Jump to content

vlagman

Member
  • Content Count

    31,962
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    223

vlagman last won the day on February 3

vlagman had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,497 Excellent

About vlagman

  • Rank
    That Stats Man
  • Birthday 03/25/1957

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  • Location
    Reading, England

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. vlagman

    6 Nations 2020

    I think they’ve always been fairly big. OK not as “big” as the like of Affies, PBH, KES, Paarl Gim, etc, but they were always in the mix as at least kind of a “rugby school”.
  2. vlagman

    6 Nations 2020

    Born in Bulls country and went to school at Monnas in Krugersdorp.
  3. I’m not sure if you’re talking about the German Panzer Korps or the SA guys but I know the SA armoured corpse guys (the old SSB - Special Services Battalion) used to sing it probably as often as the SWA guys. I did my officer’s course at the SA Army College and we had three or four of them with us. Crazy buggers. Whenever we went out after hours it was always the same story. Garlic steaks with extra extra garlic, rum and coke by the gallons and the annexation of the restaurant singing Das Südwesterlied without end. Interesting is that the SSB was not always exclusively the armoured corpse. The SSB was started by Danie Craven, when he was in the army. It was meant to be the training centre for PT instructors. The PT setup was eventually broken up into the different arms of service with the Army guys becoming a branch of the SA Army college in VTH where all the dreaded PTIs were trained. The SSB became the corpse training school, 1SSB, for the SA Armoured Corpse. They retained the corpse insignia of the old SSB.
  4. Not really. Not in the SADF in any case. There was a very close bond between the SA and Suidwes guys. I remember how we used to sing Das Südwesterlied with the Suidwes guys whenever we were together at courses or parades or other venues. We always had the traditional course party at the end of every course. At the end of our Military Law Officer’s course we decided to have our party in the form of a formal dinner at the Naval HQ Officers Mess. A formal dinner always starts off as a very formal affair, hence the name but traditionally it ends up in one hell of a revelry. There were quite a few Suidwesters on the course, supplemented by a number of guys from operational units in the border area. Suffice to say it was one hell of a party.
  5. The SADF had a special scheme under which they, the ex Rhodesian Army guys, were signed up. IIRC the suffix for their force numbers was PR, as opposed to PE for the permanent guys and the BC for the national servicemen. Some, many or probably most, of those Rhodies were great soldiers with real grit. They were fighting a hell of a battle with shit coming from all sides and with only SA (under threat itself) backing them. Having said that they also had their fair share of bullshitters. We used to call the bullshitters Whenwes. They used to start all their “bright” ideas with “When we were in Rhodesia.....”.
  6. That was some great acting from Pacino. Think I watched the movie three times. EDIT: In fact, I just decided I’m gonna watch it again this weekend. 😀
  7. vlagman

    Libtards

    And they have been funding almost everything and everybody all over the world ever since. That is Trump’s big issue and one that is a big factor in this current issue of impeachment. Burden sharing. The USA is forever criticised and rubbished by everybody but they are the main funding source for all the international organisations. NATO had the USA as the single largest contributor for ages, and that was not only because of their large economy. They were proportionally the largest contributor as well. When Trump started bitching about the contributions of member countries (long before he even announced his running for President) none of the member countries, bar five IIRC, even contributed the agreed minimum. It was only when he threatened to withdraw that they stepped up. He bitched about the Paris agreement because it is an unfair and bullshit agreement. The biggest contributor once again? The USA. What’s more, it is an agreement with large monetary contributions with no punitive measures for not sticking by the agreement and the main culprits are the very same countries who are exempted from sticking to the rules. There are also no punitive measures for not paying the contributions. He bitched about NAFTA. Why? Because it was lopsided against the USA. They put together the USMCA which was equally benefiting to all three countries and which has now at last been signed. Why only now? Because the Dems were playing political games and kept themselves busy with fucking Trump instead of looking after the American people. He bitches about US-China trade. Why? Because, once again, it was lopsided against the USA. All of his issues are because of unfair shit. All he wants is for everybody to be treated fairly.
  8. vlagman

    Libtards

    Sorry Weda. I don’t agree on this one. Friends who cannot disagree and still be friends aren’t real friends. What’s more. This thread is, by nature, political. Sociopolitical to be exact but still political. What’s more, this is a forum and the purpose is, after all about friendship communication and, in particular, debate. A debate requires at least two different opinions. And then the title and sub-title of this sub-forum... “GOSSIP SECTION General banter - anything goes.”
  9. vlagman

