Skip to content
View in the app

A better way to browse. Learn more.

Thailand News and Discussion Forum | ASEANNOW

A full-screen app on your home screen with push notifications, badges and more.

To install this app on iOS and iPadOS
  1. Tap the Share icon in Safari
  2. Scroll the menu and tap Add to Home Screen.
  3. Tap Add in the top-right corner.
To install this app on Android
  1. Tap the 3-dot menu (⋮) in the top-right corner of the browser.
  2. Tap Add to Home screen or Install app.
  3. Confirm by tapping Install.

British guys, how much trouble is starmer in?

Featured Replies

  • Popular Post
14 minutes ago, stevenl said:

The only ones who can call an election are labour. Please post one good reason, just one, why Labour would call an election soon.

Embarrassment 👍

  • Replies 224
  • Views 3.7k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Most Popular Posts

  • Show us how? I cant believe you ruined a good explanation with reflexive anti -americanism

  • johnnybangkok
    johnnybangkok

    Well for example Trump is mentioned 38,000 times in the Epstein files, he absolutely knew Epstein “liked them young” and has had so many accusations of impropriety with young girls (mostly to do with

  • Or much more discerning about what is propaganda. But continue with your anti Trump diatribes, its a British tradition to dislike your boss or your betters

Posted Images

On 2/7/2026 at 1:14 PM, Yagoda said:

Show us how?

I cant believe you ruined a good explanation with reflexive anti -americanism

Absolutely, I almost choked on my coffee!coffee1, but it made my day! I needed a good laugh and i got one!

48 minutes ago, stevenl said:

The only ones who can call an election are labour. Please post one good reason, just one, why Labour would call an election soon.

Obviously dead MPs would need to be replaced with new elections.

48 minutes ago, baansgr said:

Embarrassment 👍

Since the result would be embarrassing, that's an argument against an election soon.

24 minutes ago, BritManToo said:

Obviously dead MPs would need to be replaced with new elections.

Which is not what was being referred to.

  • Popular Post
1 hour ago, Roadsternut said:

Remember, this exchange started because you pointedly, and unprovoked, decided to insult the British, presumably for <deleted>s and giggles.

Your confusion between the word "Grandad" and "Dad" is a Freudian slip, betraying your age, at about 70-80 years old. I know you obviously live in a world of cads, hookers and thieves, with low personal standards, but my grandfather was an honourable man.

It is well documented how Australian troops, newly arrived, fled the lines in Singapore. When the Wavell report was declassified in 1993, naturally the Australian PM had to say something, but much of the content of the report was accurate. The units that were sent to directly to Singapore were trained in Australia with sticks, as they had no rifles, and lead by a poor general, Bennet. It was at the Australian government urging, that the AIF was sent and the British 18th Division was doverted from North Africa to Singapore.

Wavell issued a report, based on the recollections of officers and other troops, recounting how there was an effort to drive the Japanese who had landed on Singapore back into the sea. 3 Australian battalions were needed, but one of them had completely deserted, and were found drunk in town, some of them committing rape. Some British troops described the Australians as Daffodils, beautiful to look at, but yellow through and through. Not all the Australian troops; the ones that fought the rearguard down the Malay Penninsula did their bit. The ones arriving from Australia were the ones who turned and ran. General Percival went into captivity. General Bennet abandoned his troops and fled by boat, because he claimed Australia needed his unmatched knowledge of jungle fighting. The Australian Army never let him command in the field, again, so obviously his skill set was a bit overstated.

Wavell's full report is here:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/99765968/Report-by-General-Wavell-on-Operations-in-Malaya-and-Singapore

Some choice quotes from the report presented to Cabinet

The rest of your plagiarised stolen content also indicates you lack comprehension, possibly lacking a basic education or you have some sort of learning difficulty. Why was Britain sending tanks to Russia in 1946? You posted that Britain was sending tanks in March 1946. Were you blindly or drunkenly copy pasting from Chat GPT/Gemini/Claud etc? You probably weren't taught the war ended in 1945, at your outback school for delinquents.

