Youtube comments of Jim Taylor (@jimtaylor294).

  1. 603
  2. 233
  3. 166
  4. 155
  5. 150
  6. 149
  7. 145
  8. 141
  9. 140
  10. 135
  11. 134
  12. 131
  13. 114
  14. 112
  15. 109
  16. 107
  17. 103
  18. 100
  19. 100
  20. 88
  21. 87
  22. 82
  23. 81
  24. 79
  25. 78
  26. 76
  27. 71
  28. 70
  29. 66
  30. 63
  31. 61
  32. 60
  33. 58
  34. 58
  35. 58
  36. 50
  37. 49
  38. 47
  39. 45
  40. 43
  41. 43
  42. 43
  43. 43
  44. 41
  45. 40
  46. 40
  47. 36
  48. 35
  49. 35
  50. 34
  51. 34
  52. 34
  53. 34
  54. 34
  55. 33
  56. 33
  57. 32
  58. 32
  59. 32
  60. 32
  61. 32
  62. 32
  63. 31
  64. 31
  65. 31
  66. 30
  67. 30
  68. 30
  69. 30
  70. 29
  71. 28
  72. 28
  73. 27
  74. 27
  75. 27
  76. 27
  77. 27
  78. 27
  79. 26
  80. 26
  81. 26
  82. 25
  83. 24
  84. 24
  85. 24
  86. 24
  87. 24
  88. 24
  89. 24
  90. 24
  91. 23
  92. 23
  93. 23
  94. 23
  95. 23
  96. 23
  97. 22
  98. 22
  99. 22
  100. 22
  101. 22
  102. 21
  103. 21
  104. 21
  105. 21
  106. 21
  107. 20
  108. 20
  109. 20
  110. 20
  111. 20
  112. 20
  113. 20
  114. 20
  115. 19
  116. 19
  117. 19
  118. 19
  119. 19
  120. 19
  121. 19
  122. 19
  123. 18
  124. 18
  125. 18
  126. 18
  127. 18
  128. 18
  129. 18
  130. 18
  131. 18
  132. 18
  133. 18
  134. 17
  135. 17
  136. 17
  137. 17
  138. 17
  139. 17
  140. 17
  141. 17
  142. 17
  143. 17
  144. 16
  145. 16
  146. 16
  147. 16
  148. 16
  149. 16
  150. 16
  151. 16
  152. 16
  153. 16
  154. 16
  155. 16
  156. 16
  157. 15
  158. 15
  159. 15
  160. 15
  161. 15
  162. 15
  163. 15
  164. 14
  165. 14
  166. 14
  167. 14
  168. 14
  169. 14
  170. 14
  171. 14
  172. 14
  173. 14
  174. 14
  175. 14
  176. 14
  177. 13
  178. 13
  179. 13
  180. 13
  181. 13
  182. 13
  183. 13
  184. 13
  185. 13
  186. 13
  187. 13
  188. 13
  189. 13
  190. 12
  191. 12
  192. 12
  193. 12
  194. 12
  195. 12
  196. 12
  197. 12
  198. 12
  199. 12
  200. 12
  201. 12
  202. 12
  203. 12
  204. 12
  205. 12
  206. 12
  207. 12
  208. 12
  209. 12
  210. 12
  211. 11
  212. 11
  213. 11
  214. 11
  215. 11
  216. 11
  217. 11
  218. 11
  219. 11
  220. 11
  221. 11
  222. 11
  223. 11
  224. 11
  225. 11
  226. 11
  227. 11
  228. 11
  229. 11
  230. 11
  231. 11
  232. 11
  233. 11
  234. 11
  235. 11
  236. 11
  237. 10
  238. 10
  239. 10
  240. 10
  241. 10
  242. 10
  243. 10
  244. 10
  245. 10
  246. 10
  247. 10
  248. 10
  249. 10
  250. 10
  251. 10
  252. 10
  253. 10
  254. 10
  255. 10
  256. 10
  257. 10
  258. 10
  259. 10
  260. 10
  261. 10
  262. 10
  263. 10
  264. 10
  265. 10
  266. 10
  267. 10
  268. 10
  269. 10
  270. 10
  271. 10
  272. 9
  273. 9
  274. 9
  275. 9
  276. 9
  277. 9
  278. 9
  279. 9
  280. 9
  281. 9
  282. 9
  283. 9
  284. 9
  285. 9
  286. 9
  287. 9
  288. 9
  289. 9
  290. 9
  291. 9
  292. 9
  293. 9
  294. 9
  295. 9
  296. 9
  297. 9
  298. 9
  299. 9
  300. 9
  301. 9
  302. 9
  303. 9
  304. 9
  305. 9
  306. 9
  307. 9
  308. 9
  309. 9
  310. 9
  311. 9
  312. 9
  313. 8
  314. 8
  315. 8
  316. 8
  317. 8
  318. 8
  319. 8
  320. 8
  321. 8
  322. 8
  323. 8
  324. 8
  325. 8
  326. 8
  327. 8
  328. 8
  329. 8
  330. 8
  331. 8
  332. 8
  333. 8
  334. 8
  335. 8
  336. 8
  337. 8
  338. 8
  339.  @andro7862  One manga does not a trend make, especially when the latter medium is chiefly known for Fiction. Last time I checked anything can be depicted in fiction. It is also a given that a few will take an uncategorically militant nationalist position on Japan in WWII, but that's no different than the small minority of people whom idolize the NSDAP era in Germany. It's also a myth that Japan denies the existance of comfort women, as that was one aspect of the postwar reperations. It's also of note that in contrast to prisoners of war that were used as slave labour, comfort women were by most accounts recruited, and paid. Those whom took such work generally were condemned as collaborators after WWII, and treated poorly. As for war criminals: a large number were brought to account by the US, though the latter knew as much as the allies in Germany, that such efforts wouldn't catch everyone. It's also an inescapable fact that almost no-one in Japan today was of fighting age back then, and blaming / holding accountable the rest of the country for their ancestor's actions is as absurd, as it is immoral. And as aforementioned; the actions of a substantial part of the IJA, and of the Kempeitai as a whole, are known and generally accepted in Japan. Given how much of a recurring trope it is for the media [here in the uk at least] to wheel out the topic whenever there's a slow newsday, as well as shit on the history of one's own country almost everyday, I would say that the typical person in Japan today is justified at least in refuting the notion that their ancestors were somehow all baby munching sadists, which is a wholly reasonable position. (the IJN hoving to and rescuing the surrvivors of HMS Exeter for instance, being as noteworthy and commendable as the german cruiser Admiral Hipper rescuing the surrvivors of HMS Glowworm) After all the penalty for both murder and violating children in Japan is death by hanging, unlike much of the western world today, where unfortunately such crimes seldom result in actual life inprisonment, and where the criminal can live off the taxpayer. The lattermost reality is as disgusting to a typical Japanese person, as it is to many of us.
