AFFILIATE SEARCH | Shop Amazon.co.uk using this search bar and support WHO!
The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Forum rules
Whilst 'off-topic' means all non-football topics can be discussed. This is not a free for all. Rights to this area of the forum aren't implicit, and illegal, defamator, spammy or absuive topics will be removed, with the protagonist's sanctioned.
Whilst 'off-topic' means all non-football topics can be discussed. This is not a free for all. Rights to this area of the forum aren't implicit, and illegal, defamator, spammy or absuive topics will be removed, with the protagonist's sanctioned.
-
Come On You Irons
- Posts: 1242
- Old WHO Number: 304394
- Has liked: 86 times
- Been liked: 251 times
The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
There. Resident WHO political commentators and gurus can knock yourselves out in here and conduct your endless bickering. All other threads will be locked.
- WHU(Exeter)
- Posts: 1533
- Old WHO Number: 13669
- Has liked: 154 times
- Been liked: 234 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
You could be right about the 5% thing Nutsin, might have to raise it a lot more, if the BOSS goes full circle and starts actively supporting Putin, instead of just appeasing him.
(What is it with that relationship? I would've thought the leader of the worlds biggest stupidpower would have Putin in his pocket, rather than the other way round)
Wonder what the % of our GDP was spent towards aiding the infant nation stupidpower in Iraq and Afghanistan
Reckon we could get a refund?
(What is it with that relationship? I would've thought the leader of the worlds biggest stupidpower would have Putin in his pocket, rather than the other way round)
Wonder what the % of our GDP was spent towards aiding the infant nation stupidpower in Iraq and Afghanistan
Reckon we could get a refund?
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Fauxstralian wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 16:16 Ends wars?
Russia / Ukraine
Israel / Palestine
Venezuela
Nigeria
Greenland (or is it Iceland?)
Iran
Peace at last! Ha ha
All down to the Board of Peace featuring Trump Putin & Tony Blair
Irony is dead
What a load of bollocks!
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Nutsin wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 16:05Mr Anon" wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 15:59Nutsin wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 15:51 It would appear Trumps hurty words are just too much for some.
As For the Mong who thinks if NATO collapses the European Gov’ts won’t have to pay 5% of their GDP for defense any more, I ask how you gonna defend yourself from Putin?
It’s like listening to a bunch of old housewives complain.
What a bunch of mincers!
Gotta laugh!I'm sure a few hundred housewives have plenty to complain about considering their husbands didn't come home from a war Trump said they weren't asked for or needed in the first placeJust as well Trump ends wars then isn’t it?
TDS in full effect, little quisling weasel
-
Fauxstralian
- Posts: 4298
- Old WHO Number: 321173
- Has liked: 73 times
- Been liked: 604 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Ends wars?
Russia / Ukraine
Israel / Palestine
Venezuela
Nigeria
Greenland (or is it Iceland?)
Iran
Peace at last! Ha ha
All down to the Board of Peace featuring Trump Putin & Tony Blair
Irony is dead
Russia / Ukraine
Israel / Palestine
Venezuela
Nigeria
Greenland (or is it Iceland?)
Iran
Peace at last! Ha ha
All down to the Board of Peace featuring Trump Putin & Tony Blair
Irony is dead
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Mr Anon" wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 15:59Nutsin wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 15:51 It would appear Trumps hurty words are just too much for some.
As For the Mong who thinks if NATO collapses the European Gov’ts won’t have to pay 5% of their GDP for defense any more, I ask how you gonna defend yourself from Putin?
It’s like listening to a bunch of old housewives complain.
What a bunch of mincers!
Gotta laugh!I'm sure a few hundred housewives have plenty to complain about considering their husbands didn't come home from a war Trump said they weren't asked for or needed in the first place
Just as well Trump ends wars then isn’t it?
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Nutsin wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 15:51 It would appear Trumps hurty words are just too much for some.
