Jump to content

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 309
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

RIP. He served his country and the extended Commonwealth until his dying day. Never complained about it and just got on with it. As a British citizen I will mourn his passing with respect. Clearl

He was a veteran and a sailor, counts for a lot in my book. Fair winds, Prince Phillip. Unless the person was truly, heinously, evil and malevolent, speaking ill of the dead is poor form. I don't

Philip Mountbatten, rest his soul. There was a story years ago, sailing at Cowes and Prince Philip on port tack. Starboard tacker hails. Prince does not alter course, sails on. Starboard tacker duck

Posted Images

3 minutes ago, NeedAClew said:

Sorry @Sea warrior I am sure the former guy cares about you. His handling of 2020 shows his devotion to at least one person.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and assume that that word salad has something to do with Trump, for whom I’ve zero respect but who’s obviously living rent free inside your peabrain sized mind.

 

lol

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Ed Lada said:

Actually, while my reaction may be stronger than many, I don't think it's entirely unreasonable.  

I don't speak well of Hitler or Stalin either.  Does that make me a bad person?

Do you speak badly of all Russian and German leadership of today for the sins of those two, or is it just the Brits that get to wear the stain of those that went before them. Mao was also a bit of an asshole so all Chinese leaders, how about Greece and Italy? Seems you have a real bug up your ass over the Brits, more so than the others.

In the end it is your opinion, much like mine sees the Duke as a man that accepted a sense of duty to his wife and adopted country. One he has fulfilled fairly well over a number of decades. My feelings on the royal family and its continuation have no bearing on this.

Although I must say, if the choice is a fucked up republic like America, or the other fucked up third world republics, then a distant figurehead with little power is fine with me.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Has anyone here managed to ship anything to Britain since Brexit took hold the beginning of the year?

I have to get some desalination stuff to a customer there, and my shipping interface won't let me ship until I go through "Her Royal Majesty's" something or another, I have to collect the Value Added Tax from my customer for the Queen for some reason that has to do with Brexit and then send it to her royal majesty's tax collector.

I have no idea why they can't do this themselves, but I read a few different instructions and they're inconsistent. I don't want to fuck it up.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

The company I work for which is American owned, ships equipment and parts between its own manufacturing plants throughout  the world, including the USA, EU and the far East. It also imports parts from round the world.  It sells the stuff round the world which also comes back for calibration.

Other than a temporary stop for a couple of weeks either side of the brexit day, so that it didn't get caught the in the wrong place without the right paper work during the journey there hasn't been a problem.

This change to importing to the UK was discussed in the EU long before brexit was implemented, expect the EU to bring in something similar when they get their act together. 

This new system, is meant to replace the way we get ripped off by DHL and other couriers when importing small items. You as a seller will implement a system that is as cheap and quick as possible. Importing couriers seem to create systems as slow and expensive as possible to make bigger profits.

It appears some small sellers have switched to using Amazon and EBay, as they seem to do the tax collection rather than the actual seller themselves. But I'm not 100% sure on that one.

I've often seen the problems reported in other forums caused by US Mail and couriers about collection of  importation taxes to the USA, your equivalent of VAT and the couriers high charges.

It's "Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs" aka HMRC, this dates back to 1203 under a variety of names, however it's main management system dates from between 1643 and 1707 when direct control by Royalty was replaced by a government management board.

"Customs " comes from the original words of "customary payments"

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites


This whole channel is worth watching if you all really want to peek into the realities of that dastardly empire.

 

One simply cannot protest US racism or Australian racism or racism by whomever and still be a monarchist.

  Monarchs and their institutions by design are racist and classist.

 

Choose!! 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sea warrior said:


This whole channel is worth watching if you all really want to peek into the realities of that dastardly empire.

 

One simply cannot protest US racism or Australian racism or racism by whomever and still be a monarchist.

  Monarchs and their institutions by design are racist and classist.

 

Choose!! 

 

 

 

Pity the Brits didn't leave all the empire shit to Belgium, Spain or France. The world would be a much better place.

:lol:

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
42 minutes ago, Gissie said:

Pity the Brits didn't leave all the empire shit to Belgium, Spain or France. The world would be a much better place.

:lol:

Yeah.  How about it's a pity that the white Europeans felt the need to rape and pillage the world in the name of profits.  And the British empire did it better than anyone else, enslaving millions.  Because they could.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Sea warrior said:


This whole channel is worth watching if you all really want to peek into the realities of that dastardly empire.

 

One simply cannot protest US racism or Australian racism or racism by whomever and still be a monarchist.

  Monarchs and their institutions by design are racist and classist.

 

Choose!! 

 

 

 

You'd be Irish. 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Gissie said:

Pity the Brits didn't leave all the empire shit to Belgium, Spain or France. The world would be a much better place.

:lol:

It should of been Spain's job. Then at least semi-Great Britainers wouldn't have had to endure another 5 centuries of culinary torture......:lol:

  • Like 4
Link to post
Share on other sites

Shitty behavior predates the existence of Europe as a political thing.  Humans have caused most of the worlds problems and pains.  To claim otherwise just denies full agency to others, i.e. to imagine they are incapable of the full shitty range of human emotions and behaviors. The Europeans since roughly 1400 just had the advantage of industrialization to do more of it more quickly.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I am surprised that Phillip is being blamed for the British Empire.

During QE2 and Phillips time the Empire was dismantled in a reasonably systematic fashion. Most of the remaining colonies achieved independence .

The Royal family during QE2 time had next to nothing to do with foreign policy which is decided by the elected representative government.......which can be praised or criticized depending on your views.  

This generation of Royals had very little impact on the direction of foreign policy.

Measuring the world during the reign of QE2.

1. There have been no major European wars. Thank God!  Hopefully never again.

2. Former British colonies (outside of Africa) have generally prospered and continued to use a rule of law based on the British legal system.

3. Hong Kong has less freedom under Chinese rule than it did under the last days of British rule but had a couple of decades of immense prosperity.

4. Many of the nations of Africa have struggled to find peace and prosperity.  

Prince Phillip neither gets credit or blame .   

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Gissie said:

Pity the Brits didn't leave all the empire shit to Belgium, Spain or France. The world would be a much better place.

:lol:

Exactly.

Despite the state of Ed's lawn, the British empire was a far better place than any of it's competitors.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

I am surprised that Phillip is being blamed for the British Empire.

During QE2 and Phillips time the Empire was dismantled in a reasonably systematic fashion. Most of the remaining colonies achieved independence .

The Royal family during QE2 time had next to nothing to do with foreign policy which is decided by the elected representative government.......which can be praised or criticized depending on your views.  

This generation of Royals had very little impact on the direction of foreign policy.

Measuring the world during the reign of QE2.

1. There have been no major European wars. Thank God!  Hopefully never again.

2. Former British colonies (outside of Africa) have generally prospered and continued to use a rule of law based on the British legal system.

3. Hong Kong has less freedom under Chinese rule than it did under the last days of British rule but had a couple of decades of immense prosperity.

4. Many of the nations of Africa have struggled to find peace and prosperity.  

Prince Phillip neither gets credit or blame .   

That monarchy is a symbol of a diabolical past, just like the swastika or the confederate flag or any other of those degenerate symbols of oppression, hatred and segregation.

It should be abolished, it’s assets liquidated and the monies returned as best as possible to the rightful owners and we should view those who kowtow to that monarchy in the same way we view skinheads who fly the swastika and confederate flag.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Shortforbob said:

You'd be Irish. 

 

Well done Shortforbrains, I Tell ya, I’d have to get up pretty damned late in the afternoon to pull one over on you.

 

 

lol

Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Exactly.

Despite the state of Ed's lawn, the British empire was a far better place than any of it's competitors.

Did you miss the part where that British empire murdered millions and millions of innocent men, women and children?
 

When I read shíte like this I’m reminded how apathetic and downright dangerous the average voter is.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Sea warrior said:

Did you miss the part where that British empire murdered millions and millions of innocent men, women and children?
 

When I read shíte like this I’m reminded how apathetic and downright dangerous the average voter is.

Among your many failings, apparently reading is near the top, right next to subtlety of thought.

Where did I say or even imply that it was a good thing?

I said it was better than its competitors.

