# Politics and News > UK, Canada, Oz, NZ >  Bikers VS Canadian Elite Commandos!: The Battle of Kingsway

## Big Dummy

-

Ahhh, the shady disgraceful history of a now disbanded unit.
-

13:00 good minutes

----------

El Guapo (09-04-2021),Physics Hunter (09-05-2021),Rutabaga (09-04-2021),StanAtStanFan (09-05-2021)

----------


## El Guapo

Ah... the stuff of legends. Rebels are now Red and White.

----------

Big Dummy (09-04-2021)

----------


## El Guapo

The Chairborne Regiment met their demise for giving a somali piece of shit his come uppance during the shit-show that was the ill-fated Mogadishu 'peace keeping' action.

----------

12icer (09-04-2021),Big Dummy (09-04-2021),Esdraelon (09-04-2021)

----------


## Esdraelon

A close friend of mine in High School JROTC, lost a brother during that whole "Black Hawk Down" cluster.  He was a damned good man, a Ranger, and if there had been any justice, we would have so thoroughly incinerated Mogadishu that it would still be sterile today.

----------

Big Dummy (09-04-2021),El Guapo (09-04-2021),Katzndogz (09-05-2021)

----------


## El Guapo

> A close friend of mine in High School JROTC, lost a brother during that whole "Black Hawk Down" cluster.  He was a damned good man, a Ranger, and if there had been any justice, we would have so thoroughly incinerated Mogadishu that it would still be sterile today.


Yeah. Rumour had it at the time that local punk ass somalis were getting under the wire nightly and stealing tons of the commando's supplies and weapons, and firing randomly into the compound on a regular basis, with commando pickets under standing order not to retaliate. They caught one of them, and vented their frustration.

----------

Big Dummy (09-04-2021)

----------


## 12icer

Hasn't the class of elite troops improved drastically in the last few years. Their equipment is much better than just the old m14 and scope too. 

Funny how countries dominance in the world comes and goes with the complacency of their citizenry and their arrogance..

To think that so many Brits and their colonies call the USA an empire building country, We have never made any country we go into fly our flag and relinquish it's sovereignty. The British empire did both as did Spain and France force the country to accept subjugation, relinquish their sovereignty and place a government hierarchy made of the Empires native citizens not retain their leaders or rulers who were most times executed or imprisoned. 

It is extremely unfortunate that our country has been taken over by people who commit massive scale crimes and treason on a daily basis and our military stands by and watches, or takes active part in the treason.

The ;ast two dimshit presidents and their staff have committed CONSTITUTIONALLY DEFINED TREASON, and they have thumbed their nose at anyone who called their hand on it.

Maybe we should get a treaty between the clubs and turn them loose in DC. 
If they took it like Sturgis, it would be a one day thing. 
All the problems would be out in the street naked and skinned.

----------

Authentic (09-07-2021),StanAtStanFan (09-05-2021)

----------


## El Guapo

> Hasn't the class of elite troops improved drastically in the last few years. Their equipment is much better than just the old m14 and scope too. 
> 
> Funny how countries dominance in the world comes and goes with the complacency of their citizenry and their arrogance..
> 
> To think that so many Brits and their colonies call the USA an empire building country, We have never made any country we go into fly our flag and relinquish it's sovereignty. The British empire did both as did Spain and France force the country to accept subjugation, relinquish their sovereignty and place a government hierarchy made of the Empires native citizens not retain their leaders or rulers who were most times executed or imprisoned. 
> 
> It is extremely unfortunate that our country has been taken over by people who commit massive scale crimes and treason on a daily basis and our military stands by and watches, or takes active part in the treason.
> 
> The ;ast two dimshit presidents and their staff have committed CONSTITUTIONALLY DEFINED TREASON, and they have thumbed their nose at anyone who called their hand on it.
> ...


 There's lots of cross-pollination between Cdn Forces and MCs in Canada. Coincidentally Commandos MC was in attendance along with club reps from across the country and the world today to lay a highly respected local OG HA to rest.

RIP Spike.

----------


## UKSmartypants

> Hasn't the class of elite troops improved drastically in the last few years. Their equipment is much better than just the old m14 and scope too. 
> 
> 
> To think that so many Brits and their colonies call the USA an empire building country, We have never made any country we go into fly our flag and relinquish it's sovereignty. The British empire did both as did Spain and France force the country to accept subjugation, relinquish their sovereignty and place a government hierarchy made of the Empires native citizens not retain their leaders or rulers who were most times executed or imprisoned.


Oh here we go again with blaming the british for everything, we get sick of it.


EVERY EUROPEAN COUNTRY had colonies - the French, the Dutch, the Germans, the Italians, the Spanish. Not just the British.  The fact we were better at this game than the others, and got a bigger collection of colonies is irrelevant.

What we didnt do, however, Unlike the Americans, was invade a land and then try and exterminate the residents, and actually commit genocide on them. Talk about people who live in glass houses.  We'll take NO criticism of the British empire from America, thank you.


on the other hand, i don't recall the USA doing any similar to this wherever they invaded and killed:


WHAT DID THE BRITISH DO FOR INDIA?