As For the Mong who thinks if NATO collapses the European Gov’ts won’t have to pay 5% of their GDP for defense any more, I ask how you gonna defend yourself from Putin?
It’s like listening to a bunch of old housewives complain.
What a bunch of mincers!
Gotta laugh!
I'm sure a few hundred housewives have plenty to complain about considering their husbands didn't come home from a war Trump said they weren't asked for or needed in the first place
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 14:39Surface = Lord Haw-HawI stand corrected. The British Army is more than generously funded and equipped and its c.35,000 front-line troops are more than adequate for all tasks that our megalomaniac leaders set them.
I don't see anyone denying that, just your statement they weren't fighting on the front line.
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
It would appear Trumps hurty words are just too much for some.
As For the Mong who thinks if NATO collapses the European Gov’ts won’t have to pay 5% of their GDP for defense any more, I ask how you gonna defend yourself from Putin?
It’s like listening to a bunch of old housewives complain.
What a bunch of mincers!
Gotta laugh!
As For the Mong who thinks if NATO collapses the European Gov’ts won’t have to pay 5% of their GDP for defense any more, I ask how you gonna defend yourself from Putin?
It’s like listening to a bunch of old housewives complain.
What a bunch of mincers!
Gotta laugh!
-
dealcanvey
- Posts: 571
- Old WHO Number: 212132
- Has liked: 36 times
- Been liked: 107 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Trumps latest comments regarding British troops in Afghanistan are completely insulting.
Even more so when he dodged multiple times himself.
How anyone in the UK can give this man any credibility is beyond me. Mad world.
Even more so when he dodged multiple times himself.
How anyone in the UK can give this man any credibility is beyond me. Mad world.
- goose
- Posts: 5952
- Old WHO Number: 212806
- Has liked: 535 times
- Been liked: 1061 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
WHU(Exeter) wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 15:01
Then again he (like the leader of the Democrats also), has to appeal to core fanbase, and idiots must be a huge demographic, compared to other western democracies.
They definately over index on 'stupid' over there.
-
threesixty
- Posts: 1136
- Old WHO Number: 14819
- Has liked: 175 times
- Been liked: 321 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
some of you (you know who you are) would find an excuse for him even if he raped your kids.
You need psychiatric help. And a fucking spine.
You need psychiatric help. And a fucking spine.
- WHU(Exeter)
- Posts: 1533
- Old WHO Number: 13669
- Has liked: 154 times
- Been liked: 234 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
If NATO countries are no longer needed, would that mean that the 5% GDP on defense figure can now be ignored?
Because all that's ever mentioned in relation to that figure, is the Ukraine, with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan conveniently forgotten about.
Also, I'm hopeless at maths, but from figures available in most searches, (which I accept might not be accurate), it would suggest that the UK lost more soldiers % wise in Afghanistan than the US.
Which makes his comment even more deeply offensive.
Then again he (like the leader of the Democrats also), has to appeal to core fanbase, and idiots must be a huge demographic, compared to other western democracies.
Because all that's ever mentioned in relation to that figure, is the Ukraine, with the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan conveniently forgotten about.
Also, I'm hopeless at maths, but from figures available in most searches, (which I accept might not be accurate), it would suggest that the UK lost more soldiers % wise in Afghanistan than the US.
Which makes his comment even more deeply offensive.
Then again he (like the leader of the Democrats also), has to appeal to core fanbase, and idiots must be a huge demographic, compared to other western democracies.
- SurfaceAgentX2Zero
- Posts: 878
- Old WHO Number: 214126
- Has liked: 160 times
- Been liked: 255 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Hammer I am" wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 08:18SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 01:26I think you have this the wrong way round. It's you that's guessing what he meant. I'm simply repeating what he actually said. Which was that Britain avoided the front line in Afghanistan. Factually true. And not a criticism of British troops.Surface = Lord Haw-Haw
I stand corrected. The British Army is more than generously funded and equipped and its c.35,000 front-line troops are more than adequate for all tasks that our megalomaniac leaders set them.
