Comments by "" (@Iain1962) on "History Debunked" channel.

  1. 344
  2. 162
  3. 99
  4. 40
  5. 23
  6. 20
  7. 15
  8. 15
  9. 13
  10. 12
  11. 12
  12. 10
  13. 7
  14. 6
  15. 6
  16. 5
  17. 5
  18. 4
  19. 4
  20. 3
  21. 3
  22. 3
  23. 3
  24. 3
  25. 2
  26. 2
  27. 2
  28. 2
  29. 2
  30. 2
  31. 2
  32. 2
  33. 2
  34. 2
  35. 2
  36. 2
  37. 2
  38. 2
  39. 2
  40. 1
  41. 1
  42. 1
  43. 1
  44. 1
  45. 1
  46. 1
  47. 1
  48. The fundamental problem is how it is financed. The money comes from the top down, this is the opposite of how it should be. The NHS starts with a budget let's say for hip replacements, as each operation is carried out the money is used up, when all the money is close to being used up doctors have to pick who gets treatment and who has to wait for the next budget allocation. So they have to start rationing. Now if the money went the other way, the more operations you did the more money came in, the budget would always be there for the next patient. So this would require a complete overhaul of the system so the money goes where the demand is, rather than some guy with a spreadsheet deciding how much we are going to need for hip operations in three years time. It should all be privatised, we also have the ludicrous situations when things go wrong. Let's say a Hospital employs a bad doctor, so the taxpayer pays his salary, then the taxpayer compensates his patients for his mistakes, then the hospital is fined ( so the state fines a state run hospital- literally fining itself) and then the Hospital runs out of money and needs bailed out, so the state fines itself, and then bails itself out. And all paid for by the taxpayer, the guilty parties are promoted or transferred, and nobody is actually held accountable. What happened in the wake of the Lucy Letby situation for example? Anybody fired? Anybody held accountable for allowing it to go on? The people who get sacked are most often the whistleblowers. What kind of message does that send? It's useless, I stay away unless I have no alternative.
    1
  49. 1
  50. 1
  51. 1
  52. 1
  53. 1
  54. I disagree, there are some similarities, but then don't most wars begin along these lines, a territorial dispute, a linguistic or religious or ideological affiliation. However Hitler was out for revenge, he had a plan from the moment he came to power, he started building a war machine immediately and everything he did was about building a massive military, from building roads and buildings, Cruise ships that could be converted to troop ships in a moment, tanks and guns and planes were designed and manufactured in secret, all Political moves were designed to advance the cause. War was the goal, Lebensraum the objective, but really it was all about avenging the defeat of 1918. I don't see this with Putin at all. It seems to me he was reticent to go to war, and he has been restrained, he has moved very slowly, indeed it seems to be WWI style trench warfare (with drones and satellites and sophisticated weaponry) rather than fast moving Panzer groups encircling and advancing at tremendous speed. IN WWII the lines in Russia would move hundreds of miles in a month, in Ukraine they have been fighting over a couple of km's for years. I am no fan of Putin, but I am also no fan of Zelensky, he's a bit of a dictator himself, and let's face it he's a puppet, he is entirely dependent on continued support from the West and to ensure that he has to do as he is told.Putin should not have invaded but there is more to all this than we know...that's for sure. It didn't start as a Proxy war, but it has turned into one, and of course it's the young men in both countries and the civilians on the front line who bear the brunt of it all.
    1
  55. 1
  56. 1
  57. 1
  58. 1
  59. 1
  60. 1
  61. 1
  62. 1
  63. 1
  64. 1
  65. 1
  66. 1
  67. 1
  68. 1