Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Brexit


alibongo
 Share

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, bmk1245 said:

OK, fair enough, thats out of my league. I really don't care 'bout Brexit. Why any should?

I don't actually care.  The vote was cast, and the majority spoke.  The butthurt and whining are just business as usual.  Good for Britain, though, for showing that democracy works, no matter which was it would have gone.

Then I got dragged into the bottomless vortex of ignorance when certain posters started their chest-thumping and erroneously and hilariously tried to make claim that Britain won WWII all on their own, while denigrating the hard work and loss of all of the other allies that fought in the war as well.  I've studied WWII since I was a child--it fascinated me and there wasn't one bit of knowledge about it that I didn't gobble up.  It's part of my blood now I guess.  To me, it marks one of the greatest triumphs of good over evil, how a world can and should come together to defeat a threat.  It represents the greatest generation of humans, it represents the ultimate potential for good (and yes, it was brought about by the ultimate potential for evil as well, but that evil was squashed and defeated).  It's that damned important to me, to preserve without revision, and to make sure future generations know exactly what it was, and exactly how it was fought and resolved.

And when someone makes hollow statements like I've been railing against, and fails to act on them, AND then refuses to admit they are not only wrong but refuses to even be educated by their betters, I tend to lose my temper.  I shouldn't be surprised, too few people know and too few people are actually interested in facts and the truth anymore.  And when that happens, history is doomed to repeat itself.  And that's why I am stuck in it here with the ignorants and uninformed.  Maybe I shouldn't care, but I just can't leave it alone.  My apologies.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

By the way, for those that think Britain won the war, this might educate you:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allies_of_World_War_II

Note that Britain is only a small part of the overall effort.  That's all I posting about it for now.  Have a good weekend.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

I don't actually care.  The vote was cast, and the majority spoke.  The butthurt and whining are just business as usual.  Good for Britain, though, for showing that democracy works, no matter which was it would have gone.

Then I got dragged into the bottomless vortex of ignorance when certain posters started their chest-thumping and erroneously and hilariously tried to make claim that Britain won WWII all on their own, while denigrating the hard work and loss of all of the other allies that fought in the war as well.  I've studied WWII since I was a child--it fascinated me and there wasn't one bit of knowledge about it that I didn't gobble up.  It's part of my blood now I guess.  To me, it marks one of the greatest triumphs of good over evil, how a world can and should come together to defeat a threat.  It represents the greatest generation of humans, it represents the ultimate potential for good (and yes, it was brought about by the ultimate potential for evil as well, but that evil was squashed and defeated).  It's that damned important to me, to preserve without revision, and to make sure future generations know exactly what it was, and exactly how it was fought and resolved.

And when someone makes hollow statements like I've been railing against, and fails to act on them, AND then refuses to admit they are not only wrong but refuses to even be educated by their betters, I tend to lose my temper.  I shouldn't be surprised, too few people know and too few people are actually interested in facts and the truth anymore.  And when that happens, history is doomed to repeat itself.  And that's why I am stuck in it here with the ignorants and uninformed.  Maybe I shouldn't care, but I just can't leave it alone.  My apologies.

Much appreciations for answer. Well, so, who cares 'bout Brexit? Thats rhetorical question... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

20 minutes ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

Sure, if you throw in "what ifs" then anything could happen.  What if the Russians and Germans remained at peace?  What if they decided to take their alliance once step further and join forces (not just in Poland)?  Still, the combined forces of both the Soviet Union and Nazi Germany weren't enough to defeat the US at least...unless you want to throw in more "what-ifs"?

Thing is, we're not dealing with speculation here.  Fact is, Britain did not win the war on its own, like a couple of uninformed posters are pushing.  Germany could not have won the war.  Japan could not have won the war.  Events played out exactly as they did for a damned good reason.

