VidaRed
Unimaginative FC
- Joined
- Aug 23, 2007
- Messages
- 29,603
Seconded.So they should accept being called out as endorsers of war criminals
Seconded.So they should accept being called out as endorsers of war criminals
everyone knows the glazers are scumbags. it was known before they bought the club. the point is really simple. concentrated wealth, when we're speaking about hundreds of millions or billions, almost always implies terrible things. but there are degrees of terrible. ideally, the club would be supporter owned. anything less than that represents something crap. but as i said, there is a scale of crap. the glazers are indirectly tied to terrible things through political spending. the uae and its royal family are directly tied to a genocidal war in yemen, which the americans and some european states do also participate in, something which is a disgrace, but in relative terms you'd be hard pressed to argue that the glazers are worse than anyone whose wealth is tied up so intimately in warfare.
So they should accept being called out as endorsers of war criminals
Agree to disagree.But they're not. They're buying influence with both political parties to help their business interests, not to promote foreign political policies. Therefore there is no legitimate comparison to be made, nor would the use of the term sportwashing apply to them as it would state actors like Putin, MBS, the Qataris, and Emiratis.
Are you suggesting that positive changes have occurred in Abu Dhabi since the purchase of Man City?I wish people would open their eyes a bit about the west incl. the US. We can blame and slate Dubai and Saudi Arabia as much as we want but we need to look at ourselves too.
Also, look what they’re doing at City, you need to give these countries a chance to change.
Are you suggesting that positive changes have occurred in Abu Dhabi since the purchase of Man City?
So they should accept being called out as endorsers of war criminals
The bolded part was abundantly clear 3 posts back.
All you've done in each of your 5 posts responding to me was restate your existing view, calling mine silly, without providing a single argument.
I don't know why you're so offended by someone challenging your pre conceived notions that you have to resort to petty insults.
It's obvious you don't have an actual argument, when you think giving an argument equates to writing a 10,000 word essay. Bye bye.
Nicely summer tbh. We know there are levels to some of this but in the end, we just want the club to be run by competent peopleDoes anyone here have a candidate in mind who has a sainthood to go alongside around 5bn in loose change? Because otherwise this whole virtue signalling is pointless, glazers are scumbags who happily donate to war criminals, middle easterners are scumbags who are human rights abusers and even the sub's current champion by the looks of it is a scumbag who will happily advocate to beggar his countrymen so that he can get out regulations and pollute your waters killing your environment and harming your citizens to make money for himself. There is no clean billionaire who can buy us out there.
I too would prefer a less controversial owner but no one can say City haven`t benefitted from their owners and similar success will eventually happen at Newcastle and i don`t see many complaints from either fanbase. Our government unfortunately are the biggest suppliers of arms to Saudi and continue to have strong relationship with them, most global companies are based in both these countries too. We have also recently seen big sporting events and pop artists in Saudi showcasing and yes there does appear huge changes in those those countries, changes do take time as we know from our own history. Let's not forget how many expats are living in Dubai and Saudi, working and benefiting from their opportunity out there, i know guys who left the UK in the 90`s and are still living there. There is cultural differences and many countries have different view on Gay relationships, that is in their culture. In Saudi and Dubai there are gays but they understand that LGBT is not to be promoted and their personal lifestyle has to be kept private. I believe sports can over time help remove barriers and bring communities together so i won`t stop supporting Utd if the ownership changes to a middle eastern owner. Our government and the FA didn`t stop the Newcastle takeover/ownership and the world cup is been played in Qatar and no one is boycotting it. My preference is Ratcliffe but if it`s Dubai then eventually i will accept it as long they run it properly, i am separating sports and politics. I respect they will be people with different view to myself.Don't want those oil Merchants
Personally I prefer an English based ownership and I'm not even from England
Does anyone here have a candidate in mind who has a sainthood to go alongside around 5bn in loose change? Because otherwise this whole virtue signalling is pointless, glazers are scumbags who happily donate to war criminals, middle easterners are scumbags who are human rights abusers and even the sub's current champion by the looks of it is a scumbag who will happily advocate to beggar his countrymen so that he can get out regulations and pollute your waters killing your environment and harming your citizens to make money for himself. There is no clean billionaire who can buy us out there.