1.	Unification of all small and larger kingdom into one country. If British weren’t there today India would have been divided into multiple small countries. As such the unification eliminated centuries of small wars that had plagued the area for centuries
2.	Introduction of Railways. The British built the worlds largest railway system, including tracks, stations and thousands of engines and carriages, which are now still running and form the backbone of the national transport infrastructure, moving millions of people everyday, and gave India a massive head start when they gained independence, and providing thousands of lifetime jobs for Indians
3.	Introduction of Postal Services. There was no such thing as a postal service in India, the British built thousands of Post Offices, and created a system thats is still outstandingly efficient for the area.
4.	Improved Irrigation techniques including building dozens of dams which converted thousands acres of forest area into agricultural land, and the improved availability of food has saved te lives of millions over the years.
5.	Setting up of Reserve Bank of India to monitor and control Indian finance.
6.	Setting up of local body government which helps India to control every nook and corner of the country. The Indian Civil Service is based on the British system, and is another legacy of the British that gave India a massive head start at independence. Even today it is the most prestigious career in India, and very honest and free of corruption
7.	Indian Army. The Indian Army is based entirely on the British Army, and is run on the same traditions. We built hundreds of Barracks and forts, and has done a Stirling job in defending india since independence against moslem threats. It is efficient, well trained and thats entirely down to the British.
8.	Indian Police force, Again based on the British Police Force, is one of the least corrupt and most effective police forces on the subcontinent, trained in the methods, morals, and techniques used by the British. In their time, it was good policing and lot less corrupt, and all religions were equally represented.
9.	Indian education system. Based on the British education system, we built thousands of schools, and taught millions of Indians to read and write. Also, young Indian men were shipped to public school in England, and would return educated, with the British sense of fair play and full of ideas on how to improve their home country, much to the benefit of India. They did a great job of establishing modern education system. There were some really good intentioned persons who established some of the best universities, Engineering colleges and Medical colleges. Why do you think ther are so many Indian Doctors in the UK?
10.	Vaccinated the population and reduced infant deaths. English men were overwhelmed to see delivery deaths and child mortality thst they brought women doctors and midwives from England and trained indian women.
11.	Triangulated and mapped the country.
12.	The British built hundreds of public buildings including Hospital, and also preserved, protected and rebuilt many historic buildings. We also introduced modern Architecture, Civil Engineering, Railways Bridges, roads and tunnels. Hawarah bridge is a good example.
13.	The Judiciary System also was established by British. In the beginning it was run by the British, but later, when educated Indian men returned from England, after passing the Bar exam they also became Judges and Magistrates, and the indians eventually ran it themselves.
14.	The British eliminated the brutal practice of Suttee, wherby a mans wife was expected to throw herself alive on her dead husbands funeral pyre. We also abolished child marriage, and made efforts towards empowerment of widows and legalizing widow remarriage
15.	The English language, is also one of best things the Indians got. . That is the reason, Indians are doing so well outside, becomes scientists and authors.. India has had so many English writers. They were exposed to the best knowledge repository of the world because of knowledge of English. India thus produced some of the finest mathematicians and scientists the world has ever seen.
16.	The Indians also got democracy from us. They were a very, hierarchal society, equality was an alien to India, divided by a strict caste system. The fact that it had democracy, because of the British, when they went independent probably saved the nation from the usual collapse into anarchy and despotism so common in the Africans nations that were given independence at the same time
17.	The British changed the culture of india in many ways, one was to steer the indians into having an age of consent, and fidelity to one partner.

Its fair to say that the British literally rebuilt, educated and transformed India from a collection of feudal warlords into a fully functioning modern democracy, well prepared to become independent, and India as it is today would not exist had it not been for the billions of pounds in money and the thousands of men and machines the British poured into Indian during the Raj.

British laws and societal system were usually more humane and sane than the alternatives. It guaranteed the basic rights - freedom from slavery, freedom from lawlessness, freedom from anarchy, freedom from persecution, freedom from arbitrary imprisonment and extrajudicial punishments; freedom of expression, freedom of trade, freedom of ownership, freedom of religion and other basic rights and freedoms. This allowed the trade to flourish and economy to develop. The intent of taxation was not to milk the subjects dry, fill up the regent’s coffers and ensure nobody would get wealthy and hence threaten the despot’s status, but to provide the state the means of taking care of the essentials of rulership. The result was that the subjects themselves identified to the Empire and after the Sepoy Mutiny against the East Indian Company, mutinies and rebellions were rare. Everyone benefited to at least some extent.

And the expulsion of the moslems from India was one of the best moves they made, and occurred after independence, and wouldn’t have been possible had we not created and trained the Indian Army. it saved them after independence from moslem terrorism and takeover.

----------

Big Dummy (09-05-2021),Neo (09-05-2021)

----------


## UKSmartypants

> Hasn't the class of elite troops improved drastically in the last few years. Their equipment is much better than just the old m14 and scope too. 
> 
> Funny how countries dominance in the world comes and goes with the complacency of their citizenry and their arrogance..
> 
> We have never made any country we go into fly our flag and relinquish it's sovereignty.



So what then was it precisely you did to the Souix, the Irapaho, the Pawnee, the Lacota and hundreds of other Native American Tribes, whos land you stole, burial grounds you violated,  who's hunting grounds you built towns on and whos sacred sites you trampled over. Not to mention the oppression of native culture (hands up all those who tried to ban Ghost Dancing), and the hundreds of Treaties you tore up when it suited you.

You are living in a gigantic glass house ,mate . when it comes to this subject. Best keep your head down unless you want to start  a massive flame war.