You further outed yourself as an idiot by declaring

and then, because you can't read so well , copy paste from your stolen source:

in response to my statement which you thought was a timeline;

September 1941 was before December 1941, at least in the Northern Hemisphere. Have a read, take your time, its not a race, remember what your teachers told you:

https://www.geostrategy.org.uk/britains-world/telling-the-truth-how-britain-helped-the-soviets-win/

https://www.historynet.com/did-russia-really-go-it-alone-how-lend-lease-helped-the-soviets-defeat-the-germans/

You're <deleted> at geography as well. I was talking about Singapore, but you've decided Papua New Guinea is in Singapore.

<deleted> me, no wonder we booted out your great great great grandaddy for nicking hankies. Your bloodline diluted the national IQ too much.


Ouch!! But very well deserved, and well put!

Back in your box Harris.

4 hours ago, Roadsternut said:

Remember, this exchange started because you pointedly, and unprovoked, decided to insult the British, presumably for <deleted>s and giggles.

Your confusion between the word "Grandad" and "Dad" is a Freudian slip, betraying your age, at about 70-80 years old. I know you obviously live in a world of cads, hookers and thieves, with low personal standards, but my grandfather was an honourable man.

It is well documented how Australian troops, newly arrived, fled the lines in Singapore. When the Wavell report was declassified in 1993, naturally the Australian PM had to say something, but much of the content of the report was accurate. The units that were sent to directly to Singapore were trained in Australia with sticks, as they had no rifles, and lead by a poor general, Bennet. It was at the Australian government urging, that the AIF was sent and the British 18th Division was doverted from North Africa to Singapore.

Wavell issued a report, based on the recollections of officers and other troops, recounting how there was an effort to drive the Japanese who had landed on Singapore back into the sea. 3 Australian battalions were needed, but one of them had completely deserted, and were found drunk in town, some of them committing rape. Some British troops described the Australians as Daffodils, beautiful to look at, but yellow through and through. Not all the Australian troops; the ones that fought the rearguard down the Malay Penninsula did their bit. The ones arriving from Australia were the ones who turned and ran. General Percival went into captivity. General Bennet abandoned his troops and fled by boat, because he claimed Australia needed his unmatched knowledge of jungle fighting. The Australian Army never let him command in the field, again, so obviously his skill set was a bit overstated.

Wavell's full report is here:

https://www.scribd.com/doc/99765968/Report-by-General-Wavell-on-Operations-in-Malaya-and-Singapore

Some choice quotes from the report presented to Cabinet

The rest of your plagiarised stolen content also indicates you lack comprehension, possibly lacking a basic education or you have some sort of learning difficulty. Why was Britain sending tanks to Russia in 1946? You posted that Britain was sending tanks in March 1946. Were you blindly or drunkenly copy pasting from Chat GPT/Gemini/Claud etc? You probably weren't taught the war ended in 1945, at your outback school for delinquents.

You further outed yourself as an idiot by declaring

and then, because you can't read so well , copy paste from your stolen source:

in response to my statement which you thought was a timeline;

September 1941 was before December 1941, at least in the Northern Hemisphere. Have a read, take your time, its not a race, remember what your teachers told you:

https://www.geostrategy.org.uk/britains-world/telling-the-truth-how-britain-helped-the-soviets-win/

https://www.historynet.com/did-russia-really-go-it-alone-how-lend-lease-helped-the-soviets-defeat-the-germans/

You're <deleted> at geography as well. I was talking about Singapore, but you've decided Papua New Guinea is in Singapore.

<deleted> me, no wonder we booted out your great great great grandaddy for nicking hankies. Your bloodline diluted the national IQ too much.

Yeah sure Brits were legends. Not their fault. The Japs got smashed when the Aussies were outnumbered 10 to 1 in PNG and the Germans said Aussies and Kiwis were the best.

You live in a fantasy land champ like your cricket team with baz ball.

Aussies have crushed the poms for 100 years for a reason. Just tougher.

3 hours ago, josephbloggs said:


Ouch!! But very well deserved, and well put!

Back in your box Harris.

Except it is all lies.

3 hours ago, josephbloggs said:


Ouch!! But very well deserved, and well put!

Back in your box Harris.

Ouch lol

Japanese soldiers held Australian troops in high regard, particularly after encountering them in Papua New Guinea, despite initial underestimation.

  • Colonel Masanobu Tsuji, a prominent Japanese military strategist, ranked Australian forces as the 6th most capable army he had opposed, placing them above Americans, British, and Indians, and praising their fighting spirit and marksmanship.

