A once-in-a-lifetime collectors opportunity (1 Viewer)

Originally Posted by Capitolron View Post
No question the British are greatful for Waterloo - or they would be speaking French right now....

C'est vraie mon ami, nous ne parlons pas francais, nous ecrivons en fora et allons a la France, tous les vacances. Vive la France!:D

Avez vous un cuppa?;):rolleyes:
 
So long as the English Channel and the British Navy existed, Napoleon could never have successfully invaded Britain.
 
Louis Badolato said:
So long as the English Channel and the British Navy existed, Napoleon could never have successfully invaded Britain.
Click to expand...

‘I do not say the French cannot come; I only say they cannot come by sea’ is a famous line credited to Admiral Jervis, Earl of St Vincent. There is no evidence he ever said it but it expresses a great truth: no-one can invade Britain unless they control the sea.

Jeff
 
panda1gen said:
Dear Ron,

We are in danger of having a severe agreement about our Prussian friends, and my point was they had almost always been our friends, unlike the French until the 'Entente Cordiale', later in the 19th century.

Even if they had been defeated, the war would have gone on and the Coalition was always bigger than France alone so in a war of attrition France was always going to lose. The fact that France did lose despite such brilliant generalship proves the point.

No different than any other empire. Also a point of principle going forward for the USA, as Russia, China, India and Brazil overtake the G6 later this century? Keep up the diplomacy.;)
Click to expand...

P1G

Throughout the NAPOLEONIC period (I really do like the name of that historic time) Europena Troops always outnumber France. Napoleon would go to War with each coalition and defeat them - which they would sue for peace (or take a break) only to have another war a few years later.

IMO - I believe that Napoleon could have surived another decade by defeating Wellington at Waterloo - defeating the Prussians AGAIN :D and handel the Russians and the Austrians like he had always done by taking them one at a time. With the loss of Wellington and Prussians - I believe that the Russians would have not been so quick to invade France and that would have given Napoleon time to Attack the Austrians - without allies the Austrians would havecaved like so many times before.

We do have a diferent view on the Battle of Waterloo - but youre still a great guy......even for a brit ;)
 
panda1gen said:
Originally Posted by Capitolron View Post
No question the British are greatful for Waterloo - or they would be speaking French right now....

C'est vraie mon ami, nous ne parlons pas francais, nous ecrivons en fora et allons a la France, tous les vacances. Vive la France!:D

Avez vous un cuppa?;):rolleyes:
Click to expand...

LOL :D
 
We do have a diferent view on the Battle of Waterloo - but youre still a great guy......even for a brit

There you are you see - two things that we do agree on:D 'Entente Cordiale'

By the way, how is the coracle training coming on..... are you still dizzy?:eek:
 
I think it is time for this:

VIVE L' EMPERUER ! NAPOLEON !

:D :D I feel much better now.
 
Got to tell you folks, sure getting sick of anti British remarks on this forum.If people have bigoted views they should keep them to themselves.

Rob
 
Rob said:
Got to tell you folks, sure getting sick of anti British remarks on this forum.If people have bigoted views they should keep them to themselves.

Rob
Click to expand...


Hi Rob.

I know, I know. Unfortunately some people can't accept history for what it is and so are bound to make comments which may appear to be anti :( but these comments are usually mentioned in jest.

But we'll have the last laugh eh!

Jeff
 
I think that some times comments made in jest are not so funny to those on the receiving end.

Can we please not make those comments.
 
Let me say this.....One of my good friends lives in England. I love the British for their unyielding friendship and support of my country, in the most trying of times. We all ought be proud of our heritage and be willing to defend it. But this is not one of those times. I am a Bonapartist as a Napoleonic fan. Do not know how that happened as I grew of on Britains Highlanders and Pipers. In just about any other theatre of war history, I root for the English and of course most any conflict ,American.....History cannot be remade or relived, but as history buffs, we ought to be able to what ifs, without getting our prideful backs up. Each of our participating countries have had their share of historical triumphs and national disasters and embarrassments. In fact, in stead of this neverending Waterloo rant ,I would like to ask my English forum brothers, their thoughts and perspectives on parts of British history, that facinates me, but always seems influenced from an American perspective. It would be nice if we could share those thoughts without fighting. I am reading The Reason Why by an English author, who does not hide her dislike for the English leaders ,during the Crimean War. The British troops surely had their moments of glory, but how is the Crimean War spun in English history books? Michael
 
Rob said:
Got to tell you folks, sure getting sick of anti British remarks on this forum.If people have bigoted views they should keep them to themselves.

Rob
Click to expand...