    Libtards

    I don't agree. Read the piece that Jimi posted a few days ago. For Trump it has always been about balance. You buy from me and I buy from you. When you go back into the very basics of Economics, you'll see that that was the very essence of the start of trade. A matter of supply and demand. Whenever you have an unbalanced trade relationship, things always end up in the same way. Initially both parties are as happy as a pig in shit until it becomes unbalanced, i.e. A buys more from B than what B buys from A. Eventually A will run out of resources to trade with and B smiles all the way to the bank. If and when A runs out of money, then B will have to find a new trade "partner" and A will end up being the sucker. If B fails to find a new "partner" he will end up without a market for his goods. It will sit on the shelves and his income will dry up and he will end up without fokol, like A. Only difference is that A became poor before B. This is exactly what was starting to happen to the USA. Central to the EU and China has always been the idea of, we want to be the biggest and in control. Basically they wanted to take over from the USA and claim the BS title of "Leader of the Free World". Every previous US President rode on that title and made use of it. Maybe abuse is a better term. Every modern day President left the WH filthy stinking rich. Trump is going to be the first to leave it poorer than when he went in. He knows it and he doesn't care. It is all about America. That is where many people decide that he is in isolationist who doesn't give a shit about the rest of the world. That is as far away from the truth as you can think. He has always said the same thing, and he has been saying it for years. You can check it out, There are many examples. There needs to be a balance in the world economy. He doesn't want the USA to be the kings of the world. He wants all to have equal opportunities. He has never ever tried to harm the Chinese economy. He only wanted things to be balanced. I cannot remember the figures off the top of my head but I think that at the start of his Presidency the USA were buying about 1 1/2 times more from China than what Chine was buying from the USA and the US manufacturing sector was going for a ball of shit and nobody gave a damn. It was the same with other countries as well. When Trump asked world leaders WTF that happened, they said that nobody ever queried it. They just accepted it. Obama told the people that the manufacturing jobs are gone and will never return and they had too live with it. Trump campaigned and said he would bring the jobs back and Obama laughed at him. There is no way that one can argue that a balanced world economy is bad for the world. I cannot see how Trump could be held responsible for the failures of the SA economy. The state of the SA economy lies squarely on the shoulders of the ANC and, dare I say, business leaders who could not get enough of licking the arses of the ANC leadership in the nineties. South Africa was a net exported of intellectual property when the ANC came into power. Our arms industry compared favourably with the USA, France, the UK, Germany and the USSR. When the UK needed to replace their attack helicopters their eventual choice was between our Rooivalk and the US Apache, with the Rooivalk being superior on a number of points. What swung the deal was the fact that the USA could manufacture and provide support for hundreds of helicopters and SA could not guarantee that. The weapons systems on the Rooivalk is any day as good as, if not better than that of the Apache. Our G6 canon was the most advanced in the world and probably still is, or is at least still one of the top self propelled canons in the world. They should have been out of there long ago. The question is "Whose side is SA on in the Syria complex? The USA and the rebels or Asad and Putin?". If it is the latter then, yes, it would affect SA. I don't see the connection. The tariff war is between the USA and China. It should benefit SA. When the trade from China to the USA decline because of the tariff war, China would be looking to some other markets which puts the buyer in a stronger position, IMO. That is petulant. Trump doesn't even take his salary. He donates it to various causes. He has his home in Mar A Lago which he built with his own money, long before he became president. He has more brains under the nail of his left little finger than the entire Zuma family put together. No. He will be acquitted because the facts do not support the allegations. Have you watched the impeachment proceedings at all? He will be acquitted for the same reason the Mueller investigation couldn't pin anything on him. It was BS fabricated charges. Exactly. They have trade the Russia hoax and now they are trying impeachment. They should have worked with him to achieve what he stand for. That would have gathered them much more support from the swing voters. Instead they have been fighting him for four years and alienated the swing voters. People are gatvol for the lefty luvies, their hurt feelings and their safe spaces. It is staring to show all over the world. Same thing happened in the UK with Boris Johnson. Finally, do yourself a favour and watch the presser with Trump and Netanyahu yesterday. Listen carefully what Trump says. Try to ignore the rhetoric and listen carefully what he says. His goal is not to pick a side and help Israel come out as the only winner. He wants the whole area to be prosperous. He wants to help the Palestinians to have their own autonomous state and he has already offered to help them set up their state. He offered financial aid and expertise. His goal is to have two states with healthy relations in every way including trade relations. He wants to help the Palestinians to also become a recognised and respected independent state on the world front. Does that sound like an isolationist? I don't think so.
  10. vlagman

    Libtards

    As you say. He is light years ahead of any of the 2020 Dem candidates. And this impeachment circus is turning into a massive embarrassment for the Dems. You need to look no further than his defence team yesterday. I’m surprised that they haven’t given up yet. Maybe they have. Who knows. I loved how they used Nadler and Schumer’s own past testimonies against them and in favour of Trump. They literally made Nadler and Schumer testify in defence of Trump. 😂
  11. vlagman

    Libtards

    The Senate will be looking into Sleepy Joe and Snorting Hunter. He has already said that on Friday or Saturday. What was interesting to me is John Kerry’s stepson. I was under the impression that he was also in on all these dodgy deals and was more or less wringing my hands for when they were going to go after him as well. The evidence by the defence yesterday actually indicated differently though. According to what they testified, Kerry’s stepson was actually the one who exposed Hunter and his buddy Devon and their dealings with Burisma and said that he could not agree with it and also did not agree to have their company involved in that shit. I watched everything but stopped towards the end of Alan Dershowitz’ evidence because it was really getting boring. What he said was interesting but I think he was busy overselling his evidence. He reminded me a bit of an episode years ago. A few of our sales people were sent on a short course. Part of it was a little psychometric test to see where they were at the start of the course. One of the guys told me that he was pissing himself, laughing, when he got his evaluation back. He said that they basically said that he sometimes suffer from verbal diarrhoea. He would sell something and as soon as he realises he has the deal in the bag, he starts buying it back. This, to me, was what Dershowitz was busy doing. Then again, he is an emeritus law professor after all.
×
×
  • Create New...