Who is the greatest prime minister of the last 65 years?

[The Doctor]

Voted Thatcher. By far the biggest and best impact in modern times.

Define best, she pretty much killed communities in the north and left them to rot. No arguin she made things better for the south but other pms did far better (Attlee) without turning wales, the north and pretty much everywhere outside of the south east into a depressing crapshack.

[ADK]

Were those places ever any better?

[Guest Kopfkino]

I thought the Butler Act was 1944? That was what pretty much defined the split between primary and secondary, albeit in the divisive tripartite system.

 

That being said, it was Wilson's Labour government that introduced the comprehensive system most of of the country has today.

Ah yeah you're right, I was thinking it was 1946 for some reason. Still Attlee dealt with most of the domestic social issues as Deputy PM during the war so I'll take half a point

[l444ry]

So were the govt lying or not?

This link may be of interest to you Webbo. Whether you agree with the content or not, at least you'll understand where the other views come from.

 

http://belgranoinquiry.com/article-archive/seven-lies

[MooseBreath]

Define best, she pretty much killed communities in the north and left them to rot. No arguin she made things better for the south but other pms did far better (Attlee) without turning wales, the north and pretty much everywhere outside of the south east into a depressing crapshack.

She didn't "kill" those communities. They were dying anyway. She just made sure they didn't take the whole country with them.

[leicsmac]

She didn't "kill" those communities. They were dying anyway. She just made sure they didn't take the whole country with them.

 

And she was totally, utterly certain of this? A lot of livelihoods hung on that - interesting time to be playing God's Numbers Game.

 

Actually, scrub that. She was totally, utterly certain of a lot of things - the Belgrano being an imminent threat amongst them. That black and white certainty that she put into her leadership was something some people found appealing. Others...less so.

 

Certainly the most divisive PM of our time, that's for sure. Hated, adored, but never ignored.

[MooseBreath]

And she was totally, utterly certain of this? A lot of livelihoods hung on that - interesting time to be playing God's Numbers Game.

Actually, scrub that. She was totally, utterly certain of a lot of things - the Belgrano being an imminent threat amongst them. That black and white certainty that she put into her leadership was something some people found appealing. Others...less so.

Certainly the most divisive PM of our time, that's for sure. Hated, adored, but never ignored.

Coal mining wasn't commercially viable without huge subsidy then and has never been since, so looks like she was right. I guess it's a bit like public sector final salary pension and the like now, it's obvious to everyone that it's unsustainable and keeping them going will damage the country, but cancelling them does create victims. It's the price of progress and of putting the welfare of the majority ahead of a minority who want to keep their gravy train going.

[leicsmac]

Coal mining wasn't commercially viable without huge subsidy then and has never been since, so looks like she was right. I guess it's a bit like public sector final salary pension and the like now, it's obvious to everyone that it's unsustainable and keeping them going will damage the country, but cancelling them does create victims. It's the price of progress and of putting the welfare of the majority ahead of a minority who want to keep their gravy train going.

 

Small comfort to those who have to give their lives and livelihoods in the name of progress. 

 

I thought the individual mattered?

[MooseBreath]

Small comfort to those who have to give their lives and livelihoods in the name of progress.

I thought the individual mattered?

Nothing stopping them retraining. That's something you and I will always have to be thinking about as we go through our careers in times of increasingly rapid change. Do you feel particularly hard done by in that respect? I don't.

[Webbo]

As for the Belgrano, I find it interesting that sinking an enemy warship should garner so much controversy. But Thatcher's popularity for causing the Falklands war and then almost losing it is misplaced.

I think you'll find Argentina caused the Falklands War by invading them.

[leicsmac]

Nothing stopping them retraining. That's something you and I will always have to be thinking about as we go through our careers in times of increasingly rapid change. Do you feel particularly hard done by in that respect? I don't.

 

Was there anywhere near adequate provision for them to do that when it happened? 

 

I do agree that the time of a 'job for life' is over - the game has changed, you need to keep learning to keep ahead these days, unless you truly strike gold and then don't have to work again.

 

Personally I don't mind retraining and I certainly don't mind travelling for different jobs, but I can see the point of those who crave stability and I don't think those who can't adapt should be punished for it. That's pretty social Darwinist.

