Churchill: Of Words and Deeds

by Guest Wed Dec 17, 2014 11:21 am

Fifty years on from Winston Churchill’s death, Chris Wrigley surveys the literature available, highlighting key works and lesser-known titles

On January 24th, 1965, Sir Winston Churchill died. Much of the nation watched television six days later, when his state funeral was held in St Paul’s Cathedral. Just over 112 years earlier, in November 1852, a state funeral had been held there for another Conservative prime minister and soldier, the Duke of Wellington. Wellington was buried in a tomb beside Lord Nelson in St Paul’s, but Churchill was buried beside his parents and his brother at St Martin’s Church, Bladon, Oxfordshire. His funeral seemed to mark the end of an era, almost the last wheeze of Empire.

Churchill was a soldier in the late Victorian British Empire. His experiences fighting on the North-West Frontier of India coloured his understanding of India thereafter. He displayed great bravery when fighting in India, with Kitchener’s forces at Omdurman in 1898 and as a war correspondent in South Africa in 1899-1900. The importance of his military career has been discussed often, not least in the official biography by Randolph Churchill and Martin Gilbert. This career is surveyed well by Douglas S. Russell in Winston Churchill – Soldier: Life of a Gentleman at War (2008).

http://www.historytoday.com/chris-wrigley/churchill-words-and-deeds

by veya_victaous Thu Dec 18, 2014 10:53 pm

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 04, 2015 4:37 am

SOME ONE SAID AUSSIE DIDN'T DO THIS
http://www.buzzfeed.com/simoncrerar/14-little-known-nuggets-of-australian-history#.fkQd2aAJ1L

In World War II, the Australian Army was the first to defeat the Germans (Tobruk, 1941) and Japanese (Kokoda, 1942) in battle.

Tobruk fell to Aussies on 21 January 1941
Battle Of Britain Concludes "By February 1941"
tongue

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Tobruk

the Allies were unable to take advantage of their victory. With the Italians close to collapse, Winston Churchill commanded the British general staff to call a halt to the offensive in order to allow many of the most experienced units from Richard O'Connor's XIII Corps to be moved to Greece to fight in the Battle of Greece.

Man Churchill is a military fuck up Rolling Eyes

by nicko Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:30 am

Is there anything you like about Britain? anything, anything at all. and you call us whingers.

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 6:42 am

I would not worry Nicko his history is completely absurd.

I suppose he has never heard of the "Battle of the River Plate"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_River_Plate

Or the "Battle of Narvik"

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battles_of_Narvik

Battle of Britain finished Oct 1940

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Britain

Operation Crusader which relieved Tobruk

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Crusader

He ignores the facts.

by Ben Reilly Wed Feb 04, 2015 7:15 am

TRIBALISM! All of you are better than that outmoded, dysfunctional, 19th-century bullshit.

Let's just be Earthicans and shit on the graves of our oh-so-wise forefathers Smile

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 04, 2015 8:26 am

nicko wrote:Is there anything you like about Britain? anything, anything at all. and you call us whingers.

Well.... I really like the part about calling you whingers Razz

I like a number of Modern British Authors Smile

that's something Razz

and you guys cheers

by Irn Bru Wed Feb 04, 2015 8:32 am

Churchill was a better politician than a soldier of that there is no doubt. His speeches in particular roused a nation and as an inspirational leader during WWII he has no equal imo.

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 04, 2015 8:43 am

@Basidas

Ship escaped no victory ... And the New Zealanders fair best in that battle

OK I actually will give you battle of Britain, it is often debated/denied here silent

..... but it was an air battle bounce

And the 3rd one says you were relieving us after we captured it from the Nazi (almost a year latter)
SO we still won first land battle tongue

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 8:46 am

veya_victaous wrote:@Basidas

Ship escaped no victory ... And the New Zealanders fair best in that battle

OK I actually will give you battle of Britain, it is often debated/denied here ..... but it was an air battle

And the 3rd one says you were relieving us after we captured it from the Nazi (almost a year latter)
SO we still won first land battle

Absurd, the ship did not escape and was scuttled knowing it would be destroyed if it left the harbour so that is daft.

You did not captured it from the Nazi;s but the Italians.

DOH

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 04, 2015 8:49 am

Irn Bru wrote:Churchill was a better politician than a soldier of that there is no doubt. His speeches in particular roused a nation and as an inspirational leader during WWII he has no equal imo.

