ChatterBank1 min ago
Euro elections
11 Answers
The B.N.P's election pamphlet has just been delivered to my house. Am I right or wrong when I suggest that the insignia on the nose of the Spitfire relates to a Polish squadron? Ironic or what. In fact furthermore I find it hugely ironic that both U.K.I.P and the B.N.P relate very conciously to the second world war which (at the time) heralded unmitigated levels of immigration from America, Poland, France, Denmark, Holland, India (including Pakistan), South Africa, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Rhodesia (Zimbabwe) and many more besides. We kindly took all these people in, we kindly sent them on their way with free travel, free board, free lodgings and free clothes all they had to do was go to Europe or Africa and kill Germans or if they were really lucky they got to to Asia and the Pacific to kill the Japs.
And in spite of all that we were even so kind to pay for their burial thousands of miles from home in our foreign war, ingrates.
And yet apparently we stood alone in 1940. If such parties wish to mention the war they should at least offer credit where it's due, I feel.
And in spite of all that we were even so kind to pay for their burial thousands of miles from home in our foreign war, ingrates.
And yet apparently we stood alone in 1940. If such parties wish to mention the war they should at least offer credit where it's due, I feel.
Answers
1 to 11 of 11
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by 123everton. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
Regarding the Polish Squadron Spitfire, this has been covered in past posts.
I think you have got the rest of your post especially your anti-British rant completely up the chute, but then I suppose apart from the slagging off of our people you can be excused seeing that you wasn't around during those times, and you can't appreciate what the world stood to loose, had we had lost the war.
During this period in our history, we and a very large number of countries were in a World War situation, and the countries you highlighted were also very much involved, not just doing us a favour but in their own right.
Regarding standing alone in 1940, this refers to the fact that the whole of Europe was under the Jack Boot of the Nazis, and the whole free world was at threat. The reason that so many foreign forces were in this country was because this country was the nearest base from which they could attack the nazis.
Don't forget that our own country men also lost their lives in far off foreign lands to protect their peoples.
I think you have got the rest of your post especially your anti-British rant completely up the chute, but then I suppose apart from the slagging off of our people you can be excused seeing that you wasn't around during those times, and you can't appreciate what the world stood to loose, had we had lost the war.
During this period in our history, we and a very large number of countries were in a World War situation, and the countries you highlighted were also very much involved, not just doing us a favour but in their own right.
Regarding standing alone in 1940, this refers to the fact that the whole of Europe was under the Jack Boot of the Nazis, and the whole free world was at threat. The reason that so many foreign forces were in this country was because this country was the nearest base from which they could attack the nazis.
Don't forget that our own country men also lost their lives in far off foreign lands to protect their peoples.
I'm not being anti-British AOG.
India fought hard on our side in two world wars to protect rights that we ourselves denied them.
They had little to gain by fighting the Germans and far more to gain by allying themselves to them.
The thrust of my argument (which you appear to have missed) is that A the plane seems to be flown by an immigrant and B that if you seek to refer to the war for electoral purposes it is shallow and grossly hypocritical to do so on an anti-immigration basis, is it not?
India fought hard on our side in two world wars to protect rights that we ourselves denied them.
They had little to gain by fighting the Germans and far more to gain by allying themselves to them.
The thrust of my argument (which you appear to have missed) is that A the plane seems to be flown by an immigrant and B that if you seek to refer to the war for electoral purposes it is shallow and grossly hypocritical to do so on an anti-immigration basis, is it not?
On the contrary, I think the thrust of your argument was anti-British especially your rather sarcastic and hurtful sentence,
And in spite of all that we were even so kind to pay for their burial thousands of miles from home in our foreign war, ingrates.
India fought hard on our side in two world wars to protect rights that we ourselves denied them.
I can't speak for WW1 because I wasn't around but regarding WW2 please don't forget that India itself was at threat of being over run by the Japanese, and then inhabitants would have then understood what being occupied really meant.
The plane that you want me to believe you hang your argument on, was more than likely piloted by a member of the Polish Air force, (not an immigrant) stationed in England, seeing that his country had been over-run by the Nazis, who were most likely keeping his family in captivity.
if you seek to refer to the war for electoral purposes it is shallow and grossly hypocritical to do so on an anti-immigration basis, is it not?
