Royal Wedding - now watching

Status
Not open for further replies.
Originally Posted By: user52165

Some good points, but if you think the Brits would have won WWI and WWII, and the Cold War without overwhelming US support, you are sorely mistaken.

True but consider that since they burned Washington in 1814, no two countries have ever been closer. And 200 years is a lot. Many American lives in WWII were saved bc of the Brits and and vice-versa. True...we were the difference maker in WWII, but the Brits certainly gave up more..in proportion.
They burned Washington a long time ago..where are they now that it really needs that same treatment (figuratively speaking)
 
This wedding is more of a reality show than a Royal Wedding. It really reflects on the Country of Britian. If you held a gun to my head to watch it, you may as well put down the plastic.
 
And if you think this is all just sentimental claptrap, try to imagine the USA facing, for the first time in its short history, a genuinely scary threat from an enemy that is bigger, younger and way better armed than you. Who are you going to coalesce around? Your recent heads of state, George W, Obama & Trumpski are hugely divisive figures. In such circumstances, having a neutral monarch whose very purpose is to exemplify what we all share in common ain't such a bad idea!

Now think on...

Umm, isn't this how Anericans became America by defeating a Country with a much larger, better equipped, better trained military, vastly outnumbered and yet we did beat the snot out of them with a bunch of rag tag farmers and hunters??
You think about that.
 
Originally Posted By: Panzerman


Umm, isn't this how Anericans became America by defeating a Country with a much larger, better equipped, better trained military, vastly outnumbered and yet we did beat the snot out of them with a bunch of rag tag farmers and hunters??
You think about that.

But again..to be honest. We had a many advantages. Gorilla warfare on our own turf. Really we set the bar on that. Look at Afghans defeating the Russians and the North Vietnamese defeating us.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
I really do get it that so many of you (especially you Yanks) don't get royalty & The Crown and all it means, so I'll try and explain...

Britain is an old country. We have seen & endured a lot. We have throughout our history been involved in conflict and faced at times, ridiculously overwhelming odds. We saw off the Spanish Armada when the Spanish Empire was at its peak. We fended off Napoleon when he had the whole of Europe subjugated. We beat The Kaiser when logic said we should have lost and repeated the trick twenty years later with Hitler. We never got down in the dirt to settle things but had it come to blows, I reckon ALONE, we could have could even have put up a decent show against Ivan! (at MASSIVE cost to ourselves obvs).

How do we do this? Well it's partly that we put a lot of effort into cultivating powerful friends (like Portugal, the Dutch, the Prussians, France, the US and the Sovs). We also stubbornly (sometimes insanely) refuse to be beat and part of this happens because we can collectively, as a nation, coalesce around one thing...The Crown...because in embodies what we all are & have in common.

And if you think this is all just sentimental claptrap, try to imagine the USA facing, for the first time in its short history, a genuinely scary threat from an enemy that is bigger, younger and way better armed than you. Who are you going to coalesce around? Your recent heads of state, George W, Obama & Trumpski are hugely divisive figures. In such circumstances, having a neutral monarch whose very purpose is to exemplify what we all share in common ain't such a bad idea!

Now think on...


The USA coalesced very well during WWII without a monarch. We don't need any particular President to coalesce around, it is the country itself. FDR died, and Truman finished WWII. Presidents come and go and hand wars to the next one. There is no less loyalty one to the next. We are not loyal to a monarch but a principle.
 
Well, the big event has come and us good ole boys can get back to pressing problems with cutting open filters and high tech stuff,,,imho...
 
Originally Posted By: Panzerman

Umm, isn't this how Anericans became America by defeating a Country with a much larger, better equipped, better trained military, vastly outnumbered and yet we did beat the snot out of them with a bunch of rag tag farmers and hunters??
You think about that.


And in New Zealand it was just a handful of stoneage natives....
 
Originally Posted By: Al
True...we were the difference maker in WWII, but the Brits certainly gave up more..in proportion.


More, but nothing compared to the Sovs.

I'm not sure how you could define, assign or justify the title of "difference maker". but the heavy lifting in the defeat of Nazi Germany was done by the Soviet Union.

And they'd just shot thiers.
 
Originally Posted By: Ducked
Originally Posted By: Al
True...we were the difference maker in WWII, but the Brits certainly gave up more..in proportion.


More, but nothing compared to the Sovs.

I'm not sure how you could define, assign or justify the title of "difference maker". but the heavy lifting in the defeat of Nazi Germany was done by the Soviet Union.

And they'd just shot thiers.

You are forgetting about Japan. Not only did we did most of the heavy lifting there(yes-Australia did their share). But we supplied half of the Russians material. Without us most of the world would be speaking Japanese and German. No one with any knowledge doubts that.
 
*DELETED*
12.gif
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: hatt
I can't think of many less interesting things to do that watch a "royal" wedding.

Watching NASCAR comes to mind.
 