----------


## StanAtStanFan

> Oh here we go again with blaming the british for everything, we get sick of it.
> 
> 
> And the British, as they always did in colonization, got richer and richer imposing their rule on India. Granted it turned the massive Indian nation into what is known as a "safe" country for nuclear weapons and military. Well done.
> 
> Why, if they were SO great in Asia, were they so petrified of a few poets, writers and singers in tiny Ireland just across the sea from them? Their methods of subjugation of Ireland, including an attempt at completely wiping out the Irish people and history, were nothing short of a Nazi-type Holocaust. The symbol of British rule in Ireland for 700-consistent years, was the hanging tree, hunger strikes by political Irish prisoners, and forcing more Irishmen out of the country then occupy it today. 
> 
> The British under Cecil Rhodes, who Rhodesia was named after, later did exactly the same thing in South Africa when they illegally started the war to grab the Transvaal region, where the Kimberly Diamond mines are located. For once, they were met by a white, German-Dutch army, on horses and armed with rifles, the British were used to fighting people with guns vs sticks. The Dutch-Germanic Boers, who occupied the Transvaal for over 300-years were of no harm for the British - they wanted the wealth. In a savage war from 1899-1902, which saw the British destroy the Boers homes, farms, crops, imprison their women and children in concentration camps (the Nazi's didn't invent the idea), and shooting without trial, any captured Dutch Boer (the same thing they did to the poets and writers of Dublin in the Easter Rising), the British eventually won the war, but not before massive military troops sailed to South Africa to put down the Boers, who were simply fighting for their existence. The famous Rhodes Scholorship's of today, are tainted with the blood of the Dutch-Boers. I doubt if any of the brilliant people awarded the two years study at Oxford, take into consideration, the fact that honor was created out of major bloodshed.
> 
> ...

----------


## StanAtStanFan

> So what then was it precisely you did to the Souix, the Irapaho, the Pawnee, the Lacota and hundreds of other Native American Tribes, whos land you stole, burial grounds you violated,  who's hunting grounds you built towns on and whos sacred sites you trampled over. Not to mention the oppression of native culture (hands up all those who tried to ban Ghost Dancing), and the hundreds of Treaties you tore up when it suited you.
> 
> You are living in a gigantic glass house ,mate . when it comes to this subject. Best keep your head down unless you want to start  a massive flame war.



Mistreated, yes, the Native American Indian tribes, however, were not foreign nations in existence when our government opened the Western lands to the massive number of immigrants fleeing England; Ireland; Germany; Poland and Russia, from political and religious persecution in Europe. It was those white, Judeo-Christian immigrants who built America to the great nation it is today. The Indians were wandering hunter-gathering tribes with no sense of or even a word for development or ownership. The Native American's were not a massive nation like India; or Palestine; Singapore-Malaysia;  portions of China; Australia; New Zealand; South Africa; those were actual existing nations that the British attacked and controlled. America doesn't do that.


Stan

----------


## UKSmartypants

> Mistreated, yes, the Native American Indian tribes, however, were not foreign nations in existence when our government opened the Western lands to the massive number of immigrants fleeing England; Ireland; Germany; Poland and Russia, from political and religious persecution in Europe. It was those white, Judeo-Christian immigrants who built America to the great nation it is today. The Indians were wandering hunter-gathering tribes with no sense of or even a word for development or ownership. The Native American's were not a massive nation like India; or Palestine; Singapore-Malaysia;  portions of China; Australia; New Zealand; South Africa; those were actual existing nations that the British attacked and controlled. America doesn't do that.
> 
> 
> Stan



Well isnt it odd they are referred to, and refer to themselves as "The Navaho nation" or the "Souix nation".

GTFO, you vile owl killer. not invited to this thread, or any other i post.

----------


## El Guapo

> Well isnt it odd they are referred to, and refer to themselves as "The Navaho nation" or the "Souix nation".


 Culturally appropriated terms, paleface.

----------

StanAtStanFan (09-05-2021)

----------


## Big Wheeler

"Mistreated" says Stan.   Here's me thinking the Brits are masters of understatement.

----------

UKSmartypants (09-06-2021)

----------


## UKSmartypants

> Culturally appropriated terms, paleface.


well a half american indian i talk to called Ron Pleec, when asked, said to me "Yes and no, most refer to themselves as Cherokee, Apache, Chippewa, or Pawnee, which ever tribe *or nation* they originated "

----------


## El Guapo

> well a half american indian i talk to called Ron Pleec, when asked, said to me "Yes and no, most refer to themselves as Cherokee, Apache, Chippewa, or Pawnee, which ever tribe *or nation* they originated "


 You seem to be having a lot of comprehension difficulties of late.

 also...if you can't tie your screeds to the Canadian military or the Canadian Motorcycle scene...then I suggest you start another thread.

----------

Big Dummy (09-05-2021),StanAtStanFan (09-05-2021)

----------


## El Guapo

Somewhere else.

----------


## StanAtStanFan

> Well isnt it odd they are referred to, and refer to themselves as "The Navaho nation" or the "Souix nation".
> 
> GTFO, you vile owl killer. not invited to this thread, or any other i post.



They could refer to themselves whatever way they wanted to, but they didn't own the Western land, and were not nations. The ONLY actual Indian nation in America, was the Six Nation Iroquois Confederation of tribes in Eastern Canada and the United States with their massive lands and a Constitution that predated America's by 200 years. The rest of the Native American tribal lands were known as Indian Territories, NOT COUNTRIES.

In fact, the Iroquois were camped on the grounds of Independence Hall in Philadelphia when our philosophical Founding Fathers were writing the U.S. Constitution, which borrowed heavily from the Iroquois Constitution at the time, hoping for citizenship. They were sponsored for it by Benjamin Franklin. Our Founding Fathers, revered today as they are, forgot just a few when establishing the American Republic. Like the Black slaves, the Iroquois and, oh yea, women, as citizens. Although many were slave owners, and the Constitution recognized that for every three slaves owned, it would count as one person in population, we didn't exactly live up to our lofty rhetoric. The Native Americans were denied citizenship. It took a mega Civil War and Constitutional Amendment in the middle of it, to eradicate slavery and involuntary servitude in America, and 144 years, all the way to 1920, for women to obtain the right to vote in our republic.