    8
  340. 8
  341. 8
  342. 8
  343. 8
  344. 8
  345. 8
  346. 8
  347. 8
  348. 8
  349. 8
  350. 8
  351. 8
  352. 8
  353. 8
  354. 8
  355. 8
  356. 8
  357. 8
  358. 8
  359. 8
  360. 8
  361. 8
  362. 7
  363. 7
  364. 7
  365. 7
  366. 7
  367. 7
  368. 7
  369. 7
  370. 7
  371. 7
  372. 7
  373. 7
  374. 7
  375. 7
  376. 7
  377. 7
  378. 7
  379. 7
  380. 7
  381. 7
  382. 7
  383. 7
  384. 7
  385. 7
  386. 7
  387. 7
  388. 7
  389. 7
  390. 7
  391. 7
  392. 7
  393. 7
  394. 7
  395. 7
  396. 7
  397. 7
  398. 7
  399. 7
  400. 7
  401. 7
  402. 7
  403. 7
  404. 7
  405. 7
  406. 7
  407. 7
  408. 7
  409. 7
  410. 7
  411. 7
  412. 7
  413. 7
  414. 7
  415. 6
  416. 6
  417. 6
  418. 6
  419. 6
  420. 6
  421. 6
  422. 6
  423. 6
  424. 6
  425. 6
  426. 6
  427. 6
  428. 6
  429. 6
  430. 6
  431. 6
  432. 6
  433. 6
  434. 6
  435. 6
  436. 6
  437. 6
  438. 6
  439. 6
  440. 6
  441. 6
  442. 6
  443. 6
  444. 6
  445. 6
  446. 6
  447. 6
  448. 6
  449. 6
  450. 6
  451. 6
  452. 6
  453. 6
  454. 6
  455. 6
  456. 6
  457. 6
  458. 6
  459. 6
  460. 6
  461. 6
  462. 6
  463. 6
  464. 6
  465. 6
  466. 6
  467. 6
  468. 6
  469. 6
  470. 6
  471. 6
  472. 6
  473. 6
  474. 6
  475. 6
  476. 6
  477. 6
  478. 6
  479. 6
  480. 6
  481. 6
  482. 6
  483. 6
  484. 6
  485. 6
  486. 6
  487. 6
  488. 6
  489. 6
  490. 6
  491. 6
  492. 6
  493. 6
  494. 6
  495. 6
  496. 6
  497. 6
  498. 6
  499. 5
  500. 5
  501. 5
  502. 5
  503. 5
  504. 5
  505. 5
  506. 5
  507. 5
  508. 5
  509. 5
  510. 5
  511. 5
  512. 5
  513. 5
  514. 5
  515. 5
  516. 5
  517. 5
  518. 5
  519. 5
  520. 5
  521. 5
  522. 5
  523. 5
  524. 5
  525. 5
  526. 5
  527. 5
  528. 5
  529. 5
  530. 5
  531. 5
  532. 5
  533. 5
  534. 5
  535. 5
  536. 5
  537. 5
  538. 5
  539. 5
  540. 5
  541. 5
  542. ^ The US didn't "bail out" the UK. We'd entered into a material aid agreement during WWII, and simply game to an agreement postwar as to how to pay for it, not a great deal when considering that everyone else's material aid was waved in light of the by then obviously approaching Cold War, but a deal none the less. The UK retained a defence budget of more than 11% of GDP post-1945, and would until 1957, where for political reasons it began to shrink toward the 2% typical today. With that timeframe in mind; everyone of note still had Capital Ships in the postwar period, even the hapless French. Standing navies were already 2nd fiddle to the new Atomic weaponry, and the means to deliver them, but that was not clear in 1942/43 nor 1945. The RN did in the late-'40's what everyone else did; take stock of their assets, retire the outdated ones, and keep the most modern. This was the same as after WWI, and as the KGV's & Vanguard were the only modern Capital Ships in the fleet capable of topping 25 knots only they were kept. Until 1949 the plan was to restart the Lion class (with modifications), though changed government priorities meant this didn't happen. Only when it became clear that the USSR was unable to build new Capital Ships, and their cruisers downgraded in threat perception, did the politicians have their excuse to cut the fleet further. There was no reason not to preserve Vanguard, as unlike with Warspite (a ship that actively was considered for preservation in 1946) the ship was in prime condition and the apitomy of several centuries of Royal Navy engineering, so much so she'd always topped the USN's lowa class ships in gunnery competitions. Same thing with HMS Ark Royal (R09) in 1978*, and HMS Illustrious in the 2010's. The means and public support was there, but the politicians just didn't give a shit. *A decision everyone would regret in 1982, as operating Phantoms & Buccaneers down in the S-Atlantic was no longer possible. (not until after the conflict was won & the islands given a fighter squadron anyway, only then did Phantom FGR's get down there)
    5
  543. 5
  544. 5
  545. 5
  546. 5
  547. 5
  548. 5
  549. 5
  550. 5
  551. 5
  552. 5
  553. 5
  554. 5
  555. 5
  556. 5
  557. 5
  558. 5
  559. 5
  560. 5
  561. 5
  562. 5
  563. 5
  564. 5
  565. 5
  566. 5
  567. 5
  568. 5
  569. 5
  570. 5
  571. 5
  572. 5
  573. 5
  574. 5
  575. 5
  576. 5
  577. 5
  578. 5
  579. 5
  580. 5
  581. 5
  582. 5
  583. 5
  584. 5
  585. 5
  586. 5
  587. 5
  588. 5
  589. 5
  590. 5
  591. 5
  592. 5
  593. 5
  594. 5
  595. 5
  596. 5
  597. 5
  598. 5
  599. 5
  600. 5
  601. 5
  602. 5
  603. 5
  604. 5
  605. 5
  606. 5
  607. 5
  608. 5
  609. 5
  610. 5
  611. 5
  612. 5
  613. 5
  614. 5
  615. 5
  616. 5
  617. 5
  618. 4
  619. 4
  620. 4
  621. 4
  622. 4
  623. 4
  624. 4
  625. 4
  626. 4
  627. 4
  628. 4
  629. 4
  630. 4
  631. 4
  632. 4
  633. 4
  634. 4
  635. 4
  636. 4
  637. 4
  638. 4
  639. 4
  640. 4
  641. 4
  642. 4
  643. 4
  644. 4
  645. 4
  646. 4
  647. 4
  648. ​@GregWampler-xm8hv If Boeing "warned" DH about the windows (which weren't the source of the problem), then they didn't heed their own "advice" if looking at the 707 😂 . (see video for example) It's also worth noting that the American view of the Comet when she debuted - according to aviation historian James Patterson - was typically that the UK had sized a 20 year lead on the US; that was how seriously they took it. I'd also dispute the "not innovative" line, as the Comet was - as pointed out in the video - flying at an altitude higher than any other commercial aircraft had ever done, as well as higher than basically all WWII Bombers, and was one of the first uses of swept wings on an airliner, among other new features. Objectively speaking DH went all in with innovation, whereas others in the industry were still making prop' 'planes with straight wings and tailsitting landing gear. Tis of note also that the Comet set a quantum leap in aviation safety measures and investigation methods, while by contrast the contemporary Soviet passenger jet TU-104 remained a temperamental death trap right up until full retirement in the 1980's. (the TU-104 also has the weird accolade of having killed more Soviet admirals than the Germans did in all of WWII) Last off: the Brabazon Committee makes sense as a wartime move, when considering the UK saw the efforts of chaps like Kaiser in the US, and knew that the US would be robust industrial competition after the war. Thus any kind of an edge was rather important, and being the smaller nation also requires an emphasis on innovation. That said the US didn't ironically take over in Shipbuilding after the war, for while Kaiser had proved he could build entire cargo ships faster than some aircraft companies could build a single aircraft, overall the US still wasn't peak competitive on cost (of labour & of end product), relative to the British. We both lost in the latter ultimately though, with wartime shipping loser Japan starting from scratch with an all new approach, while us westerners were slow to adapt and now only really build warships domestically.
    4
  649. 4
  650. 4
  651. 4
  652. 4
  653. 4
  654. 4
  655. 4
  656. 4
  657. 4
  658. 4
  659. 4
  660. 4
  661. 4
  662. 4
  663. 4
  664. 4
  665. 4
  666. 4
  667. 4
  668. 4
  669. 4
  670. 4
  671. 4
  672. 4
  673. 4
  674. 4
  675. 4
  676. 4
  677. 4
  678. 4
  679. 4
  680. 4
  681. 4
  682. 4
  683. 4
  684. 4
  685. 4
  686. 4
  687. 4
  688. 4
  689. 4
  690. 4
  691. 4
  692. 4
  693. 4
  694. 4
  695. 4
  696. 4
  697. 4
  698. 4
  699. 4
  700. 4
  701. 4
  702. 4
  703. 4
  704. 4
  705. 4
  706. 4
  707. 4
  708. 4
  709. 4
  710. 4
  711. 4
  712. 4
  713. 4
  714. 4
  715. 4
  716. 4
  717. 4
  718. 4
  719. 4
  720. 4
  721. 4
  722. 4
  723. 4
  724. 4
  725. 4
  726. 4
  727. 4
  728. 4
  729. 4
  730. 4
  731. 4
  732. 4
  733. 4
  734. 4
  735. 4
  736. 4
  737. 4
  738. 4
  739. 4
  740. 4
  741. 4
  742. 4
  743. 4
  744. 4
  745. 4
  746. 4
  747. 4
  748. 4
  749. 4
  750. 4
  751. 4
  752. 4
  753. 4
  754. 4
  755. 4
  756. 4
  757. 4
  758. 4
  759. 4
  760. 4
  761. 4
  762. 4
  763. 4
  764. 4
  765. 4
  766. 4
  767. 4
  768. 4
  769. 4
  770. 4
  771. 4
  772. 4
  773. 4
  774. 4
  775. 4
  776. 4
  777. 4
  778. 4
  779. 4
  780. 4
  781. 4
  782. 4
  783. 4
  784. 4
  785. 4
  786. 4
  787. 4
  788. 4
  789. 4
  790. 4
  791. 4
  792. 4
  793. 4
  794. 4
  795. 4
  796. 4
  797. 4
  798. 4
  799. 4
  800. 4
  801. 4
  802. 4
  803. 4
  804. 4
  805. 4
  806. 4
  807. 4
  808. 4
  809. 4
  810. 4
  811. 4
  812. 4
  813. 4
  814. 4
  815. 4
  816. 4
  817. 3
  818. 3
  819. 3
  820. 3
  821. 3
  822. 3
  823. 3
  824. 3
  825. 3
  826. 3
  827. 3
  828. 3
  829. 3
  830. 3
  831. 3
  832. 3
  833. 3
  834. 3
  835. 3
  836. 3
  837. 3
  838. 3
  839. 3
  840. 3
  841. 3
  842. 3
  843. 3
  844. 3
  845. 3
  846. 3
  847. 3
  848. 3
  849. 3
  850. 3
  851. 3
  852. 3
  853. 3
  854. 3
  855. 3
  856. 3
  857. 3
  858. 3
  859. 3
  860. 3
  861. 3
  862. 3
  863. 3
  864. 3
  865. 3
  866. 3
  867. 3
  868. 3
  869. 3
  870. 3
  871. 3
  872. 3
  873. 3
  874. 3
  875. 3
  876. 3
  877. 3
  878. 3
  879. 3
  880. 3
  881. 3
  882. 3
  883. 3
  884. 3
  885. 3
  886. 3
  887. 3
  888. 3
  889. 3
  890. 3
  891. 3
  892. 3
  893. 3
  894. 3
  895. 3
  896. 3
  897. 3
  898. 3
  899. 3
  900. 3
  901. 3
  902. 3
  903. 3
  904. 3
  905. 3
  906. 3
  907. 3
  908. 3
  909. 3
  910.  @mikereger1186  That's rather too relativist for me, and my point was upon how - by the standards of the time and situation - the allies [as the UK was involved] had a simple choice to make re' Japan, and chose the one that was expected - and for once also did - to have the lowest bodycount. I should also note that the key difference [ideology wise] between [Classical] Liberalism and Authoritarianism, is that the former advocates for vicarious use of force, and in the case of war to use the actions of your enemy to set the precedent. An Authoritarian by contrast will capriciously use force, for show or to enforce their personal / ideological will. It's no coincidence that the [western] allies spent most of WWII - and WWI before it - responding to their enemies precedent, instead of setting it. For example: the RAF had access to plentiful supplies of Mustard Gas throughout WWII, and the Germans [who had built up Chlorine Gas & Sarin stocks in the '30's] knew it. Hitler and others in his circle knew [first hand] the horrors of when the allies in WWI had responded in-kind to German use of chlorine gas, and refrained from their use throughout the war. It's unknown if the Germans knew that the RAF also had access a small stockpile of Weaponized Anthrax by 1944, though the latter detail makes it fortunate that: 1. The UK wasn't an authoritaritarian state. 2. That the Germans didn't give the UK a counter-strike motivation to use their CB weapon stocks. My bottom line (as far as meaning is concerned) is that if the allies could have struck first, and hit the axis with the very worst weapons in their arsenals... but they didn't . In many ways this restraint from setting precedent can be demonstrated to have lengthened WWII (such as Chamberlain & his french counterpart refusing to authorize bombing of Germany in 1939; even though Poland was desperate for any kind of military aid from the west), but in others it also saved lives in other areas of the conflict.
    3
  911. 3
  912. 3
  913. 3
  914. 3
  915. 3
  916. 3
  917. 3
  918. 3
  919. 3
  920. 3
  921. 3
  922. 3
  923. 3
  924. 3
  925. 3
  926. 3
  927. 3
  928. 3
  929. 3
  930. 3
  931. 3
  932. 3
  933. 3
  934. 3
  935. 3
  936. 3
  937. 3
  938. 3
  939. 3
  940. 3
  941. 3
  942. 3
  943. 3
  944. 3
  945. 3
  946. 3
  947. 3
  948. 3
  949. 3
  950. 3
  951. 3
  952. 3
  953. 3
  954. 3
  955. 3
  956. 3
  957. 3
  958. 3
  959. 3
  960. 3
  961. 3
  962. 3
  963. 3
  964. 3
  965. 3
  966. 3
  967. 3
  968. 3
  969. 3
  970. 3
  971. 3
  972. 3
  973. 3
  974. 3
  975. 3
  976. 3
  977. 3
  978. 3
  979. 3
  980. 3
  981. 3
  982. 3
  983. 3
  984. 3
  985. 3
  986. 3
  987. 3
  988. 3
  989. 3
  990. 3
  991. 3
  992. 3
  993. 3
  994. 3
  995. 3
  996. 3
  997. 3
  998. 3
  999. 3
  1000. 3
  1001. 3
  1002. 3
  1003. 3
  1004. 3
  1005. 3
  1006. 3
  1007. 3
  1008. 3
  1009. 3
  1010. 3
  1011. 3
  1012. 3
  1013. 3
  1014. 3
  1015. 3
  1016. 3
  1017. 3
  1018. 3
  1019. 3
  1020. 3
  1021. 3
  1022. 3
  1023. 3
  1024. 3
  1025. 3
  1026. 3
  1027. 3
  1028. 3
  1029. 3
  1030. 3
  1031. 3
  1032. 3
  1033. 3
  1034. 3
  1035. 3
  1036. 3
  1037. 3
  1038. 3
  1039. 3
  1040. 3
  1041. 3
  1042. 3
  1043. 3
  1044. 3
  1045. 3
  1046. 3
  1047. 3
  1048. 3
  1049. 3
  1050. 3
  1051. 3
  1052. 3
  1053. 3
  1054. 3
  1055. 3
  1056. 3
  1057. 3
  1058. 3
  1059. 3
  1060. 3
  1061. 3
  1062. 3
  1063. 3
  1064. 3
  1065. 3
  1066. 3
  1067. 3
  1068. 3
  1069. 3
  1070. 3
  1071. 3
  1072. 3
  1073. 3
  1074. 3
  1075. 3
  1076. 3
  1077. 3
  1078. 3
  1079. 3
  1080. 3
  1081. 3
  1082. 3
  1083. 3
  1084. 3
  1085. 3
  1086. 3
  1087. 3
  1088. 3
  1089. 3
  1090. 3
  1091. 3
  1092. 3
  1093. 3
  1094. 3
  1095. 3
  1096. 3
  1097. 3
  1098. 3
  1099. 3
  1100. 3
  1101. 3
  1102. 3
  1103. 3
  1104. 3
  1105. 3
  1106. 3
  1107. 3
  1108. 3
  1109. 3
  1110. 3
  1111. 3
  1112. 3
  1113. 3
  1114. 3
  1115. 3
  1116. 3
  1117. 3
  1118. 3
  1119. 3
  1120. 3
  1121. 3
  1122. 3
  1123. 3
  1124. 3
  1125. 3
  1126. 3
  1127. 3
  1128. 3
  1129. 3
  1130. 3
  1131. 3
  1132. 3
  1133. 3
  1134. 3
  1135. 3
  1136. 3
  1137. 3
  1138. 3
  1139. 3
  1140. 3
  1141. 3
  1142. 3
  1143. 3
  1144. 3
  1145. 3
  1146. 3
  1147. 2
  1148. 2
  1149. 2
  1150. 2
  1151. 2
  1152. 2
  1153. 2
  1154. 2
  1155. 2
  1156. 2
  1157. 2
  1158. 2
  1159. 2
  1160. 2
  1161. 2
  1162. 2
  1163. 2
  1164. 2
  1165. 2
  1166. 2
  1167. 2
  1168. 2
  1169. 2
  1170. 2
  1171. 2
  1172. 2
  1173. 2
  1174. 2
  1175. 2
  1176. 2
  1177. 2
  1178. 2
  1179. 2
  1180. 2
  1181. 2
  1182. 2
  1183. 2
  1184. 2
  1185. 2
  1186. 2
  1187. 2
  1188. 2
  1189. 2
  1190. 2
  1191. 2
  1192. 2
  1193. 2
  1194. 2
  1195. 2
  1196. 2
  1197. 2
  1198. 2
  1199. 2
  1200. 2
  1201. 2
  1202. 2
  1203. 2
  1204. 2
  1205. 2
  1206. 2
  1207. 2
  1208. 2
  1209. 2
  1210. 2
  1211. 2
  1212. 2
  1213. 2
  1214. 2
  1215. 2
  1216. 2
  1217. 2
  1218. 2
  1219. 2
  1220. 2
  1221. 2
  1222. 2
  1223. 2
  1224. 2
  1225. 2
  1226. 2
  1227. 2
  1228. 2
  1229. 2
  1230. 2
  1231. 2
  1232. 2
  1233. 2
  1234. 2
  1235. 2
  1236. 2
  1237. 2
  1238. 2
  1239. 2
  1240. 2
  1241. 2
  1242. 2
  1243. 2
  1244. 2
  1245. 2
  1246. 2
  1247. 2
  1248. 2
  1249. 2
  1250. 2
  1251. 2
  1252. 2
  1253. 2
  1254. 2
  1255. 2
  1256. 2
  1257. 2
  1258. 2
  1259. 2
  1260. 2
  1261. 2
  1262. 2
  1263. 2
  1264. 2
  1265. 2
  1266. 2
  1267. 2
  1268. 2
  1269. 2
  1270. 2
  1271. 2
  1272. 2
  1273. 2
  1274. 2
  1275. 2
  1276. 2
  1277. 2
  1278. 2
  1279. 2
  1280. 2
  1281. 2
  1282. 2
  1283. 2
  1284. 2
  1285. 2
  1286. 2
  1287. 2
  1288. 2
  1289. 2
  1290. 2
  1291. 2
  1292. 2
  1293. 2
  1294. 2
  1295. 2
  1296. 2
  1297. 2
  1298. 2
  1299. 2
  1300. 2
  1301. 2
  1302. 2
  1303. 2
  1304. 2
  1305. 2
  1306. 2
  1307. 2
  1308. 2
  1309. 2
  1310. 2
  1311. 2
  1312. 2
  1313. 2
  1314. 2
  1315. 2
  1316. 2
  1317. 2
  1318. 2
  1319. 2
  1320. 2
  1321. 2
  1322. 2
  1323. 2
  1324. 2
  1325. 2
  1326. 2
  1327. 2
  1328. 2
  1329. 2
  1330. 2
  1331. 2
  1332. 2
  1333. 2
  1334. 2
  1335. 2
  1336. 2
  1337. A handful of notable details, albeit amidst a narrative that omits a lot of inconveniant facts, such as, though not limited to: • Hitler's adherence to the - then commonplace but since discredited - Shrinking Markets theory. • The existance of vast state social programs under the NSDAP, such as the KDF. (all part of their own version of cradle to grave indoctrination) • The then unprecedented explosion in the size of the German Civil Service under the NSDAP. So large and powerful did this red tape machine grow, that aquiring parts for war industry during WWII was as much a beauraucratic nightmare as it was industrial. (it shrank again dramatically in the postwar, and firmly capitalist, FRG) • The fact that All rival political factions were banned after 1933, with members of any political shade being repressed thereafter, simply for not towing the NSDAP line, which was that the party and the state were the same thing, and the state itself was [essentially] god. • That the NSDAP deliberately endeavoured toward Autarky, under the assumption that "Living Space" in the east would ultimately provide the resources they had traditionally had to trade for. (such as oil from venezuela & romania, rare metals from turkey, ball bearings & iron ore from sweden, etc) • That "property rights" meant little if anything to the NSDAP. A businessman [on paper] could own a business, but at a whim the NSDAP controlled state could take it all away, without compensation nor a given reason. Same thing if in basically any other aspect of german society. • The USSR also had a single state run trade union, albeit with a gulag labour system for those whom displeased the state, or anyone within the political class. • That the NSDAP for most of their rule considered British and US style mass production with scorn, rather like conservatism & classical liberalism, which the NSDAP & Communists alike considered antithetical to their ideologies. The NSDAP were very much like gangsters, but that was also true of Stalinism, where the slightest whim of one man, meant no position below him was secure from arbatrary incarceration &/or murder, for pretty much anything.
    2
  1338. 2
  1339. 2
  1340. 2
  1341. 2
  1342. 2
  1343. 2
  1344. 2
  1345. 2
  1346. 2
  1347. 2
  1348. 2
  1349. 2
  1350. 2
  1351. 2
  1352. 2
  1353. 2
  1354. 2
  1355. A vast subject, that was more recently covered by Drachinifel, but this was the first youtube video that covered it in detail, which also; deserves to be remembered ;-) . Slight correction: Though often stated in tv documentarys and even some books over the years, we Brit's didn't forbid the 2nd Pacific Squadron from using the Suez Canal (despite the Dogger Bank incident and near war situation that followed), nor did the French whom had part ownership thereof. The Russians sent some of their ships through it, but Admiral Rozhestvensky opted to send the bulk of his ships - including himself - via the long route, because: • The entire fleet would've created a traffic jam in the canal, only irritating the British and other countries more. • The Red Sea was one place the IJN genuinely did possess the means to lay an ambush for them (but didn't). Some interesting details of note are that when the seven ships surrendered; they had already fought hard, were hopelessly outgunned & outnumbered, as well as some of the oldest ships in the squadron. Several of the Battleships thst were sunk also in several cases didn't cease firing back, until they capsized. Whether this was due to refusal of the gunners to surrender, or because they never got the order to abandon ship & fought to the end, will never be known. Admiral Togo was also dubbed "The Nelson of the East" in the UK press, and highly commended for his fleet's efforts. Most Japanese accounts concluded that the battle was hard fought, and that in many cases the Russians fought well, a firm compliment from the IJN, whom respected opponents that didn't yield easily.
    2
  1356. 2
  1357. 2
  1358. 2
  1359. 2
  1360. 2
  1361. 2
  1362. 2
  1363. 2
  1364. 2
  1365. 2
  1366. 2
  1367. 2
  1368. 2
  1369. 2
  1370. 2
  1371. 2
  1372. 2
  1373. 2
  1374. For a less OSK limited refutation though: ""your number are not correct"" Ironic XD ""Main battle tank was used as a term"" False, because no such doctrine existed. ""people like you"" Ah; pigeon holing. Cliche much? XD ""like to claim all German TD and SPGs as other vehicles yet don't do the same for eney other nation to inflate numbers"" Projecting your hypocrisy onto others now?. Pathetic. ""I just prospered my self for a come back I assumed you would try and stated before you even said it."" That doesn't even make grammatical sense XD. "I would also argue heavy tank are not out of date" Because of course you would XD. Heavy Tanks faded out after WWII for two primary reasons: 1. The Shaped Charge - and Square Cube Law - made simply having thicker RHA steel armour no longer worthwhile. A cold war era TOW missile for instance, could punch through RHA Steel over 1ft thick, far beyond what a practical Tank can heft. MBT armour trends reflected this reality, particularly with AMX-30 & Leopard 1. 2. WWII proved that Heavy Tanks were too impractical. Armies like being able to traverse bridges without them collapsing, cross ground without sinking in the mud, and not require double or triple heading by tractors during battlefield recoveries. ""The TD were all but dead after ww2, the 10,000 or so took out some 2x there number 20,000, yet only one nation built them after ww2 and only stopped in what the 80 or 90s"" Questionable stat's aside; casemated self-propelled guns were generally the result of wanting larger guns on hulls too small to mount them in turrets, thus saving on development time, resources & money. WWII ending removed this raison d'etre, and there were few other reasons for such vehicles postwar, besides being able to fit large guns on relatively light chassis'. Neither the British nor the US bothered fielding one, with most R&D examples being for niche purposes. ""We build tanks for all rolls now, a jack of all traids"" Let me guess... Spell Checking's for nerds? XD ""if there is a ww then you find the return of all other type's"" I could refute this in quite a few ways; but I think the simple fact that WWIII will never happen without a nuclear exchange renders the entire topic moot. Standing Armies are no match for split atoms. ""SPGs are still present in small numbers in most of the top 10 most powerful nations doesn't mean there obsolete just there not much need for them so only a few hundred are needed."" A handful of casemated SPG's isn't going to spontaneously turn into thousands, for pretty self-evident reasons. There's also no indication of any 1st world country having considered one in decades. MBT's are the paradigm. And again; name dropping two YT channels you clearly haven't actually watched as a crutch for unsourced word salad, isn't a substitute for putting a verifiable source, as I did, and you ignored because it was inconvenient to your narrative.
    2
  1375. 2
  1376. 2
  1377. 2
  1378. 2
  1379. 2
  1380. 2
  1381. 2
  1382. 2
  1383. 2
  1384. 2
  1385. 2
  1386. 2
  1387. 2
  1388. 2
  1389. 2
  1390. 2
  1391. 2
  1392. 2
  1393. 2
  1394.  @mikereger1186  I'd have to differ re' the Atomic Bombings, as there's an entirely rational and demonstrable causation for their use and effect. After all: The Japanese [and the Germans before them] had set the precedent for bombing civilians, though the Japanese were the only ones to use air-dropped Chemical/Biological weapons [and IIRC only upon China] during the period. By that point in 1945 Japan's government were still refusing to surrender, despite being militarily depleted, under a supplies blockade of all materials needed from outside Japan, and most of Japan's cities having been destroyed by firebombing. Instead they [Japan's government] were preparing the population to resist an allied invasion to the death . The allies had taken heavy casualties on Okinawa [and seen the lengths their opponent would go to], and expected the combined death toll [allied personnel & the servicemen & armed civilians they faced] of taking Japan's home islands as being far higher for all concerned. As such: the decision to send the Japanese government an unsubtle demonstration of the abject futility of not surrendering, ultimately can be demonstrated to have saved lives, by ensuring an invasion that was expected to be a mutual bloodbath, was supplanted with an uncontested landing of troops, in a country that had unconditionally surrendered. It could also be argued; that without the double precident for their use; M.A.D. wouldn't have been as effective in deterring war between first world nations, as it has been since 1945.
    2
  1395. 2
  1396. 2
  1397. 2
  1398. 2
  1399. 2
  1400. 2
  1401. 2
  1402. 2
  1403. 2
  1404. 2
  1405. 2
  1406. 2
  1407. 2
  1408. ^ ""I do think the advent of guided munitions was what really put the nail in the coffin for the battleship"" A demonstrably false notion, as no allied Capital Ship was ever sunk by such a weapon, and no [non-nuclear] example of such a weapon was ever used postwar to successfully sink an armoured warship, of any kind . In practice Guided Munitions ended up being a tool used By postwar Battleships, and other vessels of similar size and purpose. This was a logical choice as a smaller vessel [such as a Destroyer] had neither the operational range nor the hull capacity for such large weapons, nor their complex firing and guidance systems. (as Drach' tries at length to point out; sensors & computers [+ the operators] take up a lot of space and tonnage on ships) ""I mean, if you look at it this way, a battleship is only a show of power for a nation heavily reliant on overseas trade."" Hardly. Every major nation in the world engaged in global trade, and thus had a stake therein, requiring a Navy to police their share of it. Within that structure Capital Ships were just one of various assets, all to be used in combination to maintain peace, and achieve victory in war. ""I mean the British’s supposed most potent weapon had a range of about 30 miles from the coast...yeah."" That statement makes no sense whatsoever. "most potent" also means nothing without context. Look up the use of shipboard missiles between WWII & the 1990's; there isn't much in the way of instances, nor success. In the Falklands the British and Argentines both had shipboard Exocet missiles, yet neither made a serious effort to use them, nor did the British consider having them a counter to a WWII Light Cruiser with 6" guns (otherwise the fleet commander wouldn't have had to go to such lengths to get a Nuclear Attack Sub' to eliminate said Cruiser). Incidentally: That Cruiser had a gun range of just 15 miles, yet that was deemed more of a threat than the taskforce's missile armed ships could cope with. Heck; the most visual use of shipboard missiles [with a theoretical anti-ship capability] in the war, was in an ad-hoc shore bombardment, intended to both rid the ships of obsolete weaponry, and inspire the troops as the [Sea Slug] missiles were militarily unfit to do much damage to anything, but looked rather impressive when launched. One decent Cruiser or Battleship; could have shortened said conflict for the British considerably, pounding the enemy with un-returnable ordinance, from an armoured warship they lacked* any counter thereto. *contrary to what some may think; most ASM's aren't even designed to penetrate armour, and indeed missiles are ill suited for armour penetration full stop. For why see what a A/P shell from a [relatively small caliber] gun does to a concrete block, vs a fighter plane crashing into one at high speed.
    2
  1409. ^ "now as for guided munitions" Worded like a 2nd comment; a typing mistake or has YT deleted something?. "not sinking any capital ships, that’s just wrong." No it isn't; for I stated "no Allied [and Modern ] Capital Ships", which is demonstrably True. Roma* was an Italian vessel, and Warspite was neither modern nor sunk. Indeed: the allied nations only lost one modern Battleship in the entire war, whilst Germany & Japan lost all of theirs. whilst Italy lost one and surrendered two. Kindly read a statement before replying. Saves everyone time. *Furthermore; Roma was mid-voyage to being surrendered to the British. She had barely enough fuel and thus was steaming at reduced speed. She also had no Radar Direction for the AA Armament [which was also inferior to allied standards] and had only a partial crew compliment. All of those and more are factors in her being lost to a weapon that had failed [thrice] to sink a vastly older warship. ""The fritz x (guided bomb) sunk many ships"" sank*, and no. The weapon is considered an operational failure, as only small warships and merchantmen were lost thereto. Even the Kaiten and Kamikaze achieved more in WWII. ""proving to Britain and in fact the world, that battleships at this point were nothing more than expensive toys"" As nonsensical a statement as it is demonstrably false. The British retained a Battleship force long after WWII, alongwith the French. Defence cuts and shortage of threat countries with counterparts [the USSR gad no modern Capital Ships nor the means to build them until the 1970's] put paid to them; not Glide Bombs, which saw no postwar use with any country. Indeed: The USN had Capital Ships in their inventory, right into the late 00's. The last one wouldn't be de-registered until 2011.
    2
  1410. 2
  1411. 2
  1412. 2
  1413. 2
  1414. 2
  1415. 2
  1416. 2
  1417. 2
  1418. 2
  1419. 2
  1420. 2
  1421. 2
  1422. 2
  1423. 2
  1424. 2
  1425. 2
  1426. 2
  1427. 2
  1428. 2
  1429. 2
  1430. 2
  1431. 2
  1432. 2
  1433. 2
  1434. 2
  1435. 2
  1436. 2
  1437. 2
  1438. 2
  1439. 2
  1440. 2
  1441. 2
  1442. 2
  1443. 2
  1444. 2
  1445. 2
  1446. 2
  1447. 2
  1448. 2
  1449. 2
  1450. 2
  1451. 2
  1452. 2
  1453. 2
  1454. 2
  1455. 2
  1456. 2
  1457. 2
  1458. 2
  1459. 2
  1460. 2
  1461. 2
  1462. 2
  1463. 2
  1464. 2
  1465. 2
  1466. 2
  1467. 2
  1468. 2
  1469. 2
  1470. 2
  1471. 2
  1472. 2
  1473. 2
  1474. 2
  1475. 2
  1476. 2
  1477. 2
  1478. 2
  1479. 2
  1480. 2
  1481. 2
  1482. 2
  1483. 2
  1484. 2
  1485. 2
  1486. 2
  1487. 2
  1488. 2
  1489. 2
  1490. 2
  1491. 2
  1492. 2
  1493. 2
  1494. 2
  1495. 2
  1496. 2
  1497. 2
  1498. 2
  1499. 2
  1500. 2
  1501. 2
  1502. 2
  1503. 2
  1504. 2
  1505. 2
  1506. 2
  1507. 2
  1508. 2
  1509. 2
  1510. 2
  1511. 2
  1512. 2
  1513. 2
  1514. 2
  1515. 2
  1516. 2
  1517. 2
  1518. 2
  1519. 2
  1520. 2
  1521. 2
  1522. 2
  1523. 2
  1524. 2
  1525. 2
  1526. 2
  1527. 2
  1528. 2
  1529. 2
  1530. 2
  1531. 2
  1532. 2
  1533. 2
  1534. 2
  1535. 2
  1536. 2
  1537. 2
  1538. 2
  1539. 2
  1540. 2
  1541. 2
  1542. 2
  1543. 2
  1544. 2
  1545. 2
  1546. 2
  1547. 2
  1548. 2
  1549. 2
  1550. 2
  1551. 2
  1552. 2
  1553. 2
  1554. 2
  1555. 2
  1556. 2
  1557. 2
  1558. 2
  1559. 2
  1560. 2
  1561. 2
  1562. 2
  1563. 2
  1564. 2
  1565. 2
  1566. 2
  1567. 2
  1568. 2
  1569. 2
  1570. 2
  1571. 2
  1572. 2
  1573. 2
  1574. 2
  1575. 2
  1576. 2
  1577. 2
  1578. 2
  1579. 2
  1580. 2
  1581. 2
  1582. 2
  1583. 2
  1584. 2
  1585. 2
  1586. 2
  1587. 2
  1588. 2
  1589. 2
  1590. 2
  1591. 2
  1592. 2
  1593. 2
  1594. 2
  1595. 2
  1596. 2
  1597. 2
  1598. 2
  1599. 2
  1600. 2
  1601. 2
  1602. 2
  1603. 2
  1604. 2
  1605. 2
  1606. 2
  1607. 2
  1608. 2
  1609. 2
  1610. 2
  1611. 2
  1612. 2
  1613. 2
  1614. 2
  1615. 2
  1616. 2
  1617. 2
  1618. 2
  1619. 2
  1620. 2
  1621. 2
  1622. 2
  1623. 2
  1624. 2
  1625. 2
  1626. 2
  1627. 2
  1628. 2
  1629. 2
  1630. 2
  1631. 2
  1632. 2
  1633. 2
  1634. 2
  1635. 2
  1636. 2
  1637. 2
  1638. 2
  1639. 2
  1640. 2
  1641. 2
  1642. 2
  1643. 2
  1644. 2
  1645. 2
  1646. 2
  1647. 2
  1648. 2
  1649. 2
  1650. 2
  1651. 2
  1652. 2
  1653. 2
  1654. 2
  1655. 2
  1656. 2
  1657. 2
  1658. 2
  1659. 2
  1660. 2
  1661. 2
  1662. 2
  1663. 2
  1664. 2
  1665. 2
  1666. 2
  1667. 2
  1668. 2
  1669. 2
  1670. 2
  1671. 2
  1672. 2
  1673. 2
  1674. 2
  1675. 2
  1676. 2
  1677. 2
  1678. 2
  1679. 2
  1680. 2
  1681. 2
  1682. 2
  1683. 2
  1684. 2
  1685. 2
  1686. 2
  1687. 2
  1688. 2
  1689. 2
  1690. 2
  1691. 2
  1692. 2
  1693. 2
  1694. 2
  1695. 2
  1696. 2
  1697. 2
  1698. 2
  1699. 2
  1700. 2
  1701. 2
  1702. 2
  1703. 2
  1704. 2
  1705. 2
  1706. 2
