News1 min ago
Had Hitler Invaded Britain.
75 Answers
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by anotheoldgit. 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.
DTCwordfan
/// And that's a bloody machine gunner not a bomb aimer.......just to be a pedant. ///
Two words of advice, if you wish to be pedantic do make sure of your facts, and secondly you must try and control your language.
http://
/// And that's a bloody machine gunner not a bomb aimer.......just to be a pedant. ///
Two words of advice, if you wish to be pedantic do make sure of your facts, and secondly you must try and control your language.
http://
jno
/// probably not, aog, it would just have been seen as pure chance (as it would have been). If destroying thousands of homes doesn't break morale, knocking over an easily rebuildable pillar wouldn't have. ///
Perhaps nowadays, but believe me in those dark far off days, people were much more patriotic than they are today I'm afraid.
It is what such monuments etc, stood for, 'the might of the British Empire' and all that.
/// probably not, aog, it would just have been seen as pure chance (as it would have been). If destroying thousands of homes doesn't break morale, knocking over an easily rebuildable pillar wouldn't have. ///
Perhaps nowadays, but believe me in those dark far off days, people were much more patriotic than they are today I'm afraid.
It is what such monuments etc, stood for, 'the might of the British Empire' and all that.
What we do know is, if they had the ability to hit Nelson's column from 15,000 feet or any other height, they didn't. Could have hit Trafalgar Square on purpose, probably, but they didn't do that either. Must have turned a blind eye to the possibility.
Never mind about that. They would send their boys to Eton. That's a relief. Harrow was spared the task of creating a lot of relaxed, unfussed, gentlemen out of them. Eton could do what it always does; convince its pupils that they belong to some quasi master race, just by being there. An easy task, given that material.
Never mind about that. They would send their boys to Eton. That's a relief. Harrow was spared the task of creating a lot of relaxed, unfussed, gentlemen out of them. Eton could do what it always does; convince its pupils that they belong to some quasi master race, just by being there. An easy task, given that material.
Bazile
/// Can i just mention what , as a result of this thread , i'm starting to think of now ? ///
/// That excellent series - 'The World At War ' , with Laurence Olivier's brilliant narration ///
Yes absolutely superb, and dare I say it? "Courtesy of the Daily Mail" I collected the coupons and obtained the full series on DVD.
/// Can i just mention what , as a result of this thread , i'm starting to think of now ? ///
/// That excellent series - 'The World At War ' , with Laurence Olivier's brilliant narration ///
Yes absolutely superb, and dare I say it? "Courtesy of the Daily Mail" I collected the coupons and obtained the full series on DVD.
In those dark, far off days,morale would or could have been broken by Nelson's column being destroyed and that was because people were more patriotic then ? So the corollary is that now, in a war, our morale would be stronger than back then, we not being affected by such an event?
And such monuments stood for the British Empire? Trafalgar was important because it stopped Britain being invaded, preventing the French from exercising sea power. That was why the Square and the Column were constructed. This island being overrun was a rather more immediate worry than Empire, and the monument is not standing as testimony to the might of it, such as it was in 1805 !
What other monuments stand, or stood, for the might of the British Empire, do you say, AOG?
And such monuments stood for the British Empire? Trafalgar was important because it stopped Britain being invaded, preventing the French from exercising sea power. That was why the Square and the Column were constructed. This island being overrun was a rather more immediate worry than Empire, and the monument is not standing as testimony to the might of it, such as it was in 1805 !
What other monuments stand, or stood, for the might of the British Empire, do you say, AOG?
FredPuli43
/// What we do know is, if they had the ability to hit Nelson's column from 15,000 feet or any other height, they didn't. Could have hit Trafalgar Square on purpose, probably, but they didn't do that either. Must have turned a blind eye to the possibility. ///
Ignoring your unnecessary dig at Eton, which was completely out of place in a subject such as this.
In reference to your first paragraph this is what is confusing, but to put my slant on it Hitler must have been fascinated by such historical structures not to want to destroy them, but to keep them so that in the future he would be able to visit them after his troops had captured the city, which apparently was the case with Paris.
/// What we do know is, if they had the ability to hit Nelson's column from 15,000 feet or any other height, they didn't. Could have hit Trafalgar Square on purpose, probably, but they didn't do that either. Must have turned a blind eye to the possibility. ///
Ignoring your unnecessary dig at Eton, which was completely out of place in a subject such as this.
In reference to your first paragraph this is what is confusing, but to put my slant on it Hitler must have been fascinated by such historical structures not to want to destroy them, but to keep them so that in the future he would be able to visit them after his troops had captured the city, which apparently was the case with Paris.
Quite likely, AOG; you wouldn't want to find that , for example,your palace in Britain had been wrecked by your own bombers before you got there. But Hitler did have the Baedeker raids, which included Canterbury Cathedral as an intended target:
http://
http://
FredPuli43
/// This island being overrun was a rather more immediate worry than Empire, and the monument is not standing as testimony to the might of it, such as it was in 1805 ! ///
Don't you think that if this Island had been overrun, that would have been the end of the Empire for us?
No one said that Nelson's column is testimony to the British Empire in it's self, it is all 'part and parcel' of the overall image, along with Big Ben, the Tower of London, Westminster Abbey, St Paul's, The Union jack, and Britannia etc none in their selves have any direct association with the Empire, except of course the flag and the image of Britannia.
/// This island being overrun was a rather more immediate worry than Empire, and the monument is not standing as testimony to the might of it, such as it was in 1805 ! ///
Don't you think that if this Island had been overrun, that would have been the end of the Empire for us?
No one said that Nelson's column is testimony to the British Empire in it's self, it is all 'part and parcel' of the overall image, along with Big Ben, the Tower of London, Westminster Abbey, St Paul's, The Union jack, and Britannia etc none in their selves have any direct association with the Empire, except of course the flag and the image of Britannia.
the square was part of a redevelopment scheme (the Royal mews used to stand there) and was originally just to be called King William's Square. "Trafalgar" was an afterthought. The man who laid it out was annoyed that Nelson's Column was put in it; that wasn't part of the original plan either.
The National Gallery was, though I wish they'd gone for something grander - its pepperpot domes are rather feeble, I think. Just as well Hitler didn't knock it down, though, or it would have been replaced by some 1950s brutalist lump.
The National Gallery was, though I wish they'd gone for something grander - its pepperpot domes are rather feeble, I think. Just as well Hitler didn't knock it down, though, or it would have been replaced by some 1950s brutalist lump.