As someone noted upthread, there are many of the most advanced nations that grew out of that empire.

Did any colonies of other empires ever gain their independence by asking nicely?

I hope you read your ballots more closely than you do posts here.

Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sea warrior said:


This whole channel is worth watching if you all really want to peek into the realities of that dastardly empire.

 

One simply cannot protest US racism or Australian racism or racism by whomever and still be a monarchist.

  Monarchs and their institutions by design are racist and classist.

 

Choose!! 

 

 

 

Still, Britain is not the "classest" nation in the world.  At this point I would place Japan number one. Japan also has a history of imperialism, so what is you issue?

Link to post
Share on other sites
55 minutes ago, Laker said:

Still, Britain is not the "classest" nation in the world.  At this point I would place Japan number one. Japan also has a history of imperialism, so what is you issue?

The UK or more specifically England is a very “classest” place.

 

Now, this thread is about the death of an old codger who was part of the British royal family and that is why I’m speaking out about the British. It’s a simple concept, get it ?

 

The next time a member of the Imperial House Of Japan kicks the bucket start a thread about them and I’ll be glad to assist in highlighting the atrocious actions of that family.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Among your many failings, apparently reading is near the top, right next to subtlety of thought.

Where did I say or even imply that it was a good thing?

I said it was better than its competitors.

As someone noted upthread, there are many of the most advanced nations that grew out of that empire.

Did any colonies of other empires ever gain their independence by asking nicely?

I hope you read your ballots more closely than you do posts here.

lol

ok boomer 


And for the record, by “boomer” I mean daft idiot.

 

 

 

lol

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, EYESAILOR said:

I am surprised that Phillip is being blamed for the British Empire.

I didn't blame Phil for the Empire.  I blamed Phil for being part and parcel for being a symbol of the remnants of the toxic system far beyond a time where it is decent to do so.  See Sea Warriors comments about the remnants of the monarchy are a symbol of a terrible time and to many people in the world, the same as seeing a confederate flag.  It's bad enough to see some ignorant redneck with a big ole stars and bars flag in the back window of his pick up truck.  It's unconscionable to see Liz and Phil all decked out in royal regalia and seeing world leaders bowing and treating them with reverence.  They are living reminders of a past that shouldn't be forgotten, but certainly shouldn't be revered.  How hard is that to understand?  

During QE2 and Phillips time the Empire was dismantled in a reasonably systematic fashion. Most of the remaining colonies achieved independence .

The empire was dismantled because 2 world wars had virtually bankrupted England.  It was already done for before WW I.  If you thing the fight for independence in India which ended in 1947, was reasonably systematic, then maybe you should read a little about it.  How fucking arrogant can a little island nation struggling for relevance in a modern world be, to tell the inhabitants of a country that they aren't allowed to be free.  Holy shit.  How many Indians were killed in the fight to throw the fucking Brits out?  If Great Britain wasn't on the brink of becoming bankrupt or communist after WW II, I doubt that they would have left India, they would have just suppressing and killing them to maintain control.

You comment that most of the remaining colonies achieved independence is laughable.  What a nice way to say it, ignoring the price that was paid for that independence in many cases.

The Royal family during QE2 time had next to nothing to do with foreign policy which is decided by the elected representative government.......which can be praised or criticized depending on your views.  

If the royal family in Liz's time had next to nothing to do with foreign policy, then what the fuck do they need them for. Sure, the government was elected by the people, but please don't tell me that the queen didn't have any influence on the government.  

This generation of Royals had very little impact on the direction of foreign policy.

Measuring the world during the reign of QE2.

1. There have been no major European wars. Thank God!  Hopefully never again.

The fact that there have been no major European wars during Liz's reign has nothing to do with her.  She has no influence on British foreign policy, remember?  I am pretty certain she does have little influence on other European countries foreign policy.  What a stupid statement.

2. Former British colonies (outside of Africa) have generally prospered and continued to use a rule of law based on the British legal system.

To imply that the years of exploitation and suppression of the native people of the colonies was a good thing for those people is another statement beyond ludicrous.  How fucking arrogant are you that you don't think these people would have prospered under their own rule.  You sound like a die hard southerner trying to justify slavery.  "Well, we gave those ignorant savages hones work and fed and clothed them, what are they complaining about."    

3. Hong Kong has less freedom under Chinese rule than it did under the last days of British rule but had a couple of decades of immense prosperity.

Big fucking deal.  It's a shitty little island that managed to become rich because of it's unique position and protection.  And how nicely you parsed your words, "has less freedom under Chinese rule than it did under the last days of British rule  but had a couple of decades of immense prosperity."  How about all that freedom they had in the prior centuries of British domination?  And then they had a couple of decades of immense prosperity, as though that makes everything right, because you know money buys happiness.  

4. Many of the nations of Africa have struggled to find peace and prosperity.  

Are you fucking serious????  After hundreds of years of virtual slave labor and suppression, how on earth were those colonies able to develop any kind of their own system?  And the vast wealth of many of those countries, gold, diamonds and other things of value were stolen and they will never be compensated for the loss.  Christ, your arrogance and ignorance are astounding.

Prince Phillip neither gets credit or blame . 

If Phil was the saint that people are trying to make him to be here, if he had a shred of decency, a hint of morality, then he would have either not married Liz, divorced her, or at a bare minimum, refuse to participate in the fantasy, empty charade that the British still perpetrate with the royal family. They are stinking rich, totally rotten, completely sociopathic in that they only follow the rules that they believe in, and are as useless to the world as tits on a bull.  Say what you will about Harry's behavior, but he had the guts to resign as a 'working royal' whatever the fuck that means.  But he had the guts to leave the system than neither he or his parents are responsible for yet they still insist on representing it and therefore are complicit in the crimes of the empire by refusing to renounce them. Is that so hard to understand?

The mere existence of the royal family is a toxic reminder of a bygone era and has no reason to exist, or if they insist, then they need to quit the ceremonial shit, not participate in meetings with foreign heads of state and go live quietly somewhere with  their vast amount of wealth that they acquired strictly by by virtue of their being born.  They didn't fucking earn on half pence of that money.  And the genesis of the majority that wealth was obtained mostly by immoral and amoral means.  These fuckin people that many revere are blatant hypocrites that are so enveloped in their fantasy life for so long, that I doubt they even think about that. They think they belong there and have every right to bask in the privilege and glory of it all!  What a crock of shit.

 

3 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Exactly.

Despite the state of Ed's lawn, the British empire was a far better place than any of it's competitors.

What does that mean and who are/were the competitors?  Do you mean to say the white man's attempted domination of the world was inevitable, and thank god that the Brits did it and not the Spaniards, or god forbid the Germans?

3 hours ago, Sea warrior said:

That monarchy is a symbol of a diabolical past, just like the swastika or the confederate flag or any other of those degenerate symbols of oppression, hatred and segregation.

It should be abolished, it’s assets liquidated and the monies returned as best as possible to the rightful owners and we should view those who kowtow to that monarchy in the same way we view skinheads who fly the swastika and confederate flag.

Exactly!!!

 

 

2 hours ago, Sea warrior said:

Did you miss the part where that British empire murdered millions and millions of innocent men, women and children?
 

When I read shíte like this I’m reminded how apathetic and downright dangerous the average voter is.

Absolutely!

 

 

2 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Among your many failings, apparently reading is near the top, right next to subtlety of thought.

Where did I say or even imply that it was a good thing?

I said it was better than its competitors.

Bullshit

As someone noted upthread, there are many of the most advanced nations that grew out of that empire.

And little of that had to do with the 'benevolent' rule of the empire!  And there would probably far more advanced nations and far less trouble in the world if those arrogant twats hadn't tried to impose their will on the rest of the world.  For every inch of advancement, they created 100 miles of future trouble by not allowing human beings from different cultures establish their own society with their rules.  

Did any colonies of other empires ever gain their independence by asking nicely?

Could you be a little less clever and cryptic and explain what that means?

I hope you read your ballots more closely than you do posts here.

 

I am appalled at how many members of the royal family apparently paid members here to defend the indefensible.  It's fucking appalling I tell ya.

