Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie
Hi all! We have been experiencing an issue on site where threads have been missing the latest postings. The platform host Vanilla are working on this issue. A workaround that has been used by some is to navigate back from 1 to 10+ pages to re-sync the thread and this will then show the latest posts. Thanks, Mike.
Hi there,
There is an issue with role permissions that is being worked on at the moment.
If you are having trouble with access or permissions on regional forums please post here to get access: https://www.boards.ie/discussion/2058365403/you-do-not-have-permission-for-that#latest

How British are You?

12467

Comments

  • #152
    Wattle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,075 ✭✭✭Wattle


    I love the way they enter ever soccer world cup on a huge wave of optimism and then it all falls apart in a welter of blame and recrimination. I love the way they have an ultra-patriotic tabloid press that does it's very best to destroy the team while shouting 'Come on England'. Happens every single time :D


  • #153
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Wattle wrote: »
    I love the way they enter ever soccer world cup on a huge wave of optimism and then it all falls apart in a welter of blame and recrimination. I love the way they have an ultra-patriotic tabloid press that does it's very best to destroy the team while shouting 'Come on England'. Happens every single time :D

    And what about Scotland, Wales and Norn Iron? They are British as well.

    Why does every thread about Britain turn into a thread about England?


  • #154
    LordSutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,078 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    later12 wrote: »
    If someone wants to align themselves with what they perceive to be a specific cultural identity, that's fine by me. I'm sure most of us have UK relatives of some kind. But please don't dismiss that as most Irish people being British even "to a degree". If that's a cultural identity someone like you wants to construct for yourself, fine.

    I agree with most of what you say, but I am not talking about people aligning themselves with anything, I am talking about what people are.

    I am off now to watch Britains got talent (on TV3).


  • #155
    Wattle
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,075 ✭✭✭Wattle


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    And what about Scotland, Wales and Norn Iron? They are British as well.

    Why does every thread about Britain turn into a thread about England?

    Well ye see Scotland Wales and Norn Iron are usually so sh1te they don't qualify.


  • #156
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Wattle wrote: »
    Well ye see Scotland Wales and Norn Iron are usually so sh1te they don't qualify.

    Harsh, but.....


  • Advertisement
  • #157
    Enkidu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭Enkidu


    One thing about them is that we know a lot about them (familiar with their regions, history, accents), but they often don't really know anything about us.

    My opinion of our neighbours and here I mean England. I love most of their accents and I hope that different parts of England in particular don't lose their local flavour over the next century. Their history is fascinating, one of the rare countries were essentially all of their history is fascinating (most countries tend to have a dull bit). Personally I find their literature/poetry a little dull/dry, but their comedy is my global favourite. They're unbelievably polite in the upper classes (I really didn't believe this until I saw it).
    The class system is very strange and one of the biggest reasons that I wouldn't really feel British. Although I can understand what it means to be from a working/middle/upper class background, I'll never really intuitively get it.
    And, they've great book stores and libraries.


  • #158
    LordSutch
    Closed Accounts Posts: 12,078 ✭✭✭✭LordSutch


    And lets not confuse British with English, there is a distinct difference. To be British covers soo much more than just being English.


  • #159
    Enkidu
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,005 ✭✭✭Enkidu


    LordSutch wrote: »
    And lets not confuse British with English, there is a distinct difference. To be British covers soo much more than just being English.
    Well I guess that's one of the things I don't get. I don't really know what being British is.


  • #160
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    LordSutch wrote: »
    And lets not confuse British with English, there is a distinct difference. To be British covers soo much more than just being English.
    The English themselfs would be more aware of this than anybody .
    Enkidu wrote: »
    Well I guess that's one of the things I don't get. I don't really know what being British is.
    Outside of the United Kingdom itself , it had an large empire , of which many of the people who's country they 'ruled ' came to Britain and became ' British ' as well as some expats in Canada and Australia who consider themselfs British because of the Commonwealth and their roots .


  • #161
    44leto
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    LordSutch wrote: »
    And lets not confuse British with English, there is a distinct difference. To be British covers soo much more than just being English.

    There are not really any British left on the mainland, they are all English, Welsh and Scots. The only British you meet from the UK are from Northern Ireland.


