Jump to content


  • Post count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won


Sampson last won the day on 12 April 2016

Sampson had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

933 Very Good

About Sampson

  • Rank
    Key Player

Profile Information

  • Gender

Recent Profile Visitors

4,002 profile views
  1. Unpopular Opinions You Hold

    Careful. You could slice your finger open with that edgeiness.
  2. US, France and UK fire missiles at Syria

    Do you think intervention was warranted? If yes, then why the hell would you want to take a back seat? These countries can only take a back seat because they've got the US protecting them in the first place. But if you see people being murdered you should take action - Turning a blind eye to mass murder and saying "oh someone else will deal with it" is tacitly allowing the committing of mass murder. If our government believes strongly enough that Assad needs to be shown even in some small way that we can't except him committing mass murder via chemical weapons on his own people and they can do that in a way which won't cause escalation (or even if they do feel there is a risk then they should still act in the case of crimes heinous enough or when rogue governments are showing they are repeatedly happy to commit this while their arsenal and technological advancements to do so is only going to get stronger the more non-intervention happens) then of course our government should be taking action. How the hell are Germany, Australia, Canada and New Zealand the ones with the morale high round here? It's the Kitty Genovese case and the bystander effect in real-life action. I would certainly like to live in a country where our government is one which is prepared to make difficult decisions and take responsibility for its own actions and doesn't delegate difficult decisions to other nations or just sit on the fence. If our government said they didn't agree with the bombing so didn't participate then fair enough.But to publically back the attacks but sit back and allow others to dish them out despite being the second biggest Western power as Germany has done - nah, that's bollocks. I'd hope our government wouldn't be partaking in such bystander behaviour as that - how can you trust that government to make big decisions and take responsibility for those decisions as every government must do? (And I say that as someone who is a huge fan of Merkel and thinks she''s pretty much the greatest world leader of the 21st century so far).
  3. US, France and UK fire missiles at Syria

    The main problem is though, if The West don't do it then you can bet your bottom dollar that Russia or China will and for all its flaws I'd far rather it was the US doing the policing than Russia or China in their current regimes. It's the same issue with Saudi Arabia - I'd far rather the US was profiting from selling weapons than the inevitable profiting Russia or China would be doing instead.
  4. US, France and UK fire missiles at Syria

    Yeah sorry. I meant the faults of intervention are much more obvious than the faults of non-intervention.
  5. US, France and UK fire missiles at Syria

    Pretty much agree. I've said it several times before but the problem is that Iraq has caused us to swing too much the other way and turned the West paranoid into intervening in anything and got people dismissing that all intervention turns out to be a disaster rather than judging each individual act of intervention on its own merits. The problem is faults of intervention are much more obvious than the faults of intervention, so people are much more likely to see the faults of intervention. A lot of it goes back to the old "trolley problem" - people are much more likely not to get involved even if it saves lifes because they feel like their blood isn't on it if they don't get involved (even though the blood is just as equally on your hands and doing nothing when you could be helping when people are dying is just as much on you as killing them yourselves is).
  6. Vardy - 60 in 3 seasons.

    As much as I loved Lineker and Worthington, Vardy is the best forward I've ever seen wear the Leicester shirt. Probably the best player overall too.
  7. Burnley away match thread

    I wish Silva was non-existent. Every time he's got the ball he's slowed down any counter-attack...
  8. US, France and UK fire missiles at Syria

    No it doesn't. It's implied what it says - that Russia have used its veto 6 times during UN mestings, not that chemical weapons have been used 6 times.
  9. US, France and UK fire missiles at Syria

