Black Lives Matter Protest.

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, Morgan said:

Ya slavering old goat.

 

Much appreciated.

[Morgan]

Just now, redjambo said:

 

Much appreciated.

You know I mean it.

 

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

21 minutes ago, Nucky Thompson said:

The simple answer is delete your facebook. it will do your blood pressure the World of good.

Never had it myself. It's bad enough reading the shit of assholes on here

Lol ! 

[redjambo]

1 minute ago, Morgan said:

You know I mean it.

 

 

 

It's only the "old" bit I actually object to.

[Eldar Hadzimehmedovic]

20 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

There are some great articles about how they dealt with it.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/20/why-there-are-no-nazi-statues-in-germany-215510

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?next_url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.washingtonpost.com%2fnews%2fworldviews%2fwp%2f2017%2f11%2f11%2fthis-museum-didnt-think-its-hitler-statue-was-a-problem-until-the-selfies-started%2f

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/09/germany-has-no-nazi-memorials/597937/

 

Nice one. Thanks!

[Spellczech]

17 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

There are some great articles about how they dealt with it.

https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2017/08/20/why-there-are-no-nazi-statues-in-germany-215510

 

https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?next_url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.washingtonpost.com%2fnews%2fworldviews%2fwp%2f2017%2f11%2f11%2fthis-museum-didnt-think-its-hitler-statue-was-a-problem-until-the-selfies-started%2f

 

https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2019/09/germany-has-no-nazi-memorials/597937/

There were never any statues of Hitler. He was too modest and insecure about his looks to want any. Lenin too - his were made after his death and against his explicit wishes. Other despots did make statues of themselves, most notably Stalin and Saddam - but these were for political purposes not commemoration, celebration or gratitude. Consequently nobody batted an eyelid when they were torn down at the end of the political regimes they were meant to glorify....As far as I am aware Jimmy Saville is the only example of a statue put up by others which has been taken down later due to discomfort with things that later emerged about him. TBH that was a really rubbish statue too

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

29 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Films and dramas can’t be included in this, it’s crazy and taking attention away from the point. Alleged comedies like Til death us do part have rightly been banned.

Unsure about this , where do you start and end ? It’s a slippery slope . There are some films I find offensive in their stereotyping of gay people ( I’m gay ) but should they be banned ? Another poster just commented on “ injuns “ in westerns . These were really harmful stereotypes to native Americans . I can’t stand westerns anyway so not bothered if they all got banned , leaving out the newer revisionist types like “ Unforgiven “ “310 to Yuma “ . Black people have been harshly treated in earlier films too , as well as Chinese and others countries . A victim of this was the good actress Anna May Wong who only got  the usual Chinese parts then ( mysterious , devious  , not to trusted etc 

[luckyBatistuta]

25 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

I'll help you out then, Norm. In future, if you see a post where the "red" in question is making a sensible measured point, it's probably redm. If, on the other hand, the poster is making a vain attempt at humour, being silly, posting images/videos with only a tenuous connection to the thread, or having people get angry at him, it's probably me.  

 

To complicate things, there's another poster simply called "red" who posts from time to time!

 

16 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

It never was me, Morgan. I am merely an illusion, fated to flit in and out of the JKB pages with the grace of a charging elephant, leaving chaos in my wake.

 

Oh, and sometimes I make a reasonable point or two (to which I limit myself to a maximum of one a week, two if the prevailing wind is westerly).

Such honesty, I doff my cap

 

 

and then you went and spoiled it with that last line 😁

[redjambo]

6 minutes ago, luckyBatistuta said:

 

Such honesty, I doff my cap

 

 

and then you went and spoiled it with that last line 😁

 

[Lone Striker]

2 hours ago, CJGJ said:

Have to agree..good post

 

Just how far back do we go in history and demand statues are removed or damaged ?..especially when many of those demanding action are just trying get publicity for themselves or group they claim to represent.