Originally Posted By: Al
Originally Posted By: Panzerman


Umm, isn't this how Anericans became America by defeating a Country with a much larger, better equipped, better trained military, vastly outnumbered and yet we did beat the snot out of them with a bunch of rag tag farmers and hunters??
You think about that.

But again..to be honest. We had a many advantages. Gorilla warfare on our own turf. Really we set the bar on that. Look at Afghans defeating the Russians and the North Vietnamese defeating us.


Guerrilla warfare.

It's not large apes. It's Spanish derived.

America defeated the Brits because we had home field advantage and geographically isolated. The war was on our turf. It's hard to conquer folks on their home turf unless you're prepared to accept heavy casualties. (other than the French. And don't get me started about the Syrians and how 10,000 Isis rebels in their Toyota pick up trucks took over the country)
 
Originally Posted By: Dallas69
Originally Posted By: hatt
I can't think of many less interesting things to do that watch a "royal" wedding.

Watching NASCAR comes to mind.


Exactly. Different strokes for different folks.

People love royal families. In the US, people love the Kennedys, Vanderbilts, and Rockefellers.
 
"The royal couple is finally heading to their honeymoon for two weeks of living in pampered luxury, followed by a lifetime of . . . the same."

Craig Ferguson
 
Originally Posted By: Panzerman

And if you think this is all just sentimental claptrap, try to imagine the USA facing, for the first time in its short history, a genuinely scary threat from an enemy that is bigger, younger and way better armed than you. Who are you going to coalesce around? Your recent heads of state, George W, Obama & Trumpski are hugely divisive figures. In such circumstances, having a neutral monarch whose very purpose is to exemplify what we all share in common ain't such a bad idea!

Now think on...

Umm, isn't this how Anericans became America by defeating a Country with a much larger, better equipped, better trained military, vastly outnumbered and yet we did beat the snot out of them with a bunch of rag tag farmers and hunters??
You think about that.



I love the way you rewrite history to big yourselves up.

The corrected version should read...a bunch of rag tag farmers and hunters, organised by a cadre of professional revolutionaries, funded by The Spanish Empire, The Dutch Republic and most importantly, The French who also critically 'lent' you their brand new Caribbean war fleet to win The Battle of the Chesapeake and precipitate Cornwallis's surrender.

If the French knew back then that their contribution was fated to be airbrushed out of history & that their one time grateful allies would refer to them as 'Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys', one wonders whether they should have even bothered!
 
Originally Posted By: Al
Originally Posted By: Ducked
Originally Posted By: Al
True...we were the difference maker in WWII, but the Brits certainly gave up more..in proportion.


More, but nothing compared to the Sovs.

I'm not sure how you could define, assign or justify the title of "difference maker". but the heavy lifting in the defeat of Nazi Germany was done by the Soviet Union.

And they'd just shot thiers.

You are forgetting about Japan. Not only did we did most of the heavy lifting there(yes-Australia did their share). But we supplied half of the Russians material. Without us most of the world would be speaking Japanese and German. No one with any knowledge doubts that.


The original post was about greatest relative sacrifice.

Not a contest you would want to win, which is good, because you wouldn't.

No one with any relevent knowledge would doubt that.
 
Originally Posted By: SonofJoe
Originally Posted By: Panzerman

And if you think this is all just sentimental claptrap, try to imagine the USA facing, for the first time in its short history, a genuinely scary threat from an enemy that is bigger, younger and way better armed than you. Who are you going to coalesce around? Your recent heads of state, George W, Obama & Trumpski are hugely divisive figures. In such circumstances, having a neutral monarch whose very purpose is to exemplify what we all share in common ain't such a bad idea!

Now think on...

Umm, isn't this how Anericans became America by defeating a Country with a much larger, better equipped, better trained military, vastly outnumbered and yet we did beat the snot out of them with a bunch of rag tag farmers and hunters??
You think about that.



I love the way you rewrite history to big yourselves up.

The corrected version should read...a bunch of rag tag farmers and hunters, organised by a cadre of professional revolutionaries, funded by The Spanish Empire, The Dutch Republic and most importantly, The French who also critically 'lent' you their brand new Caribbean war fleet to win The Battle of the Chesapeake and precipitate Cornwallis's surrender.

If the French knew back then that their contribution was fated to be airbrushed out of history & that their one time grateful allies would refer to them as 'Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys', one wonders whether they should have even bothered!
"All that hate's going to burn you up."
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

D
"Thank You" no longer a thing?
2 3 4
Replies
64
Views
3K
silversport
shortyb
Lost 135lbs.
2
Replies
23
Views
815
4WD
Bailes1992
Not Wanting To Be Involved In Siblings Wedding
5 6 7
Replies
135
Views
10K
wpod
N
Royal Purple...how does it compare?
2 3
Replies
41
Views
2K
factorytuned2012
shortyb
Weekend in Gatlinburg TN.
2
Replies
33
Views
936
SammyChevelleTypeS3
Back
Top Bottom