The Chelsea F.C. Thread IV

I'm actually really worried about this game without Ramires. With him there I really didn't think there was a chance we would lose but now I'd be worried about the pairing. Lampard/Mikel is just asking for trouble tbh. Should be a 4-3-3. Expecting a boring game.

Yeah, best thing about the Saddam Hussain bit was that they were the allies of the Americans. The Bin Laden case as well, where apparently they'd been trained by the CIA then the US start to support Israel because the soviet union collapsed and we all know what the supporting of Israel has done to Palestine and the negative press palestine has received. Another funny thing would be the case of Syria, just lol that the russians were the ones who actually decided to step in to do peace talks while Obama was ready to just blow up the country with more drones like with pakistan. So much hypocrisy, hardly anything you can do about it.

If you wanted to make the world a better place and more equal, the only way you can do it immediately is by force, but in doing that, you're just becoming as bad as the people that are being oppressed. All this 'if you rally and ask the government to stop' nonsense will only get you so far, still inequality in womans pay despite the suffragettes starting the movement for over 100 years, still institutional racism despite slavery being abolished in this country 205 years ago, that's not even mentioning all the other messed up places in the world. If you were to actually make a difference and stand up, you'll be put in jail, force fed and have your skin bruised and battered with tear gas and rubber bullets. Doesn't matter that this place ain't africa, it's the same thing when corrupt people are in power.

Honestly, this is an ignorant view but one I see a lot. The only reason we can buy players like Özil now is because of the brilliant work Wenger did when all our money was going on the stadium and he was being forced to sell his best players every year. Mourinho is a good manager with money, but he never would have lasted in that scenario.

You may take this as a dig at Chelsea, you may see the truth behind it, but it's a lot easier to win trophies when you're being funded by a Russian billionnaire than when you're pumping over £400m into a stadium. Arsenal are in a fantastic position now compared to 10 years ago.

Pretty much. We were allies with Stalin albeit out of necessity during the Second World War. More recently we were also allies with Pinochet. You'll notice the 'good countries' get away with attention to evils quite often. You may hear of certain countries in Asia being labelled a terrorist country, such as Pakistan, but do you hear France being labelled the same? Accusations were made against for them for supporting the Hutu militia during the Rwandan genocide and it wasn't disputed by Sarkozy last I heard. Always amuses me to hear Americans complain about being the target of political violence when they've supported it themselves, e.g. Guatamela, Vietnam, Israel etc.

Speaking of Israel:



Direct action is often a last resort because concerns raised by specific people fall on deaf ears, e.g. Emily Davison with the suffragette movement.

I have a feeling that Suarez will have a ridiculous game tomorrow and destroy Terry/Cahill/Luiz tomorrow. Do you guys reckon you can stop him?

Exactly, Wenger looked long term and accepted a decade of mediocrity for a century of future success. He's not just the manager he brought Arsenal into the commercial and footballing elite. Someone said it earlier but he's almost wasted in football. He should be president of France.

So Western 'demography' is selective and hypocritical'. Yet your solution is let's embrace Roman, let's give him a safe haven and means to impunity from all his action- to exacerbate to situation. Can't beat them, might as well join them mentality. You're just as bad and as hypocritical as them.




Posted from TSR Mobile

Well, are you planning to do direct action and violent protests like I said? Pointing out this hypocrisy isn't going to work when 80% of the country listen to the bull**** the daily mail utters and the biased drivel put by the BBC and other news like SKY news. I remember my friend saying he watched sky, they said that Israeli people were killed in bombings by Palestinians yet forgot to report that the Israeli people had bombed more Palestinians the very same day. Yet on Russia today they reported both stories. Not to say that russia are better or anything, but just goes to show the hidden agenda in this country and their support of Israel.

If you don't do that, you're falling on deaf ears. The corrupt are in power, the only way to stop the corruption is by force. I'd rather this place stay like it is and play the game than turn it into Rwanda over politics.

