All Queen visit related discussion goes here.

LondonIrish90

sensibleken wrote: »

agreed.

"so sorry about all the civilian casualties. to cheer you up heres a bust of a man who advocated experimenting on arabs with poison gas"

Tear gas. As used by dozens of western nations when policing their own people nowadays.

I would say most people regard Churchill as one of the greatest wartime leaders the world has ever seen and one of the most inspirational leaders ever in times of adversity. Thats probably why the bust was given to the president following such an attack on his country.

Don't let that get in the way of your agenda though.

ISDW

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

Tear gas. As used by dozens of western nations when policing their own people nowadays.

I would say most people regard Churchill as one of the greatest wartime leaders the world has ever seen and one of the most inspirational leaders ever in times of adversity. Thats probably why the bust was given to the president following such an attack on his country.

Don't let that get in the way of your agenda though.

In fairness, I think that probably depends on what country you're from.

Sonnenblumen

sensibleken wrote: »

you have trotted this out constantly and have been asked to back it up every time. Can you provide links to these handouts. Prefereably against what we have paid into the EU through our own trade agreements and relitive to other member states. In order to show that we are the sucking parasites you are so keen to portray us as

Why don't you go look it up for yourself? If you dispute this, prove it?

You're yawning and you want someone to waken you up?

BTW, it is only in recent years that Ireland has become a nett contributor to EU.

LordSutch

ISDW wrote: »

In fairness, I think that probably depends on what country you're from.

What, you mean the Allied countries or ze Nazi's ???

ISDW

LordSutch wrote: »

What, you mean the Allied countries or ze Nazi's ???

No, I'm Irish and I have no respect for the man at all.

sensibleken

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

Tear gas. As used by dozens of western nations when policing their own people nowadays.

I would say most people regard Churchill as one of the greatest wartime leaders the world has ever seen and one of the most inspirational leaders ever in times of adversity. Thats probably why the bust was given to the president following such an attack on his country.

Don't let that get in the way of your agenda though.

what agenda is that?

also no. poison gas

"I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/2719939.stm

LordSutch

ISDW wrote: »

No, I'm Irish and I have no respect for the man at all.

Ah I see, so might you have been on the side of Sean Russell? I'm Irish and my family were heavily involved with the Allied war effort against Mr Hitler, and I'm very proud of that. I thank Winston for his leadership during some of the darkest days Europe has ever seen.

Churchill was the right man for the job (39-45).

ISDW

LordSutch wrote: »

Ah I see, so might you have been on the side of Sean Russell? I'm Irish and my family were heavily involved with the Allied war effort against Mr Hitler, and I'm very proud of that. I thank Winston for his leadership during some of the darkest days Europe has ever seen.

Churchill was the right man for the job (39-45).

Thats a big leap to make isn't it? I don't respect Winston Churchill so therefore I'm a nazi sympathiser? WTF?

My Grandfathers also were heavily involved with the Allied war effort, still doesn't mean that I like Winston Churchill.

sensibleken

ISDW wrote: »

Thats a big leap to make isn't it? I don't respect Winston Churchill so therefore I'm a nazi sympathiser? WTF?

My Grandfathers also were heavily involved with the Allied war effort, still doesn't mean that I like Winston Churchill.

there is a mythology around churchill that because Hitler was evil,
Churchill was the epytomy of good. Of course by that logic Stalin was more the better of Churchill because it was ultimately the Soviets that won the second world war.

LondonIrish90

sensibleken wrote: »

there is a mythology around churchill that because Hitler was evil,
Churchill was the epytomy of good. Of course by that logic Stalin was more the better of Churchill because it was ultimately the Soviets that won the second world war.