  • Advertisement
  • #162
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    KeithAFC wrote: »
    Not many I would imagine. The Empire didn't lose that often.
    What empire?

    I guess we can file that under "lost more often than not" so.


  • #163
    IrishAm
    Registered Users Posts: 1,576 ✭✭✭IrishAm


    KeithAFC wrote: »
    Not many I would imagine. The Empire didn't lose that often.

    "The Spirit of Dunkirk".


    Sixty years ago, at the beginning of World War II, Britain snatched victory from the jaws of defeat when hundreds of thousands of its soldiers were rescued from the beaches at Dunkirk, in northern France.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/771784.stm


    It's funny to see that people to this day still think the British army actually escaped the Germans. The Germans let them escape.


  • #164
    44leto
    Closed Accounts Posts: 4,137 ✭✭✭44leto


    IrishAm wrote: »
    "The Spirit of Dunkirk".


    Sixty years ago, at the beginning of World War II, Britain snatched victory from the jaws of defeat when hundreds of thousands of its soldiers were rescued from the beaches at Dunkirk, in northern France.

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/talking_point/771784.stm


    It's funny to see that people to this day still think the British army actually escaped the Germans. The Germans let them escape.

    No the French fought like fkuc and held the Germans off long enough for the British and some French forces escape.


  • #165
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Enkidu wrote: »

    It's funny to see that people to this day still think the British army actually escaped the Germans. The Germans let them escape.
    Hitler did so because he still haboured thoughts that Britain would side with him or come to some sort of agreement ( more suitable to the Nazis than the British ) Of course Hitler in the military sense , made so many Gaffs throughout WW2 and this was just one of his earlier ones .
    Enkidu wrote: »
    Well I guess that's one of the things I don't get. I don't really know what being British is.
    The French to their credit did try their best to keep then Germans at bay but the force was to much for them in the end .


  • #166
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    Wibbs wrote: »
    Apologies. Within the R1b group, there are subsets and the Basque marker is different to ours. We're L21. The so called "O'Neill" line IIRC. We are not the same population on that score. Related yes, but they're a different population.
    There are numerous proposed genetic lines, often named after groups less than a thousand years old, which is biologically impossible, and none of which consider the archaeological evidence.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    Not quite. Read your links. For a start the last glacial maximum is 20,000 years ago when Ireland was an ice cube. The clue is in the name itself. It receded 11 odd thousand years ago. The R1b marker is later. At most 8000 years, likely younger. Given there is evidence of human habitation in Ireland soon after the ice receded someone else was here. Who knows who they were.The Welsh have higher.
    Last glacial maximum - 19,000 years ago. Late glacial maximum, 13,000 years ago. R1b haplogroup 18,500 years ago or less.
    Wibbs wrote: »
    No we're not. Again read your links. We're most like the Welsh, but the Basques are different. "Autosomal genetic studies, on the one hand, confirm that Basques have a very close relationship with other Europeans, especially with Spaniards, who have a common genetic identity of over 70% with Basques". "The principal conclusion is that the male Basques living today have rather recent roots of less than four thousand years, contrary to legend that proposes they lived some 30,000 years ago. Despite the ancient language, it is very likely that the present day Basques represent a rather recent Iberian population, in terms of DNA genealogy." Here's a pic showing the distances between the populations
    That picture makes no sense, what's the article so I can put it in context?
    Wibbs wrote: »
    On the English front, define "English".
    The people of England.


  • #167
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    IrishAm wrote: »
    Sixty years ago, at the beginning of World War II, Britain snatched victory from the jaws of defeat when hundreds of thousands of its soldiers were rescued from the beaches at Dunkirk, in northern France.
    Yep, that was some victorious running away they did. Like the mighty battle of britain, where they successfully allowed the Germans to bomb the dickens out of their capital city. Wot wot.

    :D


  • #168
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    Yep, that was some victorious running away they did. Like the mighty battle of britain, where they successfully allowed the Germans to bomb the dickens out of their capital city. Wot wot.

