Political Crossfire Forums

[thundertaker]

Quote: Empire is evil in my opinion, no matter how you dress it up and for people in my nation to still be blabbering about empire when it only led to death, suffering and slavery is incredibly sick.

The empire is dead, devolution will finally destroy that most sickening of sights.......The Union Jack, emblem of superiority and exploitation across the world.

I totally disagree with your position on the Empire. The British Empire was in no way comparable to the Third Reich, and had it's good points as well as bad points.
For a start, your point about it encouraging slavery completely ignores the fact that the British Empire did more than any other global institution to rid the world of trade in human beings from about 1807 when the Royal Navy was deployed to intercept slave ships travelling to other countries, and from the 1830s onwards when slavery was abolished throughout the Empire.
Countries such as India, Canada, Australia, New Zealand and even the United States would not be the successful democracies they are today without the British Empire.

Your point about the Union Jack is especially misguided. The Union Jack is a symbol of Liberal Values and the rule of law, not just the Empire itself. Servicemen and Women who helped to liberate the Continent from Nazi tyranny and the far East from Japanese brutality fought under that flag....

[Limey Boosk]

Britain was the first truely multi-cultural country. It emancipated slaves 60 years before the yanks. In a recent poll of Europeans, Britain topped the poll by a country mile in the chart when asked 'Which country has done the most for the world?'.

I think a lot of other people on this forum are jealous of Britains success in the world. Its sad that the old inferiority complex is still around. I see it all the time in Americans. Thats why all the hollywood villians have English accents.

Its a bit sad. I view us all as equal. Except the French. And the gay spartans.

[thundertaker]

Limey Boosk wrote: Britain was the first truely multi-cultural country. It emancipated slaves 60 years before the yanks. In a recent poll of Europeans, Britain topped the poll by a country mile in the chart when asked 'Which country has done the most for the world?'.


30 years, although some American States such as Massachusets abolished slavery as early as the 1780s, at a time when the cause of Granville Sharp was dismissed as that of an extremist fringe activist.......

[Limey Boosk]

There was several acts that led to the absolute ridding of slavery in Britain. I think it started with an act in 1806. Each time the blackies got a bit more freedom.

Its funny how William Wilberforce is hardly known, but Abe Lincoln sets a bunch of them free due to the pressure of a civil war and he is a hero. What crap!

[Spider]

Limey Boosk wrote: Britain was the first truely multi-cultural country. It emancipated slaves 60 years before the yanks. In a recent poll of Europeans, Britain topped the poll by a country mile in the chart when asked 'Which country has done the most for the world?'.

I think a lot of other people on this forum are jealous of Britains success in the world. Its sad that the old inferiority complex is still around. I see it all the time in Americans. Thats why all the hollywood villians have English accents.

Its a bit sad. I view us all as equal. Except the French. And the gay spartans.

Limey, despite the truly heroic amount of nonsensical, offensive, ill-informed, and generally mean-spirited crap you are flinging around, I can't help but admire your panache and enthusiasm. Just like those old guys who wonder around the city park looking for a chess match, mumbling disjointed nonsense, I can't help but smile. Well Done! :lol:

[Limey Boosk]

Well thanks..

hows life in the colonies? I hear it went downhill since 1776.

Give me the nod and you can become a state of the kingdom of Yorkshire.

[Spider]

Limey Boosk wrote: Well thanks..

hows life in the colonies? I hear it went downhill since 1776.

Give me the nod and you can become a state of the kingdom of Yorkshire.

Life in the colonies? Dunno. Haven't seen any colonies around here for better than a couple centuries. And I havent been to that narrow little strip on the east coast where there used to be some colonies for about 10 years. I suppose some Romans could call you up and ask you the same question...but with a lot more syllables.

Bah. If you give me the Isle of Man (hurray, no speed limits) and maybe Cornwall and Devon...we could work something out. Of course, handing over the State of Oregon would effectivly double the size of Britain...and you could use it as a quarantine zone to house all those gay spartans and unsavory gallic masses that you so despise...so maybe something of an unequal exchange could be worked out. 8:)

[Snake]

thundertaker wrote: Britain would not have been able to take the offensive without the Americans. However, Britain would not have been 'crushed' The Germans simply didn't have the naval or air resources to successfully invade and occupy Britain. Worst case scenario would have involved a negotiated peace with Hitler leaving him with a free hand to wage war in Russia and much of the continent occupied by the axis. Hitler didn't even want to fight Britain, he wanted them to stop fighting so he could concentrate on his real enemies, the Bolshevik 'Untermensch' in the East, a task which he even hoped to persuade Britain to join him with in a grand anti-communist alliance.
Some historians argue it would have been better for the British national interest to ally with Hitler against Stalin. To be honest, it's difficult to know if it was the right thing to do. Both were just as murderous and wicked as each other........ Yeah, I suppose crushed was an excessively colorful word. Patton was right though, we should have signed a peace agreement with the Germans and turned on Russia. Or perhaps not, who knows?