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Pub Bigot" wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 12:50WHU(Exeter) wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 10:50 Good news for fellow NATO countries, that their forces will no longer be required to join in various future US fuck ups across the globe.That was a cunty thing for Trump to say considering British lives were lost fighting alongside his forces and he needs to give his head a wobble.
What I find astonishing is the pricks in power at Westminster jumping to the defence of the UK armed forces while human rights lawyers with government support are trying to convict British military veterans for their role in Northern Ireland.
Trump’s a fat cսnt who showed zero respect and is ungrateful , but our insidious government are the lowest form of pond life.
I know, certain hard of thinking individuals on here believe you can't possibly think the governments on both sides of the Atlantic are odious, you must absolutely pick a side, I mentioned this a while back and got accused of "fence sitting" They treat it like its some sort of fucking football rivalry
-
Pub Bigot
- Posts: 883
- Old WHO Number: 255703
- Has liked: 1158 times
- Been liked: 429 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
WHU(Exeter) wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 10:50 Good news for fellow NATO countries, that their forces will no longer be required to join in various future US fuck ups across the globe.
What I find astonishing is the pricks in power at Westminster jumping to the defence of the UK armed forces while human rights lawyers with government support are trying to convict British military veterans for their role in Northern Ireland.
Trump’s a fat cսnt who showed zero respect and is ungrateful , but our insidious government are the lowest form of pond life.
- WHU(Exeter)
- Posts: 1533
- Old WHO Number: 13669
- Has liked: 154 times
- Been liked: 234 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Good news for fellow NATO countries, that their forces will no longer be required to join in various future US fuck ups across the globe.
-
Fauxstralian
- Posts: 4298
- Old WHO Number: 321173
- Has liked: 73 times
- Been liked: 604 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Trump is the first President in living memory who hasn’t put his investments into a blind trust to avoid any accusations of decisions made to benefit him financially
The assets are managed by Don Jr & Eric Trump
Trump announces tariffs on Europe for not agreeing to him invading Greenland - market drops
Trump TACOS on the tariffs - market rises
Wonder what Don Jr & Eric were doing in the market this week?
The assets are managed by Don Jr & Eric Trump
Trump announces tariffs on Europe for not agreeing to him invading Greenland - market drops
Trump TACOS on the tariffs - market rises
Wonder what Don Jr & Eric were doing in the market this week?
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Sixty years ago I read Joseph Heller’s Catch 22. As a satire on WW2 it was excellent entertainment. What brought back this memory was seeing a clip of Jared Kushner, with pictures of a rubble strewn Gaza overlaid with high rise condos, talking about the benefits peace would bring to the region.
What shocks me is how blatant the Trump family are about making money. The Don will surely be the President who most enhanced his wealth during his term of office.
What shocks me is how blatant the Trump family are about making money. The Don will surely be the President who most enhanced his wealth during his term of office.
-
Hammer I am
- Posts: 395
- Old WHO Number: 22726
- Has liked: 96 times
- Been liked: 95 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Love the Irony of Donald "Bonespur" Trump suggesting others avoided fighting
-
Hammer I am
- Posts: 395
- Old WHO Number: 22726
- Has liked: 96 times
- Been liked: 95 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 01:26Mr Anon" wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026, 23:51SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026, 23:16British troops performed badly in both Iraq and Afghanistan, not because the troops were anything less than brave and utterly professional, but because they were criminally ill-equipped by Blair, Brown and Cameron. Furthermore the military leaders lacked the stones to admit this. This was well-documented at the time.
Trump's word are a criticism of the uselessness of their leaders and the leaders of other NATO nations and their continuing failure to properly fund the armed forces, not the troops.fuck me, you really going to defend that cսnt over that statement, all this "what he meant was" hand wringing is sickeningI think you have this the wrong way round. It's you that's guessing what he meant. I'm simply repeating what he actually said. Which was that Britain avoided the front line in Afghanistan. Factually true. And not a criticism of British troops.