The Germans may very well have won the war had it not been for allied attacks from the west. But, if you do want to go by the theory the soviets would have won regardless, thank god for Churchill and the Battle of Britain. Because mainland Europe, and probably Britain and Ireland too, would be under communist rule to this day. And that would be probably the only thing imaginable that could be worse than living under Nazi rule.

shadowninty

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

The Germans may very well have won the war had it not been for allied attacks from the west. But, if you do want to go by the theory the soviets would have won regardless, thank god for Churchill and the Battle of Britain. Because mainland Europe, and probably Britain and Ireland too, would be under communist rule to this day. And that would be probably the only thing imaginable that could be worse than living under Nazi rule.

There are plenty of things worse than living in a Soviet puppet state

I think Churchill is hugely overrated
He was a bitch to Ireland too

sensibleken

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

The Germans may very well have won the war had it not been for allied attacks from the west. But, if you do want to go by the theory the soviets would have won regardless, thank god for Churchill and the Battle of Britain. Because mainland Europe, and probably Britain and Ireland too, would be under communist rule to this day. And that would be probably the only thing imaginable that could be worse than living under Nazi rule.

Im not making any sort of arguement that Britain didnt significantly contribute in a very large way to the defeat of nazis if thats the corner you're trying to put me in. Churchill as a man who was in love with war was the right man in the right place at the right time to make inspiring speachs. However his relentless blood lust soon found him out of office when he tried to push on into the soviet union

Duckworth_Luas

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

Why don't you go look it up for yourself? If you dispute this, prove it?

You're yawning and you want someone to waken you up?

BTW, it is only in recent years that Ireland has become a nett contributor to EU.

Ah, the burden of proof does not lie with sensibleken.

dr.bollocko

We're good and godwinned here now.
I think we'll be closing this one shortly.

end a eknny

LordSutch wrote: »

What, you mean the Allied countries or ze Nazi's ???

i thought he was an alcoholic fat ugly tw4t who would have been hammered by hitler if it had not been for the americans. didnt he make some claim about wiping the irish of the face of the earth typical bully pick on the small country and sh1t himself when faced with the germans then when his friends (came along ) he was the big fella again

Sonnenblumen

Sounds good, otherwise we're going to have the nutters coming out of the woodwork that the Soviets were freedom fighters and loved the west:eek:


How distorted is that? Even Stalin hated his fellow citizens and his record of torture and killing exceeds WWII casualties.

No wonder some cannot even figure out even basic facts.


Not only was it timely and fortunate that The West had a great leader like Winston Churchill. WC had the vision and strength to persuade many brave men and women to make a stand and ultimately to make a great difference.

The Russians who never ever had any respect for individual rights, freedom or expression. On the contrary, much of their involvement was fuelled by revenge, plunder, and greed of local civilians.

Nothing much has changed.

gigino

Sonnenblumen wrote: »

it is only in recent years that Ireland has become a nett contributor to EU.

you really think in recent years with Ireland borrowing billions every month just to keep the show on the road, and the IMF / EU / UK bailing us out, that we are NET contributers to the EC ? lol lol.

http://www.independent.ie/business/irish/after-30-years-our-eu-structural-funds-are-leaving-us-72891.html