I was just getting comfortable on my front porch to enjoy the beautiful weather and a gin and tonic and a whole shitload of fuckers are not only running across my lawn, but taking a shit on it too.  I have a couple of large Labs to clean up after already, I don't need any more shit on my fucking lawn.  Now get the fuck off of my lawn and stay off of it.  And take your shit with you.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, Ed Lada said:

I didn't blame Phil for the Empire.  I blamed Phil for being part and parcel for being a symbol of the remnants of the toxic system far beyond a time where it is decent to do so.  

Im sorry you see Phillip as a symbol.   Im sorry that you see the British History as being all bad.

That Island and its remnant of Empire and Commonwealth kept Nazi facism at bay. We should at least give them that. We should thank Phillip and all the "great generation" for that contribution.

I am not a royalist but I did the Duke of Edinburgh Award program 45 years ago and it meant something to be that he supported that kind of Britain. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Mambo Kings said:

Im sorry you see Phillip as a symbol.   Im sorry that you see the British History as being all bad.

That Island and its remnant of Empire and Commonwealth kept Nazi facism at bay. We should at least give them that. We should thank Phillip and all the "great generation" for that contribution.

I am not a royalist but I did the Duke of Edinburgh Award program 45 years ago and it meant something to be that he supported that kind of Britain. 

No they didn’t.

They would have been destroyed but for the Ruskies and the Yanks.

The Yanks in particular sent hardware and financial support etc. to the British long before they (US) officially entered the war and the British themselves did fuck all after Hitler invaded Poland other than “declare war” until their hand was forced.

It was the French who, despite how they were portrayed by historians who first went to the defense of Poland.

Had Hitler not turned east and concentrated his efforts to the west the outcome of the war would have been drastically different.

Hitler let the British off the hook for some reasons, which he took to the grave with him.

 

As for “thanking Philip for the war effort”, that is a Ludacris proposal.

If you want to thank anyone, thank the average grunt, be he English, Irish, Russian, French or Polish or whom ever, who twice within a few short decades was forced to fight to the death because of the ignorance and arrogance of the dastardly ruling classes of Europe and the rest of the world who caused those wars and of which Philip was a part.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Sea warrior said:

Did you miss the part where that British empire murdered millions and millions of innocent men, women and children?
 

When I read shíte like this I’m reminded how apathetic and downright dangerous the average voter is.

 

 

The British had the most dangerous method of Colonialsm.

The Portuguese tried to entice the population with good engineering, the Spanish with the Church, the Germans with their culture, the Belgians with their actuarial methods, the Americans with our commerce, the French with the military.

But the British, they send in their cartographers. They purposefully set up borders and jurisdictional boundaries designed to get the natives to kill each other off, and while the blood flowed, the British extracted the wealth.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sea warrior said:

Did you miss the part where that British empire murdered millions and millions of innocent men, women and children?
 

When I read shíte like this I’m reminded how apathetic and downright dangerous the average voter is.

 

 

The British had the most dangerous method of Colonialsm.

The Portuguese tried to entice the population with good engineering, the Spanish with the Church, the Germans with their culture, the Belgians with their actuarial methods, the Americans with our commerce, the French with the military. We all left a mess, in various degrees.

But the British, they sent in their cartographers. They purposefully set up borders and jurisdictional boundaries designed to get the natives to kill each other off, and while the blood flowed by design, the British extracted the wealth.

The English people somehow managed to create a nation of remarkable culture, science, intelligence and art, and yet for some odd reason, they not only allowed a family of thugs and miscreants to run the place, but they continue to celebrate this family as a cultural touchstone ...

2048169394_ScreenShot2021-04-11at4_07_30PM.png.6fe04f356d0e5d3c16323fdc75abc116.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed Lada said:

I was just getting comfortable on my front porch to enjoy the beautiful weather and a gin and tonic and a whole shitload of fuckers are not only running across my lawn, but taking a shit on it too.  I have a couple of large Labs to clean up after already, I don't need any more shit on my fucking lawn.  Now get the fuck off of my lawn and stay off of it.  And take your shit with you.

 

Off the subject of politics, but I re-discovered something with G&T's.

First off, I'm a believer in not fucking with the Gin and Tonic. I find it to be one of the most perfectly balanced cocktails ever invented. Yes, it can be improved a bit by getting one's hands on pharmaceutical-grade quinine and making one's own tonic with seltzer, simple syrup and quinine, the commercial tonics (even Fever Tree) just don't put anywhere near enough quinine into the tonic water. I've found that BC Aspirin Powder makes a really decent stand-in for the quinine, but it's just still not the same as real quinine, the bitter tastes slightly different, and the "high" from aspirin isn't the same as from quinine.

So most of the time, I just grab regular old blue collar tonic water, Canada Dry, even the store brand, it's really so similar that it barely matters. And the quality of the gin shouldn't be too high. Yes, an expensive gin is necessary for a memorable martini, because the gin is going into the martini bare-balls, it has to carry the show. But in the Gin and Tonic, the gin is really - TRADITIONALLY - a supporting player. The star of the G&T is the quinine, that's why the drink exists. So for a G&T, a half-decent, inexpensive dry gin with a bit of chemical bite seems to bind better with the quinine in my opinion.

But here's the thing, you're going to fucking curse at me when you read this, but I swear, there is something to this. I've tried it and I believe that I might be onto somehting.

Before I even start on the drink, I put a single sprig of fresh mint in the shot glass to measure the gin. Then I pour the gin and let it sit. While I'm getting the glass, the ice, slicing the lime, getting the tonic (and possibly doctoring it with BC aspirin powder or quinine if I can get it, which is nearly impossible these days), the gin seems to extract some of the phenols from the mint.

Then, when I pour the gin into the glass, (of course I leave the depleted mint in the shot glass, since I am not a godless heathen) the drink just seems to come alive a little bit more. One other method, is to take the slice of lime and rub it on a big leaf of mint before throwing it into the ice and then adding the gin and tonic on top of that. I never understand why anyone puts the lime in last, it never tastes as good as when the mechanical action of the carbonation hits it from the bottle.

So there you go Len, just a tiny hint of mint, it seems to open up the botanicals in the gin. I don't know why or how it works, but it seems to work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed Lada said:

 

What does that mean and who are/were the competitors?  Do you mean to say the white man's attempted domination of the world was inevitable, and thank god that the Brits did it and not the Spaniards, or god forbid the Germans?

 

 

 

I am appalled at how many members of the royal family apparently paid members here to defend the indefensible.  It's fucking appalling I tell ya.

I was just getting comfortable on my front porch to enjoy the beautiful weather and a gin and tonic and a whole shitload of fuckers are not only running across my lawn, but taking a shit on it too.  I have a couple of large Labs to clean up after already, I don't need any more shit on my fucking lawn.  Now get the fuck off of my lawn and stay off of it.  And take your shit with you.

 

"A gin and tonic"...Oh Dear Old Chap! something from the Brits you do admire?...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gin_and_tonic#:~:text=British officers in India in,the sweet concoction made sense.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Hmmmm.....I was taught many, MANY years ago by a professional alcoholic (at the tender age of 8).....that the most unhealthy and the worse booze you drink....was Gin. Something about poisonous Juniper berries and shit. Apparently my Evil Step Mom #3 took her own advice and switched to vodka. 'Cuz the bitch is still alive.....55 years after raking my Dad thru the coals in their divorce and basically leaving him destitute and about 2 feet away from being homeless. 

 

So fuk you, Toni......wish you would have stuck to that London liquid diet.....bitch....

received_3390168074348850.jpeg

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Grabbler said:

"A gin and tonic"...Oh Dear Old Chap! something from the Brits you do admire?...

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gin_and_tonic#:~:text=British officers in India in,the sweet concoction made sense.

Why are you equating all things ‘British’ with one particular demented member of the current royal house?

Condemning a specific racist, xenophobic misogynistic, cousin fucker  has nothing to do with the historical cultural contributions of the English people.

What a silly ass you are. 
 

 

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, mikewof said:

The British had the most dangerous method of Colonialsm.

The Portuguese tried to entice the population with good engineering, the Spanish with the Church, the Germans with their culture, the Belgians with their actuarial methods, the Americans with our commerce, the French with the military.