I am not a BNP supporter, although I do agree with some of the things they say, but I think you loose the gist of where they are coming from regarding referring to 'war for electoral purposes'.
It is simply a play on words 'The Battle For Britain 2009' hence we will protect British jobs from cut-throat foreign competition and put British workers first- every time.
I don't think anyone can argue against this, at this present time.
And in spite of all that we were even so kind to pay for their burial thousands of miles from home in our foreign war, ingrates.
India fought hard on our side in two world wars to protect rights that we ourselves denied them.
I can't speak for WW1 because I wasn't around but regarding WW2 please don't forget that India itself was at threat of being over run by the Japanese, and then inhabitants would have then understood what being occupied really meant.
The plane that you want me to believe you hang your argument on, was more than likely piloted by a member of the Polish Air force, (not an immigrant) stationed in England, seeing that his country had been over-run by the Nazis, who were most likely keeping his family in captivity.
if you seek to refer to the war for electoral purposes it is shallow and grossly hypocritical to do so on an anti-immigration basis, is it not?
I am not a BNP supporter, although I do agree with some of the things they say, but I think you loose the gist of where they are coming from regarding referring to 'war for electoral purposes'.
It is simply a play on words 'The Battle For Britain 2009' hence we will protect British jobs from cut-throat foreign competition and put British workers first- every time.
I don't think anyone can argue against this, at this present time.
Japan did'nt enter the war until 1941 whereas Indian troops were stationed in North Africa before that.
There were a great many Indian troops lined up in the battles of the Somme and Ancre whilst again a great many participated in the landings at Gallipoli and during the campaign in Messopotamia.
The gist of the pamphlet shows a WW2 aircraft on one and a picture of Churchill (U.K.I.P) on the other, the connotation is clear to my eyes.
The Poles were indeed the first to stand up to the Germans (and they never stopped fighting) but alas there are many on here who seek to berate the Polies whilst forgetting just how many "Polish poppies" there are on Monte Cassino.
And again Canada did not have conscription at the beginning of the war (I don't think conscription existed on any dominion territory, including the whole of Ireland, WW1) Canada, New Zealand, Australia and South Africa were all a very long way away from Germany so had little need to fear Nazism at least in the immediacy.
Economic protectionism won't get us far nowadays as we no longer have much in the way of heavy industry (the mines and the ship yards are long gone, never to return) the model we have followed (wrongly to my mind) is called the knowledge econonomy reliant upon invisibles. These invisibles can be traded in any country anywhere very quickly, protectionism won't cut it anymore.
What we need is an education system that seeks to teach not entertain, what we need is a culture that values sobrierty.
Ask yourself one simple question.
How many foreign men do you see walking down the road with their hands down the front of their trousers?
There were a great many Indian troops lined up in the battles of the Somme and Ancre whilst again a great many participated in the landings at Gallipoli and during the campaign in Messopotamia.
The gist of the pamphlet shows a WW2 aircraft on one and a picture of Churchill (U.K.I.P) on the other, the connotation is clear to my eyes.
The Poles were indeed the first to stand up to the Germans (and they never stopped fighting) but alas there are many on here who seek to berate the Polies whilst forgetting just how many "Polish poppies" there are on Monte Cassino.
And again Canada did not have conscription at the beginning of the war (I don't think conscription existed on any dominion territory, including the whole of Ireland, WW1) Canada, New Zealand, Australia and South Africa were all a very long way away from Germany so had little need to fear Nazism at least in the immediacy.
Economic protectionism won't get us far nowadays as we no longer have much in the way of heavy industry (the mines and the ship yards are long gone, never to return) the model we have followed (wrongly to my mind) is called the knowledge econonomy reliant upon invisibles. These invisibles can be traded in any country anywhere very quickly, protectionism won't cut it anymore.
What we need is an education system that seeks to teach not entertain, what we need is a culture that values sobrierty.
Ask yourself one simple question.
How many foreign men do you see walking down the road with their hands down the front of their trousers?
123everton
How many foreign men do you see walking down the road with their hands down the front of their trousers?
I don't actually know since I have never seen anyone walking down the road with their hands down their trousers.
And if I had, how would I know if they were foreign or not? Unless of course this habit of walking in such a way is a cultural thing, then you are getting into racial prejudicialness, and I don't think you wish to go down that road, with your hands down the front of your trousers or not.