[Johannes]

Kamel wrote: thundertaker wrote: Britain would not have been able to take the offensive without the Americans. However, Britain would not have been 'crushed' The Germans simply didn't have the naval or air resources to successfully invade and occupy Britain. Worst case scenario would have involved a negotiated peace with Hitler leaving him with a free hand to wage war in Russia and much of the continent occupied by the axis. Hitler didn't even want to fight Britain, he wanted them to stop fighting so he could concentrate on his real enemies, the Bolshevik 'Untermensch' in the East, a task which he even hoped to persuade Britain to join him with in a grand anti-communist alliance.
Some historians argue it would have been better for the British national interest to ally with Hitler against Stalin. To be honest, it's difficult to know if it was the right thing to do. Both were just as murderous and wicked as each other........ Yeah, I suppose crushed was an excessively colorful word. Patton was right though, we should have signed a peace agreement with the Germans and turned on Russia. Or perhaps not, who knows?

Hopefully, if that route had been taken, Patton would have advised that a line be added to the treaty saying, in effect, "The Reich will not, or will stop, try or trying, to kill 6 million people.

[SpartanPhalanx]

Limey Boosk wrote: Quote: As for the Greeks, we were an advanced civilization while you were still swinging from tree to tree, so you can put that comment where the sun don't shine.

Like you say, you WERE an advanced civilization. Now you are a nation of oiley barmen who beat up women and have daft tashes.

Ever hear of the industrial revolution and the British advances in science?

Once again... :lol: Greece

LOL....and you WERE an empire one upon a time. You're living in the past buddy, someone should pour a pint of beer over you and wake you up....:-)...

You can't even build a car for crying' out loud. Your precious Jag was taken over by Ford and they are holding that bag of kaka now looking for a place to put it ...

British Leyland, now there was a fine example British engineering. I wouldn't have owned any of their crap had it been given to me wrapped in a big red bow. Rover, Austin, all gone down the toilet. You also used to build aircraft. The British Trident was a massive flop, good design but you couldn't build an engine to power it, so it too went down the toilet.

Only decent civilian aircraft you built was Concorde. Oh, wait a minute, that was a joint effort with ....wait for it......THE FRENCH.

With your track record, I'll give the French the credit there...... :lol:


You need to go back to school Mr Limey. Greece was occupied by the Ottoman Empire for 450 years. We missed the Industrial revolution because we were occupied at the time.

Anymore chunks you want to throw my way?..... :twisted:

[Nico]

yay another France bashing thread.


I swear, if a Frenchman doesn't want to shoot you he's a coward, and if he does he's a bastard. It's amazing how millions upon millions of brave war-dead and an entire Empire can slip past the radar of self-proffessed historians. Hard time to be a Frenchman if it wasn't for the fact that they have the hottest women and best food to ease their respective minds about the ill-informed, badly educated haters out there :P

[asainspace]

Limey Boosk wrote: Greece :lol:

France :lol:

Anyone heard of the Greek Empire or the French Empire?

Nope.

Anyone heard of the British Empire, the biggest Empire there ever was which spat out America, New Zealand and Australia?

Why do people even attempt argueing with us British when we are obviously the best most upstanding moral people in the world.

Moral, upstanding people are not nationality defined. I know plenty of English people who are complete losers and I wouldn't waste one minute of my time on them.

Pretending that this nation is somehow so superior to everyother is just not truthful is it. We have a rising social problem, complete swathes of youths with no future and an endemic drug culture that is rising.

If we were ever such an amazing people, then it is very evident that we are going downhill very fast and the reasons for that are numerous.

[asainspace]

Limey Boosk wrote: Quote: As for the Greeks, we were an advanced civilization while you were still swinging from tree to tree, so you can put that comment where the sun don't shine.

Like you say, you WERE an advanced civilization. Now you are a nation of oiley barmen who beat up women and have daft tashes.

Ever hear of the industrial revolution and the British advances in science?

Once again... :lol: Greece

Oh dear. :roll:

And the Greeks made no scientific advances?????

[asainspace]

Limey Boosk wrote: Quote: So, we modernised the world on the back of empire, genocide, exploitation and the disgusting period in our time when we enslaved other human beings. I saddened to read another Englishman come out with such crap.



The Glory days. They should bring them days back. Britain would still be great if it wasn't for cross-dressers like yourself.

Cross-dresser..................like to tell me how you worked that out?

[asainspace]

[quote="thundertaker"] Quote: I totally disagree with your position on the Empire. The British Empire was in no way comparable to the Third Reich, and had it's good points as well as bad points.