But the British, they send in their cartographers. They purposefully set up borders and jurisdictional boundaries designed to get the natives to kill each other off, and while the blood flowed, the British extracted the wealth.

Well they did give the Pakistanis a better deal than they had. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Mambo Kings said:

Im sorry you see Phillip as a symbol.   Im sorry that you see the British History as being all bad.

That Island and its remnant of Empire and Commonwealth kept Nazi facism at bay. We should at least give them that. We should thank Phillip and all the "great generation" for that contribution.

I am not a royalist but I did the Duke of Edinburgh Award program 45 years ago and it meant something to be that he supported that kind of Britain. 

Yes. Neville Chamberlain did his best to keep Nazi Facism ‘at bay’ 

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Sea warrior said:

That monarchy is a symbol of a diabolical past, just like the swastika or the confederate flag or any other of those degenerate symbols of oppression, hatred and segregation.

It should be abolished, it’s assets liquidated and the monies returned as best as possible to the rightful owners and we should view those who kowtow to that monarchy in the same way we view skinheads who fly the swastika and confederate flag.

 

 

Except it’s the most important ‘industry’ England still has.  They probably stilL bring in more tourist money than they cost. Otherwise they would be gone. 
 

as Philip said when told England was once  running in the red ‘Oh dear I may have to give up polo’ 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Mambo Kings said:

Im sorry you see Phillip as a symbol.   Im sorry that you see the British History as being all bad.

That Island and its remnant of Empire and Commonwealth kept Nazi facism at bay. We should at least give them that. We should thank Phillip and all the "great generation" for that contribution.

I am not a royalist but I did the Duke of Edinburgh Award program 45 years ago and it meant something to be that he supported that kind of Britain. 

And it would mean a whole lot more if he hadn't spent 75 years symbolizing the other kind of Britain.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Cristoforo said:

Except it’s the most important ‘industry’ England still has.  They probably stilL bring in more tourist money than they cost. Otherwise they would be gone. 
 

as Philip said when told England was once  running in the red ‘Oh dear I may have to give up polo’ 

Are you just making the shit up as you go along or are you just this ignorant of the facts?
 

Tourism (The category that revenues from or because of the monarchy would fall under) isn’t in even the top 10 of British industries 

https://primeofficespace.co.uk/latest/top-ten-industries-in-uk/

 

But, even if it was, there is nothing to suggest that tourism to the UK would take a major hit to its bottom line because of the ending of monarchy. 
To suggest that Great Britain has nothing to offer a tourist other than to see and gawk at the monarchy is absurd.

The country is rich in history and monuments and castles and museums and other sites to see besides gawking at a bunch of inbred’s.

 

 


 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Sea warrior said:

Are you just making the shit up as you go along or are you just this ignorant of the facts?
 

Tourism (The category that revenues from or because of the monarchy would fall under) isn’t in even the top 10 of British industries 

https://primeofficespace.co.uk/latest/top-ten-industries-in-uk/

 

But, even if it was, there is nothing to suggest that tourism to the UK would take a major hit to its bottom line because of the ending of monarchy. 
To suggest that Great Britain has nothing to offer a tourist other than to see and gawk at the monarchy is absurd.

The country is rich in history and monuments and castles and museums and other sites to see besides gawking at a bunch of inbred’s.

 

 


 

They're just short in one department however......

FB_IMG_1583450440446.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, El Mariachi said:

They're just short in one department however......

FB_IMG_1583450440446.jpg

Naw, even the food is way more diverse over there these days.

Last time I was home in Ireland I was shocked and pleasantly surprised to find authentic South American empanadas being sold by a street vendor near Nuns Island in Galway.


 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Sea warrior said:

Naw, even the food is way more diverse over there these days.

Last time I was home in Ireland I was shocked and pleasantly surprised to find authentic South American empanadas being sold by a street vendor near Nuns Island in Galway.


 

 

Fuking seriously? We just got done 'training' our local 7 am 'burrito gal' a few months ago on the beauty of learning how to make a proper empanada....and she fuking nailed inside of 2 weeks. So four times a week, for 67 cents a pop....it's a most fuktabulousy Mexican version of a great Argentine empanada. And her homemade salsa? It's like doing two huge lines of triple spicy orange coke. If THAT shit doesn't wake you up? Then you're probably in a g-damn coma......:lol:

FB_IMG_1615309499954.jpg

Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, El Mariachi said:

Fuking seriously? We just got done 'training' our local 7 am 'burrito gal' a few months ago on the beauty of learning how to make a proper empanada....and she fuking nailed inside of 2 weeks. So four times a week, for 67 cents a pop....it's a most fuktabulousy Mexican version of a great Argentine empanada. And her homemade salsa? It's like doing two huge lines of triple spicy orange coke. If THAT shit doesn't wake you up? Then you're probably in a g-damn coma......:lol:

FB_IMG_1615309499954.jpg

Yup,

Two summers ago I was home and I was walking ahead of the missus heading out to Salthill reminiscing about the old misspent days of my youth when next thing I heard the babbling in Spanish. I looked back to see My wife had struck up a conversation with the vendor who was Peruvian if I recall correctly. Coincidentally the lady was vending just a stone’s throw from the famous Spanish Arch.

The empanadas were ok but nothing like what my wife makes. (She’s South American )

 

As a whole though, the culinary delights of the UK and Ireland have improved exponentially in the last 30 or 40 years. The days of bacon and cabbage eight days a week or over, thankfully.

:-)

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Cristoforo said:

Why are you equating all things ‘British’ with one particular demented member of the current royal house?

Condemning a specific racist, xenophobic misogynistic, cousin fucker  has nothing to do with the historical cultural contributions of the English people.

What a silly ass you are. 
 

 

 

 

I agree. British imperialism can hardly be blamed on the house of Windsor. Liz is a German and Phil is a Danish wog.

Randy Andy is a chip off the old block however. A real root rat!

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, El Mariachi said:

They're just short in one department however......

FB_IMG_1583450440446.jpg

The UK's national dish is now a Chicken Balti.

Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

The UK's national dish is now a Chicken Balti.

So that fugly Markle chick got dropped to the number 2 spot?....

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Sea warrior said:

No they didn’t.

They would have been destroyed but for the Ruskies and the Yanks.

The Yanks in particular sent hardware and financial support etc. to the British long before they (US) officially entered the war and the British themselves did fuck all after Hitler invaded Poland other than “declare war” until their hand was forced.

It

It wasn't for free we Paid for it, we finished paying for your assistance in 2004..

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, LB 15 said:

I agree. British imperialism can hardly be blamed on the house of Windsor. Liz is a German and Phil is a Danish wog.

Phil was Greek. He had Danish royal blood as well but that doesn't mean much with the Euro royals - they are all cousins - or closer.

Most of the current Euro royals have Victoria in their background.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Phil was Greek. He had Danish royal blood as well but that doesn't mean much with the Euro royals - they are all cousins - or closer.

Most of the current Euro royals have Victoria in their background.

Word has it that quite a few of them had a bit of Phil in them as well at various times.

Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Sea warrior said:

 

But, even if it was, there is nothing to suggest that tourism to the UK would take a major hit to its bottom line because of the ending of monarchy. 
To suggest that Great Britain has nothing to offer a tourist other than to see and gawk at the monarchy is absurd.

 


 

The number one attraction in London is Buckingham Palace where tourists can see and gawk at the monarchy. The number two attraction is the Tower where tourist can see and gawk how the monarchy stores their jewelry and tortured their subjects. 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Having visited Britain many times for work and tourism with family and friends, just my 2 cents as an American.  Given the costs and hassles of travel it's not just about what is in Britain (or anywhere else) but what is uniquely interesting about the British experience of it as opposed to anywhere else.

