thirteenball.bsky.social
Trying so very hard to be a good, kind, tolerant person....
1,221 posts
64 followers
31 following
Getting Started
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
It's sort of... getting a bit sad to watch now isn't it?
comment in response to
post
A man's gotta have a dream, brother. 👍
comment in response to
post
Who has sex with who.
Seriously, unless you're in the bed at the time, it ain't your business.
comment in response to
post
How different would the cost of a transfer be if every last penny wasn't considered in the light of the increasingly unfair and counter-productive PSR rules?
comment in response to
post
Due to it being El Salvador there's got to be a 'got out of jail' joke in there somewhere....
comment in response to
post
Immunity? 🤔
comment in response to
post
I'm fucked as well then....
comment in response to
post
A lot of UK clubs seem to be applying a 'Saudi tax' to their players when NUFC make a bid - forgetting that PSR is a thing, and no club will be able to spend like city did until the rules change.
Except Chelsea of course. Rules don't apply to them.
comment in response to
post
I'd clean forgotten about suede until a Spotify shuffle threw out 'filmstar' a few weeks ago.
So then I had to revisit the whole "Coming Up" album.
Banger. 👍 How did I forget about them?
comment in response to
post
And now RFK Jr....
comment in response to
post
Yeah if you try reading what I posted rather than knee-jerk reacting to what you THINK I wrote then you look less stupid next time.
I'm not defending anyone. And I even used the word "genocide" to describe Israel's actions.
So sit the fuck down.
comment in response to
post
Leaving Brentford for Manchester United doesn't feel like a big step up.
Ok now Thomas Frank has gone to Tottenham there's instability at Brentford... but crikey. Manchester United? Really?
comment in response to
post
Not ours for sure.
UK PM said exactly the same as France, Germany, EU and Canada - that US actions were theirs alone.
Doesn't matter what we think. US will do what it wants.
But we are reliant on the US for defence against Russia - as unpalatable as that may be - so can't be openly critical.
comment in response to
post
Probably correct. A good point there. 👍
comment in response to
post
Yeah. You're not rational and your arguments aren't based in fact.
A regime that believes any Muslim who dies a martyr goes to paradise wouldn't be too concerned about waxing a few hundred fellow Arabs if it could turn downtown tel aviv into a glassy crater at the same time.
Goodbye.
comment in response to
post
They probably shouldn't. But the fact is they have them and that can't presently be changed.
Because no American president has ever been returned to office without the Jewish vote. Any actions to rein-in Israel automatically lose that vote.
I don't agree with the situation but that IS how it is. 🤷♂️
comment in response to
post
You're seriously suggesting the situation in the Middle East could be improved by the biggest state-sponsor of terrorism in the world having access nuclear weapons?
🤦🏼♂️
Are you the same person who suggested school shootings should be countered by giving teachers guns?
No. Just.... no.
comment in response to
post
Possibly. He's not perfect, but he's a better statesman than anyone else available right now.
Politics is a dirty business & nobody comes away clean.
He can't openly criticise the US. That would be suicidal. But he knows joining a Trump war would be a bad move.
Impossible to please everyone.
comment in response to
post
The problem was not the Palestinian flag.
The problem was the Hamas flag.
World of difference between support for a people facing genocide and repping a proscribed jihadi terrorist organisation that machine-gunned children in their beds.
A certain distinction necessary, wouldn't you say?
comment in response to
post
No win in it for us.
UK may not have chosen bombing, but Iran hates us & them not having nukes is a good thing.
But we can't afford a war. And with Israel already involved and (justifiably) not popular here, Starmer knows to stay arm's length.
Cameron & Blair would be itching to get involved.
comment in response to
post
🤷♂️ Iran was already our enemy. Iran already launches hundreds of cyber-attacks per day against us and funds proxy terror groups like the 7/7 and Bataclan theatre attackers. It won't change their attitude to us at all.
But what it does do show a united front with EU and Canada in not taking part.
comment in response to
post
Funny isn't it. People are queuing up to paint Starmer black over a very non-committal and diplomatic response to an action he had no say in & took no part in.
But Canada, France & Germany give the same response & nobody bats an eyelid.
If US goes to war, UK won't be directly involved. Guaranteed
comment in response to
post
He said:
Preventing terrorist regimes having nuclear weapons = best done by diplomacy.
Rappers waving Hamas flags onstage & giving publicity to Iranian proxy terrorist organisations that machine-gun children in their beds = not acceptable.