It would seem that my comment "sick of helping out Europe " upset a few people for which I apologise but the fact is that we the Brits have helped out countries in Europe when these countries tried to start wars with one another including ourselves. We have been invaded quite a few times in past history by Vikings, Romans and French, Scots and  even Americans (John Paul Jones came to Wales and was subdued by the Welsh Ladies) oh dear.  But lets get down to basics We all know that the Brits did not beat Germany on our own .but at that time the Germans had the worlds best Armies and it took people from  42 countries to beat them and over a dozen to beat the Japanese   although it would seem that America takes all the credit as usual.so can we now drop this. apart from the fact that we have given Europe millions of Pounds while in the Common Market,and its time we stood on our own again, Brexit in my opinion is the best thing us Brits have done for a long time but I have no axe to grind with the Remainers and wish them well.  

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

Don't be so damned stupid.  Russia wasn't just "eating grass".  Russia wasn't just using sticks.  Do some actual research and stop trolling me with your stupidity.  Educate yourself for once.

Go through all you want to one by one.  You'll still be absolutely wrong.  It was a team effort.  Geez.

You have no answer then, no they didn't just eat grass or fight with sticks because we won "The battle of Britain" the main problem here is you don't know as much as you think you do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Leonardo said:

A load of rubbish. Germany lost (rather than "Britain won") the Battle of Britain because the Luftwaffe made a strategic error in opting to bomb British cities, rather than factories, airfields, etc. If the High Command of the Luftwaffe (Goering) had not been strung out on heroin most of the time, and a militarily incapable egoist, Britain likely wouldn't have had an airforce with which to fight the Battle.

Britain's "industrial might" was far below that of Germany's at the time, and the truth is the rate Britain could build ships, airplanes, etc, and train people to use those weapons of war, was insufficient to make up their losses. Britain was losing the war through attrition until the German military command made several mistakes (including the one I mentioned above) which forced them to take a step back.

By then, Germany had decided to focus on North Africa, the Mediterranean and the Near/Middle East, and then entangled itself in the east against Russia, and so the opportunity to crush Britain was lost. Britain would not have "beaten Germany on it's own", that is just your nationalist delusion speaking.

That's just a load of cow poo, battles are won because the other side made an error, this is true with all battles, we won the "Battle of Britain" Yes they turned there focus on north Africa and we defeated them, i suppose you're going to tell us we didn't defeat them they defeated themselves.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Thorvir Hrothgaard said:

Um, no.  Just no. They were as much of a threat, if not greater, than Germany.  Not a threat of conquering the world as you fear mongers are pushing, of course, but they were a very powerful enemy that did a lot of damage before they were brought to heel.  Don't dismiss them.

Sure, they had no chance of winning, just like Germany, but labeling them "minor" is a gross misinterpretation of history.

The Japanese war was about 15% of WWII. They had failed to subdue a backward China after campaigning for ten years. To compare the Japanese Army to the terrible war machine that was the Wehrmacht, is laughable. Even the million-strong Kwantung Army was routed in a matter of days by the Soviets in 1945. The Japanese "threat" was real enough to those under its boot, but they were long odds to prevail. The Germans were likely to dominate Europe until faltering in 1941. I looked up an old newspaper archive of my local paper, to see what the commentaries were, in real time. In the days after the June 1941 launch of Barbarossa. a "foreign correspondent" opined that Hitler had 4 or 5 months to knock Russia out of the war, or lose the entire struggle. How prescient.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

21 hours ago, hetrodoxly said:

How have the goal posts been moved? so Russia would have beaten Germany by eating grass and fighting with sticks all those tanks and airplanes were left on the dockside (that Britain paid for)

 

 Have you ever heard of the T-34? Better than anything Germany had until they introduced the Panther, and over 80,000 built, all in the USSR; Il-2 Sturmovik, 36,000 built, all in the USSR ... 

Edited by Grand Moff Tarkin
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

it's a pity that Thor seems to be ignoring me again, since he's making a lot of sense in this thread. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, hetrodoxly said:

You have no answer then, no they didn't just eat grass or fight with sticks because we won "The battle of Britain" the main problem here is you don't know as much as you think you do.