  • Speaking English (even with some twists) makes Britain an easy first international destination for Americans.  But English is very common in Iceland, Netherlands, Singapore, Italy, etc.  And even in Germany it's easy to get by with a mix of basic German and basic English.
  • The monarchy (and its related stuff) is behind much of the attraction.  The gang wants to see the palace and the Tower.  We didn't go to see the Pickle and the Shard.  Like Cinderella's castle in the Disney Parks, it's the thing folks think about.
  • Art museums are all over, and the Louvre, US National Gallery, Uffizi, and the Rijksmuseum and VanGogh are fine examples.  I would not personally trek to the UK just to see art.
  • Personally I like Windsor, though seeing American fast food shops outside the gate is a bit of a drag.
  • Post Brexit will see how that impacts business travel versus now going to the EU.
  • Many Americans have some Irish ancestors and thus some interest in the island of Ireland (yes I know it's not England) but recent unrest in NI may give some pause if it spreads.  
  • Castles are interesting, but a vestige of the whole monarchy feudalism thing.
  • As a golfer, a round or 2 in Scotland would be nice, but it would be a bit of a hassle compared to just playing a links course here in the US.
  • I suppose Scotch whisky distilleries are unique to Scotland, and they are nice, but at some point when you've visited a couple that's probably enough.  
  • My BA flights force me to take a bus from the plane to get to the terminal at LHR.  Then a very long walk but at least there is coffee when you exit customs and immigration.  Last thing I need after a long overnight flight.
  • Brighton and Portsmouth are interesting day trips, again in part due to Nelson's ship, which arguably links back to the monarchy warring with some other monarchy.  But similar experiences are available elsewhere.
Link to post
Share on other sites
41 minutes ago, Cristoforo said:

The number one attraction in London is Buckingham Palace where tourists can see and gawk at the monarchy. The number two attraction is the Tower where tourist can see and gawk how the monarchy stores their jewelry and tortured their subjects. 

Gimme a million Euros and I could easily build two tourist attractions there that would put Buckingham & the Towers out of business. A real Mexican Restaraunt like El Tarasco? And a real Hawaiian style joint like The Beach Hut. Both are So Cal icons that have been going strong for decades now. Like why eat a scone and f'ng greasy fake French fries.....when you could be chomping on a 3 lb. Super Deluxe burrito or a Royal Hawaiian..... with a C Plate backer instead?......:lol:

Screenshot_2021-04-12-04-56-22.png

Screenshot_2021-04-12-05-05-42.png

Screenshot_2021-04-12-05-05-17.png

Screenshot_2021-04-12-05-09-27.png

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Among your many failings, apparently reading is near the top, right next to subtlety of thought.

Where did I say or even imply that it was a good thing?

I said it was better than its competitors.

As someone noted upthread, there are many of the most advanced nations that grew out of that empire.

Did any colonies of other empires ever gain their independence by asking nicely?

I hope you read your ballots more closely than you do posts here.

I think you are showing a Brit-bias here. In Canada, and other Commonwealth countries I assume, we were brought up with the belief that the Brits did it better with no clear evidence of this. You can make a good case that the French did it better in many parts of the world. Consider the French bits of the Caribbean compared to the formerly British bits.

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

I think you are showing a Brit-bias here. In Canada, and other Commonwealth countries I assume, we were brought up with the belief that the Brits did it better with no clear evidence of this. You can make a good case that the French did it better in many parts of the world. Consider the French bits of the Caribbean compared to the formerly British bits.

So - you want to compare *current* French colonial possessions with *former* British colonial possessions?

Is that good logic in your mind?

Perhaps you should ask the Algerians or the Vietnamese for their opinions on French colonial policies, After all, just like the British, they packed up quietly and went home when asked, didn't they?

FKT

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Sea warrior said:

No they didn’t.

They would have been destroyed but for the Ruskies and the Yanks.

The Yanks in particular sent hardware and financial support etc. to the British long before they (US) officially entered the war and the British themselves did fuck all after Hitler invaded Poland other than “declare war” until their hand was forced.

It was the French who, despite how they were portrayed by historians who first went to the defense of Poland.

...

If you want to thank anyone, thank the average grunt, be he English, Irish, Russian, French or Polish or whom ever, who twice within a few short decades was forced to fight to the death because of the ignorance and arrogance of the dastardly ruling classes of Europe and the rest of the world who caused those wars and of which Philip was a part.

The Brits did send their army to France in 1939, remember all that Dunkirk stuff after things went pear-shaped. My father was part of a combined British/Canadian force that was sent to France (Brest and then inland) just after Dunkirk to try to rally French forces. When it became apparent there was no rallying to do they also escaped back to England.

I think the situations of WWI and WWII are entirely different except that WWII became pretty much inevitable because of the criminal shortcomings of the Treaty of Versailles and not just in Europe, consider how it might have lead to the Communists taking over in both China and Viet Nam. I agree about your comments about WWI but not WWII. My father arrived in France at the beginning of 1917 at the age of 15 1/2. They didn't check birth certificates when you joined up and they needed the manpower (boy power?).

Highly recommended book about the T of V. All of MacMillan's books are wonderful. Coincidentally, she is great grand-daughter of David Lloyd George.

Paris 1919: Six Months That Changed the World by Margaret MacMillan

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

After all, just like the British, they packed up quietly and went home when asked, didn't they?

Well in defense of the French (I can't believe I just said that), they did pack up quietly and leave with their tails between their legs after General Giap asked nicely for them to leave at Dien Bien Phu.   

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Fah Kiew Tu said:

So - you want to compare *current* French colonial possessions with *former* British colonial possessions?

Is that good logic in your mind?

Perhaps you should ask the Algerians or the Vietnamese for their opinions on French colonial policies, After all, just like the British, they packed up quietly and went home when asked, didn't they?

FKT

I think it is simplistic to say that colonial power A is always good and B is not. In general, colonialism was and is a very bad thing but within that rubric you can see gradations. The British generally left their possessions post-WWII because they had little choice. They were in no position to stay by force or by economics. There were exceptions - Malaya and the Falklands come to mind where they employed force. In general, the Brits left their former colonies ill-prepared for independence. Don't get me started on Hong Kong. Obviously, you cannot defend French actions in Indo-China and Algeria, but in many places the French prepared their possessions better. They also chose to keep a variety of colonies (Martinique, St Martin, Reunion, etc) as parts of France. At times they have sent troops to protect former colonies from external threats, happening in Chad now.

Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

I think it is simplistic to say that colonial power A is always good and B is not. In general, colonialism was and is a very bad thing but within that rubric you can see gradations. The British generally left their possessions post-WWII because they had little choice. They were in no position to stay by force or by economics. There were exceptions - Malaya and the Falklands come to mind where they employed force. In general, the Brits left their former colonies ill-prepared for independence. Don't get me started on Hong Kong. Obviously, you cannot defend French actions in Indo-China and Algeria, but in many places the French prepared their possessions better. They also chose to keep a variety of colonies (Martinique, St Martin, Reunion, etc) as parts of France. At times they have sent troops to protect former colonies from external threats, happening in Chad now.

What you say is pretty much true.  The problem is that the European powers took it upon themselves to rape the world.  They inflicted a tremendous amount of damage that may never be repaired and stole uncountable amounts of money by exploiting the resources of their colonies.  And the thing that is equally appalling is they have never been held accountable for their actions.  The Nazis were put on trial in Nurnberg and 10 of them were executed.  It's too late now, but there should have been similar trials for the European colonial powers, especially Great Britain.  The Brits pulled off the greatest heist in history and have never been held accountable for it.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

The Brits did send their army to France in 1939, remember all that Dunkirk stuff after things went pear-shaped. My father was part of a combined British/Canadian force that was sent to France (Brest and then inland) just after Dunkirk to try to rally French forces. When it became apparent there was no rallying to do they also escaped back to England.

I think the situations of WWI and WWII are entirely different except that WWII became pretty much inevitable because of the criminal shortcomings of the Treaty of Versailles and not just in Europe, consider how it might have lead to the Communists taking over in both China and Viet Nam. I agree about your comments about WWI but not WWII. My father arrived in France at the beginning of 1917 at the age of 15 1/2. They didn't check birth certificates when you joined up and they needed the manpower (boy power?).

Highly recommended book about the T of V. All of MacMillan's books are wonderful. Coincidentally, she is great grand-daughter of David Lloyd George.

Paris 1919: Six Months That Changed the World by Margaret MacMillan

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not trying to diminish in any way the horrific sacrifices made by the average British, French, Canadian or Polish grunt etc. I salute your father and all the fathers who fought in those wars. But that doesn’t give us permission to rewrite history and the simple fact of the matter is that the British were only a cog in the machinery of the allied forces who ultimately defeated the Axis.