Many jumping on to a bandwagon

Yes..... and an example of that was on tonight's TV news, when they interviewed a few folk at one of these anti-statue BLM protests.    A mixed-race girl actually said   "I don't think there should statues to people from long ago who didn't reflect today's society".      Wooooooosh

 

 

;t

[Pasquale for King]

14 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Unsure about this , where do you start and end ? It’s a slippery slope . There are some films I find offensive in their stereotyping of gay people ( I’m gay ) but should they be banned ? Another poster just commented on “ injuns “ in westerns . These were really harmful stereotypes to native Americans . I can’t stand westerns anyway so not bothered if they all got banned , leaving out the newer revisionist types like “ Unforgiven “ “310 to Yuma “ . Black people have been harshly treated in earlier films too , as well as Chinese and others countries . A victim of this was the good actress Anna May Wong who only got  the usual Chinese parts then ( mysterious , devious  , not to trusted etc 

I think if they’re depicting how things are/were then that’s fine, if it’s a blatant untruth then that can be challenged and should be. I don’t like the way working class people are stereotyped but if some act that way then it can be justified, I just wouldnt watch it. As for how actors from different backgrounds or sex are treated then that’s a different conversation. White washing has been a black mark in Hollywood for years, pun intended. 
 https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?next_url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.washingtonpost.com%2fposteverything%2fwp%2f2016%2f01%2f28%2f100-times-a-white-actor-played-someone-who-wasnt-white%2f
Was there not a film recently that had to recast an Asian actor to replace a white one? Found it.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/sep/14/daniel-dae-kim-replaces-ed-skrein-hellboy-whitewashing

[Pasquale for King]

51 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

There were never any statues of Hitler. He was too modest and insecure about his looks to want any. Lenin too - his were made after his death and against his explicit wishes. Other despots did make statues of themselves, most notably Stalin and Saddam - but these were for political purposes not commemoration, celebration or gratitude. Consequently nobody batted an eyelid when they were torn down at the end of the political regimes they were meant to glorify....As far as I am aware Jimmy Saville is the only example of a statue put up by others which has been taken down later due to discomfort with things that later emerged about him. TBH that was a really rubbish statue too

 

There are 15 countries with Stalin statues to this day. 18 with Churchill.

 

Hitler.

https://www.businessinsider.com/france-finds-bust-of-hitler-underneath-luxembourg-palace-in-paris-2019-9?r=US&IR=T

Would anyone bat an eyelid if Dundas was replaced?

Looks more like Phil Collins 😃.

Edited June 12, 2020 by Pasquale for King

[Pasquale for King]

What a ****ing place.

https://www.google.com/?sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiIgZeIqv3pAhV0QRUIHataCeoQOwgC

[luckyBatistuta]

29 minutes ago, redjambo said:

 

[JudyJudyJudy]

18 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

I think if they’re depicting how things are/were then that’s fine, if it’s a blatant untruth then that can be challenged and should be. I don’t like the way working class people are stereotyped but if some act that way then it can be justified, I just wouldnt watch it. As for how actors from different backgrounds or sex are treated then that’s a different conversation. White washing has been a black mark in Hollywood for years, pun intended. 
 https://www.washingtonpost.com/gdpr-consent/?next_url=https%3a%2f%2fwww.washingtonpost.com%2fposteverything%2fwp%2f2016%2f01%2f28%2f100-times-a-white-actor-played-someone-who-wasnt-white%2f
Was there not a film recently that had to recast an Asian actor to replace a white one? Found it.

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2017/sep/14/daniel-dae-kim-replaces-ed-skrein-hellboy-whitewashing

Had a few the night so I’ll read them tomorrow 

[Pasquale for King]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

Had a few the night so I’ll read them tomorrow 

No bother, hope you had a good night.

[JudyJudyJudy]

1 minute ago, Pasquale for King said:

No bother, hope you had a good night.

Yeah been good , drink and a Smoke and FaceTime chat with a friend 

[Pasquale for King]

18 minutes ago, JamesM48 said:

Yeah been good , drink and a Smoke and FaceTime chat with a friend 

Good stuff 👍🏽

[Spellczech]

31 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

There are 15 countries with Stalin statues to this day. 18 with Churchill.

 

Hitler.

https://www.businessinsider.com/france-finds-bust-of-hitler-underneath-luxembourg-palace-in-paris-2019-9?r=US&IR=T

Would anyone bat an eyelid if Dundas was replaced?