But alienated all the colonies by his instance that we were lesser being than a Englishman Rolling Eyes

And he seems to have made 'mistakes' that kill colonials at every opportunity Evil or Very Mad

and he demanded we sacrifice the north half of Australia to the Japanese and come save your asses pirat

John Curtin

Australia’s 14th Prime Minister is widely regarded as one of the greatest. John Curtin’s achievement rests on his leadership of the nation during much of World War II. Curtin’s rejection of the British strategy for Australian troops enabled the successful defence of New Guinea. And, in a remarkable move, he put US General Douglas MacArthur in charge of Australia’s defence forces.

http://primeministers.naa.gov.au/primeministers/curtin/

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 8:52 am

veya_victaous wrote:
Irn Bru wrote:Churchill was a better politician than a soldier of that there is no doubt. His speeches in particular roused a nation and as an inspirational leader during WWII he has no equal imo.

But alienated all the colonies by his instance that we were lesser being than a Englishman And he seems to have made 'mistakes' that kill colonials at every opportunity and he demanded we sacrifice the north half of Australia to the Japanese and come save your asses

John Curtin

Australia’s 14th Prime Minister is widely regarded as one of the greatest. John Curtin’s achievement rests on his leadership of the nation during much of World War II. Curtin’s rejection of the British strategy for Australian troops enabled the successful defence of New Guinea. And, in a remarkable move, he put US General Douglas MacArthur in charge of Australia’s defence forces.
http://primeministers.naa.gov.au/primeministers/curtin/

Churchill: Of Words and Deeds 3489511464

Sorry how many people remember John Curtain compared to Churchill?

That speaks for itself who has gone down in history as great.

There is no denying Churchill had some poor foreign policies, but his achievements for Britain are great which is why he is one of, if not the greatest leader we have ever had in Britain.

by Original Quill Wed Feb 04, 2015 5:22 pm

nicko wrote:Is there anything you like about Britain? anything, anything at all. and you call us whingers.

Don't be so defensive. It's not all that absolute. You don't mean to be absolute when you toss a zinger or two at Oz or America. Roll with it.

You guys did invent the middle-finger salute, didn't you?

Churchill: Of Words and Deeds Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQMHpnqJ2kATmMHPubJF7q6CVijZtJ9PhaWyrmzo0IwzT5iTP3Aaw

Churchill: Of Words and Deeds Images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQMHpnqJ2kATmMHPubJF7q6CVijZtJ9PhaWyrmzo0IwzT5iTP3Aaw

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 04, 2015 9:05 pm

Brasidas wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Irn Bru wrote:Churchill was a better politician than a soldier of that there is no doubt. His speeches in particular roused a nation and as an inspirational leader during WWII he has no equal imo.

But alienated all the colonies by his instance that we were lesser being than a Englishman And he seems to have made 'mistakes' that kill colonials at every opportunity and he demanded we sacrifice the north half of Australia to the Japanese and come save your asses

John Curtin

Australia’s 14th Prime Minister is widely regarded as one of the greatest. John Curtin’s achievement rests on his leadership of the nation during much of World War II. Curtin’s rejection of the British strategy for Australian troops enabled the successful defence of New Guinea. And, in a remarkable move, he put US General Douglas MacArthur in charge of Australia’s defence forces.
http://primeministers.naa.gov.au/primeministers/curtin/

Sorry how many people remember John Curtain compared to Churchill?

That speaks for itself who has gone down in history as great.

There is no denying Churchill had some poor foreign policies, but his achievements for Britain are great which is why he is one of, if not the greatest leader we have ever had in Britain.

I never denied the Potency of British Propaganda machine. The Fact a Coward, Fool and Incompetent Like Churchill can be so revered Shows how bloody powerful it is.

Churchill Presided over the demise of the British position in the world, your fall has been inevitable since him. Curtain Moved Australia Forward and threw off the Yoke of England. Made us new Stronger Allies, that treated us better.

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 9:17 pm

You can say as you please veya, it still will not discount the fact he is seen in America also as one of the best British leaders.
That is telling in itself let alone in this country.
Anyway not really concerned what a Aussie thinks, they just tend to be jealous of British history hence as seen earlier poor claims being made as if they did things first.
That is born from jealousy they have little or no where near the fascinating history Great Britain does have.

