Reply to: Did Boris boink her as well?

[vetran]

Well you must be in a category of 1!

The trouble is you wouldn't necessarily know people like me had been in. The ones that out themselves are what we used to term MCs (Military Cabbages). Most of the people I worked with joined out of necessity back in the eighties when most northern industries were in decline. We got some superb technical training and they (the RAF) got their aircraft fixed. Most summers never even wore a uniform, cycled into work in shorts and T-shirt threw some overalls on and found out what needed fixing. Amongst engineers there was no rank until you got to the officers, all civil first name terms.

Nope I also find your posts insightful and informative most times.

[Gibbon]

Really .. you're one of a few on here then

Unfortunately your fellow ex-servicemen on here, and those I meet locally (I live in an ex-military hotspot) live up to my generalisation pretty well. There will always be exceptions and I know you're well thought of on CUK, but you really are the exception in my (anecdotal) experience.

Well you must be in a category of 1!

The trouble is you wouldn't necessarily know people like me had been in. The ones that out themselves are what we used to term MCs (Military Cabbages). Most of the people I worked with joined out of necessity back in the eighties when most northern industries were in decline. We got some superb technical training and they (the RAF) got their aircraft fixed. Most summers never even wore a uniform, cycled into work in shorts and T-shirt threw some overalls on and found out what needed fixing. Amongst engineers there was no rank until you got to the officers, all civil first name terms.

[vetran]

My accusations are of you being jingoistic and xenophobic. Your posts are the proof. I'm not anti UK any more than I am anti or pro any other modern nation.

You live in history. You live in the glory days of colonial Britain. Almost every one of your posts is critisising other countries, and only showing what you consider the positive traits on the UK.

All I'm saying is, all (well most) countries have both positive and negatives. Even North Korea; the average North Korean is no different from you or I, they just happen to have been born under the wrong flag. You, however, seem to put all people in a nation in the same bucket, you fail to see people as individuals, as fellow humans. That, my friend, is quite a sad way to go through life.

I have not posted serious incorrect and unsubstantiated accusations about the Allies in WW2. I have posted links to facts that prove your accusations are incorrect, I have supported any of my accusations with facts.

I am sad to confirm that the UK has been responsible for lots of atrocities, we were big on shooting defenceless tribesmen and protestors etc. however I know the British outlawed murder, rape and looting by soldiers on duty during the Napoleonic wars unlike other armies.

Germans have been at the forefront of Physics and psychology for decades but they also committed atrocities in WW1 & 2. The Russians were well ahead in architecture & Literature but they raped their way to Berlin.

[Whorty]

All your accusations and opinions have been unsupported by facts. I have replied with facts. Your accusations come across as unfounded and anti the UK, do try to prove me wrong rather than just insult me.
<snipped the rest as you're clearly triggered>

My accusations are of you being jingoistic and xenophobic. Your posts are the proof. I'm not anti UK any more than I am anti or pro any other modern nation.

You live in history. You live in the glory days of colonial Britain. Almost every one of your posts is critisising other countries, and only showing what you consider the positive traits on the UK.

All I'm saying is, all (well most) countries have both positive and negatives. Even North Korea; the average North Korean is no different from you or I, they just happen to have been born under the wrong flag. You, however, seem to put all people in a nation in the same bucket, you fail to see people as individuals, as fellow humans. That, my friend, is quite a sad way to go through life.

[vetran]

History is simply not a list of facts but you know that.

That may be your opinion but its not mine.

It is, there are plenty of stories but they need to fit the facts and the motives understood.

[vetran]

All your posts only look at how 'wonderful' Britain was, and everyone else, whichever side they were on, were rubbish. You can't see the good in other countries, and you can never see the negative in Britain. Your views are biased and blinkered.

WW2, like WW1 and other wars, are atrocious. They are not to be proud of. Soldiers from both sides will have been brave, and equally there would be soldiers on both sides 'evil'.

I'm not saying that the one side you portray is all wrong, but yo don't give a balanced view. Please re-read your posts and see why you come across as jingoistic.

All your accusations and opinions have been unsupported by facts. I have replied with facts. Your accusations come across as unfounded and anti the UK, do try to prove me wrong rather than just insult me.