Surface = Lord Haw-Haw
- WHU(Exeter)
- Posts: 1533
- Old WHO Number: 13669
- Has liked: 154 times
- Been liked: 234 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
I’m surprised Assad hasn’t been sent an invite.
Scratch that though, as the Yanks have now put their weight fully behind the new leader in Syria and thrown their Kurdish ‘allies’ under the bus this week, with ISIS held prisoners escaping in the process.
Maybe the Kurds should’ve been on the front line a bit more?
Scratch that though, as the Yanks have now put their weight fully behind the new leader in Syria and thrown their Kurdish ‘allies’ under the bus this week, with ISIS held prisoners escaping in the process.
Maybe the Kurds should’ve been on the front line a bit more?
-
Fauxstralian
- Posts: 4298
- Old WHO Number: 321173
- Has liked: 73 times
- Been liked: 604 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
So the 5 time draft dodging coward is questioning the bravery of British troops?
I see Trumps Board of Peace includes himself, Putin & Blair
Irony is officially DEAD
I see Trumps Board of Peace includes himself, Putin & Blair
Irony is officially DEAD
- goose
- Posts: 5952
- Old WHO Number: 212806
- Has liked: 535 times
- Been liked: 1061 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Exactly. Places like Sangin, Musa Qala, Lashkar Gah saw probably the fiercest and most amount of fighting in the campaign. If that doesn’t constitute being on the frontline then I don’t know what does.
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑23 Jan 2026, 01:26Mr Anon" wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026, 23:51SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026, 23:16British troops performed badly in both Iraq and Afghanistan, not because the troops were anything less than brave and utterly professional, but because they were criminally ill-equipped by Blair, Brown and Cameron. Furthermore the military leaders lacked the stones to admit this. This was well-documented at the time.
Trump's word are a criticism of the uselessness of their leaders and the leaders of other NATO nations and their continuing failure to properly fund the armed forces, not the troops.fuck me, you really going to defend that cսnt over that statement, all this "what he meant was" hand wringing is sickeningI think you have this the wrong way round. It's you that's guessing what he meant. I'm simply repeating what he actually said. Which was that Britain avoided the front line in Afghanistan. Factually true. And not a criticism of British troops.
1) they were deployed in the Helmand province, about as dangerous as it got there, 2) US had overall top level command of all coalition troops in Afghanistan and Iraq so if it were marginally true what you and the moron in the Whitehouse was saying then blame the US commanders
- SurfaceAgentX2Zero
- Posts: 878
- Old WHO Number: 214126
- Has liked: 160 times
- Been liked: 255 times
Re: The Official Politics Thread (enter at your own risk)
Mr Anon" wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026, 23:51SurfaceAgentX2Zero wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026, 23:16MaryMillingtonsGhost wrote: ↑22 Jan 2026, 22:21 Over 450 British, not to mention other nations, troops dying because of NATO’s Article 5 in Afghanistan after 9/11. Yet the dementia ridden man-child appears to think that the nations that stood side by side with American troops weren’t on the ‘front line’, as the septics obviously were.
The cսnt’s fucking deluded, and I truly wish that for the memory of our, and other nations fallen, he dies a lingering death.
The cսnt has finally shown his true colour.British troops performed badly in both Iraq and Afghanistan, not because the troops were anything less than brave and utterly professional, but because they were criminally ill-equipped by Blair, Brown and Cameron. Furthermore the military leaders lacked the stones to admit this. This was well-documented at the time.
Trump's word are a criticism of the uselessness of their leaders and the leaders of other NATO nations and their continuing failure to properly fund the armed forces, not the troops.fuck me, you really going to defend that cսnt over that statement, all this "what he meant was" hand wringing is sickening
I think you have this the wrong way round. It's you that's guessing what he meant. I'm simply repeating what he actually said. Which was that Britain avoided the front line in Afghanistan. Factually true. And not a criticism of British troops.