    :D
    A battle which turned the tide in Britains favor = The Germans overstretched their Air force , just like they did with their Divisions on the ground over on the Eastern front.( Another of Hitlers Gaffs )


  • #169
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    Latchy wrote: »
    A battle which turned the tide in Britain America's and Russia's favor = The Germans overstretched their Air force , just like they did with their Divisions on the ground over on the Eastern front.( Another of Hitlers Gaffs )
    FYP. Sitting down and getting blasted to pieces isn't up there with the most successful strategies of all time.


  • #170
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    FYP. Sitting down and getting blasted to pieces isn't up there with the most successful strategies of all time.
    FYP ...the Russians gained more by the British and Americans actions against the Nazis, and Stalin had so much admiration for the Allies and how they executed the landings on D- Day . Only for the Germans and Hitler trying to fight to many battles and biting off more than they could chew , on to many fronts , there could have been another more different map of Europe at the end of WW2 .


  • #171
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    Latchy wrote: »
    FYP ...the Russians gained more by the British and Americans actions against the Nazis, and Stalin had so much admiration for the Allies and how they executed the landings on D- Day . Only for the Germans and Hitler trying to fight to many battles and biting off more than they could chew , on to many fronts , there could have been another more different map of Europe at the end of WW2 .
    Hitler was pwned from day one, but that doesn't excuse british incompetence. Genghis Khan, now there was a brilliant military leader. Napoleon, a military monster. Caesar, not a man I'd want to face of a misty morning. Suleiman the Great, one astonishing victory after another. Hannibal of Carthage, to be feared.

    Churchill on the other hand missed his true calling in marketing.


  • Advertisement
  • #172
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    Hitler was pwned from day one, but that doesn't excuse british incompetence. Genghis Khan, now there was a brilliant military leader. Napoleon, a military monster. Caesar, not a man I'd want to face of a misty morning. Suleiman the Great, one astonishing victory after another. Hannibal of Carthage, to be feared.
    Hitlers main weakness was indecisiveness and letting his Megalomania interfer with his generals decision making ,people on the ground who knew the reality of the situation than the fantasy world he eventually lived in (right up to the final days ) but what do you expect when you put a coparal in charge of an Army .
    Churchill on the other hand missed his true calling in marketing.
    Whatever about Genghis Khan,Napoleon,Caesar ,Suleiman the Great ,Hannibal of Carthage ... Churchill was the Simon Cowell of his day .:D


  • #173
    IrishAm
    Registered Users Posts: 1,576 ✭✭✭IrishAm


    44leto wrote: »
    No the French fought like fkuc and held the Germans off long enough for the British and some French forces escape.

    The French suffered massive casualties alright. Something like 100,000 in just over a week. Quite the opposite of the cheese eating surrender monkeys stereotype that is unfairly attached to them. :(


  • #174
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    IrishAm wrote: »
    The French suffered massive casualties alright. Something like 100,000 in just over a week. Quite the opposite of the cheese eating surrender monkeys stereotype that is unfairly attached to them. :(
    They did but I think they sometimes forget their history .Of course there are many well tended British and Allied graves in France by the local population but after the war , they tended to side with the American side of the conflict forgetting that up until liberation , De Gaulle was in exile in Britain and very very much against any post war british plans the british might have in France ( for fcuks sake he was even strongly against the D-Day plans and the Allied invasion of France ,so entrenched was he in '' all things French '' and not seeing the bigger picture ''...sorta like Dev in Ireland )


  • #175
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    Latchy wrote: »
    Whatever about Genghis Khan,Napoleon,Caesar ,Suleiman the Great ,Hannibal of Carthage ... Churchill was the Simon Cowell of his day .:D
    If only the nazs were vulnerable to biting ripostes. :p


  • #176
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    If only the nazsi were vulnerable to biting ripostes. :p
    Discussing in finer detail, the military escapades of those regimes is one thing but again , the topic is very very British :p


  • #177
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    Latchy wrote: »
    Discussing in finer detail, the military escapades of those regimes is one thing but again , the topic is very very British :p
    The topic is a troll and the op doesn't even make sense.


  • #178
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    Yep, that was some victorious running away they did. Like the mighty battle of britain, where they successfully allowed the Germans to bomb the dickens out of their capital city. Wot wot.