Does that make any sense?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, hetrodoxly said:

That's just a load of cow poo, battles are won because the other side made an error, this is true with all battles, we won the "Battle of Britain" Yes they turned there focus on north Africa and we defeated them, i suppose you're going to tell us we didn't defeat them they defeated themselves.

Well, having Mussolini as an ally was not much of an asset, and Adolf was far more preoccupied with the campaign in Russia to give Rommel the resources he needed, what he achieved was really an absolute miracle. Perhaps the main way that the British defeated him was in strangling his supply lines across the Med, particularly in starving him of fuel. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Grand Moff Tarkin said:

 Have you ever heard of the T-34? Better than anything Germany had until they introduced the Panther, and over 80,000 built, all in the USSR; Il-2 Sturmovik, 36,000 built, all in the USSR ... 

Yes i have of the heard "T-34" (saw a privately owned one recently) they did become fantastic tanks eventually the BT range based on American and British designs, the tank factories were over run by the Germans as they advanced into Russia 1944-45 saw the peak production,

Are you implying the thousands of lives lost were in vain and the sacrifice not needed?

  • 1941-1945

The Russian convoys, 1941-1945

After the German invasion of Russia in June 1941 the Atlantic convoys became not only the means of ensuring Britain’s survival, but also that of the Soviet Union.  Britain immediately agreed to send some of her precious American Lend Lease supplies direct to Russia.

The first Russian convoy sailed under Royal Navy escort from Reykjavik in Iceland to Archangel in northern Russia in late August 1941.  Many others, including ships of several Allied nations, followed regularly throughout the rest of the war.   From spring 1942 they faced, in addition to the terrible ordeal of the Arctic winter, relentless attacks from strong German sea and air forces based in Norway.  Sailing in almost continuous daylight or total darkness in these latitudes, the convoys were especially vulnerable.

The 2,500-mile voyage to northern Russian took convoys to within 750 miles of the North Pole, where temperatures could be as low as 50 degrees of frost.   On reaching journey’s end in winter the ships concerned, in addition to their original cargoes, were often carrying an extra load of 50 to 150 tons of ice.

Because of the extreme Arctic weather conditions often experienced on convoys to Russia, seamen had to undergo a special medical examination before sailing.  If passed fit, they were then issued with extra-thick clothing to help them to withstand the cold.  Duffle coats were lined with lamb’s wool and had extra hoods, with only slits for the eyes and mouth.

Captain Henry Richard Saalmans, OBE

The Liverpool-born Captain Saalmans was awarded the OBE and Lloyd’s War Medal for his work in supervising the unloading of war cargoes from Allied merchant ships at the north Russian port of Murmansk in 1942-1943.

Saalmans was Master of the 3,000 ton ‘SS Empire Bard’, which sailed in convoy for Russia in March 1942.  After surviving heavy air attacks, the ‘Empire Bard’ arrived at Murmansk on 6 May.  For the next ten months, in the absence of cranes on shore, she acted as a floating crane for Allied merchant ships reaching Murmansk with their cargoes.   By the end of her stay, despite being damaged several times by air attacks, she unloaded 27,000 tons of war supplies for Russia.

The Arctic graveyard

Between June 1941 and May 1945 one in every twenty Allied merchant ships (104 in all) sailing in convoys to or from North Russia were sunk.  These figures are comparable with the worst annual sinking rates (for 1942) for the much more numerous North Atlantic convoys during the war.  The cost of the Russian convoys to the Royal Navy was also high (22 ships) and included the sinking of the cruisers ‘Edinburgh’ and ‘Trinidad’.  The German Navy lost 4 surface warships and 31 U-boats.  On both sides, casualty rates among crews were often even higher than in the Atlantic due to the appallingly cold Arctic winter.

Convoys PQ 17 and PQ 18

In mid September 1942 the strongly-protected convoy PQ18 lost one third of its merchant ships (13 out of 39) to German aircraft and U-boats.  Two months earlier the disastrous convoy PQ17 had lost two-thirds of its merchant ships (24 out of 35).  The main damage to both convoys had been caused by aircraft.  The switching of many of these aircraft to other theatres of war led to much lighter losses on later Arctic convoys.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 hours ago, hetrodoxly said:

That's just a load of cow poo, battles are won because the other side made an error, this is true with all battles, we won the "Battle of Britain" Yes they turned there focus on north Africa and we defeated them, i suppose you're going to tell us we didn't defeat them they defeated themselves.