Whilst I agree that the Nazi regime was intimately more focused on destruction and vicimisation, you cannot ignore the fact that the very ideal of empire is evil. We are talking about the repression of people, the exploitation, an elitist circle which gains the most wealth whilst it's poorest suffer. Empire is not something to be proud of, it is something not to ever revert to.

thundertaker wrote: For a start, your point about it encouraging slavery completely ignores the fact that the British Empire did more than any other global institution to rid the world of trade in human beings from about 1807 when the Royal Navy was deployed to intercept slave ships travelling to other countries, and from the 1830s onwards when slavery was abolished throughout the Empire.

Whilst I can accept that we helped rid the world of slavery, we helped to create it. You cannot ignore responsibility for helping create such an evil practice in the first place and your statement is irrelevant when you tell me that I'm ignoring something or other. Evil acts are evil no matter what you do after to correct your mistakes and you have to accept that.



thundertaker wrote: Your point about the Union Jack is especially misguided. The Union Jack is a symbol of Liberal Values and the rule of law, not just the Empire itself. Servicemen and Women who helped to liberate the Continent from Nazi tyranny and the far East from Japanese brutality fought under that flag....

That maybe so, but it was a personal view that I do not recognise the Union Jack as the flag of my nation nor the anthem we sing to idolise such a non-entity as the monarchy. I have passed what happened under that flag to history and wish to live now for the future, as England.

[thundertaker]

asainspace wrote:

Whilst I agree that the Nazi regime was intimately more focused on destruction and vicimisation, you cannot ignore the fact that the very ideal of empire is evil. We are talking about the repression of people, the exploitation, an elitist circle which gains the most wealth whilst it's poorest suffer. Empire is not something to be proud of, it is something not to ever revert to.

If it wasn't for the British Empire, far worse Empires would have filled the void. Although the reason for the Empire was mainly based around the exploitation of resources and national prestige, the people running the Empire tended to care more about the welfare of Imperial subjects. As with the case of abolishing slavery, sutee thuggsim etc....

Quote:

Whilst I can accept that we helped rid the world of slavery, we helped to create it. You cannot ignore responsibility for helping create such an evil practice in the first place and your statement is irrelevant when you tell me that I'm ignoring something or other. Evil acts are evil no matter what you do after to correct your mistakes and you have to accept that.

We did not help create slavery. Slavery existed long before civilisation even arrived in Britain. The Portugese instigated the african slave trade as we know it. We joined in about a century later, and then abolished it and led international efforts leading to the current international situation were slavery is officially proscribed around the world (although it does exist unofficially today in some countries)...

Quote:

That maybe so, but it was a personal view that I do not recognise the Union Jack as the flag of my nation nor the anthem we sing to idolise such a non-entity as the monarchy. I have passed what happened under that flag to history and wish to live now for the future, as England.

I'm as proud to be English as the next person, but the British as a whole have been through a lot together in the past 300 years. It would be a shame then, to take the reactionary step of reverting back to our constituent nations as they existed back in the middle ages.....

[maxtsu]

asainspace wrote: That maybe so, but it was a personal view that I do not recognise the Union Jack as the flag of my nation nor the anthem we sing to idolise such a non-entity as the monarchy. I have passed what happened under that flag to history and wish to live now for the future, as England.
You make a valid point here.
I have conducted my own straw poll on this, and basically have always asked english people who do you feel most; British or English?
Overwhelming majority always respond English.
This can be seen in the support for the English football team.

[Snake]

Johannes wrote: Hopefully, if that route had been taken, Patton would have advised that a line be added to the treaty saying, in effect, "The Reich will not, or will stop, try or trying, to kill 6 million people. Once we discovered those camps, I doubt it would have been possible for them to continue the genocide.

[thundertaker]

maxtsu wrote: asainspace wrote: That maybe so, but it was a personal view that I do not recognise the Union Jack as the flag of my nation nor the anthem we sing to idolise such a non-entity as the monarchy. I have passed what happened under that flag to history and wish to live now for the future, as England.
You make a valid point here.
I have conducted my own straw poll on this, and basically have always asked english people who do you feel most; British or English?
Overwhelming majority always respond English.
This can be seen in the support for the English football team.

It wouldn't have happened if there was a UK football team, rather than 4 different ones made up of the constituent nations......

[maxtsu]

thundertaker wrote: maxtsu wrote: asainspace wrote: That maybe so, but it was a personal view that I do not recognise the Union Jack as the flag of my nation nor the anthem we sing to idolise such a non-entity as the monarchy. I have passed what happened under that flag to history and wish to live now for the future, as England.
You make a valid point here.
I have conducted my own straw poll on this, and basically have always asked english people who do you feel most; British or English?
Overwhelming majority always respond English.
This can be seen in the support for the English football team.

It wouldn't have happened if there was a UK football team, rather than 4 different ones made up of the constituent nations......
Well, in one aspect.
If the UK was not split up the way it is. Then you would be suffering break-away issues like Spain are going through at present.
At least allowing Scotland & Wales to have autonomy and put forward their own football team reduces their need to be fully independent.