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 9:21 pm

Fast-forward a century later to Winston Churchill, another national leader during a time of crisis. I have certain personal feelings toward Churchill. Growing up in the suburbs of London, with parents who emigrated from India, I heard nothing but glowing tributes to this great national icon. The fearless leader who stood up to Adolf Hitler and led the country in its brave solitary fight against the Nazis.

As I got older and began to learn more about Churchill, I was horrified to hear of his racist, derogatory views toward Indians. Of one of the world's greatest freedom fighters, he said: "It is alarming and also nauseating to see Mr. Gandhi, a seditious Middle Temple lawyer of the type well-known in the East, now posing as a fakir, striding half naked up the steps of the Viceregal palace to parley on equal terms with the representative of the King-Emperor."

It's well known that Churchill favored allowing Gandhi to die in prison. He was also quoted saying: “I hate Indians. They are a beastly people with a beastly religion."

Those Indians he was talking about were my grandparents; thoroughly decent, law abiding and hard-working people who just wanted the simple right of self-rule. But it wasn't just Churchill’s words that were so offensive and hurtful. His deliberate policies are estimated to have starved millions of Indians during the famine of Bengal -- a loss of life on a terrible scale. The more I learned about this side to Churchill, the more dismayed I became. There's little doubt that had it been left to his bullish nature, India may never have even gained Independence.

I went through a period of disappointment and betrayal, because these aspects of Churchill's life seemed so conveniently forgotten. Yet over the years, I have become much less angry, and more reasoned in my approach to his legacy. Not only as I read more books about his fearless nature, but also through my job as a medical doctor I had the privilege of talking to dozens, if not hundreds, of people who lived through the war and constantly reaffirmed what a great leader he was.

As hard as it was, I found that I could not ignore Churchill's heroic qualities. I may have to constantly balance these against his views and acts against my ancestors, but he undoubtedly deserves to be held in high esteem for his service to his people and country.

http://www.ibtimes.com/redeeming-racism-forgiving-winston-churchill-thomas-jefferson-933098

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 04, 2015 9:37 pm

And in A 100 years no one will care what someone from the "State of Britain" thinks Razz

And Will give even less of a Fuck about the opinion of someone from a 'nation of Britain' if it still exists.

As an average Aussie is worth about 50% more in real dollars than A Brit I think you will find Per individual The world cares more about we think than you as an individual Razz

And All that is propaganda, His Legacy Like the Heroic Escape ... where he selfishly fled leaving the guys who did all the bloody work to get caught AFTER HE alerted the guards with his bumbling.

The Guy was a Drunken Alcoholic. whenever actually put to the test he pushes others into danger, all he did successfully is motivate Britain to resist the Nazis (when some is bombing your home that shouldn't be hard) and beg others to come Save the UK... And even then he did a bad job Because he made Australia and India hate him and think of the UK as cowards that want 'their colonials' to die for them.

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 9:44 pm

Veya is just jealous.

the "white aussie" has (just like America) no history to speak of and they cant cook either

they have to run outside and burn their food over open wood fires....then name it after a kids toy doll... Twisted Evil

the resulting food is so bad they then have to get sloshed on a second rate larger ...note larger, not beer, that is again so bad it has best be served at sub zero temperatures in order that the cold numbs your taste bus.

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 9:46 pm

I think you are sadly wrong on that Vay, this year alone we are going to celebrate kicking the French's arse commemorating Waterloo.
No matter what you say, the British really know how to honour great people and leaders and Churchill is one of them, who did unite a nation in its darkest hour. That will always be remembered because WW2 will always be remembered. It is not something that ill be left out of the history books, no matter how badly you hope for this to happen.
Your ancestors in years to come will be reading about how great Churchill was. So no matter how badly you try to get a rise here, I just am smilling and imagining patting you on the head going, there, there, one day you might have some Australian rise to doing something great that everyone will know about and remember.
Might have along wait though ha ha
You really are quite jealous Veya, that is the sore French loser side coming out of you

Smile

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 9:50 pm

darknessss wrote:Veya is just jealous.

the "white aussie" has (just like America) no history to speak of and they cant cook either

they have to run outside and burn their food over open wood fires....then name it after a kids toy doll...

the resulting food is so bad they then have to get sloshed on a second rate larger ...note larger, not beer, that is again so bad it has best be served at sub zero temperatures in order that the cold numbs your taste bus.