We have had this discussion before, you have learned nothing from it nor forgot anything about it, being on the dead wrong side of history as it applies to America. The Native American Indians, wandering the vast Western lands, established no towns; no infrastructure; no religious beliefs; no monuments; no cities, nothing of intrinsic value that would establish them as countries, for the American government to recognize. Meanwhile, millions of European immigrants from your own countries persecution (the Pilgrims came to America because of religious persecution by the British); along with French; Polish; German; Italian and Russians flocked to America, in search of freedom and land, and found it in the Homestead Act passed by Congress to move them to settle the West. The Native Americans fought that decision, were defeated, and relegated to reservations. If they had any infrastructure that could be recognized, other than the lowest form of human development, stone-age hunter-gathering types, perhaps the story would have been different, but they never were, nor considered to be "nations." 

Meanwhile, just to add some more facts, the British Crown and media of the time, desperately cried over the rape of tiny Belgium by the Germans, bringing England into World War I, where their stupid generals, Kitchener in particular, cost them an entire generation of their youth. Same occurred in France, which is why the French were defensive, and wouldn't fight the Nazi's in 1939 when they could have unleashed a million man army and destroyed Hitler and his movement. The Crown, crying crocodile tears for tiny Belgium (with a horrific colonial record of conquest in Central Africa known as the Belgium Congo at the time), plead with the tiny Irish to enlist and fight for England against Germany, with the promise of Home Rule for Ireland at the conclusion of the war - instead they crushed a minor rebellion of writers, poets and entertainers in 1916 at the Dublin Easter Rising, executing the leaders without trial for the act of disobeying a government they totally disagreed with being imposed on them.

In 1939, the vaunted British actually went to war with Nazi Germany over the invasion of Poland, a small nation which has disappeared several times from the map of Europe, and was more anti-semantic to the Jewish population there than Hitler's Nazi's were. You don't seem to know, or acknowledge these events - and try to concentrate on how badly America treated our Native Americans, when in fact, we took in your persecuted immigration population, used it to become the world's greatest power, and have never attempted to colonize anybody in our history.

As to whether I am invited or not to post to any member of the forum, you post it up in here, everybody can answer to it, I just happen to be telling the truth on you and the British history, which you are extremely lacking, or choosing to ignore in discussions. When you are going to post up historical fact, try to research the actual history before doing so, because you know little about the subject.


Stan

----------


## Big Wheeler

So,Stan.Quite apart from most of your rant,whatever status you give the north American native population you imply that your country's treatment of them was fine and barely worthy of comment.
And another thing. It's anti semitic !  I can explain semantic to you if you don't understand

----------

UKSmartypants (09-06-2021)

----------


## StanAtStanFan

> So,Stan.Quite apart from most of your rant,whatever status you give the north American native population you imply that your country's treatment of them was fine and barely worthy of comment.
> And another thing. It's anti semitic !  I can explain semantic to you if you don't understand



It is not a rant, it is simply telling history as it happened. Our treatment of the Native American Indians wasn't fine, nor is it not worthy of mentioning, it is. However, the implication of our British poster is that our government's response to the Indians is somehow comparable to the British invading and conquering nation after nation without cause, for profit, establishing the British Empire. That is fact. 

The Native American's were never considered to be "nations" - simply wandering "hunter-gathering" clans. They were moved to accommodate the massive European immigration influx in the 1800's from Europe, particularly Ireland and Eastern European countries. He never acknowledges that, nor the British atrocities in Ireland for 700 years and in South Africa. I also note that he doesn't seem to give the Aborigine population of Australia, founded as a British penal colony, the status of a nation, seems strange, they are and were exactly like the Native American Indian population.

I understand anti-semantic just fine, and the fact England and France went to war in 1939 over a nation, Poland, that was just as anti-semantic as Nazi Germany was, is one of the strangest things in history. That they went into World War I to save the integrity of another hostile colonial power, tiny Belgium, while imploring tiny Ireland to enlist and allow her men to bleed out on Flanders Fields and the Somme, on the promise of Irish Home Rule after that war, and then denied it, was just typical of their normal misrule of the countries they put their boots into.

You got any other things for my consideration? If I wanted to post a rant, it wouldn't be of historical truths, but a lot different type of post.


Stan

----------


## UKSmartypants

> Stan



TL;DR.

eff off, not interested in what you have to say, you disgusting  owl killer

----------


## StanAtStanFan

> TL;DR.
> 
> eff off, not interested in what you have to say, you disgusting  owl killer




You are about three pints short of a six pack son. Chill.

We are discussing basic known history - your knowledge of it is feeble. You are trying to defend the British Empire as some all encompassing, grand monolith organization which brought peace and prosperity to the world - and also trying to diminish America in the process as lessor for our policies, on our own land. 

The British Empire didn't bring peace or prosperity to its conquered countries. More, it brought misery on many of the nations that they conquered and ruled. Without America - you all would be speaking German today, the Nazi's had sent your military tail-dragging back to the home island, and your navy was in a shambles in 1940-1941.  The U-Boats owned the Atlantic. Your country still exists today because of American industrial supplies and our food sent to you through Lend Lease, past those Nazi-U-Boats. Many American sailors drowned to get those supplies to you.


I will admit that the British Navy shielded the United States in the early years of the countries founding, allowing Manifest Destiny to advance us from the Atlantic to the Pacific, without European interference. They also eliminated the slave trade on the high seas. This all occurred after the War of 1812, which they lost, after the King sent his troops to America with the instruction to punish us - but occupy no territory. Punish being the operative word for British Foreign Policy throughout its empire.


That war brought America its Star Spangled Banner, made a hero and President out of Andrew Jackson, saw Washington burned to the ground, and the British army destroyed at the Battle of New Orleans, and the British Navy destroyed at the Battle of Lake Erie. After that, America-British relations were generally stable, and solidified in the American involvement in World War I and World War II. That "special relationship" between our two countries, still exists today, and is a bulwark against oppression in Europe. The Queen, gawd bless her, has sat on the British throne since, amazingly, 1951. All of that is a credit to the John Bull's.