Don't want those oil Merchants
Personally I prefer an English based ownership and I'm not even from England
Imagine taking your gay kid to watch his favorite team and the new owners are killing or sentencing gay people to life imprisonment in their home country.
" Nah nah kiddo, its ok, they use money on players "
Agreed. 5/10 on the BadBillionaire scale.Yes. But dubai isn't on par with kim jong, i'll put them somewhere in the middle between the figures you've cited.
Imagine taking your gay kid to watch his favorite team and the new owners are killing or sentencing gay people to life imprisonment in their home country.
" Nah nah kiddo, its ok, they use money on players "
Its nearly double what the club is worth.feck off. No sheikh or state owners. And this isn't true. No way are the Glazers selling the club for anything below 4 billion. Absolutely no way.
Imagine taking your muslim kid to watch his favorite team and the current owners are donating monies to israel leading to muslims being killing or sentenced to life imprisonment in palestine for demanding basic human rights.
" Nah nah kiddo, its ok, they're the lesser evil "
There is no difference between them. Aiding and financing Bush and Benjamin Netanyahu put blood on their fecking hands as well.
No way. Only marginally ahead of Saudis. Terrible record on human rights, womens rights, gay rights etc etc. We would be no better than City. Don’t want our club to be a sportswashing “project”.
Why ?No thanks. I'd rather keep the Glazers.
Because Dubai is an autocratic state in which things like being gay is illegal. It is abhorrent.Why ?
More head chopping scumbags is not what is needed.
No thanks.
That's precisely why it's not just about there being "billionaires" around.Consider the Glazers wealth which is each at about $1B (they are barely billionaires). Therefore it wouldn't take that much to buy United if a person was worth 20-30b. It would get exponentially easier as we get into the 50-100m range.
Are Western states attempting to buy Man Utd?Sportswashing ? You're just regurgitating mainstream talking points.
We have propagandizing into thinking the West doesn't do anything wrong. How about the illegal invasion of Iraq & killing of millions of civilians. Or the illegal detention of Julian Assange.
To be honest I would much prefer a Dubai takeover because they don't have a profit motive. Someone like Sir Jim will be counting every dollar.
Why ?
And when did the ruler of dubai order the invasion of another country or killed thousands of people ?Because the Glazers for their faults are not intentionally complicit and/or directly responsible in the death and oppression of thousands of people.
Absolute NO NO to this purchase option. Would stop following United if it came to supporting the sportswashing for such a regime.
Because the Glazers for their faults are not intentionally complicit and/or directly responsible in the death and oppression of thousands of people.
I'm genuinely curious to see how many people would follow through with these sorts of statements. My guess? None.
This would definitely be a case of "out of the frying pan and in to the fire".
The Glazers are awful and of course it is rational for all United fans to want them gone, but to see United reduced to nothing more than a public relations tool for a despicable, human rights abusing nation state, would just be sad. I don't want it and United doesn't need it - the club can stand on its own two feet.
Thankfully, there appears to be very little substance to this "story".
And when did the ruler of dubai order the invasion of another country or killed thousands of people ?
Dubai was literally built only decades ago by slavery/bonded labour. No one is asking for George Bush and Tony Blair to buy United ffs.Hahaha so are we lumping ever middle eastern country into one bucket. Dubai is actually one of the most advanced countries in the world.
You don't think the Glazer's and Jim Ratcliffe profited of the illegal wars in the Iraq and Afghanistan? Those wars killed 1000x more people than anything the Dubai group could even capable of.
yes, where it is illegal to be homosexual. Super advanced.Hahaha so are we lumping ever middle eastern country into one bucket. Dubai is actually one of the most advanced countries in the world.
Also would be fun to watch Mr. Gary "Human Rights" Neville's take on this!