Looks more like Phil Collins 😃.

A bust is not a statue. By and large a bust is for displaying indoors, a statue outdoors - public v private...Busts are obviously a lot cheaper too.

 

I don't think anyone would really bother about Dundas being replaced. He was apparently a very talented politician and lawyer but those are careers which I don't really have very high regard for personally! Haha

 

However, as always, the question is where will it end, how far can we go?

 

Content is already being removed from streaming services...People are saying "move the statues to museums" but which museums? and museums are still public displays... and is it not inevitable that museums will be targetted in due course too? particularly museums with statues removed from parks and squares, and the Portrait Galleries (Scottish and National). 

 

As I said earlier tokenism will not end this.

[JFK-1]

On 09/06/2020 at 14:28, Pasquale for King said:

I don’t think the removal of the statues in Scotland have anything to do with BLM, or the ones like Colstons where it’s been a nine of contention for 29 years. It’s just been highlighted in the last few days. Just because Dundas didn’t own any slaves doesn’t somehow make him innocent, Hitler/Churchill and Stalin probably didn’t kill anyone in person. The point is these statues glorifying these kinds of people rightly should be taken down, as Savilles was, and more deserving people put up instead. 

 

There are people who deserve to be remembered with a statue in a public place due to their great achievements. Churchill is one of those people. A man was a product of his time and his class.

I can't demonise a man who effectively delivered us from the tyranny of the Nazis for the 'crime' of being born into a specific time and class. There but for circumstance go all of us.

In my view Churchill saved not just Britain but the entire world from the tyranny of the Nazis and that can't be brushed aside nor the man demonised for being typical of his time and class.

The Battle of Britain which would never have been fought if not for Churchill might easily be described as the first truly key battle of the war regarding the final outcome of WWII. If this battle had been lost or not fought at all Britain would have capitulated and negotiated a deal at best. At worst occupied by Nazi Germany.

 

Following the fall of France and the evacuation at Dunkirk British morale crashed and there was a real sentiment of defeatism throughout the country. With very good reason. It looked like an impossible situation and the Americans too came to that conclusion.

They thought the British would negotiate a deal which Hitler was perfectly willing to offer. Hitler never had any desire to fight the British and in fact had a great admiration for them.

He saw them as good 'Aryan' stock and in an ideal world he would have them fighting alongside him in the upcoming battle against the Soviets. Or the Bolshevists as he would have called them.

So with all that in the mix Churchill steps into a situation in which not just much of the establishment, but the mass of the population too want out of this. Hitler also knew that, and had his foreign office propaganda machine working fervently to point out the apparent futility of fighting on.

I think it was either Halifax or Butler who told the Swedish ambassador that common sense not 'bravado' would ultimately prevail. This was referring to the rhetoric of Churchill, which some were calling dangerous bravado. So the prevailing view was that common sense dictated a deal be negotiated.

How can you inspire a population to fight on when that's the mood not just throughout the nation but abroad too? Churchill somehow managed it even while effectively telling the people that all the doom merchants were right, that we're in deep shit.

He admitted it with phrases like "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat", becoming even more gloomy when saying things like “If this long island story of ours is to end at last, let it end only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground.”

Hardly inspiring, but when he goes on to add things like "we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender", it somehow inspired a fearful population in the mood to negotiate to fight on till the bitter end "no matter what the cost may be"

 

For this alone Churchill has earned what should be gratitude not just from the British people but the entire world and perhaps even more so people of colour. They would be naive indeed to imagine that a Nazified world would be anything but a nightmare for them. The current world is a shangri la in comparison. Agreed it could be much better. But thanks to Churchill it's not unimaginably worse.

In a Nazified world there would never have been any civil rights marches to put right the iniquities of US apartheid. Nor South Africa either for that matter.

If Britain had exited the war in 1940 there would obviously never be any D day without the island aircraft carrier of the British isles to launch it from. And from which German industry was bombed into the dust both before and after D day. There would have been no bombing of Germany at all.