Its their goddess they worship

Churchill: Of Words and Deeds Barbie_on_fire_by_grimgail

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 04, 2015 10:28 pm

Brasidas wrote:I think you are sadly wrong on that Vay, this year alone we are going to celebrate kicking the French's arse commemorating Waterloo. Clausewitz points out it was mainly the Austrian that did all the work
No matter what you say, the British really know how to honour great people and leaders and Churchill is one of them, who did unite a nation in its darkest hour. That will always be remembered because WW2 will always be remembered. It is not something that ill be left out of the history books, no matter how badly you hope for this to happen. Pfft it will be rewritten as A European Tiff that Occurred during the more important war in the Pacific the one the lead to the creation of the Nuclear deterrent that has prevented WW3
Your ancestors in years to come will be reading about how great Churchill was. No Aussies and Indians already expose him for the Coward Racist incompetent he was So no matter how badly you try to get a rise here, I just am smilling and imagining patting you on the head going, there, there, one day you might have some Australian rise to doing something great that everyone will know about and remember. nuh we're not so Propaganda driven to need to self promote lies in such a way to attempt to generate respect... we know we're better and we'll just let the number do the talking... Ok maybe a knob like Abbott would but that twat just made Prince Phillip a Knight of Australia
Might have along wait though ha ha Maybe but there is a future Unlike Britain that can look forward to sinking into state hood, just one of the nations that became United States of Europe
You really are quite jealous Veya, that is the sore French loser side coming out of you the French contempt for the Ridiculous of British propaganda/lies

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 10:35 pm

veya_victaous wrote:Clausewitz points out it was mainly the Austrian that did all the work
Pfft it will be rewritten as A European Tiff that Occurred during the more important war in the Pacific the one the lead to the creation of the Nuclear deterrent that has prevented WW3
No Aussies and Indians already expose him for the Coward Racist incompetent he was[nuh we're not so Propaganda driven to need to self promote lies in such a way to attempt to generate respect... we know we're better and we'll just let the number do the talking... Ok maybe a knob like Abbott would but that twat just made Prince Phillip a Knight of Australia
Maybe but there is a future Unlike Britain that can look forward to sinking into state hood, just one of the nations that became United States of Europe
the French contempt for the Ridiculous of British propaganda/lies

We know you French are so upset we have kicked your butts so many times, hence why all the jealousy, even your greatest figure of napoleon got his arse spanked at Waterloo, all of which we are going to commemorate again this year and in great pomp and circumstance, which proves my point on how jealous you are, that the English have continue to kick the French butts throughout history.
The Aussie;s have no history to speak of, so you have to poorly attempt o think you can bother us with your jealous words.
That just makes me even more proud that you are jealous

Laughing

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 10:38 pm

he he...whats the difference between a slice of toast and a frenchman????

you can make soldiers out of toast.........(sorry david Embarassed

)

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 04, 2015 10:51 pm

darknessss wrote:Veya is just jealous.

the "white aussie" has (just like America) no history to speak of and they cant cook either... ONLY those of British Decent cannot Cook... I think it is Genetic... Anglos are allergic to flavour

they have to run outside and burn their food over open wood fires....then name it after a kids toy doll... Actually most of us have gas, too many wood fires get out of control

the resulting food is so bad they then have to get sloshed on a second rate larger Again JUST like their British Ancestors ...note larger, not beer, that is again so bad it has best be served at sub zero temperatures in order that the cold numbs your taste bus. TO be Fair 'Refrigerated' is the room temperature of Britain, not our fault our land actually see the sun

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 10:53 pm

darknessss wrote:he he...whats the difference between a slice of toast and a frenchman????

you can make soldiers out of toast.........(sorry david )

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:08 pm

LOL
England Conquered By Citizens of France. Ok technically it only took 1 French province to Conquer ALL of England, Anglo Saxon Peasants lol!

Note the French have more rivalry with Austrians and Russians You Know Nations that Were actually powerful for most of History.. geek

Not just the Propaganda from Europe's Equivalent of New Zealand Suspect

British a.k.a. Empire of Pirates pirat

and you've sucked since you stopped being the biggest pirates in the world... And any Decent Adventurous Pirate Blood Got Sent to Australia the Convict nation descended from pirates.