How many foreign men do you see walking down the road with their hands down the front of their trousers?
I don't actually know since I have never seen anyone walking down the road with their hands down their trousers.
And if I had, how would I know if they were foreign or not? Unless of course this habit of walking in such a way is a cultural thing, then you are getting into racial prejudicialness, and I don't think you wish to go down that road, with your hands down the front of your trousers or not.
Really?
Then you should get out more, if you still don't believe me that this is prevalent amongst young British men and boys then cast your mind back to the incident with David Cameron last year, when a youth made the sign of a pistol behind his back, check to see where his left hand is....
And in case you did'nt know I work with the public and see it daily.
But do you at least accept that many foreigners have spilt their blood both for Britain and France when in reality they had little to gain (especially the Algerians, for France) and that as the blood of their ancestors enriches the soil of Europe they can at least expect a little appreciation and recognition in return.
You should (for example) look up Serbia to see the sacrifices made by foreign nationals at the behest of the British crown in both world wars.
Credit should always be given were it's due to all peoples of whatever race, creed or colour, the B.N.P chooses to gloss over these facts. To their utter shame.
Then you should get out more, if you still don't believe me that this is prevalent amongst young British men and boys then cast your mind back to the incident with David Cameron last year, when a youth made the sign of a pistol behind his back, check to see where his left hand is....
And in case you did'nt know I work with the public and see it daily.
But do you at least accept that many foreigners have spilt their blood both for Britain and France when in reality they had little to gain (especially the Algerians, for France) and that as the blood of their ancestors enriches the soil of Europe they can at least expect a little appreciation and recognition in return.
You should (for example) look up Serbia to see the sacrifices made by foreign nationals at the behest of the British crown in both world wars.
Credit should always be given were it's due to all peoples of whatever race, creed or colour, the B.N.P chooses to gloss over these facts. To their utter shame.
Using WW2 in political arguments really, really, really irritates me.
There's a massive UKIP poster near where I live with a large picture of Churchill saying 'He'd Get Our Money Back!'
AAARRRGGGHHH!
First, We are not in 19-F***ING-40. We are in a completely different time and position, and the world has changed a helluva lot since then.
Second, Winston Churchill was not some god-like sage who uttered every single truth known to man. He was a human being who demonstrated excellent leadership but is not some infinite fountain of wisdom and oracle-like vision.
I also hate it when people basically say the equivalent of 'well, where would that attitude have got us in 1939?' It's ridiculous.
Our WW2 performance is in many ways a proud part of UK history, but it's hideous exploitation on both sides of the political spectrum to justify interpretations of a world that is a completely and utterly different place are paper-thin and extremely annoying.
There's a massive UKIP poster near where I live with a large picture of Churchill saying 'He'd Get Our Money Back!'
AAARRRGGGHHH!
First, We are not in 19-F***ING-40. We are in a completely different time and position, and the world has changed a helluva lot since then.
Second, Winston Churchill was not some god-like sage who uttered every single truth known to man. He was a human being who demonstrated excellent leadership but is not some infinite fountain of wisdom and oracle-like vision.
I also hate it when people basically say the equivalent of 'well, where would that attitude have got us in 1939?' It's ridiculous.
Our WW2 performance is in many ways a proud part of UK history, but it's hideous exploitation on both sides of the political spectrum to justify interpretations of a world that is a completely and utterly different place are paper-thin and extremely annoying.
jake: this is a picture of what's on the billboard near me:
http://www.ukip.org/media/_leader/billboard.gi f
http://www.ukip.org/media/_leader/billboard.gi f
I'm minded to agree with the last two protagonists, we none of us should ever forget the sacrifices and the triumphs of the second world war but they should be remembered at the appropiate time and in the appropiate way which is school books, rememberance week and for adults historical knowledge. Indeed if many more British adults studied WW2 more closely then rather than resorting to jingoistic platitudes they'd appreciate the endeavours of all the subjects of the British crown.
Of course it'd be fair to say that we should stop mentioning the war when everyone else stops mentioning the British empire and slavery.
Krom and I in agreeance, miracles never cease....
Of course it'd be fair to say that we should stop mentioning the war when everyone else stops mentioning the British empire and slavery.
Krom and I in agreeance, miracles never cease....
1 to 11 of 11