"At the end of this year, Ireland's 30-year love affair with EU money comes to an end. The country's current programme of structural funds comes to an end, and there will not be another one.
Ireland's farmers continue to get substantial EU support. As a result, it will be another couple of years before we actually pay in more than we receive. But the structural funds were once one of the hottest political topics, and people still argue about what they did for the economy.
This is not surprising, given that the total received came to almost €20bn in today's money. "They were the seed capital of our economic development," says Albert Reynolds who, as Taoiseach in the early 1990s, was most associated with Ireland's success in getting substantial transfers. "They were the foundations on which we built today's economy," he says.
Some commentators, especially abroad, went further, saying the funds were, not the foundations, but the cause of the Celtic Tiger economy. London analysts were prone to say the whole thing would collapse when the funds dried up.
"The British were quite sniffy and the Germans, who paid for most of it, felt they owned a bit of the Celtic Tiger," says John FitzGerald of the Economic and Social Research Institute (ESRI), one of whose tasks was to assess the spending of the funds.
"But it was more the case that the structural funds had a walk-on part in the Irish economic success story. They gave the economy a push, and helped recovery come earlier, but they probably did not change the overall amount of investment by much in the end." German politics played a key role in Mr Reynolds' finest EU hour, when he secured over €10bn at a fraught EU summit in Edinburgh in 1992, despite widespread scepticism that such a deal could be done.
In the previous phase of funding, that old Francophile Charles Haughey had cultivated Commission President Jacques Delors to secure an average 1.9pc of national income (GNP) for Ireland.
Mr Delors was pushing the single market. But Mr Reynolds did a deal with German Chancellor Helmut Kohl, who wanted the EU to open up to the eastern countries which had just escaped from Soviet domination. The French and British were dubious, but Ireland sided with Germany, and got its reward.
Ireland received over 2pc of GNP annually from 1993-99, with the total hitting 3pc in the early years. That is a lot of money by any standards, but the general view now is that the process did even more good than the money.
Those old enough can remember when government investment in Ireland depended entirely on whether there was a few bob in the annual Budget. Roads would be started, and work might stop for years because budgets got tight. To get EU funding, there had to be a plan.
Brussels officials could also delicately query useless bits of investment inserted for Ministers' favourite constituencies. And then there had to be evaluation, to see how the money had been spent.
Once forced into it, Ireland proved very good at planning. One reason it did so well out of the funds was that Brussels felt the money was better spent than in the other "developing" members, Greece, Portugal and Spain.
Now the fear is not so much that the money is coming to an end, but that the EU oversight is coming to an end as well. Will Irish politicians and civil servants slip back to their bad old ways, the former putting politics above economics, and the latter budgets before development and efficiency?
Certainly, the EU money is no longer a big deal. For the last three years, it has been less than 1pc of GNP, and tailing off as the deadline approaches. Even so, the Border, Midland and Western region may well feel the passing of its under-developed status which allowed bigger EU funding in projects, as well as higher State aid.
But there are few other regrets. "In a sense, it is a coming-of-age for the economy, and people should realise that," says John FitzGerald.
"We are in a very strong position, when you look at where we have come from and where we are today," says Albert Reynolds.
"But, of course, you would always take more money if you could get it." "

Dionysus

LordSutch wrote: »

Ah I see, so might you have been on the side of Sean Russell? Churchill was the right man for the job (39-45).

More importantly, in that little historical detail which rightwing British nationalists like you consistently prefer to gloss over, you'd be "on the side" of far more British people than Irish people if you did fight with the Nazis. You know, the British nobility and aristocracy's infamous support for Nazisms in the 1930s? the British state's (very popular) collaboration (euphemistically: "appeasement") with Mr Hitler until it finally declared war on him in September 1939? the British Free Corps in the SS during WWII?


How very, very quickly all you British nationalists have rushed to hide the ignominious history of British state support for Nazism throughout the 1930s, the support of very many British aristocrats and members of that royal family for Nazism and the involvement of British people as active supporters of the Nazis.

You can keep saying "Seán Russell" but there are, as most educated people now know, far more British people than Irish people who supported the Nazis. Fact.

PS: Your "great" WWII "sacrifice", the "Blitz", with its c. 45,000 deaths, pales to the point of near insignificance when compared to the sacrifice of the millions upon millions of Russians who gave their lives fighting Nazism. Revealingly, in the ultra nationalist British poppy day commemorations that you laud here each year, the Russians are not commemorated. So much for your claim that the British poppy is not a nationalistic symbol commemorating British Empire deaths alone. :rolleyes:

Dionysus

LondonIrish90 wrote: »

Tear gas. As used by dozens of western nations when policing their own people nowadays.

I would say most people regard Churchill as one of the greatest wartime leaders the world has ever seen

Wrong, once again.

'I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare.... I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes.'