With Britain out of the war Hitler would have had no oil crisis because middle east oil would have been there for the taking, more than he could ever need. No troops and resources tied up in France, North Africa, Italy etc. Barbarossa would have been launched earlier likely leading to the capture of Moscow before the Winter arrived to save it.

And it's thought there's a very great likelihood that Hitler would have been able to persuade the Japanese to at least temporarily abandon their Pacific adventure against the US to attack the Soviets from the East as he attacked from the West.

Splitting Stalin's forces and handing him, not Hitler, a two front war. Stalin actually did have forces in the East anticipating the likelihood of a Japanese attack until they launched their Pacific operation. At which point he moved these forces to fight Germany in the West.  

With Britain out of the war there would never have been any aid for the Soviets which was also crucial and ultimately amounted to hundreds of thousands of troop carrying vehicles. As well as the obvious tanks and various other weaponry. Lacking these vehicles they could have taken days or even longer to respond to German operations rather than just hours.

Then there's even more basic factors such as food. The Soviets to this day are reluctant to admit to any great Western help in the defeat of the Nazis. But even Zhukov in an unguarded moment once admitted that without the virtual mountains of canned spam provided by the US he would have been entirely unable to feed his men.

All of these things combined lead me to a belief that here is no way the Soviets or anybody for that matter could have won this war alone. And that the root of the ultimate victory stems from the sheer defiance of Churchill in what seemed to most at the time nonsensical, almost suicidal 'bravado'.

A feat for which the entire world and all people in it, perhaps especially so those deemed by the Nazis to be non 'Aryan' owes him a debt of gratitude.

[JackLadd]

This Candace Owens girl sure takes no BLM prisoners.  

 

 

[Pasquale for King]

7 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

 

There are people who deserve to be remembered with a statue in a public place due to their great achievements. Churchill is one of those people. A man was a product of his time and his class.

I can't demonise a man who effectively delivered us from the tyranny of the Nazis for the 'crime' of being born into a specific time and class. There but for circumstance go all of us.

In my view Churchill saved not just Britain but the entire world from the tyranny of the Nazis and that can't be brushed aside nor the man demonised for being typical of his time and class.

The Battle of Britain which would never have been fought if not for Churchill might easily be described as the first truly key battle of the war regarding the final outcome of WWII. If this battle had been lost or not fought at all Britain would have capitulated and negotiated a deal at best. At worst occupied by Nazi Germany.

 

Following the fall of France and the evacuation at Dunkirk British morale crashed and there was a real sentiment of defeatism throughout the country. With very good reason. It looked like an impossible situation and the Americans too came to that conclusion.

They thought the British would negotiate a deal which Hitler was perfectly willing to offer. Hitler never had any desire to fight the British and in fact had a great admiration for them.

He saw them as good 'Aryan' stock and in an ideal world he would have them fighting alongside him in the upcoming battle against the Soviets. Or the Bolshevists as he would have called them.

So with all that in the mix Churchill steps into a situation in which not just much of the establishment, but the mass of the population too want out of this. Hitler also knew that, and had his foreign office propaganda machine working fervently to point out the apparent futility of fighting on.

I think it was either Halifax or Butler who told the Swedish ambassador that common sense not 'bravado' would ultimately prevail. This was referring to the rhetoric of Churchill, which some were calling dangerous bravado. So the prevailing view was that common sense dictated a deal be negotiated.

How can you inspire a population to fight on when that's the mood not just throughout the nation but abroad too? Churchill somehow managed it even while effectively telling the people that all the doom merchants were right, that we're in deep shit.

He admitted it with phrases like "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat", becoming even more gloomy when saying things like “If this long island story of ours is to end at last, let it end only when each one of us lies choking in his own blood upon the ground.”

Hardly inspiring, but when he goes on to add things like "we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we shall fight in the fields and in the streets, we shall fight in the hills; we shall never surrender", it somehow inspired a fearful population in the mood to negotiate to fight on till the bitter end "no matter what the cost may be"

 

For this alone Churchill has earned what should be gratitude not just from the British people but the entire world and perhaps even more so people of colour. They would be naive indeed to imagine that a Nazified world would be anything but a nightmare for them. The current world is a shangri la in comparison. Agreed it could be much better. But thanks to Churchill it's not unimaginably worse.