But if you are going to try to sell the foreign policies of the East India Tea Company; British conquests against the Zulu's and the Boers in South Africa; British rule of India; Palestine; Australia; and most particularly, Ireland, as something to brag about - you don't know jack about or have decided to ignore your own history. More importantly, instead of ripping off nasty one liners or defending, or acknowledging known history, it shows me simply that you are not in my league historically, or debate wise, here on a debate forum. Every time you post on the topic, you come off as stupid and childish.


You can dish it out, and you can't take the truth back. I could spend months teaching you British history AND literature, of which you sorely lack, AND American history, of which I happen to teach. 

Step up, or step aside dude - your opinions are not logical, polite or factual in the discussion, and your fear of the confrontation is obvious.


Stan

----------


## Big Wheeler

Stan.It's interesting to see history from the American perspective.I'm reluctant to comment on WW2 because i may give the impression of not appreciating the human effort of American forces.This is far from the case.You may remember that our war started started 2 years before yours after the UK and the rest of Europe stood by and watched German rearmament and were driven back by the impetus of blitzkrieg.Yes,we would have struggled to survive without supplies and equipment from the US but it wasn't given to your best buddies was it?It was paid for handsomely and had a lot to do with the US being the only country in the world to do very nicely,economically,thank you out of WW2.How many US cities,ports and industrial sites were bombed daily by enemy bombing raids?How many women and children were killed in their homes?Our fightback initially was enabled by soldiers from the former empire(now Commonwealth)countries who you say hated and despised us but put their lives on the line to assist their mother country.By the time the US stationed troops in the UK and were trained up for D Day our war had been going on for 4 years.American forces certainly shortened the war but it depends what you read whether the rest of the allies could have prevailed alone.To say you saved me and my countrymen from speaking German is insulting to the whole country.
Then you drift back to 1812.For heaven's sake.The battles of Lake Erie and New Orleans were 2 of the British army's long list of screw ups over the centuries.The latter being pointless being fought after the peace treaty was signed.I've just seen a tv programme about an abandoned fort near the battle site.The books I have read regarding the war of 1812 put the result in boxing terms as a points win for the Brits because they retained their north American possessions.Also remember that our forces had unfinished business in Europe with a guy called Napoleon.
The above,though,is not your real issue though is it Stan.You've made similar statements several times while I've been a member of this forum.The bottom line is that you must have Irish descent which has twisted your brain into hating all English (me too?why?)over perceived slights over(you say)700 years.Anyone who lets something like that fester in his head needs serious heavy duty therapy.You are as bad as jews and arabs.

----------


## StanAtStanFan

> Stan.It's interesting to see history from the American perspective.I'm reluctant to comment on WW2 because i may give the impression of not appreciating the human effort of American forces.This is far from the case.You may remember that our war started started 2 years before yours after the UK and the rest of Europe stood by and watched German rearmament and were driven back by the impetus of blitzkrieg.Yes,we would have struggled to survive without supplies and equipment from the US but it wasn't given to your best buddies was it?It was paid for handsomely and had a lot to do with the US being the only country in the world to do very nicely,economically,thank you out of WW2.How many US cities,ports and industrial sites were bombed daily by enemy bombing raids?How many women and children were killed in their homes?Our fightback initially was enabled by soldiers from the former empire(now Commonwealth)countries who you say hated and despised us but put their lives on the line to assist their mother country.By the time the US stationed troops in the UK and were trained up for D Day our war had been going on for 4 years.American forces certainly shortened the war but it depends what you read whether the rest of the allies could have prevailed alone.To say you saved me and my countrymen from speaking German is insulting to the whole country.
> Then you drift back to 1812.For heaven's sake.The battles of Lake Erie and New Orleans were 2 of the British army's long list of screw ups over the centuries.The latter being pointless being fought after the peace treaty was signed.I've just seen a tv programme about an abandoned fort near the battle site.The books I have read regarding the war of 1812 put the result in boxing terms as a points win for the Brits because they retained their north American possessions.Also remember that our forces had unfinished business in Europe with a guy called Napoleon.
> The above,though,is not your real issue though is it Stan.You've made similar statements several times while I've been a member of this forum.The bottom line is that you must have Irish descent which has twisted your brain into hating all English (me too?why?)over perceived slights over(you say)700 years.Anyone who lets something like that fester in his head needs serious heavy duty therapy.You are as bad as jews and arabs.



The RAF saved England in 1940, but the British Army was not a factor - it had saved the troops with the Dunkirk evacuation, but lost all of its weapons on the beach there. Hitler's strange order for Guderian to halt his attack on the BEF for three days allowed for the miracle at Dunkirk, otherwise you would have had to face the panzers and German Luftwaffe in the sand. Outcome of that? Probably dismal.

Most historians consider Hitler's biggest error was his attack on the Soviet Union. Why not, the Nazi's were flush with victory after victory, and controlled the land mass of Europe. I have always felt his biggest error was leaving England as an adversary in his European backyard, but he expected the German Air Force to convince them to quit, and pull a Petain-type French government he could install as an ally. Churchill, with nothing to bargain with but the hope of America entering the war, convinced England not to give up. 

America flooded the island with war material, and the Nazi's didn't have a Case Lion for an overseas water attack against the British home island. Had the German General Staff planned for such an attack, flooding the channel with U-Boats, and forcing the British to bring what remained of their navy back to the home island, questionable whether England could have survived. Hitler was reckless and bold, but actually a talented amateur like Churchill. Had there been a plan to cross the channel in 1940, when your BEF was stranded on the beaches, Hitler probably would have initiated it. The result easily could have been a pacified England - leaving him free to tackle the Soviets. Roosevelt and Churchill decided otherwise. In fact the two met at sea, while America was still technically neutral, and declared that Germany was losing the war with their Atlantic Charter.