  • On the Kokoda Trail, Japanese troops were deeply impressed by the Australians' resilience, tenacity, and refusal to surrender. They described them as fighting "like wounded boars" and acknowledged their superiority in jungle warfare and use of grenades.

2 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

Ouch lol

Japanese soldiers held Australian troops in high regard, particularly after encountering them in Papua New Guinea, despite initial underestimation.

  • Colonel Masanobu Tsuji, a prominent Japanese military strategist, ranked Australian forces as the 6th most capable army he had opposed, placing them above Americans, British, and Indians, and praising their fighting spirit and marksmanship.

  • On the Kokoda Trail, Japanese troops were deeply impressed by the Australians' resilience, tenacity, and refusal to surrender. They described them as fighting "like wounded boars" and acknowledged their superiority in jungle warfare and use of grenades.


More unattributed AI waffle.

Real men

Australian forces: Approximately 625 Australians were killed and over 1,600 wounded during the Kokoda Track campaign (July 1942 – January 1943). More than 4,000 Australian soldiers were also incapacitated by illness, primarily due to tropical diseases.

Japanese forces: Total Japanese casualties in the Papua campaign—including Kokoda, Milne Bay, Buna, Gona, and Sanananda—were estimated at 19,250, including 15,000 from the Imperial Japanese Army and 3,750 from the Imperial Japanese Navy. Of these, over 2,000 were battle casualties, with the rest from disease, malnutrition, and other non-combat causes.

Just now, Harrisfan said:

Real men

Australian forces: Approximately 625 Australians were killed and over 1,600 wounded during the Kokoda Track campaign (July 1942 – January 1943). More than 4,000 Australian soldiers were also incapacitated by illness, primarily due to tropical diseases.

Japanese forces: Total Japanese casualties in the Papua campaign—including Kokoda, Milne Bay, Buna, Gona, and Sanananda—were estimated at 19,250, including 15,000 from the Imperial Japanese Army and 3,750 from the Imperial Japanese Navy. Of these, over 2,000 were battle casualties, with the rest from disease, malnutrition, and other non-combat causes.

More unattributed AI waffle.

4 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:


More unattributed AI waffle.

Hell's Battlefield: The Australians in New Guinea in World War II by Phillip Bradley is the definitive single-volume history covering the full scope of Australian-Japanese conflict in Papua New Guinea, from the 1942 invasion to the final campaigns in 1945. It provides new perspectives on the Kokoda campaign and lesser-known battles, drawing on extensive research from Australian, U.S., and Japanese records, interviews with veterans, and Japanese prisoner interrogation data. The book also includes firsthand accounts from Papua New Guineans and is richly illustrated with previously unpublished photographs and maps.

3 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

More unattributed AI waffle.

You will never be a real man. You can't even read books or study history.

  • Popular Post
1 minute ago, Harrisfan said:

You will never be a real man. You can't even read books or study history.

Righty ho.

At least I can write my own posts.

^^ HF you really should provide a link when you copy sources. No credit to a source is called plagiarism and it seems to be your specialty. Its a crime, as you are stealing someone's words. Did you ever think of that in your many google generated replies?

https://www.ipsos.com/en-uk/labour-party-more-liked-starmer-both-reach-historic-lows-ipsos-poll

13 minutes ago, josephbloggs said:

Righty ho.

At least I can write my own posts.

Keir Starmer's approval rating has fallen to -44 as of early February 2026, according to Opinium, with 55% of the public believing he should resign as Labour leader. His net favourability has been consistently negative since mid-2025, reaching a low of -57% in January 2026, the worst for any UK prime minister in 50 years, per Ipsos.

All the abuse by the right wing press the BBC SKY and GB news has backfired in spectacular fashion

Look at the threads on Twitter/X and you'll see huge multiple threads with huge "likes" based on the fact he wants to lead the country to success and wont resign

The likes of Rigby Ridge Coates on Sky and Mason and Kuennsborg on the BBC are looking very stupid

3 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

29 ahead of Keir. Keir should move his first name to his surname and call himself Wayne.

You can't do simple arithmetic either?

Starmer: 44% approval

Trump: 41% approval

16 minutes ago, gargamon said:

You can't do simple arithmetic either?

Starmer: 44% approval

Trump: 41% approval

Is 44% from what link? Ipsos has him at 20% lol

19 minutes ago, gargamon said:

You can't do simple arithmetic either?