In a Nazified world there would never have been any civil rights marches to put right the iniquities of US apartheid. Nor South Africa either for that matter.

If Britain had exited the war in 1940 there would obviously never be any D day without the island aircraft carrier of the British isles to launch it from. And from which German industry was bombed into the dust both before and after D day. There would have been no bombing of Germany at all.

With Britain out of the war Hitler would have had no oil crisis because middle east oil would have been there for the taking, more than he could ever need. No troops and resources tied up in France, North Africa, Italy etc. Barbarossa would have been launched earlier likely leading to the capture of Moscow before the Winter arrived to save it.

And it's thought there's a very great likelihood that Hitler would have been able to persuade the Japanese to at least temporarily abandon their Pacific adventure against the US to attack the Soviets from the East as he attacked from the West.

Splitting Stalin's forces and handing him, not Hitler, a two front war. Stalin actually did have forces in the East anticipating the likelihood of a Japanese attack until they launched their Pacific operation. At which point he moved these forces to fight Germany in the West.  

With Britain out of the war there would never have been any aid for the Soviets which was also crucial and ultimately amounted to hundreds of thousands of troop carrying vehicles. As well as the obvious tanks and various other weaponry. Lacking these vehicles they could have taken days or even longer to respond to German operations rather than just hours.

Then there's even more basic factors such as food. The Soviets to this day are reluctant to admit to any great Western help in the defeat of the Nazis. But even Zhukov in an unguarded moment once admitted that without the virtual mountains of canned spam provided by the US he would have been entirely unable to feed his men.

All of these things combined lead me to a belief that here is no way the Soviets or anybody for that matter could have won this war alone. And that the root of the ultimate victory stems from the sheer defiance of Churchill in what seemed to most at the time nonsensical, almost suicidal 'bravado'.

A feat for which the entire world and all people in it, perhaps especially so those deemed by the Nazis to be non 'Aryan' owes him a debt of gratitude.

You certainly know your history.

I would just add that in 1941 the German Navy had control of the Atlantic and had isolated the UK, if Hitler had ever wanted to invade he could’ve. In fact the UK were happy to give up Scotland to him. As you say he admired the UK, he wanted to expand Germany’s empire as the UK had. If Hitler hadn’t taken his Navy away to help attack Russia who knows what might’ve happened. Stalin knew what Hitler would do and got Russia ready to fight him. The deaths of 20 million Russians and the blood of a further 27 million casualties meant Hitler lost the war. Academics accept this was the most important part of WWII.

The Yalta conference in February 1945 where Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt carved up what would be left when the Nazis were defeated show that the war was won. As for bombing German industry into dust it’s a shame they didn’t even bomb the train tracks into the five Polish concentration camps or the actual camps as the prisoners wanted.
The bombing of Dresden by the despot Bomber Harris was to perfect the firestorm technique, where if you drop enough bombs in the same spot the temperature reaches 1000 degrees and everything is eviscerated . The war was won, there was no excuse to do that, Churchill had no control over Harris. It was also to show the Russians what the UK could do, as Hiroshima and Nagasaki was from the US.
Chirchill played his part, as did Stalin. It’s just a shame they were murdering *******s like Hitler, the Bengal famine being Churchill’s darkest hour. 
It’s up to the English if they want to keep statues of Churchill up, his exploits won’t be forgotten if it’s there or in a museum. 
It was 80 years ago, will the UK ever move on?

[JudyJudyJudy]

3 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

You certainly know your history.

I would just add that in 1941 the German Navy had control of the Atlantic and had isolated the UK, if Hitler had ever wanted to invade he could’ve. In fact the UK were happy to give up Scotland to him. As you say he admired the UK, he wanted to expand Germany’s empire as the UK had. If Hitler hadn’t taken his Navy away to help attack Russia who knows what might’ve happened. Stalin knew what Hitler would do and got Russia ready to fight him. The deaths of 20 million Russians and the blood of a further 27 million casualties meant Hitler lost the war. Academics accept this was the most important part of WWII.