[Webbo]

Also, do you honestly think Mrs Thatcher ordered the navy to look for an ship they could sink no matter what? She would have been advised of the situation by the military and advised of the options The ultimate decision would have been hers but seeing as we won the conflict it seems she was right.

[ADK]

I think you'll find Argentina caused the Falklands War by invading them.

 

They wouldn't have been able to if we had defended them properly instead of trying to save money and leaving them vulnerable. Yes, you can certainly say they started the war but we could have prevented it so therefore we had a part to play in causing it.

[Webbo]

They wouldn't have been able to if we had defended them properly instead of trying to save money and leaving them vulnerable. Yes, you can certainly say they started the war but we could have prevented it so therefore we had a part to play in causing it.

Expecting countries to follow international law is a bit much I suppose.

[leicsmac]

Also, do you honestly think Mrs Thatcher ordered the navy to look for an ship they could sink no matter what? She would have been advised of the situation by the military and advised of the options The ultimate decision would have been hers but seeing as we won the conflict it seems she was right.

 

History-written-by-the-winners argument is a bit reductive in this case, Webbo. The fact that we won has little bearing on that one incident.

 

Evidently Mrs T was advised that the Belgrano was a capital threat to the Task Force, and gave the order accordingly. Whether or not it truly was such a threat at that time 

 

They wouldn't have been able to if we had defended them properly instead of trying to save money and leaving them vulnerable. Yes, you can certainly say they started the war but we could have prevented it so therefore we had a part to play in causing it.

 

This is oft-forgotten: If the Argentines had waited another year, due to Navy cuts they would have had a reasonable chance of holding onto the Falklands.

is very much up for debate, as has been shown here.

[leicsmac]

Expecting countries to follow international law is a bit much I suppose.

 

Yup, that's why the US and UK didn't do so when they went into Iraq for the second time. 

[Webbo]

 

 

 

This is oft-forgotten: If the Argentines had waited another year, due to Navy cuts they would have had a reasonable chance of holding onto the Falklands.

is very much up for debate, as has been shown here.

We were actively negotiating a 25 year lease back arrangement  with them at the time. If they hadn't invaded they'd own the Falklands by now.

[ADK]

In all honesty relying on countries not invading has never been a smart strategy throughout history.

[ADK]

We were actively negotiating a 25 year lease back arrangement  with them at the time. If they hadn't invaded they'd own the Falklands by now.

 

That's all very well but then why not defend them properly for another few years?

 

The legacy of the war has cost a lot of money and of course the lives lost for both countries.

[Webbo]

In all honesty relying on countries not invading has never been a smart strategy throughout history.

There's some truth in that but blaming the victim is not fair.

[Webbo]

That's all very well but then why not defend them properly for another few years?

 

The legacy of the war has cost a lot of money and of course the lives lost for both countries.

Because we couldn't afford to. It's easy to be wise after the event but the country was skint and savings had to be made.

[leicsmac]

We were actively negotiating a 25 year lease back arrangement  with them at the time. If they hadn't invaded they'd own the Falklands by now.

 

True. The banana republic junta in charge of Argentina at the time really should have thought things through more.

[leicsmac]

Because we couldn't afford to. It's easy to be wise after the event but the country was skint and savings had to be made.

 

I think it came down to us being lucky and the Argentine command being greedy and impulsive, to be honest. As you said, all they had to do was wait, but they were too impatient and through a lot of courage and logistical effort we made it through.

 

If we had ended up losing the Falklands Mrs T wouldn't have lasted another election, that's for sure.

[Guest]

She didn't "kill" those communities. They were dying anyway. She just made sure they didn't take the whole country with them.

 

She should have made sure that those people had alternate jobs available. It was whole communities and swathes of the country that suddenly became unemployed, emasculated and without hope.

[ADK]

Because we couldn't afford to. It's easy to be wise after the event but the country was skint and savings had to be made.

 

If we were skint we wouldn't have been able to afford the war at all. The war cost many times what it would have cost to simply defend the islands in the first place and has necessitated us to spend on defence of the islands for the foreseeable future when they would probably be safely forgotten about now. It was a mistake that almost led to catastrophe, fair enough all politicians make mistakes, but it's ridiculous that Thatcher actually emerged with massive support after the war and it probably had an influence on people like Blair.