---- Winston S. Churchill: departmental
minute (Churchill papers: 16/16) 12 May
1919 War Office.

This is, of course, the same racist imperialist Winston Churchill who, in May 1920 as Secretary of War, advocated the establishment of the Black and Tans and Auxiliaries to fight against another "barbarous" people, the Irish, during the Irish War of Independence.

Yes, indeed it is the same Churchill. With personal heroes like Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, one can assume you're on an Irish website merely to troll.

LordSutch

Dionysus wrote: »

How very, very quickly all you British nationalists have rushed to hide the ignominious history of British state support for Nazism throughout the 1930s, the support of very many British aristocrats and members of that royal family for Nazism and the involvement of British people as active supporters of the Nazis.

You mean like Sir Oswald Mosley & his supporters?

http://www.searchlightmagazine.com/features/century/images/1932-1938_2.jpg

Dionysus wrote: »

PS: Your "great" WWII "sacrifice", the "Blitz", with its c. 45,000 deaths, pales to the point of near insignificance when compared to the sacrifice of the millions upon millions of Russians who gave their lives fighting Nazism. Revealingly, in the ultra nationalist British poppy day commemorations that you laud here each year, the Russians are not commemorated. So much for your claim that the British poppy is not a nationalistic symbol commemorating British Empire deaths alone.

I don't understand why you are comparing 45 Thousand deaths in the London blitz with millions of Germans & Russians who also died in WWII fighting each other, and as regards Poppy day, nowadays we tend to remember all those who have died in all wars, specially the Irish & British war dead, but also the commonwealth, US, and the Russian dead if you like! > The 11th of November is a somber personal reflection,

. . . but this is the 26th of May and I think the Queens visit was a resounding success.

Dionysus

sensibleken wrote: »

there is a mythology around churchill that because Hitler was evil, Churchill was the epytomy of good. Of course by that logic Stalin was more the better of Churchill because it was ultimately the Soviets that won the second world war.

+ 1. You'll really upset the John Bull brigade with such honesty, however.

Fratton Fred

Dionysus wrote: »

Wrong, once again.

'I do not understand this squeamishness about the use of gas. We have definitely adopted the position at the Peace Conference of arguing in favour of the retention of gas as a permanent method of warfare.... I am strongly in favour of using poisoned gas against uncivilised tribes.'

---- Winston S. Churchill: departmental
minute (Churchill papers: 16/16) 12 May
1919 War Office.

This is, of course, the same racist imperialist Winston Churchill who, in May 1920 as Secretary of War, advocated the establishment of the Black and Tans and Auxiliaries to fight against another "barbarous" people, the Irish, during the Irish War of Independence.

Yes, indeed it is the same Churchill. With personal heroes like Winston Leonard Spencer-Churchill, one can assume you're on an Irish website merely to troll.

A very often misquoted letter from Churchill that one. He uses the word Lachrymatory that quite conveniently gets lost.

gigino

Dionysus wrote: »

there are, as most educated people now know, far more British people than Irish people who supported the Nazis.

link, proof please ?

May I point out done more than any other European nation to defeat Nazism. They actually sent supplies to Russia via the arctic convoys.
Many many times more Irishmen fought in the British forces than supported Sinn Fein. About 120,000 Irishmen join british armed forces in ww2. Many more Irish people helped the war effort by eg nursing in England, working in factories there etc. There was extremely little support for the Nazis in the UK during the war. Contrast that with the internment position in Ireland - DeValera interned 1000 IRA ....and let some die in jail. Fact.

dr.bollocko

My good friends, this is the second time in our history that there has come back from Germany to Downing Street peace with honour. I believe it is peace for our time. We thank you from the bottom of our hearts. And now I recommend you to go home and sleep quietly in your beds.

I think we're at the stage now where this thread is no longer a discussion of a current event and is now simply an exercise in point scoring. So in the absence of new material to discuss and with the earlier indication in mind we are now done with this thread.