The Yalta conference in February 1945 where Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt carved up what would be left when the Nazis were defeated show that the war was won. As for bombing German industry into dust it’s a shame they didn’t even bomb the train tracks into the five Polish concentration camps or the actual camps as the prisoners wanted.
The bombing of Dresden by the despot Bomber Harris was to perfect the firestorm technique, where if you drop enough bombs in the same spot the temperature reaches 1000 degrees and everything is eviscerated . The war was won, there was no excuse to do that, Churchill had no control over Harris. It was also to show the Russians what the UK could do, as Hiroshima and Nagasaki was from the US.
Chirchill played his part, as did Stalin. It’s just a shame they were murdering *******s like Hitler, the Bengal famine being Churchill’s darkest hour. 
It’s up to the English if they want to keep statues of Churchill up, his exploits won’t be forgotten if it’s there or in a museum. 
It was 80 years ago, will the UK ever move on?

Good posting 

[Pasquale for King]

51 minutes ago, Spellczech said:

A bust is not a statue. By and large a bust is for displaying indoors, a statue outdoors - public v private...Busts are obviously a lot cheaper too.

 

I don't think anyone would really bother about Dundas being replaced. He was apparently a very talented politician and lawyer but those are careers which I don't really have very high regard for personally! Haha

 

However, as always, the question is where will it end, how far can we go?

 

Content is already being removed from streaming services...People are saying "move the statues to museums" but which museums? and museums are still public displays... and is it not inevitable that museums will be targetted in due course too? particularly museums with statues removed from parks and squares, and the Portrait Galleries (Scottish and National). 

 

As I said earlier tokenism will not end this.

I wouldn’t put them in museums but it’s an option. Vandalism doesn’t usually happen in museums. What your failing to grasp is that it doesn’t stop, it shouldn’t stop if relics of the past are deemed unacceptable by the present then they should be taken down, they will be taken down, it’s happening. It’s for all of us to decide, if there’s enough pressure on our representatives it will happen. 

[Pasquale for King]

1 minute ago, JamesM48 said:

Good posting 

Much easier than putting it in a tweet anyway 😆.

[JudyJudyJudy]

11 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Much easier than putting it in a tweet anyway 😆.

Aye I struggle on that too 

[JFK-1]

1 hour ago, Spellczech said:

However, as always, the question is where will it end, how far can we go?

 

This shit is now getting way out of hand. It's beginning to smack of book burning.

[Spellczech]

23 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

I wouldn’t put them in museums but it’s an option. Vandalism doesn’t usually happen in museums. What your failing to grasp is that it doesn’t stop, it shouldn’t stop if relics of the past are deemed unacceptable by the present then they should be taken down, they will be taken down, it’s happening. It’s for all of us to decide, if there’s enough pressure on our representatives it will happen. 

This is so subjective though -  basically it panders to the offended, the angry and the misinformed. It is just a total miscomprehension about what history means and why it matters... Do you truly believe that people think Dundas' statue is offensive and unacceptable? Are you offended by it yourself? How many BLM people who are not white activists taking offense on behalf of others do you think had even heard of him a fortnight ago, or have read about him since?

 

I would put money on one or two activists pulling together a list of 70 statues as part of a hobby, or social science research uni project, and everyone else is just blindly jumping on a bandwagon of seethe...

 

Edited June 13, 2020 by Spellczech

[JFK-1]

26 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

You certainly know your history.

I would just add that in 1941 the German Navy had control of the Atlantic and had isolated the UK, if Hitler had ever wanted to invade he could’ve. In fact the UK were happy to give up Scotland to him. As you say he admired the UK, he wanted to expand Germany’s empire as the UK had. If Hitler hadn’t taken his Navy away to help attack Russia who knows what might’ve happened. Stalin knew what Hitler would do and got Russia ready to fight him. The deaths of 20 million Russians and the blood of a further 27 million casualties meant Hitler lost the war. Academics accept this was the most important part of WWII.