    :D

    it worked though


  • #179
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    it worked though
    Through no virtues of your own.


  • #180
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    The topic is a troll and the op doesn't even make sense.
    If I'm been totally honest with you ,I saw the title of the thread a few days ago and thought as much , which is why I only contributed when I saw , or thought that some were making sense of ...which is usually one good thing to come out of a trolls thread = these ' troll ' threads have been done to death .


  • Advertisement
  • #181
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    Latchy wrote: »
    these ' troll ' threads have been done to death .
    And then some. Its depressing when the loyalist faction start taking them seriously though, we are going to have some fun untangling that knot when they finally get to join civilisation again.


  • #182
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    And then some. Its depressing when the loyalist faction start taking them seriously though, we are going to have some fun untangling that knot when they finally get to join civilisation again.
    Indeed ...one doesn't have to be a historian to debate but at least have some facts , figures or analysis which suits a more modern era than relying on the same old same .


  • #183
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    Through no virtues of your own.

    Err, no.

    As much as you would hate to admit it, the battle of Britain played a significant part in the war.

    But hey, were all British, so let's not argue.


  • #184
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    Through no virtues of your own.

    Err, no.

    As much as you would hate to admit it, the battle of Britain played a significant part in the war.

    But hey, we're all British, so let's not argue.


  • #185
    IrishAm
    Registered Users Posts: 1,576 ✭✭✭IrishAm


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    But hey, we're all British, so let's not argue.

    Why cant you lot get it into your heads that we Irish are not British nor do we ever want to be?


  • #186
    Doc Ruby
    Registered Users Posts: 3,956 ✭✭✭Doc Ruby


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    As much as you would hate to admit it, the battle of Britain played a significant part in the war.
    I'd say the 60,000 Londoners killed certainly viewed it as significant.


  • Advertisement
  • #187
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Fratton Fred wrote: »

    But hey, were all British, so let's not argue.
    You're obiously not familiar with Irish passports ( maybe you are ) but then you could also argue that we are all European , which puts a different slant on it altogether ( as opposed to been British )


  • #188
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    IrishAm wrote: »
    Why cant you lot get it into your heads that we Irish are not British nor do we ever want to be?

    The thing is, the Doc here is convinced that because the English language is comprised of a lot of French words, the English must be French. Therefore, by the dame logic, the Irish must be English, or French, or something.


  • #189
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    I'd say the 60,000 Londoners killed certainly viewed it as significant.

    It was kind of a big war Doc, in case you hadn't noticed.


  • #190
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Maybe F Fred has a problem with his own sense of Britishness ,more so than anybody with their own sense of Irishness , which maybe 20 or 30 years ago and due to some sterotypes , was simple and easy to define for people of both islands , republic Of Ireland and UK .


  • #191
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Latchy wrote: »
    Maybe F Fred has a problem with his own sense of Britishness ,more so than anybody with their own sense of Irishness , which maybe 20 or 30 years ago and due to some sterotypes , was simple and easy to define for people of both islands , republic Of Ireland and UK .

    huh?

    Personally I wouldn't call myself British.

    I'm English and to me, defining myself as English.does not mean "Not Irish". I'm not sure the opposite applies though.


  • Advertisement
  • #192
    IrishAm
    Registered Users Posts: 1,576 ✭✭✭IrishAm


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    huh?

    Personally I wouldn't call myself British.

    I'm English and to me, defining myself as English.

    Are there not negative correlations with declaring oneself English instead of British these days?

    Pompey robbed poor Doncaster today btw. Two dodgy pens and a harsh red card. :(


  • #193
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    IrishAm wrote: »
    Are there not negative correlations with declaring oneself English instead of British these days?

    Pompey robbed poor Doncaster today btw. Two dodgy pens and a harsh red card. :(

    No, why would there be negative connotations with calling yourself English?

    Today's result might have decidrdvtje bottom two places, that's all. We are both going down.


  • #194
    Latchy
    Closed Accounts Posts: 21,191 ✭✭✭✭Latchy


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    huh?

    Personally I wouldn't call myself British.

