Sunday, 31 January 2010

Two Carriers, Four Subs and a Thousand Royal Marines

That's what would be sent by a government that had any idea about the concept of protecting the people of the country it seems to think it governs.

Going in hard would also have the happy outcome of not only rescuing two decent, hardworking, loyal, lifelong taxpayers, but would also solve the Somali pirate problem in short order (ask the Royal Navy).

But our pisspoor government is going to do nothing. Why? Who knows. It could be for any number of scary, mindless, thoughtless, couldn't-give-a-shit socialist reasons. It's possible that class is one of them (the Chandlers are from Tunbridge Wells). That's how evil this government is.

But saved Mr and Mrs Chandler must be, however. Or there will be hell to pay - and Labour better believe it.

Idiot Brown, take heed.


  1. I think that the US and China should get together and do something drastic about the farce that is the pirate situation. They have made a piece of water unusable... That's not on. Britian can#'t possibly do anything on its own. With our forces streched fighting useless wars it just ins't fair to put our troops lives at risk.

    The couple from Tunbridge Wells... yes, they should be rescued, and like the stupid naughty idiots they are, they should be put over someone's knee and given a good hard spanking.

    Why? Because they were bright enough to realise the situation. (They aren't morons; they are middle class educated people.) But they went there none the less. If I were in their situation I would have thought about how dangerous it was to be in that part of the world on a boat on my own. I would then have thought that if I got caught people might have to die to save me, or the tax payer might have to fund me to the tune of a few millions. Just becase I wanted to go there. I'm not arrogant enough to think that MY pleasure is worth a few marines' lives, or a couple of million of the taxpayrs' hard earned.

    Anyway the only people we fund like that are MPs Lords, Royals and bankers....

  2. Hey, it's about national humiliation, Tris. And all resources should be brought to bear as such, regardless of 'other priorities'.

    But we've had a decade+ of this general rubbishing by Labour, but it's something that no one will write about for some reason (not even a passionate Scots freedom fighter like you!). Well, my friend, I've had enough of being made to feel ashamed of my great nation (the United Kingdom). Lives are now at stake - and it's time to choose: we either care about our country and our people, or we don't.

    If you vote Labour, it's clear you don't. (Not you - generally!)

  3. They humiliate everyone though. They have done it to the Saudis, to the Chinese... and that is risky. The Chinese have the might and the money to smash them and thier country to smitehrines...

    We have probably only got a couple of rowing boats left and no money.

    It's not worth another one of our badly protected soldiers' lives.

    LOL... I don't think we'll agree about this though....:-)

  4. Sorry, tris, for overdoing it.

    I'm just genuinely annoyed about this one. There was a time when we would have never left countrymen out to dry like this, if there was a way to nail the perps - anywhere in the world!

    Oh dear. There I go again.

    Look, you're a super guy - that's obvious - but I really am just genuinely annoyed about this one, tris, and therefore, possibly, a little bit unrealistic. So perhaps I should leave it at that.

    Have a better one ;)

  5. Hey Denverthen... It's your blog... I'm the one with the apologies :¬).

    I just think we have to leave that kind of thing to the big boys... but we'll agree to differ and stay friends....OK?

    LOl... Thank you for the compliment by the way. I though only my mum would ever say that about me.... he he.

  6. I absolutely know we are on the same side, whatever our (pretty minor, if truth be told) differences in outlook.

    Fight on!

  7. Bob Bollocks, most likely following instructions from the gutless wonders at the top of Labour, blew TWO opportunities for the Royal Marines to rescue them - the marines were all ready to go - TWICE!

  8. That's the point, BS, they should have asked the Royal Navy - you know, the people who know what they're doing.

    Instead, Labour's sold those two poor British innocents down the fucking river - and for what? So they can carry on patronisingly appeasing their own minority constituency and, with a kind of satanic cynicism, pretend that they're somehow representing Britain's interests by abdicating all responsibility for the welfare of those innocent British nationals, abducted by non-aligned criminals on the high seas.

    That's how utterly corrupt these hideous, treacherous wreckers are. One thing is certain, if they can do that to those people without a second glance, then they are capable of anything.

    They must be removed - forcibly, if it comes to that. (It might.)

  9. A couple of problems. If the Marines / Royal Navy intervened, they would be in breach of international law. They have no legal right to act in other countries waters, to do so would be an act of war.

    The other problem is that the couple aren't 100% "innocent", they were warned by the British authorities and by other yachters not to venture into those waters alone, but they chose to ignore that advice.

    They are like the people who choose to climb Snowdon in flip-flops and t-shirts in January, and expect others to risk their own lives to rescue them when their stupidity hits the fan!

  10. It states in one's passport the following:

    >>Her Britannic Majesty's Secretary of State Requests and requires in the Name of Her Majesty all those whom it may concern to allow the bearer to pass freely without let or hindrance, and to afford the bearer such assistance and protection as may be necessary.<<

    The operative word is "requires".

    It should be the case that wheresoever a British citizen is lacking in the protection required by Her Majesty or wheresoever that protection is wilfully refused and where we can't achieve redress in an acceptable manner, that the full might and wrath of Britain's not inconsiderable, if not necessarily large, military might be brought to bear upon the culprits for the benefit of our citizens if their legal rights are being trampled upon.

    Sod the 'legal right' regarding other countries' waters: you wouldn't see the Americans respecting that right if it meant extracting their citizens from danger, regardless of how stupid those citizen had been.

    Somalia has no functioning government. Their legal rights exist only inasmuch as they are capable of expressing them, but in this case there's a vacuum. There is no diplomacy because there's nobody to talk to. There's just criminal gangs who don't do diplomacy, they only do force and blackmail. If these people were to be treated as some form of local 'governmental authority' (in that they control their territory) then by kidnapping and holding to ransom our citizens from international waters where they have free rights to be, then these groups have, de facto, declared war upon us anyway. And they should face the consequences.

    The government's lack of action, and in particular their complete absence of spine, simply sends other renegade groups the signal that it's perfectly ok to shit all over Britain's reputation with impunity (excuse the language, but I'm seething about this).

    We're a nation with nuclear weapons, for God's sake! Why can't we manage the extraction of a couple of daft but otherwise innocent citizens???

  11. "They are like the people who choose to climb Snowdon in flip-flops and t-shirts in January"

    I've never heard of people being kidnapped, starved, held to ransom and threatened with death while walking up Snowdon before. Have you?

    I have heard that North Walians are weird - but not even they would do that, would they?

    Point is, this is totally different - and, I suspect, you know it. Read Cogito Dexter's post (and blog) for further details about what our armed forces are actually for.

  12. Dex: How odd I would have thought that the operative word there was "requests" after all it comes first. Do you not think that her Majesty should do some requesting before some requiring?

  13. In respect of these Somalian criminals, I don't think they're listening to requests. They should, therefore, be *required* to give back our citizens, at the point of an SAS gun.


Any thoughts?