It was FDR, a certified Anglophile, as was Kennedy, who made the decision on Lend Lease and pushed it through the American Congress, sending massive amounts of weapons, wheeled vehicles and food supplies to England in 1940-41. Non of it was paid for it was loaned to England, repayment? Never occurred, and America never asked for repayment. Britain's North America possession during the War of 1812 was Canada.

Now, I am no Anglophile, and yes, I do have _Irish roots, but that has nothing to do with my opinion of the British Empire. The problem is simply that the other poster is attempting to equate America's treatment of the Native American Indians, with massive misrule by the British, particularly in Ireland. The Native American Indians do not have a word for ownership, and had no infrastructure development throughout their entire history. They were hunter-gathering peoples. 

America was faced with massive immigration, and only a few ways to handle it. Allow all those Irish; Polish; German; Russian; Italian immigrants flooding New York, Boston and Philadelphia to stay (which many did), or offer them an opportunity to obtain 40-acres of farmland in the American west - for $1 total, providing they stayed on the land for one year and farmed it. The Irish and Polish navies also worked on the transcontinental railroad or served in the Union Army during the Civil War. Their heritage was established in America at the expense of our movement of the Indians off of the land to make room for them. It wasn't nice, it occurred 146-some years ago, to a small group that refused to assimilate to American culture.

_Your buddy thinks that qualifies as equal to 700-years of classic misrule by England of tiny Ireland; ignores the British conquest of the Zulu and Dutch Boers in South Africa; the penal colony establishment of Australia, and their betrayal of the Jews in the partition of Palestine when they left. Note the British refused to allow immigration of the massive Jewish population into the new state of Israel, even before it was Israel. America didn't take them in either.

But we are talking about misrule, and conquest, something the British were noted for in establishing their empire. America didn't colonize anybody, and we could have easily taken over Germany and Japan permanently after the war. The two don't equate with our treatment of Indians. They also don't equate with our treatment of Blacks as slaves or Japanese-American's after Pearl Harbor, rounded up and put in camps because of war hysteria.

I can sit here and cover European and British history and conquest without a problem. Got one with the War of 1812, well I can debate Henry II (Henry Plantangenet and Eleanor of Aquataine) with ease if you want. I can debate the Black & Tans in Ireland; the concentration camps created for the Boers in South Africa, on and on - pick a topic in English history. 

America used England as a staging base for the invasion of France in 1944, what delayed that was we were fighting a two-front war in the Pacific and fighting in Sicily and Italy at the time. Chief of Staff George Marshall (who the Marshal Plan was named after), told the Zionists constantly bothering Roosevelt to do something about the holocaust in Europe (which they knew all about at the time), and Marshal answered them simply with the fact Germany would be defeated when we were capable of walking our individual soldiers into that country and shooting the Nazi's dead. And that is exactly what occurred.

We rebuilt Europe at American taxpayer expense, after the war, and initiated a protective ring there, called NATO. In their entire history, England has never done anything equivalent to that - I just want it acknowledged, instead of being told to f-off.


Stan

----------


## Authentic

Disgusting owl killer. Is that the new Ugly American?

----------


## Authentic

Some of the posts in this thread are nearly thesis length.

----------

TheOneOnly2 (09-08-2021)

----------


## Authentic

I prefer "vile owl killer".

----------


## Big Wheeler

Interesting read again Stan.A lot of speculation about what might or could have,but didn't.Numerous events in history have been defined because someone did or didn't make a particular decision.
The US were repaid their war debt by the UK in 2006 including interest at 2% according to a paper I've just read.The US Gross National Product also rose from $88.6 bn in 1939 to $135 bn.in 1944.In the meantime and for 10 years after the UK and others had food rationing of stuff like butter and cheese.During this time,apart from heroic American military forces,the war was something you read about in the papers.If I understand correctly the US took over free 99 year leases on several military bases,particularly in the area of the West Indies.
We both know that the British Empire has been the only ever empire to exist since the year dot,and that empires aren't established by being nice.Oh.I just remembered Genghiz Khan and the Ottomans.Jolly decent chaps unlike us Brits.Whatever differences may have existed the Commonwealth is a sociable association who let the past lie.As indeed do 99.9% of the Irish apart from a tiny minority of fanatics.As you know your president Biden has excelled himself recently and dropped some of his allies in the crap.I read a resume about him and he appears to be a supporter of Irish nationalism which will endear him to a small section of the American population.
I know of Henry II.Although king of England,technically he was French with a fearsome mother and wife.As it happens when I drive to/from my home in Spain I pass through the village in France(Fontevraud)where he and his son(Richard)were buried.I am not intellectual but I have an interest in history.At school my history teacher considered me useless and told me to report to the art room and draw some pictures.
As for NATO,obviously with its extra size and population it was sponsored by the US being like a big brother to other smaller countries.As I understand it the UK kept up its responsibilities of support where some others didn't.
Finally,do you or anybody else know why these conversation began life in a thread about a fight between Canadian troops and a biker gang?

----------


## StanAtStanFan

> Some of the posts in this thread are nearly thesis length.


So - you having reading and comprehension troubles also?
Now you can agree or disagree with my POV about the British, makes no difference to me whatsoever. 
But we are America, we air our dirty laundry in public, and fly our flag proudly across the world and celebrate our success in public.