 

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Sea warrior said:

But that doesn’t give us permission to rewrite history and the simple fact of the matter is that the British were only a cog in the machinery of the allied forces who ultimately defeated the Axis.

And a pretty small cog at that.  

Except for the king.  he kept a stiff upper lip and stayed in London during the blitz to assure the hoi polloi that everything would be fine.  Probably the strain of that lip stiffening is what killed him a few years after the war.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Enlarge Image

 

The Land Rover that will transport Prince Philip
 
 
The hybrid Land Rover that will carry the coffin will be a Defender 130 Gun Bus, which the Duke helped design.Bav Media / Splash
 
If it holds up to British tradition it will break down three times on the procession, and they will have to wait 3 weeks for the parts to come in to the dealer.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Cristoforo said:

Enlarge Image

 

The Land Rover that will transport Prince Philip
 
 
The hybrid Land Rover that will carry the coffin will be a Defender 130 Gun Bus, which the Duke helped design.Bav Media / Splash
 
If it holds up to British tradition it will break down three times on the procession, and they will have to wait 3 weeks for the parts to come in to the dealer.

Apparently the Royals don't give a fuk about the cost of SL 30 wt motor oil.....

Link to post
Share on other sites
52 minutes ago, Ed Lada said:

What you say is pretty much true.  The problem is that the European powers took it upon themselves to rape the world.  They inflicted a tremendous amount of damage that may never be repaired and stole uncountable amounts of money by exploiting the resources of their colonies.  And the thing that is equally appalling is they have never been held accountable for their actions.  The Nazis were put on trial in Nurnberg and 10 of them were executed.  It's too late now, but there should have been similar trials for the European colonial powers, especially Great Britain.  The Brits pulled off the greatest heist in history and have never been held accountable for it.  

I think you are being euro-centric to the extreme. Throughout history powerful nations have taken advantage of weaker, less-organized neighbours both near and far. You can see it from Asia (Genghis Khan being only the best known example) to Africa (the takeover of what became South Africa by the Zulus), to South America (Inca Empire). China is (re)building its empire today. Remember that 'China' literally means 'Middle Kingdom'. In the past the Chinese divided the world into three categories of peoples - them, near barbarians (people similar to Chinese) and far barbarians (everyone else). All barbarians were considered inferior and subject to Chinese dominance. A fascinating event happened in 1793 when the Brits send their first mission to China. Barbarians visiting China were expected to kowtow (kneel and put their foreheads on the ground) to the Emperor. The Dutch and Portuguese who were there first followed the custom while the British representative refused to do so in a clear clash of a rising empire and one that would soon be in decline - the Qing Dynasty in the 19th century with the Opium Wars, etc.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Ed Lada said:

What you say is pretty much true.  The problem is that the European powers took it upon themselves to rape the world.  They inflicted a tremendous amount of damage that may never be repaired and stole uncountable amounts of money by exploiting the resources of their colonies.  And the thing that is equally appalling is they have never been held accountable for their actions.  The Nazis were put on trial in Nurnberg and 10 of them were executed.  It's too late now, but there should have been similar trials for the European colonial powers, especially Great Britain.  The Brits pulled off the greatest heist in history and have never been held accountable for it.  

Not to diminish the Brit bashing or bashing of the larger region, but this isn't a group or group of groups problem.  This is humanity and what it does.  There are very few groups of humans, cultures, countries, or any other classification human gathering that haven't been ... inhumane as we currently define it.  Some groups gain advantages for periods of time and do things on a larger scale or through different means or have kept better records of their horribleness, but humans are not what we would like to think they are.  Humans are tribal and vicious, greedy, vain, petty, etc., etc. You can look at the histories of southeast Asia, Asia, India (if you consider it a subcontinent), sub-Saharan Africa, North America (before and after the whiteys showed up), Central and South America, etc.  you'll see the same deplorable things.  Those who learned to sail and navigate expanded more quickly and in different ways than those that had to do their evil over land, but the same things happen.  In the last 100 years or so, the tools and methods have changed, but the game is the same.  More damage can now be done with the press of button (missiles or money).  If you throw in the horrors performed under the guise of religion and the story gets even more deplored - yet this is all carried out by humans not the god(s) they claim to represent.  I hesitate to call out examples as it will distract from the fact that it's not the group(s) in whatever example, it's humans doing this and it's not unique to any grouping.  Just some are more prolific than others at a given time.

One of the only reasons to watch The Return of the Jedi is to listen the exchange between Obi-Wan and Luke.  After Luke asks why he was lied to about his dad really being the bad-ass Vader and not some chump who got taken out by Vader, Obi-Wan's response was ""[…] what I told you was true, from a certain point of view. […] You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

Every culture applies this "certain point of view" and 99 out of 100 times the (currently) oppressed would have done as bad or worse than the oppressor being referenced if circumstances enabled them.

Since I've stumbled into science fiction, I'll end with this quote from one of the Star Trek iterations where "Q" referred to humans as "being a grievously savage child-race."

On that uplifting note about humanity, I'll allow you all to return to bashing countries, cultures, and people - including me.  Unless you'll be the one who knows enough anthropology to call out the one of the few exceptions which are usually a group that is somehow isolated from the rest of us (and lacks historical records that would otherwise expose prior nastiness).

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
19 minutes ago, Snaggletooth said:

eskimoes

Perhaps, but they're prime suspects in the mystery of why the Vikings got wiped out of Greenland.

Also, they fall into the small group category and do not live in large groupings.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Ed Lada said:

And a pretty small cog at that.  

Except for the king.  he kept a stiff upper lip and stayed in London during the blitz to assure the hoi polloi that everything would be fine.  Probably the strain of that lip stiffening is what killed him a few years after the war.

I actually had typed “small cog” initially but decided against using it in order avoid insulting or being perceived as insulting the contributions of the poster’s father because that was and is not my intention.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
39 minutes ago, PurpleOnion said:

Not to diminish the Brit bashing or bashing of the larger region, but this isn't a group or group of groups problem.  This is humanity and what it does.  There are very few groups of humans, cultures, countries, or any other classification human gathering that haven't been ... inhumane as we currently define it.  Some groups gain advantages for periods of time and do things on a larger scale or through different means or have kept better records of their horribleness, but humans are not what we would like to think they are.  Humans are tribal and vicious, greedy, vain, petty, etc., etc. You can look at the histories of southeast Asia, Asia, India (if you consider it a subcontinent), sub-Saharan Africa, North America (before and after the whiteys showed up), Central and South America, etc.  you'll see the same deplorable things.  Those who learned to sail and navigate expanded more quickly and in different ways than those that had to do their evil over land, but the same things happen.  In the last 100 years or so, the tools and methods have changed, but the game is the same.  More damage can now be done with the press of button (missiles or money).  If you throw in the horrors performed under the guise of religion and the story gets even more deplored - yet this is all carried out by humans not the god(s) they claim to represent.  I hesitate to call out examples as it will distract from the fact that it's not the group(s) in whatever example, it's humans doing this and it's not unique to any grouping.  Just some are more prolific than others at a given time.

One of the only reasons to watch The Return of the Jedi is to listen the exchange between Obi-Wan and Luke.  After Luke asks why he was lied to about his dad really being the bad-ass Vader and not some chump who got taken out by Vader, Obi-Wan's response was ""[…] what I told you was true, from a certain point of view. […] You're going to find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on our own point of view."

Every culture applies this "certain point of view" and 99 out of 100 times the (currently) oppressed would have done as bad or worse than the oppressor being referenced if circumstances enabled them.

Since I've stumbled into science fiction, I'll end with this quote from one of the Star Trek iterations where "Q" referred to humans as "being a grievously savage child-race."

On that uplifting note about humanity, I'll allow you all to return to bashing countries, cultures, and people - including me.  Unless you'll be the one who knows enough anthropology to call out the one of the few exceptions which are usually a group that is somehow isolated from the rest of us (and lacks historical records that would otherwise expose prior nastiness).

That has to be the worst rationalization I've ever heard.  So what you are saying is since everybody does it, it's OK.  It's just a modified "I was just following orders" defense.  I am a cynical old bastard but I still like to think that humans can do better.

