Customer Discussions > politics discussion forum

DPRK hassled again.


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 51-70 of 70 posts in this discussion
In reply to an earlier post on 19 Jul 2013 14:55:11 BDT
I'll need more than old Ollie Fraudster to help me.

In reply to an earlier post on 19 Jul 2013 14:56:56 BDT
[Deleted by Amazon on 19 Jul 2013 15:13:54 BDT]

In reply to an earlier post on 19 Jul 2013 14:59:45 BDT
Trade flat? Try the DM News Board...much much much rounder, pneumatic and bouncy..

In reply to an earlier post on 19 Jul 2013 16:13:58 BDT
Ah...no, Ollie did not offer any evidence that the USA was merely looking to intimidate the USSR and/or provoke them into WWIII...he just showed a load of old newsreels and made a load of unsubstantiated voice over claims...he's got all the tricks of the top hack director of feature filums and TV commercials that he is. Ollie is a bombastic baloney man.

In reply to an earlier post on 19 Jul 2013 16:15:05 BDT
Tell me....what do YOU think?

In reply to an earlier post on 19 Jul 2013 17:59:11 BDT
Wot do oi fink? With my limited knowledge of the subject, and I'm enjoying my sunbath...ooooh Trot's gone for a duck... I think my thoughts are not worth a wink...22 for 2.

OK for what it's worth, here's a trite reply: It was six and two threes.

An inevitable clash of diametrically opposed ideologies. Each side mistrusted the actions of the other.

USSR wanted Eastern Europe under its control to ensure that never again...

USA saw this as the first step in the Soviet's aim at installing communism in every country.

USA saw Stalin as a ruthless megalomaniac who couldn't be trusted...look at his pre War pact with Germany.

Soviets said the same about USA & Ukey...they tried to undermine our Revolution at the end of WWI.

Oi fink Ollie's a load of rollox...look at the lies he peddled in 'JKK' the fairy story...so I'm not favourably disposed to putting any store by his latest rantings.

In reply to an earlier post on 19 Jul 2013 18:15:29 BDT
Mmmmmmmhhhhhhhhhh?......mmmmmmhhhhhhhhhh.........
?.......ooooooooooooohhhhhhhhh......arh........eh?

In reply to an earlier post on 19 Jul 2013 19:08:38 BDT
Yep I agree, England threw three wickets away for 30 runs and Kev was a disgrace.

btw, which chapter is this in your Causes of the Cold War Thesis?

In reply to an earlier post on 19 Jul 2013 19:33:16 BDT
Ah....yes.....um....okay....it's er lovely kookley...

In reply to an earlier post on 20 Jul 2013 12:51:59 BDT
David Groom says:
Gordon Bennett,

'Simone doesn't like joining in, quiz nites, karaoke, Christmas dinners, coach trips, cheering on X-Factor contestants...he's not clubable.. '

I'm hard pressed to think of anything he does like!

In reply to an earlier post on 20 Jul 2013 13:10:02 BDT
He's a self confessed Hammocker.

In reply to an earlier post on 20 Jul 2013 13:16:03 BDT
David Groom says:
Gordon Bennett,

'He's a self confessed Hammocker.'

And he objects to fishing!!

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Jul 2013 14:47:12 BDT
Just because somebody doesn't agree with you doesn't mean they haven't thought about it and neither does it mean they're wrong. What an ego you must have.

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Jul 2013 15:07:07 BDT
The fount is devoid of ego...a word you do not understand.

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Jul 2013 15:47:42 BDT
Oh no don't suppress your ego Funboy, embrace it, revel in it, boost it!!!

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Jul 2013 16:16:42 BDT
Anybody who refers to himself in the third person with his own made up nickname is not devoid of ego.

Posted on 24 Jul 2013 16:32:56 BDT
Could be a sign of the funboy's humility, &/or that he's suppressed 'I'...The Funboy has evolved beyond 'I'...so he says...but then...

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Jul 2013 16:36:08 BDT
Dear Brian...explain what you think ego means?

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Jul 2013 16:41:38 BDT
Spin says:
Brian: not really. Have you ever played a video game called "Mass Effect"? In its plot there is a species whose individuals do not refer to themselves in the first-person because they believe that "ego" is unnecessary. I cannot explain it further because that would spoil your enjoyment of the game. But The Fount reminds me of those creatures. =) And, in philosophical terms, to refer to oneself in the third-person is, in fact, to deny the existence of "oneself" as a separate entity from the other "selves". Not "one among many", but rather "one that is many".

In reply to an earlier post on 24 Jul 2013 16:56:24 BDT
Spin...good post.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  politics discussion forum
Participants:  8
Total posts:  70
Initial post:  18 Jul 2013
Latest post:  24 Jul 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions