Jump to content
We’re excited to announce the forum is under new management! Details to follow.

From The Queen's Royal Lancers Website: sent to me by a friend.

Recommended Posts

Hasn't England benefited from ANYTHING due to being a member of the European Economic Community?

 

Why the anti-European bias?

 

I left England a long time ago but have been back on visits several times over the years. I find the England of today a pretty cool place to be in and a lot more prosperous in every way. It has vitality!

 

Some of this new found prosperity must be due to being a part of the EEC surely!

it's not really about the eec,more a pop at how britain has been sold down the river by politicians over the years,what we once had has been sold off,industry,mining,gas, now we are dependant on other countries whereas once we stood on our own two feet

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
now we are dependant on other countries whereas once we stood on our own two feet

 

With quite a lot of help from other countries in the last two world wars I seem to recall.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With quite a lot of help from other countries in the last two world wars I seem to recall.
What countries, you mean the Commonwealth? But I gather that if it hadn't been for us trying to help out certain other (European) countries we'd never have been involved in either of them, the starting of them was no more to do with us than the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts are.

 

I don't think the USA really 'helped' us, they only came in because of Pearl Harbour. And as I understand it, they charged us a lot of money for what they did which we only finished paying em back a few years ago? I'm not anti-Yank, I admire them for protecting their own country the way they do. But the 'special relationship' only ever seems to work one way, their way.

 

According to my grandpa, it seems that we're constantly being involved in other people's arguments and always end up carrying the can for everyone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What countries, you mean the Commonwealth? But I gather that if it hadn't been for us trying to help out certain other (European) countries we'd never have been involved in either of them, the starting of them was no more to do with us than the Afghanistan and Iraq conflicts are.

 

I don't think the USA really 'helped' us, they only came in because of Pearl Harbour. And as I understand it, they charged us a lot of money for what they did which we only finished paying em back a few years ago? I'm not anti-Yank, I admire them for protecting their own country the way they do. But the 'special relationship' only ever seems to work one way, their way.

 

According to my grandpa, it seems that we're constantly being involved in other people's arguments and always end up carrying the can for everyone else.

 

So if you believe that the "USA did not really help" do you honestly believe that Britain (and not to detract from Britains role in the war) could have launched an invasion the size of D-Day to liberate Europe. Could Britain have had the industrial might to manufacture the thousands of guns, tanks, ships, aircraft and other military hardware, aside from the manpower to overpower the Germans? I think not! So why do you come up with the argument that there was no help from the US?

 

What most likely would have happened if the US had not entered the war is that Britain by 1942 and totally bankrupt and exhausted would have made a peace agreement with Germany and become an unoccupied Vichy like state with a pro-German Prime Minister replacing Churchill

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
it's not really about the eec,more a pop at how britain has been sold down the river by politicians over the years,what we once had has been sold off,industry,mining,gas, now we are dependant on other countries whereas once we stood on our own two feet

 

It's global economics. Most likely it became cheaper for Britain's government to buy it's coal from Poland, steel products from China and natural gas from Russia and the hell with the consequences

 

Millions of jobs have been lost in the US through businesses closing down and moving to countries where labour is cheaper.

 

We're all getting screwed in the end, including the underpaid, overworked coolies in third world countries who now manufacture products we once did.

 

Only the fat cats profit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So if you believe that the "USA did not really help" do you honestly believe that Britain (and not to detract from Britains role in the war) could have launched an invasion the size of D-Day to liberate Europe. Could Britain have had the industrial might to manufacture the thousands of guns, tanks, ships, aircraft and other military hardware, aside from the manpower to overpower the Germans? I think not! So why do you come up with the argument that there was no help from the US?

 

What most likely would have happened if the US had not entered the war is that Britain by 1942 and totally bankrupt and exhausted would have made a peace agreement with Germany and become an unoccupied Vichy like state with a pro-German Prime Minister replacing Churchill

come off it,thats a loaded question,america is many more time larger than britain and so had greater resourses.

 

the americans came in after pearl harbour this was designed by your president and churchill as everyone now knows that the information about the attack was well known in advance and our two leaders needed that attack to bring the american people behind the decision to join the war,a little later than warranted but they turned up eventually,without England your troops would have had nowhere to launch the attack from as they werent capable of coming across europe to get to normandy

 

history tells that your help wasnt given,it was sold as a war debt and most of your battles were in the pacific because that was where the threat to you was greatest....you lost a lot of men and in no way do i intend to dishonour that loss,but you certainly didnt win the war on your own

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
With quite a lot of help from other countries in the last two world wars I seem to recall.
Well from what I remember if it wasn't for this little island called England most of the world would be talking german now.:mad:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
come off it,thats a loaded question,america is many more time larger than britain and so had greater resourses.

 

the americans came in after pearl harbour this was designed by your president and churchill as everyone now knows that the information about the attack was well known in advance and our two leaders needed that attack to bring the american people behind the decision to join the war,a little later than warranted but they turned up eventually,without England your troops would have had nowhere to launch the attack from as they werent capable of coming across europe to get to normandy

 

history tells that your help wasnt given,it was sold as a war debt and most of your battles were in the pacific because that was where the threat to you was greatest....you lost a lot of men and in no way do i intend to dishonour that loss,but you certainly didnt win the war on your own

 

Churchill knew in the summer of 1940 that there was no way he could fight the war alone. Britain despite it's gallant victory over the Luftwaffe that year was bankrupt and Churchill in a desperate situation. He met Roosevelt about seeking some kind of help. Roosevelt's hands were completely tied as Congress and the American people were dead against getting involved. He couldn't sell war supplies to Britain because Britain was bankrupt and unable to pay. Roosevelt then came up with the idea of Lend Lease which was the only way that the needed weaponry could be made available to Britain and by doing this Roosevelt risked at least a rebuke from Congress or at the most an impeachment

 

Dont blame the Americans for staying out of the war initially. Nobody wanted a repeat of the wholesale slaughter like that of WW1, least of all Neville Chamberlain who did everything he could to appease Hitler in order to avoid that but in that case his over appeasment of Hitler led Hitler to believe he could also invade Poland and get away with it

 

Many people on both side of the Atlantic believed up to the start of WW2 that it would also be fought in trenches with all the horrors. slaughter and mustard gas

of the first world war. The new German strategy of Blitzkrieg, lightning thrusts by fast moving tanks and infantry accompanied by attacks by air took the French and British by surprise and that's why Europe fell so quickly to the Germans. So much for the colonel Blimps of Whitehall and their ideas of WW1 warfare

 

You say most of the battles were fought in the Pacific. Maybe true but what about the battle of Normandy which was necessary for the breakout, the battle of the Hurtgen Forest (33,000 American casualties) and the German Ardennes offensive in December 1944. Those were battles that were a major contribution to destroying what was left of the German army and are therefore highly significant in history.

 

Who knows what would have happened if Britain had made peace with Germany through sheer necessity. The Yanks would never have been there and no D-Day obviously.

 

My guess woud be in that case that the US would have gone to war with Japan alone obviously. In time, (as in history) developed the A-Bomb and a few years later dropped a few of them on Japan. In the meantime Roosevelt would have had to come to some sort of peace with Hitler, which Hitler would have welcomed as he was never very enthusiastic about declaring war on the US in the first place and only did so to please tha Japs

 

Neither the US nor Germany had the means to wage any serious long distance war against each other at that time anyway. The US had carriers in their navy but there weren't enough of them to fight a war both in the Atlantic and the Pacific

 

This is history plain and simple.

Britain fought bravely and gallantly. My dad served in the British Army and in no way would I ever knock the country of my birth where I was born during WW2

 

However, at the same time I will never disparage or downplay the American aid and sacrifice that was given in order to win that war against Germany

Edited by Harleyman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well from what I remember if it wasn't for this little island called England most of the world would be talking german now.:mad:

 

With a little help from our friends. The USA wouldn't have been talking German.

 

Or China, India or most of Asia - and South America - and Africa.

 

Europe isn't "most of the world".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So if you believe that the "USA did not really help" [snip] that Britain by 1942 and totally bankrupt and exhausted
This is exactly the point I was trying to make, and depoix has alluded to it as well. The USA didn't come in to 'help' just out of the goodness of their hearts. Knowing we were skint, they sold us a lot of stuff, including several old rustbuckets which actually cost us to scrap, or so I understand, and came in at the last minute to 'win the war' which wasn't our fight in the first place. We were paying them back for their help for about 50 years. No wonder all the other countries overtook us after the end of the war, we were knackered and skint all through fighting to help other people. I can't find any indication that any of the ones we were fighting for ever actually chipped in to pay the debts either, did they?

 

Although I think we would have had to fight in the end because Hilter would deffo have come after us once he realised that we weren't ever going to be his big mate :D

 

We never seem to learn the lesson though, we're still at it, trying to rescue half the world, and no-one ever thanks us. I don't understand why we just don't leave them all to it and spend our money putting our own house in order.

 

As I said, I don't have a beef with the USA, I wish we were as single minded and self centred as the USA is, I think we'd be in a lot better postion than we are if our Government was like yours.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This is exactly the point I was trying to make, and depoix has alluded to it as well. The USA didn't come in to 'help' just out of the goodness of their hearts. Knowing we were skint, they sold us a lot of stuff, including several old rustbuckets which actually cost us to scrap, or so I understand, and came in at the last minute to 'win the war' which wasn't our fight in the first place. We were paying them back for their help for about 50 years. No wonder all the other countries overtook us after the end of the war, we were knackered and skint all through fighting to help other people. I can't find any indication that any of the ones we were fighting for ever actually chipped in to pay the debts either, did they?

 

Although I think we would have had to fight in the end because Hilter would deffo have come after us once he realised that we weren't ever going to be his big mate :D

 

We never seem to learn the lesson though, we're still at it, trying to rescue half the world, and no-one ever thanks us. I don't understand why we just don't leave them all to it and spend our money putting our own house in order.

 

As I said, I don't have a beef with the USA, I wish we were as single minded and self centred as the USA is, I think we'd be in a lot better postion than we are if our Government was like yours.

 

Your history regarding the old world war 1 rust buckets is a bit wonky. These ships were not "sold" to Britain. They were given in exchange for British military bases in Greenland

 

If the British navy didn't find any use for the ships then they should just have towed them out to sea and used them for target practice and sunk em

 

Hitler had no realistic desire to invade Britain and would never have if Britain had been forced to sign a peace treaty and get rid of Churchill. His ambition lay in grabbing a few hundred thousand square miles of Russian territory and the Rumanian oil fields and those in the middle east Hitler admired and respected the British.

 

Taking into consideration the American casualties in the European theatre of war, the loss of hundreds of bombers, planes, tanks and guns and god knows what other military materiel from the first operation in North Africa in 1942 until May 1945 I'd say that the US interests in that theatre of operations was

just more than trying to make a few bucks out of Britain.

 

As far as the US being "self centered" wrong again. The US kept a huge military force in Europe for 50 years at great expense to the taxpayer to protect Europe from communist expansion and aggression.

 

I hope that Obama will now concentrate his policy on taking care of issues here in the US and dump Iraq at the earliest opportunity, likewise Afghanistan.

 

I too hate to see my tax dollars being squandered on useless wars to bring "democracy" to parts of the world who dont even know what the word means

 

Seems like I've gone way off track on this thread

Edited by Harleyman

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

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
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.