The UK is guilty of many things but frequently the reasons it is guilty are the circumstances of the time. Whilst I may have presented a positive set of facts I am happy to look at any negative facts you eventually, if ever produce.

You accuse Churchill of abandoning our SE Asian colonies but what proof do you put forward? The UK was fighting a war on multiple fronts and the government at the time HAD to choose. Do they fight the Germans, Italians, Hungarians, Romanians, Slavs, Bulgarians, Croatians, Finnish and Thais and have a small possibility of winning or should they fight Japan as well?

Is that something to be ashamed of as you present or is it Pragmatic? As I said the allies (including the UK but mainly the Americans) fought for years against just the Japanese and only won because of nukes. We lost the channel islands and didn't recapture them, should that be considered shameful?

Cannon talks about the Munich betrayal as I said we could have thrown sofa cushions at them we had feck all else.

I don't regret having an Empire at the time everyone was doing it. If we hadn't India likely would have been French, Africa would be Dutch or German and the US Spanish. The commonwealth is a unique organisation where ex colonies choose to work with us because we weren't really terrible Imperial rulers. Do please cite similar organisations for the other fallen Empires. I for one would never want to be part of the Belgian Empire, not sure about the French or German either, try reading a bit about them and work out why.

I do regret slavery but as it has happened from the dawn in time everywhere, our part in stopping it should be an immense source of pride to anyone associated with the UK.

I regret the atrocities of the first & second world war but thankfully very few were committed by the UK and of those most were prosecuted.


Lets bring a few bad things out.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allied...g_World_War_II

Yes the British and American troops committed crimes but they tended to be rape by a single soldier not 20 like the Russians & Germans. We weren't too keen on Massacres either.

[SueEllen]

You mean like the testimony of people who were actually there stored in places like the national archives, Smithsonian published via the Guardian or BBC? Oh sorry I did that, people are still posting Tulip as I have proven why don't you attack them?

There are only facts in History, theories about what happened are a possible map to the facts.

History is simply not a list of facts but you know that.

[vetran]

You need to use primary sources if you are going to argue facts. Even then primary sources may be opinions and not facts.

You mean like the testimony of people who were actually there stored in places like the national archives, Smithsonian published via the Guardian or BBC? Oh sorry I did that, people are still posting Tulip as I have proven why don't you attack them?

There are only facts in History, theories about what happened are a possible map to the facts.

[MasterBait]

Certainly true that the US and Russia played a greater part in defeating Hitler, but at least the UK did a lot more than the Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys.

As Russia didn't exist as a country at the time this is bulltulip
The Soviet union under Stalin first made a pact with Hitler the Molotov von Ribbentrop pact to split up some territory between them and to invade Poland Later it got soldiers from all the Soviet republics especially as few as possible from Russia itself to die for Stalin. Both my grandfathers who were Ukrainian died in a war that was not theirs, one in Stalingrad ,only to defend a city that had Stalin's name and one in (the so called liberation of) Berlin which was the start of the Soviet occupation of East Germany

[Whorty]

<snip>

Feck me I may be a jingoistic xenophobe in your eyes but I haven't left reality like you and Cannon have in my eyes.

All your posts only look at how 'wonderful' Britain was, and everyone else, whichever side they were on, were rubbish. You can't see the good in other countries, and you can never see the negative in Britain. Your views are biased and blinkered.

WW2, like WW1 and other wars, are atrocious. They are not to be proud of. Soldiers from both sides will have been brave, and equally there would be soldiers on both sides 'evil'.

I'm not saying that the one side you portray is all wrong, but yo don't give a balanced view. Please re-read your posts and see why you come across as jingoistic.

[vetran]

On form today aren't you.

Ever read Stalingrad, or done any studies of totalitarian regimes , specifically Stalin?

Pillaging and looting.. jesus wept. Many individual soldiers from every side did that, you can't just single out Russia and Germany like they were the only ones. Do some research on Normandy for example. We just called it souvenir taking - its documented from EVERY side of the war, US included.

Do explain why almost universally the Germans wanted to surrender to the Allies not the Russians?

My explanation is because many sources suggested the Russians were well known for raping & robbing anyone who surrendered. Combine that with the chance of staying alive as a POW with the Russians was about 1 in 15, admittedly slightly better than being taken by the Japanese you can see the motivation.