England, particularly London? Well, no city in America would fly a huge mylar balloon around its town center with a reflective message that the Queen is a whore - yet they did fly one around with President Trump's image reflecting he was a "pig" and you did nothing to stop it. In fact, we allow Roger Waters, the remaining touring member of Pink Floyd, to appear here in concerts flying the same type of balloon around American arenas with "Trump Is A Pig" and his likeness. That is what American freedom is in action, allowing the stupid and lame to protest with impunity. Thousands walked out of his Miami concert, who came to hear great music, when they saw that balloon hovering across the stage throughout the evening. Fully half of our security team for concerts have already notified the office they will not work his upcoming fall concert here. Also? Your noted Rolling Stone guitarist, Keith Richards, facing seven years in prison in Canada for pot possession, was handed, without any qualms by the American government, a visa to come to America to get clean - he accepted. 

Do we reserve that treatment just for foreigners? No. Madonna got the same treatment in Miami when she came on stage an hour late, and decided to make political speech instead of singing her famous songs. Again, thousands walked out, she learned quickly, and the next year on her return, she started the concert on-time, with "Lucky Star" and sang her entire body of music straight through.

Does it have anything to do with mistreatment of minorities in long ago history? No. But it shows what Brits find amusing about us to label our President at the time he visited the Queen, and from the comments I am receiving from short term posters like yourself - I am not surprised. You don't take criticism well, never did. That would be OK if you had any historical knowledge of the topic, which apparently you don't, or refuse to acknowledge. But the two of your views on the British Empire and its history, well, you both happen to be obtuse. That's twenty three lines - about a quarter page of a normal book - take your time - I know you will be able to read that far. If you can't, don't post back.


Stan

----------


## StanAtStanFan

> Interesting read again Stan.A lot of speculation about what might or could have,but didn't.Numerous events in history have been defined because someone did or didn't make a particular decision.
> The US were repaid their war debt by the UK in 2006 including interest at 2% according to a paper I've just read.The US Gross National Product also rose from $88.6 bn in 1939 to $135 bn.in 1944.In the meantime and for 10 years after the UK and others had food rationing of stuff like butter and cheese.During this time,apart from heroic American military forces,the war was something you read about in the papers.If I understand correctly the US took over free 99 year leases on several military bases,particularly in the area of the West Indies.
> We both know that the British Empire has been the only ever empire to exist since the year dot,and that empires aren't established by being nice.Oh.I just remembered Genghiz Khan and the Ottomans.Jolly decent chaps unlike us Brits.Whatever differences may have existed the Commonwealth is a sociable association who let the past lie.As indeed do 99.9% of the Irish apart from a tiny minority of fanatics.As you know your president Biden has excelled himself recently and dropped some of his allies in the crap.I read a resume about him and he appears to be a supporter of Irish nationalism which will endear him to a small section of the American population.
> I know of Henry II.Although king of England,technically he was French with a fearsome mother and wife.As it happens when I drive to/from my home in Spain I pass through the village in France(Fontevraud)where he and his son(Richard)were buried.I am not intellectual but I have an interest in history.At school my history teacher considered me useless and told me to report to the art room and draw some pictures.
> As for NATO,obviously with its extra size and population it was sponsored by the US being like a big brother to other smaller countries.As I understand it the UK kept up its responsibilities of support where some others didn't.
> Finally,do you or anybody else know why these conversation began life in a thread about a fight between Canadian troops and a biker gang?





Henry II ruled from Chinon, on the French coast. I don't think he even set foot in England. That was common in those times. 
It also is the reason that a third of our English language is French, it was the language of the royal court. He led the only Crusade that came close to taking Jerusalem, and occupied Acre (where the vaunted Knight's Templer were based - later to return to France).

I know where he is buried, just put it up to see if you English posters knew any of your own history.

The Biker Thread was dead, we took it over, also not uncommon.

As for American military bases. We established numerous ones, particularly in England and Germany, in support of the new NATO alliance at the time. The French, as is their habit, sort of went their own way on NATO. 

Those in the West Indies? America still occupies Guantanamo in Cuba. We gave the Panama Canal Zone, an American territory, back to Panama decades ago. Puerto Rico, where Roosevelt Roads AFB was located, was and is an American territory, with their citizen's holding American citizenship rights. Guantanamo and Roosevelt Roads (now closed), were air bases used to protect the Panama Canal, still a vital waterway cutting weeks off of shipping between the Pacific and Atlantic. That canal was built by America's Teddy Roosevelt.

NATO, founded under the Truman Administration, stopped Soviet excursion farther into Western Europe. Under the Czar or Soviets, the Russian Bear is always the same, grabbing off land. NATO backed them out - the Soviet Army never advanced any further than their chop lines of where their massive army stood when World War II ended in Europe.

----------


## Authentic

> So - you having reading and comprehension troubles, slso?


No. I never said that. I said that some of the posts on this thread were approaching thesis length, not neccesarily yours. That isn't neccesarily a bad thing, just a comment, so maybe it is you who has the reading and comprehension problem. If so, that and your attitude should preclude you from teaching high school in a wealthy area of west Broward County. Maybe you should focus on security at Heat games.

----------

Oceander (09-07-2021)

----------


## Authentic

LOL! I just read post #29 and realize that Stan thinks that I am a Brit!

----------

TheOneOnly2 (09-08-2021)

----------


## Big Wheeler

Henry II spent a good part of his reign in England.His mother fought hard to get him the job.He probably spoke angevin,norman and latin.The first English king to speak English  was maybe Edward III(?) Henry sent troops into Ireland(sorry) and struggled for power with his sons.He was also responsible for the murder of Beckett which affected him deeply.I have visited Chinon.Very impressive.
West Indies territories? I understand they are on a 99 year lease and I doubt if I will be around when time is up.

----------

Authentic (09-07-2021)

----------


## Authentic

"Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?"