The Yalta conference in February 1945 where Stalin, Churchill and Roosevelt carved up what would be left when the Nazis were defeated show that the war was won. As for bombing German industry into dust it’s a shame they didn’t even bomb the train tracks into the five Polish concentration camps or the actual camps as the prisoners wanted.
The bombing of Dresden by the despot Bomber Harris was to perfect the firestorm technique, where if you drop enough bombs in the same spot the temperature reaches 1000 degrees and everything is eviscerated . The war was won, there was no excuse to do that, Churchill had no control over Harris. It was also to show the Russians what the UK could do, as Hiroshima and Nagasaki was from the US.
Chirchill played his part, as did Stalin. It’s just a shame they were murdering *******s like Hitler, the Bengal famine being Churchill’s darkest hour. 
It’s up to the English if they want to keep statues of Churchill up, his exploits won’t be forgotten if it’s there or in a museum. 
It was 80 years ago, will the UK ever move on?

 

Germany had no navy to speak of. They had three pocket battleships only two of which ventured out into the Atlantic and each of them only once. Britain could have wiped the floor with them in any naval conflict at any point of the war.

Admiral Graf Spee. Attacked and damaged by the Royal Nay during the battle of the River Plate in December 1939. Forced to retreat into Montevideo for repairs then scuttled rather than come back out to face the waiting British battleships.

Admiral Scheer conducted one operation in the Atlantic in late 1940 then never ventured out into the Atlantic again.

And once the admiralty had figured out the German U boat problem it was no problem. To the point that the Germans withdrew the submarines.

The failure to win the battle of Britain made invasion impossible. That was the only chance they would ever get.  Anywhere on the island. They couldn't beat the RAF even when outnumbering them 4:1. By 1941 Britain could have not just repelled but annihilated any invasion attempt with air and sea power.

 

By 1941 Britain has replaced the losses incurred at Dunkirk plus more. And was comfortably out producing Germany in aircraft. 

Aircraft production 1941
UK: 20,094
Germany: 12,401

[Pasquale for King]

16 minutes ago, JFK-1 said:

 

Germany had no navy to speak of. They had three pocket battleships only two of which ventured out into the Atlantic and each of them only once. Britain could have wiped the floor with them in any naval conflict at any point of the war.

Admiral Graf Spee. Attacked and damaged by the Royal Nay during the battle of the River Plate in December 1939. Forced to retreat into Montevideo for repairs then scuttled rather than come back out to face the waiting British battleships.

Admiral Scheer conducted one operation in the Atlantic in late 1940 then never ventured out into the Atlantic again.

And once the admiralty had figured out the German U boat problem it was no problem. To the point that the Germans withdrew the submarines.

The failure to win the battle of Britain made invasion impossible. That was the only chance they would ever get.  Anywhere on the island. They couldn't beat the RAF even when outnumbering them 4:1. By 1941 Britain could have not just repelled but annihilated any invasion attempt with air and sea power.

 

By 1941 Britain has replaced the losses incurred at Dunkirk plus more. And was comfortably out producing Germany in aircraft. 

Aircraft production 1941
UK: 20,094
Germany: 12,401

Yeah really easy wasn’t it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Atlantic

The UK was playing catch up, the Germans had 4.7m soldiers in 1939, the UK had 209k distributed all around it’s failing empire.

Edited June 13, 2020 by Pasquale for King

[JFK-1]

7 minutes ago, Pasquale for King said:

Yeah really easy wasn’t it.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Atlantic

The UK was playing catch up, the Germans had 4.7m soldiers in 1939, the UK had 209k distributed all around it’s failing empire.

 

Nobody but you implied it was easy, after implying Germany had a navy which was controlling the Atlantic which they never did. They were a land power not a naval power. The exact opposite of the British who had the largest navy in the world.

And there was never any chance of any invasion of the British isles following the Battle of Britain. 

[MR INCREDIBLE]

Over 50 black people have been MURDERED in Chicago alone since George Floyds death....... Don't think the problem is one racist cop. 

Seems like Black Life only Matters if a white person is involved in the death. 

[ri Alban]

17 hours ago, redjambo said:

Seriously, this thread has turned into a sort of Tommy Robinson support group recently. I'll need to blame it on the pandemic getting people all in a tizzy.

TR is filthy scumbag. 

[Unknown user]

19 minutes ago, MR INCREDIBLE said:

Over 50 black people have been MURDERED in Chicago alone since George Floyds death....... Don't think the problem is one racist cop. 