Q: Whats the difference between a Cultured English man and a unicorn?
A: Nothing, they're both fictional characters

Q: Why wasn't Jesus born in England?
A: He couldn't find 3 wise men or a virgin.

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:13 pm

William was a Norma, who were Vikings

Ha ha

1. William was of Viking origin. Though he spoke a dialect of French and grew up in Normandy, a fiefdom loyal to the French kingdom, he and other Normans descended from Scandinavian invaders. William’s great-great-great-grandfather, Rollo, pillaged northern France with fellow Viking raiders in the late ninth and early 10th centuries, eventually accepting his own territory (Normandy, named for the Norsemen who controlled it) in exchange for pe

So the Vikings beat the Saxons and then itws this united Kingdom that continued to whoop the French for centuries after

Laughing

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:16 pm

Was the Battle of Hastings a French victory? Non! William the Conqueror was Norman and hated the French. Were the Brits really responsible for the death of Joan of Arc? Non! The French sentenced her to death for wearing trousers. Was the guillotine a French invention? Non! It was invented in Yorkshire. Ten centuries' worth of French historical 'facts' bite the dust as Stephen Clarke looks at what has really been going on since 1066...
Churchill: Of Words and Deeds Z%20

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:28 pm

Yes Yes

we know the Brits have worked hard to rewrite history

Normandy Province of France in Not French LOLOLOLOL

not Frankish true but Franks, Normans, Visigoth and a bunch of others make the French.

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:33 pm

veya_victaous wrote:Yes Yes we know the Brits have worked hard to rewrite history

Normandy Province of France in Not French LOLOLOLOL

not Frankish true but Franks, Normans, Visigoth and a bunch of others make the French.

Just vikings my dear boy, just as many Vikings had settled in England by then also. These Vikings were given land on a plate because the Franks(French) were shit scared of them ha ha

by veya_victaous Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:47 pm

Brasidas wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:Yes Yes we know the Brits have worked hard to rewrite history

Normandy Province of France in Not French LOLOLOLOL

not Frankish true but Franks, Normans, Visigoth and a bunch of others make the French.

Just vikings my dear boy, just as many Vikings had settled in England by then also. These Vikings were given land on a plate because the Franks(French) were shit scared of them ha ha

My family is not Frankish.
I still wear my families Heraldic symbol.

by Guest Wed Feb 04, 2015 11:48 pm

veya_victaous wrote:
Brasidas wrote:

Just vikings my dear boy, just as many Vikings had settled in England by then also. These Vikings were given land on a plate because the Franks(French) were shit scared of them ha ha

My family is not Frankish.
I still wear my families Heraldic symbol.

Whoop dee do

Laughing

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 05, 2015 12:37 am

Brasidas wrote:
veya_victaous wrote:
Brasidas wrote:

Just vikings my dear boy, just as many Vikings had settled in England by then also. These Vikings were given land on a plate because the Franks(French) were shit scared of them ha ha

My family is not Frankish.
I still wear my families Heraldic symbol.

Whoop dee do

And Vikings?? seriously another victim of the English Propaganda machine rewriting history

THEY were the good guys Far nicer to every one they encountered that Angle or Saxon, actually had women's rights and Far more modern ideas around personal rights.... but Unfortunately EVIL king Alfred Imposed his Theoretic Nonsense on England Rolling Eyes

been a shit fountain of Evil ever since, just making life shitty for every culture they encounter...
it is like England has a history of Hating Rights and Freedom ... OH that's right IT DOES Razz

by Guest Thu Feb 05, 2015 6:30 am

Ha Ha Ha Ha you really are clueless you left wingers.
I am now seeing how you all seem to change history to suit.
Never mind you keep up the delusions Veya, being left wing seems to be a disease that infects the mind and invents history, the Vikings also got their arses kicked by the English in the end ha ha ha ha ha.

