I've changed the title of the thread.
It'll get more replies that way.
|
|
I've changed the title of the thread.
It'll get more replies that way.
It depends on who's version of history I read.
I wasn't around when it happened, I don't understand politics for the most part either, so other than the fact I know she was a prime minister during the whole falklands things I know very little about it all.
I'm sure I'll find out more on here and in the news in the coming days though.
Must say I don't really get the whole good riddence thing happening on facebook, as a general rule you should never be happy someone is dead, and tbh she's not been in power since what 1990?
we aren't talking about the ming dynasty, this was 20 years ago, history is distorted when people have something go gain from the distortion, who has anything to gain anything to gain from making stuff up about thatchers tenure as leader, conservatives are proud of it and left winger's wan't it shown in all its gory detail. Frankly its ridiculous to say you can't find an impartial account of British politics in the 80s, I'm to young I wasn't there is not good enough.
the first part of your post answers your own question in the second part.
I didn't ask a question. I simply pointed out I wasn't around and i've not read up on it as for the most part modern history doesn't interest me. You point out that knowing that she was in charge during the falklands war answered my question, but tbh not being around for that either I really don't know if you mean it was a good or bad thing that war happened (not aht war is ever good but you know what I mean) All I know about the falklands is the recent stuff that I HAVE been around for.
tbh to an extent it is good enough, if it wasn't covered in school and you weren't alive during the time or old enough to understand what was going on why would you know any details about it?
because I hold my self to a higher standerd when it comes to history and politics than "what I learned in school", that might be the dumbiest post ever put on MAP
I don't. I hold myself to a higher standard in fighting than what I learned in school
Yes the country was in AWESOME shape prior to her ascendancy wasn't it?
Three terms in means she was doing something that appealed - whilst you may not agree with her focus that is largely to do with what you consider a priority over what she did
She was certainly not perfect, nor was she the greatest thing since sliced bread - but she is also far from the pariah you are painting her as. History is impartial - your reading of it is not
You were not there; I was and for every detractor there is a supporter...that is democracy
Bookmarks