Rob

Nobody hates Great Britain or anything about our Mother Country. We are discussing past 1800's battles and each have their own opinion about "what if" - as for what you feel that is "Anti-British" - I simply dont see it.

There are plenty of jesting back in forth on British, French and everything under sun - all harmless and ribbing. I think we all are Men old enough to take on some "locker room" or "Fraternity" humor. We are not people who act out in a mean streak intentionally on Treefrog.

Lets not wear our emotions on our sleeves - now if someone personally attacks you - like has been done in other places (to you and me) That I can understand - but, the people here are friends who are having fun and shooting the bull. This is not a place where people treat you with snide remarks and hide - we all here are good people who appreciate a free spirit.

Rob - Let us rejoice in the fact that we - unlike others - do not take this hobby too serious and enjoy off the cuff humor.

Laugh and the world will laugh with you :D

All the best - MY BRITISH FRIEND !

Ron
 
maddadicus said:
I am reading The Reason Why by an English author, who does not hide her dislike for the English leaders ,during the Crimean War. The British troops surely had their moments of glory, but how is the Crimean War spun in English history books? Michael
Click to expand...

I think that it is no secret there were only two British commanders during the Crimean War who were competent: Sir Colin Campbell, who led the Highland Brigade (the stand of the thin red line), and General Scarlett, who led the Heavy Brigade (the Charge of the Heavy Brigade). Raglan was a one armed idiot who hadn't led men ever in his career (he was on Wellington's staff at Waterloo, lost and arm, and then was promoted through purchasing ranks and then, once a general officer, made the head of the Ordinance Board, until as the general officer with the most seniority, he was given overall command), and of James Brudenell, the Sixth Earl of Cardigan (in command of the Light Brigade), and his Brother in Law, Lord Lucan (in overall command of the cavalry) the less said the better. There certainly were momments of glory despite the incredibly inept leadership (the Battle of the Alma, the Stand of the Thin Red Line, the Charge of the Heavy Brigade, the capture of Sebastapol) thanks to the quality of the British troops, but I can't imagine this is a war that is given any real space in British history textbooks.
 
Louis

For many a year it would guarantee a man a drink and other charity if he could say he fought at Inkerman. The battle was 'celebrated' long afterwards until some stupid poem shifted the fame........

The truth about the war is uncomfortable though - any society with a deep divide in wealth - such as existed then and is possibly reappearing now in the UK and US, risks treating its less well off members as cannon fodder and not looking after them. Also any system that allows people to purchase their way up rather than pass on pure merit - and is there a system that doesn't to some degree - is at risk of repeating the mistake. History, including recent US and British history, is full of examples and proves the point - the fascist regimes, Stalin, and more recently some examples from Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and the first and second world wars. I have posted on these inequalities before whilst jesting.

In all our 'fun' as Ron puts it, the key from the British side is our ability to laugh at our selves. Perhaps we should export it?:cool:
 
panda1gen said:
Louis

For many a year it would guarantee a man a drink and other charity if he could say he fought at Inkerman. The battle was 'celebrated' long afterwards until some stupid poem shifted the fame........

The truth about the war is uncomfortable though - any society with a deep divide in wealth - such as existed then and is possibly reappearing now in the UK and US, risks treating its less well off members as cannon fodder and not looking after them. Also any system that allows people to purchase their way up rather than pass on pure merit - and is there a system that doesn't to some degree - is at risk of repeating the mistake. History, including recent US and British history, is full of examples and proves the point - the fascist regimes, Stalin, and more recently some examples from Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan and the first and second world wars. I have posted on these inequalities before whilst jesting.

In all our 'fun' as Ron puts it, the key from the British side is our ability to laugh at our selves. Perhaps we should export it?:cool:
Click to expand...

Well said Panda! I am too busy crying about the loss of good young men in a war that cannot be won in Iraq to laugh about it, but everything you said is dead on true. I just think that the Crimea was a particularly egregious example of the incompetence of high military command under these circumstances.
 
Speak for yourself! Or are you suggesting we export them too?:confused: With new 'recapture technology' I did wonder if Brown had us connected up by tubes to our own petrol tanks.....f**t propelled.......
 
The last one was to Jeff. Louis, we agree on too many things, but as lawyers we understand..........there is always something else to argue about! Like who can we stone now?
 
panda1gen said:
The last one was to Jeff. Louis, we agree on too many things, but as lawyers we understand..........there is always something else to argue about! Like who can we stone now?
Click to expand...

How about Stalin and Grant for getting so many of their own men killed in a successful campaign?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Community platform by XenForo® © 2010-2024 XenForo Ltd.
Back
Top