Seems like Black Life only Matters if a white person is involved in the death. 

The issue at hand is institutionalised racism on a massive and obvious scale.

 

Of course gun crime and murder in the US, especially deprived areas, are a massive issue, but that's a different thread, this one's specifically about the oppression of a minority. We all know that, surely.

[manaliveits105]

Hope any Emeline Pankhurst statues are on the list with her famous 

Id rather be a rebel than a slave quote

[Governor Tarkin]

6 hours ago, JFK-1 said:

It's beginning to smack of book burning.

 

This is exactly where it will lead.

[The Real Maroonblood]

8 hours ago, Spellczech said:

A bust is not a statue. By and large a bust is for displaying indoors, a statue outdoors - public v private...Busts are obviously a lot cheaper too.

 

I don't think anyone would really bother about Dundas being replaced. He was apparently a very talented politician and lawyer but those are careers which I don't really have very high regard for personally! Haha

 

However, as always, the question is where will it end, how far can we go?

 

Content is already being removed from streaming services...People are saying "move the statues to museums" but which museums? and museums are still public displays... and is it not inevitable that museums will be targetted in due course too? particularly museums with statues removed from parks and squares, and the Portrait Galleries (Scottish and National). 

 

As I said earlier tokenism will not end this.

I like a nice bust.

[ri Alban]

43 minutes ago, Governor Tarkin said:

 

This is exactly where it will lead.

Burns, literally!! 

[chuck berrys hairline]

So when are the blm/libtard movement gonna rip down the pyramids 👀😅

[JimKongUno]

I was behind it in the aftermath of the killing but they're dragging it out a bit now. Every time I run on the Tv it's some random black person greeting about how terrible Britain is. Sick of hearing about it now. Its going to end in an all out race war the way the media are fanning the flames 

[Governor Tarkin]

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

Burns, literally!! 

 

It's a matter of time.

[ri Alban]

Just now, Governor Tarkin said:

 

It's a matter of time.

It'll happen today, no doubt. Burns cottage will be vandalised and Princes Street will be too. Possibly Havana. 

 

This was about Police brutality. The boy was murdered by a fecking idiot copper, who will be tried for his crime. This is now mob rule, but so called anti fascists. Excuse me, but they atm are the fascists. 

[Tommy Brown]

This is just becoming farcical.

Edited June 13, 2020 by Tommy Brown

[kila]

I think the right wingers are doing that to discredit the BLM movement. 
 

Now the weather is shit this debate is back mostly online again.
 

There has been plenty good come out this movement so far despite some violence kicking off in the world. 
 

[ri Alban]

17 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said:

This is just becoming farcical.

[The Real Maroonblood]

20 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said:

This is just becoming farcical.

[JackLadd]

27 minutes ago, ri Alban said:

It'll happen today, no doubt. Burns cottage will be vandalised and Princes Street will be too. Possibly Havana. 

 

This was about Police brutality. The boy was murdered by a fecking idiot copper, who will be tried for his crime. This is now mob rule, but so called anti fascists. Excuse me, but they atm are the fascists. 

 

Totally mate. Just imagine if it was a Britsh copper that did him in London, we'd have the riots, looting and burning we had in 2011 over that thug Duggan. I've still no idea what these people want or expect. This country couldn't be more open and pluralistic. 

[The Real Maroonblood]

4 minutes ago, JackLadd said:

 

Totally mate. Just imagine if it was a Britsh copper that did him in London, we'd have the riots, looting and burning we had in 2011 over that thug Duggan. I've still no idea what these people want or expect. This country couldn't be more open and pluralistic. 

They’re bored with lockdown so let us make an erse of ourselves.

[JimKongUno]

1 hour ago, ri Alban said:

It'll happen today, no doubt. Burns cottage will be vandalised and Princes Street will be too. Possibly Havana. 

 

This was about Police brutality. The boy was murdered by a fecking idiot copper, who will be tried for his crime. This is now mob rule, but so called anti fascists. Excuse me, but they atm are the fascists. 

 

[Cade]

150 old, fat, bald, white, drunk, racist gammons are in Parliament square defending England from the blacks