill and shock and cause publicity by crimes against humanity and by atrocity.

I also wonder how much the KGB may have been involved with them back in the day.

Basically terrorists in every sense of the word, driven by twisted ideology (on both sides actually and by that I don't mean our side but the terrorists and paramilitary's on both sides whom both raised money by running protection rackets and illegal activity's), the worst kind of human beings and there hands are red to this day with the blood of there victims MOST OF WHOM were from there own community's and killed for being suspected whistle blowers and snitches or for NOT paying there protection money or for just being disrespectful to those bloody evil gang's, Mother's, Son's, Fathers, Brothers, Sisters, Wives all killed by those scum and like I say no one will ever truly know how many Irish Catholics the northern Ireland IRA murdered or how many Protestants the UDF etc murdered but more than the bombings here that is for certain and those were evil and bad enough, they had it good and did not want it to stop once the money rolled in.

a reply to: LABTECH767
I wasn't suggesting that the I.R.A were acting with any kind of legitimacy.
But for practical purposes (as distinct from legal purposes) a state of war existed, and I was just making that point to help explain why British troops were on the scene.
In fact we were fighting, in effect, with one hand tied behind our backs, because they were ruthlessly treating it as a war and we were not.

a reply to: DISRAELI

I was not suggesting that you were.

I just do not like the IRA and calling it War in some people's eye's legitimizes there terrorism even though that is NOT what you meant and I know that.

So please do not be offended at my point.

You know there are MORE people of Irish descent including many of the soldiers they murdered (the bloody Sunday massacre was a crime and those soldiers really should have been brought to justice but that is another matter though politics aside it was a murder of UK citizens by Soldiers whom were WRONG to do what they did and sowed much of the hatred that had not been there previously) whom are today British and probably quite a few of those IRA nut jobs have British ancestry.

On an off topic note in my hometown of Ormskirk up in Lancashire we have a Statue of Disraeli.

You will have to forward to about 21 minutes to see the statue.

OR from 1 minute and 49 seconds into this one.

(As you can guess this town used to be a safe conservative seat but now it is regarded more of a Labour voting town and stayed Labour even when many red wall areas became blue)

Sorry to go off topic but given your choice of Avatar name I thought you may like that.