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 05, 2015 7:02 am

Wait so now the Normans are french Razz

make up your mind geek

Seems someone just showed how the English work their propaganda Churchill: Of Words and Deeds 2984306523

If we talk about Vikings you beat them because you beat the Danes but if we talk about French the Normans were Vikings Churchill: Of Words and Deeds 3350646086

Churchill: Of Words and Deeds 3350646086

by Guest Thu Feb 05, 2015 7:53 am

Hence why both the left and the french are clueless ha ha

What a muppet, and even worse an Aussie at that, jealous of English.
Never mind veya, you can keep looking at the English with awe.

by nicko Thu Feb 05, 2015 9:52 am

I have said [on here] that veya is just jealous of British History, [being that his Country has none to speak of]

by nicko Thu Feb 05, 2015 10:06 am

veya, At aged 10 I came to Australia with my Parents on the Assisted Passage Scheme. At aged 18 I joined the Australian Regiment and was sent to Vietnam where I fought with Australian Soldiers. Not one of them criticised Britain and they all thought Churchill was "A good un" so your attempts to put down the British are just sour grapes. In the past did some Brit nick your girl friend?

by Original Quill Thu Feb 05, 2015 6:23 pm

nicko wrote:I have said [on here] that veya is just jealous of British History, [being that his Country has none to speak of]

And I have said [on here] that you are a bit over-defensive, nicko. History is just a byproduct of literacy, something that Britain has lacked for most of its existence. Literacy belonged to the Church until Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press in 1450, which popularized literacy.

The rest of y'all were a bunch of jackasses, no more advanced than the aboriginals in Australia you like to criticize.

by Guest Thu Feb 05, 2015 6:32 pm

Original Quill wrote:
nicko wrote:I have said [on here] that veya is just jealous of British History, [being that his Country has none to speak of]

And I have said [on here] that you are a bit over-defensive, nicko. History is just a byproduct of literacy, something that Britain has lacked for most of its existence. Literacy belonged to the Church until Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press in 1450, which popularized literacy.

The rest of y'all were a bunch of jackasses, no more advanced than the aboriginals in Australia you like to criticize.

Nothing to do with being defensive, the Brits do have a glorious history as well as some bad points but the fact is many are envious of our history and this is a fact. History is a by-product of actions. Take for example how we brought about the end of slavery, it was through reason and democracy. You yanks though went to war over giving basic rights to man. What does that tell you about how self-centered the yanks are, they place themselves over the needs of others and why its history is not as glorious as the Brits. Apart from WW2 and Korea, their military achievements are poor to the point of embarrassment especially with Vietnam and Ira, because they fail to learn the basic requirement of learning how to deal with civilian populations they are in conflict with. They also have no respect for their enemies to their own failing which has cost them many costly conflicts, mainly because they have a poor superiority complex. So if we are jackasses, it must make the yanks a bunch of pond slime on the evolutionary tree.

by Original Quill Thu Feb 05, 2015 6:57 pm

Brasidas wrote:
Original Quill wrote:

And I have said [on here] that you are a bit over-defensive, nicko. History is just a byproduct of literacy, something that Britain has lacked for most of its existence. Literacy belonged to the Church until Johannes Gutenberg invented the printing press in 1450, which popularized literacy.

The rest of y'all were a bunch of jackasses, no more advanced than the aboriginals in Australia you like to criticize.

Nothing to do with being defensive, the Brits do have a glorious history as well as some bad points but the fact is many are envious of our history and this is a fact. History is a by-product of actions. Take for example how we brought about the end of slavery, it was through reason and democracy.

History is a byproduct of the big bang, if you want to be philosophical. But practically speaking, history is the recording of events, which in turn is dependent upon having a written language--otherwise known as literacy.

This whole discussion arises because the British are defensive about their position in the world at present. This is evident by the compensatory behavior engaged in by so many Brits, too quick to shout their own accolades, but too slow in self-confidence.

I'm only being critical because occasionally Brits believe their own words, and turn it into an offensive weapon. My point at such times is only to remind the British of their position...coming from behind as they are. A little humility, if you please. Rolling Eyes

Brasidas wrote: You yanks though went to war over giving basic rights to man. What does that tell you about how self-centered the yanks are, they place themselves over the needs of others and why its history is not as glorious as the Brits. Apart from WW2 and Korea, their military achievements are poor to the point of embarrassment especially with Vietnam and Ira, because they fail to learn the basic requirement of learning how to deal with civilian populations they are in conflict with. They also have no respect for their enemies to their own failing which has cost them many costly conflicts, mainly because they have a poor superiority complex. So if we are jackasses, it must make the yanks a bunch of pond slime on the evolutionary tree.

Haha...proving no one is perfect, even though we are prettier.