Fixed that for you. 👍
comment in response to
post
At which point you were wrong.
He said basically exactly the same as all the other EU leaders and Mark Carney.
Lot of people pretending he didn't. Lot of misinformed people, a few liars with vested interests.
But he kept the UK at arms length. Which is more than Blair or Cameron ever did.
comment in response to
post
I don't hate America, I just hate the current crop of wankers in the whitehouse....
comment in response to
post
No, it absolutely is not. It's a neutral word deliberately chosen not to be a tacit endorsement.
This is him saying "we don't disagree with the outcome I.e. Iran not having nukes, but we had nothing to do with this."
No value in calling Trump out. But also no value in Iran targeting us either!
comment in response to
post
There's where you're going wrong.
His words: "The US has taken action to alleviate that threat."
That is fact only. No endorsement, nor criticism of the method. It's called diplomacy
Mark Carney from Canada (no lover of US policy) said EXACTLY the same thing. But nobody's wailing on him right now
comment in response to
post
I mean.... They gave one to Norman Schwarzkopf.
Surely ALL bets are off after that....
comment in response to
post
I didn't say that in any way.
I said Israel represents no direct threat to the UK.
That doesn't mean I endorse their actions in any way. Far from it.
We've had several major terrorist attacks in the UK backed by Iranian money.
US policy is beyond our sphere of influence. UK safety is not.
comment in response to
post
So tell me this. If you were PM, what would you do?
I know it's not nice, but international politics is a dirty business & nobody comes away from it clean.
Starmer's said nothing different to what the EU or Canada have said. He's keeping UK at arms length - which is more than Blair or Cameron did
comment in response to
post
You have to make the separation between what is morally accurate and what the serving head of state of a nation (whose entire defence policy is based on military alliance with the US) can realistically say in public.
It's not worth even trying to tell Trump the truth. No benefit in it.
comment in response to
post
You know that. I know that. Starmer knows that. The entire WORLD knows that
But the damage is done now. Through no fault of Starmer's
Where's the win in antagonising the US by pointing out how morally reprehensible their acts are? They don't care! It'd just mean more tariffs on us. So why bother?
comment in response to
post
That is true. And it's entirely Donald Trump's fault for ripping up the hard-won nuclear agreement signed by the Obama administration that we have ended up where we are.
But it's abundantly clear the US will continue regardless of what anyone else says. So why antagonise the vindictive orange Nazi?
comment in response to
post
Does Israel launch 100s of cyber attacks a day against the UK? Sponsor terror cells to commit atrocities in the UK? Harbour terrorists? Represent a threat to the UK?
No
So why would he?
I'm vehemently against Israel's present actions in Gaza but drawing equivalence between Iran & Israel is stupid
comment in response to
post
Which is fact & a matter of public record. Unless you're saying the raids didn't happen?
Look. Is it the course of action HE would have chosen? Or course not. But why be critical of the outcome?
You're not making sense. Stop moralising and live in the real world.
comment in response to
post
With all due respect what's he supposed to say?
It's blindingly obvious the US will do whatever they want in this situation, and any criticism they receive will only lead to recriminations from the toddler-tyrant in the whitehouse.
And let's not pretend Iran having nukes would be in any way good.
comment in response to
post
Her first mistake was thinking anyone cares how much misery she brought on herself.
comment in response to
post
So patriotic they hate the military. That's reform for you.
Only people who have never served think military service is easy.
comment in response to
post
You don't.
Because it's a £50bn hit to the treasury so it's totally undeliverable.
But the moronic followers of Clacton-dodger will lap up the shit and call it honey.....
comment in response to
post
Kier Starmer supportive of brutal regime NOT having nuclear weapons. Calls for diplomatic solution, supported by all major EU and NATO leaders.
Fixed that for you.
comment in response to
post
"Nobody came to my birthday, so I need to start a war."
comment in response to
post
Someone should remind him that it was the US deciding regime change should happen in Iran that led to the ayatollahs taking over in the first place....
comment in response to
post
Yeah it's not about that. It's about the Hamas flag they showed at their other gig.
Big difference between supporting Palestinian people against genocide & repping a proscribed terrorist organisation that machine-gunned children in their beds.
But hey, look at the publicity they got eh?
comment in response to
post
Not realistic on any condition.
comment in response to
post
<coughs in 3yrs left on his contract>