It was the actions of the German Luftwaffe that was decisive in determining the outcome of the BoB, not the actions of the RAF. By not attacking (or not continuing to attack) military targets such as airfields, the Germans allowed the RAF to recover from the early attrition. So yes, it is fair to say the Germans lost the battle, rather than the British won.

This is not at all diminishing the heroism of those in the RAF who fought so valiantly, but only stating the facts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Leonardo said:

It was the actions of the German Luftwaffe that was decisive in determining the outcome of the BoB, not the actions of the RAF. By not attacking (or not continuing to attack) military targets such as airfields, the Germans allowed the RAF to recover from the early attrition. So yes, it is fair to say the Germans lost the battle, rather than the British won.

This is not at all diminishing the heroism of those in the RAF who fought so valiantly, but only stating the facts.

American war of independence wasn't won then as England decided not to send anymore troops, this could be a long list.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Black Red Devil said:

You had to go back 6 years to find a quote?!  Wow, few and far in between huh.  :unsure:  I told you I was letting you off the hook and you're still back peddling?  Thirdeye, you live in Malaysia, if you're reading this stay on the lookout for Steve if he passes by. Catch him before he ends up as a crocs toothpick.  :P  All good fun mate.

Your running out of steam, :D  no longer can you argue your case, everything you have stated as fallen like dominoes. B) I look forward to the next time, as your teacher said when the map was pink, must try harder.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 hours ago, Black Red Devil said:

You had to go back 6 years to find a quote?!  Wow, few and far in between huh.  :unsure:  I told you I was letting you off the hook and you're still back peddling?  Thirdeye, you live in Malaysia, if you're reading this stay on the lookout for Steve if he passes by. Catch him before he ends up as a crocs toothpick.  :P  All good fun mate.

WWII is still a very painful memory for us here in many aspects as is the reasons are many ... the reasons on why it started and how it ended

Aside from the political reasoning, which is a very varied if not maligned perspective as much as it has whatever little accuracy if any, that there has been or is being proposed , it was to us here mainly a (then) newly industrial version of a smash and grab or to put it in another way , a greedy prepubescent international trade and resources looting free for all.

Just like little Adolph wanted more accurate pin point delivery bombers like the Junker Stukas because he wanted the factories and manufacturing resources intact for his expected occupation of Britain ... when that didn't pan out too well he set his sights on the Russian manufacturing behemoths to further serve his ambitions ....

China was left to her own resources because it was more profitable to leave her open to further ravages by the Japanese while the International Sectors committed stealthy pillaging when there was still much to pillage ... then the focus shifted over to raw commodities and metals ... which was then mainly in the Colonized regions. 

It is still something painful for us Malaysians when we look back on the promises made before the Japanese set foot here ... which as soon as the Japanese bicycled their way in, the promises forgotten and the Lords and Ladies packed up then retreated all the way to Singapore, left for home or India, sometimes in secret escapes in the middle of the night leaving behind the promise 'We will be back' ... for most, that too ended in tragic circumstances ... nobody gave the Japanese any serious thoughts as to their Navy borne capabilities much less their Air capacity for such extended operations ~

Meanwhile the locals were left to face the full brunt and force of a tested experienced military force with only the sarongs and singlets that was all that we had ...

You guys can argue back and forth about who won or who lost or who has the most heroic contributions of all ... it means nothing if anything at all ...

~

 

Edited by third_eye
afterthought
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 9 August 2016 at 11:58 PM, third_eye said:

THere you go ... Every single consortium was cleared [by the Foreign Investment Review Board]

Cleared old boy ... and these numbers won ...

and you don't have to believe me ... least of all in fact , seeing that believing is somewhat of a predicament for you ...

