Jump to content

Recommended Posts

So sorry about treating one of the most important single contributors to the allied victory in the war, up there with Zhukov or Churchill for importance, in a bit of a rum manner.

Whilst belated apologies are kind of gratifying, has anyone else noticed a penchant with Brown and Blair for apologising for others' misdeeds yet a total inability to put their hands up for their own very severe ills they brought upon the world?


It rather sours the whole experience, though lets face it, it's a bit late for poor old Alan isn't it.

I?m terribly sorry about some poor bastard a few generations ago who was persecuted by our great state which was actually not so hugely removed ideologically from the ?evil? one we were fighting and he helped us defeat.


What?s this you say about ruining the economy, getting involved in immoral illegal wars, robbing the public purse, destroying normal hard working people?s futures by flogging them of to profiteering bastards etc.


Wasn?t me! How dare you insinuate such things?

Brendan Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

... persecuted by our great

> state which was actually not so hugely removed

> ideologically from the ?evil? one we were fighting

> and he helped us defeat.


Um, well there were some relatively important differences.

Ok a bit of an exageration by Brendan, bit chemical castration or imprisonment of homosexuals is hardly something to be proud of.

Thinking about it. forcing millionsof people to pay ?64 to prove to the state that they are not paedophiles says to me that our society is making two steps forward one step back. Depressing really.

I'm generally quite proud of the British Empire but to ignore the fact that it was genocidal and overly militaristic would be a great insult to those who it trod on to make this country the nation it is today.


The majority of Britains success is down to the foothold it gained in the open market by the blatant exploitation of it's colonies natural resourses and to plunder and control these resourses the British empire utilised whatever means necessary. These means included genocide and overly militaristic ambition and endevour.

I don't disagree Brendan. I'm fiercely patriotic but I'm not about to turn a blind eye to the crimes the British empire/government committed to further it's gluton for land and subjects to harvest the resources of their conquests to satisfy their own appetite for world domination.

Anyway I?m not trying specifically to have a go at the British Army or anything. 2 of my great grnadfathers were officers. I?m glad they played the part they did in winning WW2. I definitely wouldn?t have wanted it the other way.


I was just playing on the irony that someone who helped beat the Nazis was persecuted by peculiarly Nazi like laws in his own country.

Believe me I'm no defender of empire or our shameful past. I think I'm just being a bit picky at the meaning of militarism and genocide.

Killing lots of people in colonial suppression is horrible and bloodthirsty but is not an attempt to eradicate a people or culture. Likewise the empire was by and large commercially driven and run and generally got interested proxies to do the dirty work of the actual fighting.


It wasn't until the very late nineteenth century with the perception that hegemony wa threatened by the likes of Germany that Britain became more militaristic. No coincidence that the Bier war was the first since the continental wars ofthr napoleonic era to be fought mostly by Britons rather than foreign British auxiliaries.

Again my pedantry shouldn't detract from the shame of gassing Kurdish civilians in Iraq or leaving civilians to die of starvation and disease intered in concentration camps.


But it is an important distinction.

Mockney, the British tactics used to end the Boer war were a direct attempt to eradicate the Boer people and their culture by destroying the lands, social and political structure. The mass deaths in the concentration camps were only part of this.


But please let?s not get into this on a Friday. It?s far, far too depressing.

It's a small distinction, and of no comfort to the Afrikaans, but didn't the British action against the Boers ultimately have a military purpous rather than being motivated by concepts of racial purity/inferiority?


BTW

Is that a stag do arranged by predictive text?


the worst argument for anything. Ever


Is there any vile practice which couldn't be excused by someone using that argument?


"Well obviously I stand to profit by selling your 9 year old drugs, but trust me, better I do it than the toerags from the next estate. Alls fair in love and war. I'm just a businessman etc etc"

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...