But when somebody gets guidance in their life from a science fiction movie...

Link to post
Share on other sites
58 minutes ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

I think you are being euro-centric to the extreme. Throughout history powerful nations have taken advantage of weaker, less-organized neighbours both near and far. You can see it from Asia (Genghis Khan being only the best known example) to Africa (the takeover of what became South Africa by the Zulus), to South America (Inca Empire). China is (re)building its empire today. Remember that 'China' literally means 'Middle Kingdom'. In the past the Chinese divided the world into three categories of peoples - them, near barbarians (people similar to Chinese) and far barbarians (everyone else). All barbarians were considered inferior and subject to Chinese dominance. A fascinating event happened in 1793 when the Brits send their first mission to China. Barbarians visiting China were expected to kowtow (kneel and put their foreheads on the ground) to the Emperor. The Dutch and Portuguese who were there first followed the custom while the British representative refused to do so in a clear clash of a rising empire and one that would soon be in decline - the Qing Dynasty in the 19th century with the Opium Wars, etc.

Ahh, another 'Everyone does it' defense.

Do you like Star War movies too?

Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Sea warrior said:

I actually had typed “small cog” initially but decided against using it in order avoid insulting or being perceived as insulting the contributions of the poster’s father because that was and is not my intention.

 

The small cog I am referring to is Great Britain.  Not any individual.  Well, except prince Phil maybe.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

I think you are showing a Brit-bias here. In Canada, and other Commonwealth countries I assume, we were brought up with the belief that the Brits did it better with no clear evidence of this. You can make a good case that the French did it better in many parts of the world. Consider the French bits of the Caribbean compared to the formerly British bits.

Name some non-British former colonies that are as successful as Canada, America, Oz, NZ, HK etc.

If you want to know what a really nasty colonial power was like, check out Belgium's record.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Name some non-British former colonies that are as successful as Canada, America, Oz, NZ, HK etc.

If you want to know what a really nasty colonial power was like, check out Belgium's record.

Belgium didn't have nearly the amount of colonies as the Brits did.

How about asking people in India, China, and South Africa. Nobody was as nasty to so many for so long as the Brits, to loosely paraphrase another nasty Englishman.

Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Ed Lada said:

That has to be the worst rationalization I've ever heard.  So what you are saying is since everybody does it, it's OK.  It's just a modified "I was just following orders" defense.  I am a cynical old bastard but I still like to think that humans can do better.

But when somebody gets guidance in their life from a science fiction movie...

Chill out.  Take a few breaths and re-read what I wrote. Or don't. It wasn't a rationalization of the behavior nor was it an attack of your seeming hatred of the British and the fact that the rest of the world hasn't held them accountable for their pillaging of the world's resources during their period of power. 

What part of my statements gave you the idea that I thought it was good behavior or even OK behavior?  I think I even upset my 9th grade English teach by using variants of the word deplore twice in a paragraph.

I used quotes from science fiction because, being a fictional existence, I thought it would have prevented people from going off on a tangent defending/attacking whatever culture/country I referenced.  You've proven to me the folly of that approach.  If you prefer, I could quote Plato, Socrates, Lao Tzu, Kung Tzu, Mencius, etc., but you would probably go on a rant about the Greeks or Chinese (or how the Brits pillaged the Parthenon or about British opium shenanigans in China)

Also, where did you get the idea that I was defending the Brits, their royal family, or anyone else?  Perhaps you me have me confused with others.

I'm glad you think that humans can do better.  I'd like to too.  Experience and various versions of history have told me otherwise.

I'm unwilling to invest the time to pull the exact quote from the interview on youtube, but I'll paraphrase what Frank Zappa said to Sandi Freeman in 1981 after she expressed exasperation about his view on some element of society saying she would hate to think that way.  His response was along the lines of: "you would hate to think like me and find out you were right".  Or ,if you want a more accurate quote from another point in his life, I'll offer this: “I like to watch the news, because I don't like people very much and when you watch the news ... if you ever had an idea that people were really terrible, you could watch the news and know that you're right.”

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Name some non-British former colonies that are as successful as Canada, America, Oz, NZ, HK etc.

If you want to know what a really nasty colonial power was like, check out Belgium's record.

I would not defend Belgium for a second. As to your list of former British colonies I would agree about Canada, Oz and NZ. The US left in an unfriendly way of course. All of these countries have a certain whiteness in common. The British treatment of Hong Kong does not measure up. HK people were not given proper British passports which they should have. Also, the Brits are doing nothing meaningful about getting China to follow the terms of their agreement. As to successful non-British former colonies you need go no further than St Pierre and Miquelon. The standard of living there is much higher than in the adjacent parts of Newfoundland. Guadeloupe, Martinique, St Martin, Need Caledonia, and Reunion also come to mind. Fascinating to compare Dominica to its neighbours, Guadeloupe and Martinique.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, PurpleOnion said:

Chill out.  Take a few breaths and re-read what I wrote. Or don't.

I did re-read what I wrote.  I am a pretty astute reader, especially when I'm sober.  Correct me if I'm wrong but what I read was that you think basically humans suck (which I don't disagree with in spite of my unshakeable and misguided idealism) and anybody would and has done what the Brits did given the chance.  And I told you why I don't believe that.  

And now your quoting Frank Zappa!  I'm a big fan of a lot of Frank's work, but geeze.  I'm going to start quoting Springsteen.  I'm sure I can find something to criticize imperialistic, evil countries in his work.

And the Brits pillaged far more than the Parthenon, if they gave back every ancient relic they stole from all over the world, their famous museum shelves would be bare.  And calling the British subjugation of the Chinese people with opium 'shenanigans' a bit of an insulting minimization of that crime don't you think?

I don't think humans can do better,  I'd like to see them do better but alas, I doubt it is possible.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

Also, the Brits are doing nothing meaningful about getting China to follow the terms of their agreement.

And just what are they going to do to get China to comply?  Send their powerful Navy there?  Oh wait, they don't have a powerful Navy anymore.  Send their colonial army there?  Oh wait, they don't have that anymore either.  Bankrupt them?  Oh wait, China could probably buy Great Britain a couple of times over.  Ply them with opium again?  Oh wait, the Chinese probably won't fall for that one again. 

I know, they can threaten to send prince Charlie, that will show those inscrutable Chinese!

6 minutes ago, Bristol-Cruiser said:

As to successful non-British former colonies you need go no further than St Pierre and Miquelon. The standard of living there is much higher than in the adjacent parts of Newfoundland. Guadeloupe, Martinique, St Martin, Need Caledonia, and Reunion also come to mind. Fascinating to compare Dominica to its neighbours, Guadeloupe and Martinique.

Yep, those places you mention sure are international powerhouses!  I'm sure many countries in the world aspire to be Miquelon or New Caledonia.  If you can't be the US, you might as well shoot for Martinique!   

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Cristoforo said:

Except it’s the most important ‘industry’ England still has.  They probably stilL bring in more tourist money than they cost. Otherwise they would be gone. 
 

as Philip said when told England was once  running in the red ‘Oh dear I may have to give up polo’ 

It's remarkable ... England literally invented the Industrial Age by developing the first precision lede screw in the 1800s, in the legacy of Isaac Newton, and then they proceeded to spend the next hundred years killing off their future by allowing well-endowed families to utterly control their decisions of commerce and policy.

I'll never understand the attraction of this royal lineage in the average Briton's life. Even when they openly despise it, it just keeps rolling over their sovereignty like a fancy-pants juggernaut.

Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, Ed Lada said:

And just what are they going to do to get China to comply?  Send their powerful Navy there?  Oh wait, they don't have a powerful Navy anymore.  Send their colonial army there?  Oh wait, they don't have that anymore either.  Bankrupt them?  Oh wait, China could probably buy Great Britain a couple of times over.  Ply them with opium again?  Oh wait, the Chinese probably won't fall for that one again.

Economic warfare is the new way. China has five of the biggest banks on the planet. The starting point would be the banks ... if Britain cared enough to put their nuts on the line, which they dont, and neither does the USA. We're all complicit in the rape of Hong Kong.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, mikewof said:

and then they proceeded to spend the next hundred years killing off their future by allowing financially well-endowed families to utterly control their decisions of commerce and policy.