Lets try a few jingoist right wing sources...

https://www.theguardian.com/books/20...ews.features11

'They raped every German female from eight to 80'


"Red Army soldiers don't believe in 'individual liaisons' with German women," wrote the playwright Zakhar Agranenko in his diary when serving as an officer of marine infantry in East Prussia. "Nine, ten, twelve men at a time - they rape them on a collective basis."

Pretty sure that wasn't a common trend with the Americans & British.

https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...Dbound%20plane.


Though to be fair it may have partially been prompted by the German treatment of Russian women.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-32529679

By this stage, German soldiers had been guilty of sexual violence and other horrors in the Soviet Union for almost four years, as Gelfand had become aware as he fought his way to Berlin.

"He went through so many villages in which the Nazis had killed everyone, even small children. And he saw evidence of rape," says his son, Vitaly.

Taking an SS dagger or Luger or NAZI flag was hardly the same as packing up everything and shipping it to Russia.

Berlin lay in smouldering ruins. Hitler had been dead for four weeks. The Soviet Union was the undisputed master of eastern Europe. Working in great secrecy, some Red Army soldiers embarked on a delicate mission: to spirit back home unique cultural treasures belonging to the vanquished Germans.

In June 1945, three chests holding 1,538 gold and silver items were loaded on to a Moscow-bound plane. For more than half a century German experts had little clue as to whether the gold necklaces and eagle brooches dating from the 5th to 8th centuries still existed or had been lost in the second world war.

Admittedly we did gather up art but then we returned it to its proper owners. Something the Russians haven't done.

https://www.smithsonianmag.com/histo...men-180949569/

This must be the different histories bit. You think the Red Army & were nice chaps you would invite for dinner ,no worse than those disgusting GIs/Brits and yet the German Civilians knew they were bloodthirsty gang rapists.

Maybe you lot should read a LOT more?

Yes individuals in the Allied forces may have committed atrocities but it wasn't a standard tactic of war but treated as a criminal act.

[SueEllen]

No there may be many opinions on history. But all opinions should be based on facts if you are documenting history. There is only one history.

Your experience of a war may be different to mine. The facts are the same you just experience different facets.

You need to use primary sources if you are going to argue facts. Even then primary sources may be opinions and not facts.

[Scoobos]

Russia with its greater population and military force did indeed repel and then drive the Germans from Russia then harried them through Europe pillaging & looting as they went.

On form today aren't you.

Ever read Stalingrad, or done any studies of totalitarian regimes , specifically Stalin?

Pillaging and looting.. jesus wept. Many individual soldiers from every side did that, you can't just single out Russia and Germany like they were the only ones. Do some research on Normandy for example. We just called it souvenir taking - its documented from EVERY side of the war, US included.

[vetran]

You keep rabbiting on but you seem to not get the point that there is more than one version of history.

No there may be many opinions on history. But all opinions should be based on facts if you are documenting history. There is only one history.

Your experience of a war may be different to mine. The facts are the same you just experience different facets.

[SueEllen]

Ok let me see, so the UK played little part in the second world war and had to be rescued in 1941 (no real fighting happened before then) by the USA and those nice Russians who we should have got into bed with in 1938 armed with sofa cushions.

Despite shipping being sunk on a daily basis while we fought the AXIS countries in their own and invaded countries, casualties that decimated our Armies and having to pick battle grounds we could actually win we apparently thoughtlessly abandoned people. Next on the agenda is our failure to eliminate the historic recurring famines in India at the height of the war.

You believe we could have protected any Asian colonies against the Japanese who had massive Imperial forces that the American forces couldn't defeat after many years of fighting ,with lots of shiny new equipment, without nuking them twice?

How about that nice Uncle Joe, how often did he abandon people to be obliterated by Adolf? People starved from scorched Earth and Russians perished in their millions while the Germans waltzed through Russia. Russian colonies and satellite states fell like dominos did he abandon them?

I suppose us losing the channel Islands doesn't illustrate how close things were?

Feck me I may be a jingoistic xenophobe in your eyes but I haven't left reality like you and Cannon have in my eyes.

You keep rabbiting on but you seem to not get the point that there is more than one version of history.