----------


## StanAtStanFan

> No. I never said that. I said that some of the posts on this thread were approaching thesis length, not neccesarily yours. That isn't neccesarily a bad thing, just a comment, so maybe it is you who has the reading and comprehension problem. If so, that and your attitude should preclude you from teaching high school in a wealthy area of west Broward County. Maybe you should focus on security at Heat games.



And why would I kick away 16-years of teaching in public High School? And, my attitude certainly isn't shared by my superiors regarding my teaching ability, otherwise, I would have been gone in 2005, here it is 2021, and you certainly are not qualified to evaluate it, based off of internet posts, shesh. 

There is nothing wrong with my attitude - nor my perception and comprehension, of posters who can't understand their own countries history.

I will apologize, England has paid America its World War II debts from the Marshal Plan. They had options, however, to defer the yearly payment anytime they needed to and used that option about 7-times. Took them 50-years, but they repaid it, along with repaying Canada.

But - it is interesting how you have decided to pull a Democratic smokescreen over the topic, by moving the goalposts, and never addressing the real issue or facts of the topic, the history of the British Empire's misrule and conquest. Instead of making historical posts - you have made it personal. That shows great immaturity.

Stan

----------


## Authentic

> And why would I kick away 16-years of teaching in public High School? And, my attitude certainly isn't shared by my superiors regarding my teaching ability, otherwise, I would have been gone in 2005, here it is 2021, and you certainly are not qualified to evaluate it, based off of internet posts, shesh. 
> 
> There is nothing wrong with my attitude - nor my perception and comprehension, of posters who can't understand their own countries history.
> 
> I will apologize, England has paid America its World War II debts from the Marshal Plan. They had options, however, to defer the yearly payment anytime they needed to and used that option about 7-times. Took them 50-years, but they repaid it, along with repaying Canada.
> 
> But - it is interesting how you have decided to pull a Democratic smokescreen over the topic, by moving the goalposts, and never addressing the real issue or facts of the topic, the history of the British Empire's misrule and conquest. Instead of making historical posts - you have made it personal. That shows great immaturity.
> 
> Stan


Dude, I haven't yet made any comment on the substance of the posts in this thread - I commented on their length - and I didn't do it negatively (although I can see some room for ambiguity).

Do you teach your students to make such off the wall assumptions as those you have leapt to concerning me?

----------


## Authentic

Interacting with Stan is like talking to an FBI agent - it is better if you don't.

----------


## Big Wheeler

> "Will no one rid me of this troublesome priest?"


That's the guy.The site of the deed is clearly marked for tourists at Canterbury Cathedral.It has been cleaned up since!

----------

Authentic (09-07-2021)

----------


## Authentic

> So what then was it precisely you did to the Souix, the Irapaho, the Pawnee, the Lacota and hundreds of other Native American Tribes, whos land you stole, burial grounds you violated,  who's hunting grounds you built towns on and whos sacred sites you trampled over. Not to mention the oppression of native culture (hands up all those who tried to ban Ghost Dancing), and the hundreds of Treaties you tore up when it suited you.
> 
> You are living in a gigantic glass house ,mate . when it comes to this subject. Best keep your head down unless you want to start  a massive flame war.


Those nations are and have always been sovereign under the United States constitution. When the United States was involved in the Indian Wars, it was against sovereign peoples and in response to their atrocities and raids against Americans. That they got practically wiped out in the process is because of their own aggressive actions and inability to adapt to change.

Did you learn CRT in Britain? That is what it sounds like to me. I'll tell you what - you quit trying to tarnish America for the Indian policy and I won't go on about British behavior towards natives in the Carribean.

I _will_ criticize Britain for what they did in Ireland. Something Stan and I can agree upon.

----------


## Authentic

> TL;DR.
> 
> eff off, not interested in what you have to say, you disgusting  owl killer


Are you confusing Stan with TOO2?

----------


## StanAtStanFan

> Those nations are and have always been sovereign under the United States constitution. When the United States was involved in the Indian Wars, it was against sovereign peoples and in response to their atrocities and raids against Americans. That they got practically wiped out in the process is because of their own aggressive actions and inability to adapt to change.
> 
> Did you learn CRT in Britain? That is what it sounds like to me. I'll tell you what - you quit trying to tarnish America for the Indian policy and I won't go on about British behavior towards natives in the Carribean.
> 
> I _will_ criticize Britain for what they did in Ireland. Something Stan and I can agree upon.



A fair response. I don't address, condone, or teach CRT in my classrooms, and it isn't taught in our schools in Florida. 
I don't know any teacher that does teach any version of it in our public schools, we stay away from political discussions like those we have here on the
internet. Mainly because the students are too young, and impressionable to make their own decisions about it. 

I deplore educators or School Boards that actually have CRT even for informational purposes. High School students are usually liberal, but not leftists. They tend to move to the conservative side of politics after college, marriage and a couple of children come along. Life comes along and changes your outlook.

American public schools, do, however, teach a mandatory class on the Nazi Holocaust, usually in the 10th grade. Some schools it is an entire credit mandatory class, some it is a week or two long discussion like Black History month concentrates on their history. A good portion of my students are from very wealthy South American Hispanic origins. American Government; Macro Economics and English 4 (British Literature), are mandatory classes in Florida that you have to pass in order to receive a High School diploma. At one time or another, have routinely taught all three of them.


Stan

----------

Authentic (09-07-2021)

----------


## TheOneOnly2

> Well isnt it odd they are referred to, and refer to themselves as "The Navaho nation" or the "Souix nation".
> 
> GTFO, you vile owl killer. not invited to this thread, or any other i post.


Ha.

----------


## TheOneOnly2

> Disgusting owl killer. Is that the new Ugly American?


Im Australian.

----------


## TheOneOnly2

Cant we all just get along?

----------


## Authentic

> Cant we all just get along?


No. Rodney King died.

----------

