CyberRose
أرفع الشفرات
Ah...about what though? What point are you hoping to make? Please tell me it is not some tiresome drivel about CR's declared 'anti-Imperialist' somehow makes him anti-british...
Ah...about what though? What point are you hoping to make? Please tell me it is not some tiresome drivel about CR's declared 'anti-Imperialist' somehow makes him anti-british...
Don't think it made much difference did it?btw fyi ... I edited a word in my post as you were replying
Don't think it made much difference did it?
Sounded like you then
I'm not sure, perhaps if you could tell me who the indigenous population were and how many remained on the islands when the British turned up we could have a go at working it outI wonder what the indigenous people called them?
Oh ok.
BTW, my comments towards CR were based on the other thread they started on the Falklands (seems like an unhealthy obsession but hey ho) where the Falklanders are described as "inbred Anglophiles" and that the protestants of Northern Ireland are only slightly less inbred. I'll leave you to draw your own conclusions on that...
The Falklanders, NI protestants or both?'inbred anglophiles', whilst a little harsh, is not too far from the truth either.
The people of Hong Kong didn't want to be part of China, but the Chinese would have sank every British battle cruiser and Britain as well.the islanders don't want to be Argentinian end of Argument really
Argentina could always send its battle cruiser to intimidate the islanders
oh wait they can't we sank it
No they wouldn't. You rate the chinese armed forces a bit highThe people of Hong Kong didn't want to be part of China, but the Chinese would have sank every British battle cruiser and Britain as well.
Yes they would have, if by nothing else than shear weight of numbers alone, and it's not as if the British army covers itself in glory when fighting an enemy willing and able to fight back.No they wouldn't. You rate the chinese armed forces a bit high
............. and it's not as if the British army covers itself in glory when fighting an enemy willing and able to fight back.
If you want to educate me then feel free.You show a woeful lack of knowledge about history.
fascist boat sent out to attack the Fleet The Argentinian Navy had no problem with it being sunk Thats what happens in wars.and the Belgrano too with 500 young soldiers on it while it was OUTSIDE the british-declared and imposed 'exclusion zone' and sailing AWAY from the islands Oh the lolz to be had eh?
Or unless they are on Britain's side.fascist boat sent out to attack the Fleet The Argentinian Navy had no problem with it being sunk Thats what happens in wars.
fascists have to be stopped by all means unless their stealing stuff of the evil Brits
If you want to educate me then feel free.
Ok, I was exaggerating, but I am not sure how much use that would be today and it was todayish that I was really talking about.The Second World War alone is crammed with examples of British Army "glory". Just because there are also countless incidents when the BA showed itself less "glorious" is no reason to deny the historical facts.
Ok, I was exaggerating, but I am not sure how much use that would be today and it was todayish that I was really talking about.
so you're saying that human wave attacks would have sunk the royal navy. Running down the british army may be fun but it's not always accurate or anything more than a political knocki.g game. Faced with an enemy like the chinese british forces would acquit themselves well. More innovative enemies would be a different story.Yes they would have, if by nothing else than shear weight of numbers alone, and it's not as if the British army covers itself in glory when fighting an enemy willing able to fight back.
What has that got to do with anything, you were implying that the war was fought because Argentina was ruled by fascists, yet Britain accepted help from other fascists, and by the way Galtieri came to power by a coup not by election so don't be referring to the Argentine forces as fascists as they were mostly conscripts with no choice, and the Belgrano was fucking mass murder, plain and simple.Chile hated Argentina at least as much as we did it.
My understanding is that Britain won that one by the skin of it's teeth, and without the help of the Chileans, yanks and French probably would have lost.The Falklands War was nearly thirty years ago. Hardly todayish.
You ain't fucking stupid so stop acting like you are.so you're saying that human wave attacks would have sunk the royal navy. Running down the british army may be fun but it's not always accurate or anything more than a political knocki.g game. Faced with an enemy like the chinese british forces would acquit themselves well. More innovative enemies would be a different story.
so you're saying that human wave attacks would have sunk the royal navy. Running down the british army may be fun but it's not always accurate or anything more than a political knocki.g game. Faced with an enemy like the chinese british forces would acquit themselves well. More innovative enemies would be a different story.
I thought that I was the one that needed educating? I know the Belgrano was outside the British exclusion zone and sailing away from the islands, that is fact so how the fuck you conclude that they were about to take part in an attack is beyond me.no the Argentine navy sent a WW2 battle cruiser to conduct a pincer attack with the 25th may aircraft carrier against the British fleet.
Thats war being incompetent and cowardly contributed to a lot of the Deaths.
as you'll have noted i was replying to a post by deareg where he said that the chinese would have sunk all britain's cruisers.and you are seriously saying that the BA could take on the Red Army in a war on China's doorstep, on an island so close to the chinese mainland? Have I fallen asleep and woken up in 1839?