    Toddy if the UK government went rogue were dropping chemical weapons on their own people, would you just want the US and France and whoever just sit back and watch? Even if it risked escalation? The problem now is that Iraq had led too many to believe we should never get involved and implanted this incredibly dangerous mindset into people that "intervention is always bad" and it will always turn out like Iraq - rather than taking each individual act of intervention on its own merit. They'll be plenty of back alley diplomacy going on here - warning Russians to get out of the way of targets - it was done in the early hours to make sure people wouldn't be in the bases. This isn't just random bombs being dropped on civilians without warning. I liked Obama in general but his biggest flaw in his presidency was undoubtably his lack of activity in the middle East had allowed many states and people to start looking towards Russia for help which has given them so much more power in this region than they had 10 years ago. We can't just keep with this inactivity forever unless we want more Assad style regimes through the Middle East protecteded by Putin.
  10. US, France and UK fire missiles at Syria

    Because we've waited long enough and given them enough chances to show that they're not continuing to use them against their own people? Because we've been so paranoid over Iraq that we became too happy to stick our fingers in our ears and said we can't do anything while it's continued to go on and now finally decided we have to actually draw a line in the sand? I don't think it's arbitrary at all. I imagine it's based on thousands over hours going over different scenarios with military, intellegence and diplomatic experts who have far more information going on about what happened than any of us do.
  11. New Statue

    Graham Cross off the top of my head for one achieved more, played more and was a better player too but no one would suggest a statue of him because people recognise there were still better players who played for the club. Someone like Arthur Chandler also indoubtably fits into that category too. Yes, Walsh made more PL appearances than Prior because he was around much longer and Walsh most certainly did look past his best and was phased out and Walsh was only a regular starter in the top flight in both 94-95 (in which he looked largely out of his depth) and 96-97. That's not to say he didn't still play after that or didn't have good games but he certainly wasn't first choice and Elliott and Taggart certainly were clearly better than him by that point. It's not unfair to say Walsh had only one good season in the top flight at all. Again, please don't say I'm not saying Walsh wasn't good for us or shouldn't be lionised. What I am saying is he is absolutely nowhere neaf the best or most iconic player in the club's 134 year history. People just remember him because a lot of fans now grew up when he was a permanent fixture in the side - my criticism was I often see the same people lionising Walsh and criticising King but It's the same thing. Walsh was a hero in the Second tier, but in the top flight he was often a bit part player and he probably isn't even in the top 100 Leicester players in terms of actually ability and performances on the pitch. And while that doesn't mean he can't still be loved by fans, he's nowhere near "build a statue after him" or "name a stand after him". In 25 years time when most fans are too young to have seen him play he'll just be another name like a Mike Stringfellow or someone - uncountably a great player to those who saw him play, but clearly not the historical relevance of Arthur Chandler or Gordon Banks. Walsh just had that now because most of us saw him play. Someone like Jamie Vardy however clearly will have that historical relevance. Statues will still be there in 50 years time - they should be of someone who will still be remembered then, Walsh will be forgotten and simply won't fit into that category. Someone lile Vardy will be.
  12. New Statue

    Playing in the Second Division and getting red cards? I love Walsh but there's a lot of ridiculous romance about him from exactly the same people who slaughter those romancing King. Walsh was a Second Division player who had one good season in the top flight (96-97), used to get slaughtered by fans and many wanted him sold during the Pleat era. I get he was great in the Second Division under Little and in O'Neill's first season in the top flight before being phased out for Elliott, Taggart and Prior (and later Sinclair) but he shouldn't be anywhere near statue level. We've had many better players than him and many who've achieved more and been here longer.
  13. Politics Thread (encompassing Brexit) - 21 June 2017 onwards

    I'm no fan of the Guardian, but that's beyond harsh. The Independent is the Daily Mail of the Left these days and definitely much worse than the Guardian, Since it's gone online order it's turned into really lowest common denominator clickbait. It's sad. I never read the paper but it at least was launched with noble aims of being bipartizan, but it reads like Buzzfeed these days.
  14. Player - Vardy Young player - Ndidi Goal - Vardy vs WBA Pretty easy choices for me this year in the end.
  15. Agreed, he should win it easily but he's been here too long I think people are used to him. Players who've been here for years don't tend to win it as often, there's always more novelty involved in newer players. So it wouldn't surprise me if Maguire or someone won it instead.