Fixed for clarity.

Although I do believe somebody here alluded to the fact that Phil was supposedly hung like a horse.  Maybe VWap can find photographic proof of that rumor.  

Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, Ed Lada said:

I did re-read what I wrote.  I am a pretty astute reader, especially when I'm sober.  Correct me if I'm wrong but what I read was that you think basically humans suck (which I don't disagree with in spite of my unshakeable and misguided idealism) and anybody would and has done what the Brits did given the chance.  And I told you why I don't believe that.  

And now your quoting Frank Zappa!  I'm a big fan of a lot of Frank's work, but geeze.  I'm going to start quoting Springsteen.  I'm sure I can find something to criticize imperialistic, evil countries in his work.

And the Brits pillaged far more than the Parthenon, if they gave back every ancient relic they stole from all over the world, their famous museum shelves would be bare.  And calling the British subjugation of the Chinese people with opium 'shenanigans' a bit of an insulting minimization of that crime don't you think?

I don't think humans can do better,  I'd like to see them do better but alas, I doubt it is possible.  

You win the Internet.  I need to get back to my job at the British Embassy in Warsaw.

Rather than quote any other philosophers or draw unfavorable comparisons to the intelligence and talent of musicians, I'll quote someone you have much more respect for.

"There are many people like Crisco who are angry and bitter and feel that the world has done them wrong.  Crisco and his long history of name changes here has been doing his thing for a long time on SA.  Of course it's best to ignore him, but he does also have some entertainment value.  I guess everybody here offers what they can.

...

I am at a point in my life where I have done many things and I've grown much less sensitive to criticism.  I know who I am, and what I am.  I am only human, like Willy Loman, I want to be well liked, but at some point in my life I discovered being me got me liked better than trying to be somebody I wasn't.  Take me as I am or walk away.  I am here to make myself happy, then I can help others.  That's how life really works.  Gratuitous, insulting criticism is hurtful to a point, but it's best just to consider the source, brush it off and enjoy the positive feedback.  As they say, haters gonna hate.  People like Crisco hate others because they hate themselves.  That's just too bad really.  Introspection isn't for pussies."

I'll substitute a few names and take the advice of the author.

Enjoy the benefits of your hatred and continue to be happy and help others.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, mikewof said:

Economic warfare is the new way. China has five of the biggest banks on the planet. The starting point would be the banks ... if Britain cared enough to put their nuts on the line, which they dont, and neither does the USA. We're all complicit in the rape of Hong Kong.

Yeah but there's a bright side to that.  The intertwined financial markets are the Mutual Assured Destruction (MAD) of the new world order.

Just like in the simpler times of the Cold War, no nuclear nation wanted to launch nukes because it would result in complete and total  destruction.  China holds a tremendous amount of US government debt.  If they ruin us financially, they will get fucked as well.  And if the US and China go broke, so goes the world.

Besides, the Chinese play the long game, who knows what their end game is.  I doubt any of us here will be alive to see what the result of their strategy is, since most folks in the western world have trouble conceiving of any time frame beyond 5 years nowadays.  The Chinese look ahead a hundred years or more.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, PurpleOnion said:

You win the Internet.  I need to get back to my job at the British Embassy in Warsaw.

Rather than quote any other philosophers or draw unfavorable comparisons to the intelligence and talent of musicians, I'll quote someone you have much more respect for.

"There are many people like Crisco who are angry and bitter and feel that the world has done them wrong.  Crisco and his long history of name changes here has been doing his thing for a long time on SA.  Of course it's best to ignore him, but he does also have some entertainment value.  I guess everybody here offers what they can.

...

I am at a point in my life where I have done many things and I've grown much less sensitive to criticism.  I know who I am, and what I am.  I am only human, like Willy Loman, I want to be well liked, but at some point in my life I discovered being me got me liked better than trying to be somebody I wasn't.  Take me as I am or walk away.  I am here to make myself happy, then I can help others.  That's how life really works.  Gratuitous, insulting criticism is hurtful to a point, but it's best just to consider the source, brush it off and enjoy the positive feedback.  As they say, haters gonna hate.  People like Crisco hate others because they hate themselves.  That's just too bad really.  Introspection isn't for pussies."

I'll substitute a few names and take the advice of the author.

Enjoy the benefits of your hatred and continue to be happy and help others.

 

Well apparently we have much more in common than either of us are willing to admit.  I get no greater pleasure in my life than when I am helping people in any way I can.  I've spent a good part of my working life in fields where helping people is the main job.  Except the hate part, I appear to differ with you there.  I too have seen and done many things, and I really don't care too much what others think of me.  Those who know me in person will generally speak highly of me.  I take more liberties here because, internet forum!, but I post under my real name so I have nothing to hide and I own my statements.  And I do try to avoid gratuitous mean, insulting criticism, if it sounds mean I like to think it is a lack of tact, not gratuitous insults.  I despise Crisco and all of his prior personae here, I like to believe I am not like him at all.  If you are somehow inferring that I am, well, I am hurt. 

I won't make excuses, but I will anyway in that after 65 years of life, going to basic training 2 different times, having 3 wives and two heart attacks, and having seen some of the best and a lot of the worst in humans in some of my many jobs, I get tired of being nice sometimes.  Sometimes I just feel a need to call things as they are, especially when people want to defend heinous behavior.  Like we used to say in the Army, what are they going to do, bend my dog tags?  As much as I try to be close to perfect (because no human can be perfect), sometimes I just give in to my baser instincts.  Again, another Army phrase, "Sometimes you just have to tell the boss the baby is ugly."

I remember my father always telling me you catch far more flies with honey than vinegar.  Now too many years too late, I should have responded "But what if I don't want to catch flies dad?  What if I just want to swat them?" 

As Frank Sinatra so eloquently sang, "Regrets, I've had a few, but then again too few to mention."*

And lastly, I have learned over the years how to deliver a gracious and sincere apology when I need to, none of this 'If ' I offended you shit.  And amazingly enough, it isn't even difficult anymore.

I see that have offended and or insulted you, or at least caused you to feel bad in some way.  I apologize for that.

*Shit, now I'm going to look like a hypocritical fool for chastising you for quoting movie character philosophy.  Please don't hate me for it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, NaptimeAgain said:

Having visited Britain many times for work and tourism with family and friends, just my 2 cents as an American.  Given the costs and hassles of travel it's not just about what is in Britain (or anywhere else) but what is uniquely interesting about the British experience of it as opposed to anywhere else.

  • Speaking English (even with some twists) makes Britain an easy first international destination for Americans.  But English is very common in Iceland, Netherlands, Singapore, Italy, etc.  And even in Germany it's easy to get by with a mix of basic German and basic English.
  • The monarchy (and its related stuff) is behind much of the attraction.  The gang wants to see the palace and the Tower.  We didn't go to see the Pickle and the Shard.  Like Cinderella's castle in the Disney Parks, it's the thing folks think about.
  • Art museums are all over, and the Louvre, US National Gallery, Uffizi, and the Rijksmuseum and VanGogh are fine examples.  I would not personally trek to the UK just to see art.
  • Personally I like Windsor, though seeing American fast food shops outside the gate is a bit of a drag.
  • Post Brexit will see how that impacts business travel versus now going to the EU.
  • Many Americans have some Irish ancestors and thus some interest in the island of Ireland (yes I know it's not England) but recent unrest in NI may give some pause if it spreads.  
  • Castles are interesting, but a vestige of the whole monarchy feudalism thing.
  • As a golfer, a round or 2 in Scotland would be nice, but it would be a bit of a hassle compared to just playing a links course here in the US.
  • I suppose Scotch whisky distilleries are unique to Scotland, and they are nice, but at some point when you've visited a couple that's probably enough.  
  • My BA flights force me to take a bus from the plane to get to the terminal at LHR.  Then a very long walk but at least there is coffee when you exit customs and immigration.  Last thing I need after a long overnight flight.
  • Brighton and Portsmouth are interesting day trips, again in part due to Nelson's ship, which arguably links back to the monarchy warring with some other monarchy.  But similar experiences are available elsewhere.

And you can have all of that without the Royal Family.

Link to post
Share on other sites