...housery.
Truly. This is not a joke. I mean it's very funny, but it's not a joke. :hehe:
Fair play to the eyeties imo.
...housery.
Truly. This is not a joke. I mean it's very funny, but it's not a joke. :hehe:
Fair play to the eyeties imo.
Imagine if they had a war. Who would surrender first? :yikes:Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
UK Remainers, probably. Always seem to be ready to roll over at the first sign hardship.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
It could be the shortest war in history (a record we currently hold for when we smashed up Zanzibar, of course).Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Slightly harsh on the ghosts of Verdun imo.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Yeah, but that’s where they shot their bolt, y’see? Falkenhayn succeeded in his intention to ‘bleed France white’. What he didn’t grasp was that in doing so, he’d do the same to Germany.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
One might suggest that it was the experience of Verdun which prompted the French military to choose early surrender over the mincing machine that is holding one's ground in a steadfast, British fashion.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
Well, it was more the utter catastrophe of the Nivelle offensives a year later, to be fair. Their collective bottle went and they haven’t won a war in a century as a result.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Indeed. A little easier, of course, to stand firm with 26 miles of water between you and the opponent after he has already let you run away.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Have you been reading a book about British military history authored by Owen Jones? Top tip: there are plenty of respected historians who can educate you with, y’know, facts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
John McCririck, Ross Kemp, Jimmy Savile, Eddie Izzard, Gary Lineker, Kenneth Williams, Clare Balding your boys took one hell of a beating.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
:sigh:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Always the insults.
Sorry a, no insult intended. One's patience is simply stretched by the left's knee-jerk belittling of this country's achievements, hence my reference to The Boy Owen.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
I was railing, not against you, but against those who detest myt country - Bastani, Milne and Grandpa Semtex. That sort.
OK, ty. So given that the presence of a moat around the country is not a disputed fact, and neither is the reality of the strategic withdrawal from France, I can only imagine it was the suggestion that the enemy could have come down a little harder on the evacuation procedure that you felt was contentious.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
It just seemed a strange (predicatble?) episode to mention, given the proud, unmatched history of the British military. From Agincourt to Tumbledown, we have consistently triumphed when we had no right to, which was my original point. Countering that with Dunkirk or Singapore or Hill 235 looks suspiciously like an attempt to do this reputation down, which, as I said, would be the leftist knee-jerk to which I objected.Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
I wouldn’t put Hill 235 in the same company as Dunkirk or Singapore. It may have been a tactical defeat (albeit a heroic one given that there were absolute hordes of bloodthirsty chinks), but the resistance slowed the Chinese down sufficiently to prevent a larger outflanking of the US forces and an advance on Seoul.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
[QUOTE=Burney;4230475]I wouldn’t put Hill 235 in the same company as Dunkirk or Singapore. It may have been a tactical defeat (albeit a heroic one given that there were absolute hordes of bloodthirsty chinks), but the resistance slowed the Chinese down sufficiently to prevent a larger outflanking of the US forces and an advance on Seoul.[/QUOTE
What.
Ever.
[QUOTE=Sir C;4230478]No need to be rude. Hmph!Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
This is good work AAR. I have absolutely no idea what's going on. Redg would be proud of you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal Alcoholic Review
Right. We should remember the good days. Arnhem. Gallipoli. Hastings. Chatham.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Yes, perhaps Arnhem, where the troops of the 10th SS Panzer division subsequently declared that the Rote Teufelen of 1 Para were the hardest troops they had encountered and the fighting more fierce than anything they had seen on the Eastern Front?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
Gallipoli was fought by foreigners, so doesn't count.
At Hastings, Alfred's army had just fought a battle and then marched all the way from Stamford Bridge. Probably West Ham fans? Who can say. But anyway, we need not concern ourselves with such ancient history.
Chatham was a sneaky surprise attack by cheating Dutchmen.
Anything they'd seen in the entire three months they'd spent in the east? Gosh.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Yes. 3 months in the Ukraine. How long do you think you'd need?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ash
Pfft. I'm sure it was jolly tough going but I bet it was no Stalingrad imo. It probably wasn't even snowing. :shrug:Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
ffs, Joan of Arc - a teenage peasant bint in the middle ages - made our army surrender (effectively) in 2 years after we'd been at war for 90+ years.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
If it weren't for Joffre at the Marne, you and I would be speaking French.