 

Just to keep you updated... :)

Australia says Chinese companies can't buy power grid

http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Deals/Australia-says-Chinese-companies-can-t-buy-power-grid

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Leto_loves_melange said:

Just to keep you updated... :)

Australia says Chinese companies can't buy power grid

http://asia.nikkei.com/Business/Deals/Australia-says-Chinese-companies-can-t-buy-power-grid

~

Quote

Cheung Kong Infrastructure, a unit of Hong Kong conglomerate CK Hutchison Holdings, said in a statement Thursday that the decision by Australia to block the sale of Ausgrid does not concern the company.

CKI, which has already acquired electricity and gas distribution companies in Australia, said that its investment in Australia is larger than in Hong Kong and mainland China.

 

~

From your link provided ...

~ its just political power play and meddling in the corporate field ... :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

EU funding for farmers, scientists and other projects will be replaced by the Treasury after Brexit, Chancellor Philip Hammond has said.  

In a move which could cost up to £6bn a year.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-37060430

 

In 2015 the UK Government paid £18 Billion (gross) -  EU spending on the UK was £4.5bn, (which is our own money coming back)  meaning the UK's net contribution was estimated at about £8.5bn. So Post Brexit we'll have £13Billion to spend how we like. so minus this £6 Billion funding guarantee to science,  farmers and other projects - So we have another £7 Billion leftover, The NHS according to the head of the NHS needs a extra £1Billion a year so lets spend that extra billion, - that leaves us with £6Billion to spend annually. we've already covered what the "EU spent on us" and have money left.  If we spend the whole of the remaining amount here at home, and we use the economic credit multiplier of having the benefit of spending it, taxes raised on it and economic growth resulting from the spending. We could boost our economy or alternately, if we cut our Aid budget by half to £5.5 Billion. We could in theory take the £6Billion Brexit money left over from the EU contribution add the other half of our Aid budget £5.5Billion giving us £11.5Billion and apply the same credit multiplier, taxes raised and the benefit of spending it here we could by 2030 generate £1.5Trillion. - National debt gone. plenty of possibilities exist and that's the beauty of Brexit taking back control. Who needs the EU to tell us how to spend our own money.

Edited by stevewinn
  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why were are on the subject of how rubbish Britain is at everything compared to its European neighbours maybe we could lighten the talk up and talk about the the Olympics.

This worn down, finished little nation is now second on the medal table ahead of the giant China!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/rio-2016/medals/countries

 

 

  • Like 6
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, skookum said:

Why were are on the subject of how rubbish Britain is at everything compared to its European neighbours maybe we could lighten the talk up and talk about the the Olympics.

This worn down, finished little nation is now second on the medal table ahead of the giant China!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/rio-2016/medals/countries

We've not really 'won' those medals the opposition didn't play as they should have.

 

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, hetrodoxly said:

 

Yes I agree, Little Britain could be knocked off second place on the medal table if mighty Germany and France could combine their results.  They would together be two medals ahead ;)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

"little" Britain is doing very well in Rio. Australian sport has fallen in a hole, and we are reduced to watching our track athletes rejoice in not finishing last, but frequently not succeeding at that !

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 hours ago, skookum said:

Why were are on the subject of how rubbish Britain is at everything compared to its European neighbours maybe we could lighten the talk up and talk about the the Olympics.

This worn down, finished little nation is now second on the medal table ahead of the giant China!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/olympics/rio-2016/medals/countries

 

 

Its funny and also equally alarming how surprised we are that Team GB are doing so well, - alarming in just how we've been conditioned to doubt and rubbish ourselves in perpetration of mediocrity even before the event has begun.

I've always thought the Olympics and sport in general should be used to boost morale and enthuse the population, giving a boost of confidence. self-confidence. which is greatly lacking by many, not the majority but many as we seen with the Remainers in the EU Referendum. self defeatist attitude. who do we blame for that attitude? weak leadership politically, and the Media, especially the Liberal Left media which is seriously lacking in self confidence always telling people how poor things are and how we cannot do anything great unless its others doing it for us. 

Edited by stevewinn
  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.