    I'm English and to me, defining myself as English.does not mean "Not Irish". I'm not sure the opposite applies though.
    Yes but prior to the reverse influux on immigrants to Ireland as opposed to the other way around ,most people in the republic of Ireland had ( and still have to some degree ) their own sense of who they as a race which goes back of course to the 8000 years of history( which I'm not trying to bog you or anybody down with ) but as I've mentioned earlier and as you yourself state now , the English will understand more then anybody their own sense of what is is to be English as opposed to being British

    .It's just that the people in the republic as I' m sure you well know don't or have never had that problem of indentity because any small island race , they hold onto who they are and what they know .


  • #195
    DonQuay1
    Registered Users Posts: 174 ✭✭DonQuay1


    senorwipesalot wrote: »
    What do you love about our neighbours?
    Do you like them alot more than the kuntz next door.


    Ya?

    I'm Irish.

    I'm a Mick.

    I'm a Paddy.

    I'm a Ginge.

    Basically ...... born bred and dragged up on this great little island ..... and despite all the d/ckheads that have robbed us blind the last couple of years, the crooks and users, the abusers and bad people of all ilks and shades ......

    ... I AM VERY PROUD TO BE IRISH.

    Not British.
    At all.


  • #196
    Cavehill Red
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Cavehill Red


    LordSutch wrote: »
    And lets not confuse British with English, there is a distinct difference. To be British covers soo much more than just being English.

    Yup, it includes the Scots (who want to leave), the Welsh (colonised by the English a millennium ago), part of Ireland which isn't actually British at all, and a collection of ocean-bound rocks scattered about the Atlantic (which also aren't British.)


  • #197
    Cavehill Red
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Cavehill Red


    Fratton Fred wrote: »

    I'm English and to me, defining myself as English.does not mean "Not Irish". I'm not sure the opposite applies though.

    Another snipe, Fred? I'd expect better from a Pompey boy. I'd have thought you might comprehend firstly the fact that when some other country claims jurisdiction over you, then part of asserting your nationality is in refusing that claim of jurisdiction. This applies as much to British popular media and television routinely claiming Irish people such as actors or sportsmen as theirs, as much as it does to the political situation involving the six counties.
    Personally, I think most Irish people assert our nationality in a wide range of positive ways, despite the constant intrusion of Britain into our affairs and achievements.
    Also, it's not our fault that British is synonymous with drunken lout in many parts of the world. Letting the locals know we're not British when we travel is a necessity to ensure a friendly welcome rather than spit in our dinner.


  • #198
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Another snipe, Fred? I'd expect better from a Pompey boy. I'd have thought you might comprehend firstly the fact that when some other country claims jurisdiction over you, then part of asserting your nationality is in refusing that claim of jurisdiction. This applies as much to British popular media and television routinely claiming Irish people such as actors or sportsmen as theirs, as much as it does to the political situation involving the six counties.
    Personally, I think most Irish people assert our nationality in a wide range of positive ways, despite the constant intrusion of Britain into our affairs and achievements.
    Also, it's not our fault that British is synonymous with drunken lout in many parts of the world. Letting the locals know we're not British when we travel is a necessity to ensure a friendly welcome rather than spit in our dinner.

    What.the.****.are.you.on.about


  • #199
    Cavehill Red
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 6,109 ✭✭✭Cavehill Red


    Fratton Fred wrote: »
    What.the.****.are.you.on.about

    Sleepydust still in your eyes, Fred? I'm simply explaining why Irish sometimes includes 'not British', and specifically 'not English', something you wondered about in the post of yours I quoted.


  • #200
    Fratton Fred
    Closed Accounts Posts: 26,567 ✭✭✭✭Fratton Fred


    Cavehill Red wrote: »
    Sleepydust still in your eyes, Fred? I'm simply explaining why Irish sometimes includes 'not British', and specifically 'not English', something you wondered about in the post of yours I quoted.

    Why then does a simple explanation involve putting down 60 million people.


  • #201
    KeithAFC
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,239 ✭✭✭✭KeithAFC


    Doc Ruby wrote: »
    What empire?

    I guess we can file that under "lost more often than not" so.
    Read the post. It is pretty obvious.


  • Advertisement
Advertisement