Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
Your total lack of any real knowledge on the war is no surprise to me.'Ill informed clump' is a new one on me.Is it an English version of thicket?
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[Politics] Brexit
- Thread starter KingstonSeagull
- Start date
Your total lack of any real knowledge on the war is no surprise to me.'Ill informed clump' is a new one on me.Is it an English version of thicket?
fanseagull
New member
- Dec 18, 2018
- 228
Yes, yes he can....
Baldseagull
Well-known member
If only they had been coordinated in some sort of European joint defence strategy, they might have been able to resist more effectively a large and powerful neighbour with ambitions to expand.
Rodney Thomas
Well-known member
The Greek government did help us. Metexas said no to the Italian ambassador and thus join the British in the flight against Axis forces. They pushed the Italians back into Albania and if we’d offered them more support they might have held the line in Macedonia against the Germans. They continued to flight to the death in Crete to support the British evacuation. So, yes, they were helping us as a country (and government) against the Germans. Churchill even called it their “finest hour” for **** sake.
You’ve got yourself into such a muddle you’re even disagreeing with Churchill
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
Oh dear,the reason appeasement was so necessary was it gave us time to manufacture the aircraft needed to defeat the Luftwaffe.The French were far more powerful than Germany,but badly led by their politicians.The Germans hadn't conquered half of France when they surrendered.
Bloke who doesn't know modern day China is not a democratic country accuses fellow poster of not knowing what he's talking about.
Reminds me Farage whinging ignorantly about the highly educated and experienced Bank of England governor being a remainer - from his position of losing his last election to a man dressed as a dolphin.
dingodan
New member
- Feb 16, 2011
- 10,080
Recommended reading:
http://www.europarl.europa.eu/legis...nger-global-actor/file-european-defence-union
https://www.pism.pl/publications/bulletin/no-162-1233
https://carnegieeurope.eu/2017/12/05/is-there-hope-for-eu-foreign-policy-pub-74909
https://www.euractiv.com/section/de...s-macron-proposes-eu-collective-defence-plan/
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
The Greek government did help us. Metexas said no to the Italian ambassador and thus join the British in the flight against Axis forces. They pushed the Italians back into Albania and if we’d offered them more support they might have held the line in Macedonia against the Germans. They continued to flight to the death in Crete to support the British evacuation. So, yes, they were helping us as a country (and government) against the Germans. Churchill even called it their “finest hour” for **** sake.
You’ve got yourself into such a muddle you’re even disagreeing with Churchill
So are you trying to tell me the Greeks didn't surrender then?As for quoting Churchill,I dare say you can find him saying just about anything,he was a politician for many years,and a journalist before that.
I'm sure someone more informed than me will come along to explain why you're wrong as usual. But in any case, that's one country out of dozens of examples.
Still, at least we now know you are aware that France is in Europe, which is a little surprising.
Rodney Thomas
Well-known member
Certainly some of them surrendered (after flighting valiantly, delaying Operation Barbarossa, helping the British evacuate to Egypt and then continuing a bloody resistance battle).
However, you stated that no country helped us before 1944. The Greeks did. Thus you were wrong.
Last edited:
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
See,you can still learn new things if you make the effort.I love the French people,their food,wine,culture and have enjoyed many holidays there.I don't like their politics or politicians,or their habit of kow-towing to Germany,and expecting others to bail them out.
Two Professors
Two Mad Professors
Certainly some of them surrendered (after flight valiantly, delaying Operation Barbarossa, helping British evacuate to Egypt and then continuing a bloody resistance battle).
However, you stated that no country helped us before 1944. The Greeks did. Thus you were wrong.
Let's just agree to disagree!
The main reason for appeasement was primarily that Britain thought war wouldn't happen because the Germans wouldn't be mad enough to go to war with them, and by the late 1930s were hopelessly unprepared for war. There was a massive push in armaments production after the invasion of the Sudetenland but by September 1939 Britain was hopelessly unprepared for war, and had it not been for the phoney war Britain would have struggled to compete. Indeed had there been some form of land crossing to allow the Wehrmacht into Britain in 1940 Britain would probably have lost.
Rodney Thomas
Well-known member
Let's just agree to disagree!
Meh, no skin off my back.
Last edited:
Partially true, however there was also a level of hubris about Britain's approach. "Germany would never attack us, don't they know who we are?" Perfidious Albion is not a new concept in international diplomacy.
As to the French being more powerful, this is a dubious claim. If you think of it purely in terms of the Western front possibly, bearing in mind much of the German war machine was already in the East subjugating Poland et al. But the French were more militarily naive than politically so, they put too much faith in the Maginot Line, which the Germans promptly walked around through the low countries.
KZNSeagull
Well-known member
Second referendum amendment will not now be put forward as Labour leadership will not support it.
What The Clamp has written is true, your denigration of the resistance movements across Europe does you no favours. Their help in extricating spies and escaped POWs was immense, and they also helped lay the ground for tactical missions such as Operation Deadstick.
cunning fergus
Well-known member
- Jan 18, 2009
- 4,747
No different then from Dyson? This not about leave or remain this is about capitalism and manoeuvring to extract maximum profit for shareholders. It was not that long ago that Airbus lost a dispute at WTO because it was in receipt of £22bn (approx) of subsidies from 4 Govs including the UK.
So, if they go, (like others have before while in the EU) they can pay back the loan in full.
Trouble is capitalists like their political handmaidens are liars.....
https://www.bloombergquint.com/poli...y-in-post-brexit-u-k-for-a-very-long-time.amp
There is no truth, merely words on a balance sheet.
Baldseagull
Well-known member
The possibility of a common defence policy is enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty's Article 42. I have already posted what the hurdles that possibility has to overcome are, to become reality, and that we cannot be forced into anything we don't want to sign up to.
Bar the first link, all of your links re iterate this and some suggest ways to achieve greater co operation in Foreign policy without there being a loss of individual member control.
Please understand that in the same way as there is no NATO army, there will not be an EU Army, all that there is, is commitment to work more closely together and for the EU to bear some of the cost of joint operations that are for the benefit of the wider EU. It really is not the case that an EU citizen will ever be able to join an EU army, they can join their national army, and may be sent on EU operations by that nations command, just as they do for NATO or UN operations.
Last edited: