11-04-2021, 02:53 PM
191
Re: World War II
Originally Posted by The Artful Todger
->
IMO Boris is being controlled by the 1922 committee and mates of members thereof, plus noise from MP's in risky seats fearful of losing them in the next GE if the government are seen as being the cause of lost jobs and unnecessarily extended covid protection measures.
At the same time that he is demanding that we can't meet up with more than a few people, he is watching the anarchists amassing in crowds of hundreds or even thousands and is turning a blind eye.
What message does that send?
11-04-2021, 03:03 PM
192
Re: World War II
Originally Posted by Donkeyman
->
Back to WW2 chaps and chappesses?At least we might learn some thing there ??
Here's your starter for ten points !!
Who's side was France really on in WW. 2 ??
After that, they became friends with Germany, certainly the Vichy government did.
They did have a few hard-line resistance people, but there again they relied on our support.
Italy, of course, did the opposite.
Initially, they were allies with Germany but, as soon as the tide began to turn, they immediately decided it would be better to be on our side after all.
All I can say is that the two countries - France and Italy - have a lot in common... in opposite ways, of course!
11-04-2021, 03:16 PM
193
Re: World War II
Originally Posted by JBR
->
Well, as I understand it, they were on our side for about five weeks.After that, they became friends with Germany, certainly the Vichy government did.
11-04-2021, 03:23 PM
194
Re: World War II
Originally Posted by JBR
->
Indeed. I think Boris should be thinking very carefully about his strategies.At the same time that he is demanding that we can't meet up with more than a few people, he is watching the anarchists amassing in crowds of hundreds or even thousands and is turning a blind eye.
What message does that send?
But I'd be interested as to who could do a better job because IMO he's had his work cut out and I wonder how May would have fared or Cameron. Do you think Cameron would maybe have done a better job? Or who? I'm not a Boris fan but I must say I feel a bit sorry for him having realised his lifetime dream he's really been dealt a bad hand.
11-04-2021, 03:33 PM
195
Re: World War II
Originally Posted by AnnieS
->
That he's a pragmatist? If he sends police into crowds to dispel them the police are next day portrayed as brutalist monsters. Best that the majority of the population mitigate the risk. After all how many are at a protest vs the number sitting at home?But I'd be interested as to who could do a better job because IMO he's had his work cut out and I wonder how May would have fared or Cameron. Do you think Cameron would maybe have done a better job? Or who? I'm not a Boris fan but I must say I feel a bit sorry for him having realised his lifetime dream he's really been dealt a bad hand.
11-04-2021, 03:50 PM
196
Re: World War II
Originally Posted by The Artful Todger
->
Who? Maggie without doubt. Otherwise someone like John Redwood.
John Redwood?
I thought you'd be more Rees-Mogg...there is a bit of a similarity there in the style.
11-04-2021, 04:09 PM
197
Re: World War II
Problem with France at the start of WW2 was that they concentrated on defence rather than attack. They had a far greater army and air force than Germany but just kept falling back at every attack and when the Maginot Line fell into German hands they gave up.As for the Italians. I would sooner have one Italian at my side during conflict than six Americans.
11-04-2021, 04:09 PM
198
Re: World War II
Originally Posted by AnnieS
->
That he's a pragmatist? If he sends police into crowds to dispel them the police are next day portrayed as brutalist monsters. Best that the majority of the population mitigate the risk. After all how many are at a protest vs the number sitting at home?But I'd be interested as to who could do a better job because IMO he's had his work cut out and I wonder how May would have fared or Cameron. Do you think Cameron would maybe have done a better job? Or who? I'm not a Boris fan but I must say I feel a bit sorry for him having realised his lifetime dream he's really been dealt a bad hand.
May? Wasn't she working for the EU?
Both Thatcher and Churchill would have done a far better job. They were both demonstrably strong leaders and stood up for this country, unlike all of the above.
11-04-2021, 04:13 PM
199
Re: World War II
Originally Posted by AnnieS
->
I meant someone alive.John Redwood?
I thought you'd be more Rees-Mogg...there is a bit of a similarity there in the style.
Unfortunately, he has the disadvantage of having a 'posh voice' which, in times gone by, would have been regarded as respectable and knowledgeable but, sadly, today's people have little respect for anyone with that sort of accent.
11-04-2021, 04:16 PM
200
Re: World War II
Originally Posted by big ben
->
Problem with France at the start of WW2 was that they concentrated on defence rather than attack. They had a far greater army and air force than Germany but just kept falling back at every attack and when the Maginot Line fell into German hands they gave up. As for the Italians. I would sooner have one Italian at my side during conflict than six Americans.
I think you're referring to the old saying:
"When the British guns fired, the Germans ducked.
When the German guns fired, the British ducked.
When the American guns fired, everyone ducked!"
|
|