Churchill: Of Words and Deeds Il_340x270.336597926

by Guest Thu Feb 05, 2015 7:05 pm

Original Quill wrote:

History is a byproduct of the big bang, if you want to be philosophical. But practically speaking, history is the recording of events, which in turn is dependent upon having a written language--otherwise known as literacy.

This whole discussion arises because the British are defensive about their position in the world at present. This is evident by the compensatory behavior engaged in by so many Brits, too quick to shout their own accolades, but lagging in self-confidence. I'm only being critical because occasionally Brits believe themselves, and turn it into an offensive weapon. My point at such times is only to remind the British of their position...coming from behind as they are.

Haha...proving no one is perfect, even though we are prettier.

History is also written in the ground by the archeological evidence, not just what you can read, as you can tell much just on those who died before us to retell history. So it does not even have to be written to tell how people lived and died in the past and even if it was through war, pestilence, starvation, prosperity etc. Nothing to do with even being in the timezone of today, our history is full from its very beginnings, where as the US and many other nations are not. Position in the world is based off a subjective level and it is only what you have achieved of which again this nation has achieved far more than many other nations, again this is a fact. Again this goes to my point that very much in the last couple of hundred years it is reason that has brought about change, one that has turned away from religion but kept its religious history a part of its culture. Our position will stand as great until such a time that we fall and at present we are still riding very high on the greatness of this country which also has much to do with the founding of your own nation. They are all interlinked, to the point the spoken word of English is predominant in the speaking world, even though it is not the first language in many countries. That speaks for itself how far reaching this nation has been Quill.

by Original Quill Thu Feb 05, 2015 7:23 pm

Brasidas wrote:History is also written in the ground by the archeological evidence, not just what you can read, as you can tell much just on those who died before us to retell history. So it does not even have to be written to tell how people lived and died in the past and even if it was through war, pestilence, starvation, prosperity etc.

Well, that’s generally known as Anthropology, but I am always in favor of disciplines sharing knowledge. Nevertheless, we were talking about definitions, and history is the written recording of events.

Brasidas wrote:Nothing to do with even being in the timezone of today, our history is full from its very beginnings, where as the US and many other nations are not. Position in the world is based off a subjective level and it is only what you have achieved of which again this nation has achieved far more than many other nations, again this is a fact.

I think now you are confusing history with propaganda. Certainly no one is as fond of British history as I, but in order to make beautiful music you’ve got to play the black keys as well as the white keys. A true historian acknowledges the bad along with the good. The devotion is to get it right.

Right now you are sounding like the Chamber of commerce.

Brasidas wrote:Again this goes to my point that very much in the last couple of hundred years it is reason that has brought about change, one that has turned away from religion but kept its religious history a part of its culture. Our position will stand as great until such a time that we fall and at present we are still riding very high on the greatness of this country which also has much to do with the founding of your own nation. They are all interlinked, to the point the spoken word of English is predominant in the speaking world, even though it is not the first language in many countries. That speaks for itself how far reaching this nation has been Quill.

Nevertheless, we began this discussion from one arising out of misguided British arrogance. I think you are always going to lose that one.

by Guest Thu Feb 05, 2015 7:31 pm

Original Quill wrote:

Well, that’s generally known as Anthropology, but I am always in favor of disciplines sharing knowledge. Nevertheless, we were talking about definitions, and history is the written recording of events.
I think now you are confusing history with propaganda. Certainly no one is as fond of British history as I, but in order to make beautiful music you’ve got to play the black keys as well as the white keys. A true historian acknowledges the bad along with the good. The devotion is to get it right.

Right now you are sounding like the Chamber of commerce.

Nevertheless, we began this discussion from one arising out of misguided British arrogance. I think you are always going to lose that one.

Nothing to do with propaganda, I am measuring the greatness of a country on its affects to other nations, of which with Great Britain it has been far reaching than most. Even more so its culture, laws, politics, governments, military etc. I certainly have no problem recognizing the bad also that this nation has done, but again it is outweigh by the far reaching affects it has had on other nations, your own testament to that.
So I am not going to lose anything on that, when your own culture is very much grounded from the British, even if you had to fight a war with us. You then lost your way with how to reason. History is written in stone and through lives how they are led and again it has been Britain that has led the way, with America being very much behind in all matters of humanity, compassion, secularism and most of all well being and equality. How long ago did us Brits form the NHS? We certainly did many wrongs in this and why we lead by example most on this because of learning from our mistakes. This is something the Americans have never been very good at especially since losing the Vietnam war. They were riding high on their industrial might after WW2 which made them ever so arrogant to the point them became too cocky to their cost. America is still very much divided and more so from still the fact they cannot let religious influence and control dissipate to the point it has no part in the governance of your nation. You nation thus lacks behind Britain in many ways. I am not being cocky here either, its just we are leaps and bounds above many other nations in always being forward thinking.

by Original Quill Thu Feb 05, 2015 8:02 pm

Brasidas wrote:
Original Quill wrote:Nevertheless, we began this discussion from one arising out of misguided British arrogance. I think you are always going to lose that one.

Nothing to do with propaganda, I am measuring the greatness of a country on its affects to other nations, of which with Great Britain it has been far reaching than most. Even more so its culture, laws, politics, governments, military etc. I certainly have no problem recognizing the bad also that this nation has done, but again it is outweigh by the far reaching affects it has had on other nations, your own testament to that.
So I am not going to lose anything on that, when your own culture is very much grounded from the British, even if you had to fight a war with us. You then lost your way with how to reason. History is written in stone and through lives how they are led and again it has been Britain that has led the way, with America being very much behind in all matters of humanity, compassion, secularism and most of all well being and equality. How long ago did us Brits form the NHS? We certainly did many wrongs in this and why we lead by example most on this because of learning from our mistakes. This is something the Americans have never been very good at especially since losing the Vietnam war. They were riding high on their industrial might after WW2 which made them ever so arrogant to the point them became too cocky to their cost. America is still very much divided and more so from still the fact they cannot let religious influence and control dissipate to the point it has no part in the governance of your nation. You nation thus lacks behind Britain in many ways. I am not being cocky here either, its just we are leaps and bounds above many other nations in always being forward thinking.

We have wandered way off course. The conversation that I encountered was telling Veya that his country had no dignity because it had no history. I think that is defensive talk for the reasons I have discussed.

I have made my point. Y'all carry on...I'm sure this was just a digression, anyway.

by Guest Thu Feb 05, 2015 8:03 pm

No worries Quill, we always have very interesting conversations which I enjoy, well most of the time.

Laughing

by Original Quill Thu Feb 05, 2015 8:05 pm

Brasidas wrote:No worries Quill, we always have very interesting conversations which I enjoy, well most of the time.

Likewise.

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 05, 2015 9:05 pm

nicko wrote:veya, At aged 10 I came to Australia with my Parents on the Assisted Passage Scheme. At aged 18 I joined the Australian Regiment and was sent to Vietnam where I fought with Australian Soldiers. Not one of them criticised Britain and they all thought Churchill was "A good un" so your attempts to put down the British are just sour grapes. In the past did some Brit nick your girl friend?

First I'm just playing, it's all fun an games Basketball

2nd I'm French Australian, So More of the Eurocentric History on One Side
and 30,000+ years on the other (great to see Englishmen still don't count aboriginals as people Rolling Eyes

)

3rd Cause they were an older generation they still grew up with British propaganda, I grew up with more American propaganda and now we are making our own cheers

Also A huge amount of Aussies are still educated by TV and You make more TV than us So yes We get BBC propaganda saying Churchill is Great completely ignoring that he was on of the individuals responsible for Screwing Us in Gallipoli, treated us like pawns to be sacrificed in WW2 and tried to leave Aussie women and children completely undefended, he wouldn't have cared if Darwin went down as another Nanking.

Any Aussie that actually knows Australian History cannot call him good. Our Best Prime Minister is So for Opposing him tongue

by veya_victaous Thu Feb 05, 2015 9:09 pm

See everything is Perspective Particularly Churchill
He motivated Britain to defend itself... why that is such an achievement I don't know Rolling Eyes

but he tried to get Aussies to sacrifice their homes and families to defend Britain.. let alone all the Colonial Killing Fuck ups he basically made a career out of previously. Evil or Very Mad

by Original Quill Fri Feb 06, 2015 4:47 am

To be honest, it wasn't a foregone conclusion that Britain would need to defend itself. Hitler's ambition lay to the east. He only went west because he anticipated military and political opposition, which he felt he needed to take care of first.

It was Churchill who motivated Britain to oppose Hitler. Then he took to the task of motivating the US for the same. All that time he was treading water on the war.

Churchill made a big difference.

by Sponsored content