If something is so bad that I'm willing to die for it to be stopped, then I'll attempt direct action(civil war, assassinations etc), otherwise I'll leave it and work through those constraints. It's a fact of life, people do bad things that affect you and others. If you can't stop it, why fight against it.

All this talking about the situation has been done for years, still nothing changed, most you can do is either get into a position of power legitimately(i.e. become rich or an MP) and change it there slowly or do it by force.

Difficult to take this seriously tbh. So they only way to enact changes is to be violent? What utter bull****.

Believe me, there are plenty of actions going on out there to bring about changes just because you sit on your couch exposing yourself to spiels from Murdoch news and bbc so that you can complain about something you don't really care about as it's obvious you encourage it about doesn't mean it doesn't exist. It just mean you're ignorant to it and actively choose to remain so.


Posted from TSR Mobile

Never said that's the only way, said that's the quickest way to make a change. Hence it's not bull****. At least read my whole point, I said at the final part blatantly that you can change it slowly by more legitimate means.

You need power of some sort to make a change, either by becoming an MP or having political influence by legitimate means, which takes some time. Or you can do it by force and protest like the suffragettes etc. to the point that the government can't ignore you.

Either way, I'd rather live through it and attempt to change the things that really irk me.

So you did a full 360 within a couple of sentences? That's why I said it was difficult to take take the post seriously. So which is it- no changes can be made at all or it can only be made through violence? No one said it was a race?

And violence has been pretty ineffective to enact changes tbh- its possibly the worst way to enact changes. Violence begets violence. Don't know what evidence there is you can point to. I can point to many examples where it's failed

If you agree that changes can be made even at snails speed, how does embracing the likes Roman helps that situation? If you think the situation is ****ed up, how does the likes of Roman improves it? This is where I'm confused.

I'm saying that change can be done, although it would be slow if you don't use violent and more drastic methods.

I get that Violence causes more violence. Well I used the suffragette movement, the Civil war in america(although that probably had ulterior motives than the ending of the slave trade), could find more examples, but this is dragging on.

Back to the point, we can get rid of the likes of roman, but for us to do that, there are many other people we have to get rid of as well. Barclays as NGAARONDI said shouldn't be sponsoring this league, none of us should be wearing nike trainers if we're planning on being moral, while I agree with fairtrade in principle, they're essentially adding 30p to a product to give to the farmer instead of them being moral, that's not fairtrade, they're just cheating the customer instead of the farmer. A large scale sanction on the likes of these people, or just a general abstinence of these people and avoiding them. To an extent, I am part of the problem which I accept.

It can be done at snails speed, I don't think Roman improves the situation, we all know Romans exploitations outweighs the good things he's done. Just think there are more people to complain about before we go to Roman. I guess it just goes to when somebody does something good for you and bad things to others, you tend to overlook the bad things they've done. It's somewhat akin to putting your mother in jail if they did a bad crime although its nowhere near as personal as that.

So Western 'demography' is selective and hypocritical'. Yet your solution is let's embrace Roman, let's give him a safe haven and means to impunity from all his action- to exacerbate to situation. Can't beat them, might as well join them mentality. You're just as bad and as hypocritical as them.




Posted from TSR Mobile

This thread can now be locked. Forever.

Tbh, I was worried about the City/Arsenal game and thought we'd be in trouble, although jam and Bulletz said that there's little worry and we'd not lose.

I still feel worried about this but you guys are saying the same thing as before, so hopefully that does mean we win!

I'd like to be referred as Bam from now on

I'm slightly worried for this game, unless Gerrard is playing, we won't have an even playing field with Ramires not playing as they have higher energy levels and mobility there. Saying that, their defence is nothing special, Sakho is dodgy at times, Skrtel is generally solid though, Johnson is suspect defensively as well, if hazard has a good game then he's going to be torn a new hole and they have no left back with quality as well.

Then theres their midfield, Their central midfield is effective but average, bar maybe henderson who's been beasting it recently ramsey style in fact, Coutinho is too inconsistent but a good player, Sterling, just lol as well.