Starmer: 44% approval

Trump: 41% approval

Starmer is 20%

Our latest Ipsos Political Monitor shows that Keir Starmer is grappling with a significant likeability deficit, with a mere 20% of Britons backing the Prime Minister, the lowest for any party leader,

25 minutes ago, gargamon said:

You can't do simple arithmetic either?

Starmer: 44% approval

Trump: 41% approval

  • As per latest More In Common poll, Starmer has approval of 17% and disapproval of 61%, giving net approval of -44%. 

https://www.opinionsandratings.com/top-stories/keirstarmers2025approvalrating

Where does your 44% come from? It seems you made it up lol

(Edit - I see you got confused between + and - best not attack people if you don't know the difference)

  • Popular Post
29 minutes ago, Chivas said:

All the abuse by the right wing press the BBC SKY and GB news has backfired in spectacular fashion

Look at the threads on Twitter/X and you'll see huge multiple threads with huge "likes" based on the fact he wants to lead the country to success and wont resign

The likes of Rigby Ridge Coates on Sky and Mason and Kuennsborg on the BBC are looking very stupid

Yes, good to see. The fightback starts here.

1 minute ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Yes, good to see. The fightback starts here.

Fightback from 17 and 20%. That's a long way back.

40 minutes ago, gargamon said:

You can't do simple arithmetic either?

Starmer: 44% approval

Trump: 41% approval

You can't read polls

Trump Job Approval

What is your opinion of the job performance of President Donald Trump?

Approve: 50%

Disapprove: 49%

https://insideradvantage.com/insideradvantage-national-survey-trump-bounces-back-to-50-approval-nearly-60-say-melania-trump-media-coverage-is-biased/

22 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

Fightback from 17 and 20%. That's a long way back.

In 1981 Margaret Thatcher's approval rating was 23% (70% dissatisfied). By 1982 her approval was 51%. Needless to say, she won the next two General Elections.

(Don't mention the 'war'!)

5 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

In 1981 Margaret Thatcher's approval rating was 23% (70% dissatisfied). By 1982 her approval was 51%. Needless to say, she won the next two General Elections.

(Don't mention the 'war'!)

Yeah but she was smart. Keir is like Kevin Rudd but voters are dumb. They picked Biden. So anything is possible. If poms don't pick Farage they deserve misery.

  • Popular Post
52 minutes ago, Harrisfan said:

Yeah but she was smart. Keir is like Kevin Rudd but voters are dumb. They picked Biden. So anything is possible. If poms don't pick Farage they deserve misery.

Thatcher was indeed smart. Picking Farage won't be an option as he (and Reform) will have imploded by then. I have faith that the UK won't turn to the extreme Right. We fought and won a war against it!

2 minutes ago, brewsterbudgen said:

Thatcher was indeed smart. Picking Farage won't be an option as he (and Reform) will have imploded by then. I have faith that the UK won't turn to the extreme Right. We fought and won a war against it!

What war was that? Hitler? He was a socialist with massive taxes. Far left.

Tax Rates Under Nazi Germany
Nazi Germany implemented high tax rates, particularly on the wealthy, as part of its strategy to fund rearmament and state expansion. By the late 1930s, income tax rates were progressive, reaching up to 95% for top earners, while corporate tax rates stood at around 40%. Additional revenue was generated through consumption taxes and a controversial Reich Flight Tax, a 25% levy on emigrants' capital—especially targeting Jews—which raised 941 million Reichsmarks (about $4 billion in 2019 USD) from 1933 to 1938.

Economic Policies: Nigel Farage and Reform UK advocate for significant tax cuts and economic liberalization. They propose raising the income tax threshold from £12,570 to £20,000, cutting corporation tax from 25% to 15% over time, and abolishing inheritance tax, which Farage calls a "really nasty tax." The party also supports reducing capital gains tax on cryptocurrency from 24% to 10% and creating a "Bitcoin

Sounds like a champ. Only idiots would vote against that

Create an account or sign in to comment

Recently Browsing 0

  • No registered users viewing this page.

Account

Navigation

Search

Search

Configure browser push notifications

Chrome (Android)
  1. Tap the lock icon next to the address bar.
  2. Tap Permissions → Notifications.
  3. Adjust your preference.
Chrome (Desktop)
  1. Click the padlock icon in the address bar.
  2. Select Site settings.
  3. Find Notifications and adjust your preference.