Did they surrender at Verdun? Did they ****. Il ne passerent pas. They did that all one their own, while simultaenously giving us some divisions for the Somme and bailing the wops out on the Italian Front.
And if the French hadn't suicidally sacfriced themselves on the approaches to Dunkirk, and then still taken over when our rear-guard left for the beach, we'd have lost the entire BEF and the 90k French soldiers we escaped with (who fought heroically for us thereafter.)
I've been in France for a month so am not really up for this drivel.
And don't ever slag off the Indian army or I'll have to remind you about every single time a Gurkha, Sikh, Pathan, Baluchi or Gurwhali saved your sorry gora arses.
No mention of the Legion Freies Indien?Quote:
Originally Posted by Ganpati's Goonerz--AFC's Aboriginal Fertility Cult
If you mean Chandra Bose's INA, they were so fücking insignificant that GB HQ didn't even bother setting up a unit to deal with them at mil or intel level.Quote:
Originally Posted by Arsenal Alcoholic Review
They were nothing, it's only the BJP fasicts in power now - you know, like the ones who shot Gandhi for having succeeded without their violence - that make them seem more than what they were.
Read the Flahman author - GMF's - autobiog of the war in Burma, Quartered Safe Out Here. He says when he captured 3 INA and took them back, on the way he passed another brigade patrol, the Baluchis. He says the look they gave the INA traitors made it clear they were lucky it was the whiteys not the Baluchis who found them.
2.5m volunteered.
A handful of PoWs defected for better rations.
About as miliarily significant as the 10 GB PoWs who tried to start an SS unit.
Now, wanna talk about them saving the empire at Neuve Chapelle on their first action in France in WW1?
Or the Sikhs and Gurkhas saving British India during the Mutiny?
I did say don't get me started on this :)
Of course it would. The Frogs would turn Rome into radioactive dust before the first Wop had even got to Ventimiglia.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
And they have a perm seat on the UNSC so no-one can tell them off.
Proper country.* That's why I'm staying here for a bit.
*India, London and Cornwall (for my glw's sake) also count as proper countries. Though the sooner India gets back the recalcitrant muzzies o'er the E and W frontiers, the better. They need to be re-civilised.
That's rubbish, B.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burney
That's why Falk resigned before the battle was even over. Once the Somme pressure made sure that Verdun would be lost with the Fr eventually recapturing Ft Duoaumont.
You mean the way we almost legged it after Gough's 5th army was smashed at the start of the Spring Offensive and it was only the Fr re-inforcements and Foch being put in over-all command that saved the Amiens rail-head and prevented a breech between the armies?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Some of us have studied this post-grad, mate. I can send you an essay if you want. Got a goodish A, obv.
WTF?Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
Are you talking about the Glorious Glosters?
They heroically sacrificed the entire rgt to hold up a whole division of chinks. One of our most glorious battles.
Is all cos Septics don't speak English that they died, anyway.
When the Septic commander phoned to ask if the Glosters were ok, the Col said "er, things are getting a little sticky."
The Septic didn't undertstand that means the shît's hit the fan.
Silly Septic cünts. They're the real enemy. Learn to speak English properly on invent your fücking own.
No. There were more untrained Brits than Convicts.Quote:
Originally Posted by Sir C
If we'd have had another brigade of Gukhas - "Send me more Indians", said the CinC - we'd have actually won Gallipolli and knocked the Turks out of the war.
Once the Indians had taken the vital high ground at the start, had re-inforcements arrived, we'd have won.
Instead, the untrained Brit brigade sent to re-inforce got lost cos they couldn't read a map and that was that.
Gallipolli, almost won by highly trained Indians, lost by untrained, semi-literate, probably northern, Britishers and Convicts. Fact.
Read Corrigan or Morton-Jack if you don't believe me.
And if the Lib govt/UKMoD given in to Haig's request when in India in charge of the army there c.1909 to prepare to use the Indian army in full in Flanders, we'd have won quicker.
But, like most politicians, they penny pinched, and wouldn't pay for Haig's secret Indian force.
See what Haig says about the Indians.
He was in charge of them in their own land for a couple of years and wanted to turn them into a secret army to smash the Hun as soon as it kicked off. But was banned by London.
Scum.
As usual, those who've been to India are right and those that haven't are wrong. Like supporting Sperz.
Btw, I'm in that very small cross section venn diagram flefties who love Douggie Haig.