  1707. 2
  1708. 2
  1709. 2
  1710.  @Lusa_Iceheart  I recommend brevity & paragrsphs in comment writing, as that was a headache to read 😅 . I also disagree on various points, but will keep it simple: • The UK was never skittish about taking on escaped slaves from the US. Heck when they left the 13 Colonies in 1783 a lot of blacks opted to with them, knowing they'd have better odds of a better life, and invariably they did. Similar story when the UK withdrew from territories captured in the War of 1812. • The Canadian territories were sparsely populated for most of their early history, so if anything they benefitted from runaway slaves. • India (or more precisely the myriad of disunited kingdoms that the British ended up ruling) actually had anything but a ""parasitic"" experience, rather it was the UK that put more in overall than they took out. This is proven by looking at the in depth economic side of things, as well as the fact that the British expended a great amount of money, time and resources there. For example: 1. There was barely any civil plumbing - nor sewage treatment- before the British (and since the 1940s it's slipped backwards in many ways). 2. All but one of India's railway lines were built by the British. 3. There was no domestic Tea industry in India - nor anywhere in the region besides China - before the British not only managed to get the precious plants from out of the Qing's clutches, but also set up successful plantations across India, Ceylon, East-Africa & other locations. ...among various other aspects one could name. In other words; don't take school history books too seriously; they're mostly fiction and outright lies.
    2
  1711. 2
  1712. 2
  1713. 2
  1714. 2
  1715. 2
  1716. 2
  1717. 2
  1718. 2
  1719. 2
  1720. 2
  1721. 2
  1722. 2
  1723. 2
  1724. 2
  1725. 2
  1726. 2
  1727. 2
  1728. 2
  1729. 2
  1730. 2
  1731. 2
  1732. 2
  1733. 2
  1734. 2
  1735. 2
  1736. 2
  1737. 2
  1738. 2
  1739. 2
  1740. 2
  1741. 2
  1742. 2
  1743. 2
  1744. 2
  1745. 2
  1746. 2
  1747. 2
  1748. 2
  1749. 2
  1750. 2
  1751. 2
  1752. 2
  1753.  @AdamMGTF  I have to disagree, partially because I am British and have looked into this topic a lot over the years. Like you I have had family that lived through WWII and fought in it, but unlike yourself their experience was more of experience-based apathy of the government, its immense wastefulness and the sheer amount of self-induced destruction it brought upon the country postwar, while under its self-delusion that ""big government won the war"". (ironically WWII had proved the opposite, but politicians and civil servants will believe what they want to believe, as well as whatever feathers their own nest) Debates about ""free healthcare"" (an oxymoron in of itself) and other non-arguments aside, the fact is that the Royal Navy did consider Warspite for preservation, and that the government could afford to do so without prejudicing other commitments. The reason it didn't happen was partially down to postwar weariness yes, but also - quite bluntly - that those in power didn't give a damn (unlike those whom weren't behind a desk filing paper for most of the war), as indeed has long been the case. The fact remains is that the "there was no money" argument falls apart completely when considering the various occasions from the 1950's to present day where the country was in good stead, yet calls to preserve a notable warship was blocked or ignored by the government of the day; most infamously HMS Illustrious in the 2010's, the fate of the Warship Trust on Merseyside (which had government corruption all over it), HMS Ark Royal (R09) in the late-1970's - which also prompted the Falklands crisis mere years later - and HMS Vanguard in 1959/60. Contrast this with the salvage of the Mary Rose and SS Great Britain, feats which would ostensibly seem impossible in a country whos government perpetually claims to be broke, yet were undertaken successfully and without prejudicing other commitments. I suppose you could summarise this as, Don't chalk up to lack of money, what can be attributed to lack of effort or interest by those in charge .
    2
  1754. 2
  1755. 2
  1756. 2
  1757. 2
  1758. 2
  1759. 2
  1760. 2
  1761. 2
  1762. 2
  1763. 2
  1764. 2
  1765. 2
  1766. 2
  1767. 2
  1768. 2
  1769. 2
  1770. 2
  1771. 2
  1772. 2
  1773. 2
  1774. 2
  1775. 2
  1776. 2
  1777. 2
  1778. 2
  1779. 2
  1780. 2
  1781. 2
  1782. 2
  1783. 2
  1784. 2
  1785. 2
  1786. 2
  1787. 2
  1788. 2
  1789. 2
  1790. 2
  1791. 2
  1792. 2
  1793. 2
  1794. 2
  1795. 2
  1796. 2
  1797. 2
  1798. 2
  1799. 2
  1800. 2
  1801. 2
  1802. 2
  1803. 2
  1804. 2
  1805. 2
  1806. 2
  1807. 2
  1808. 2
  1809. 2
  1810. 2
  1811. 2
  1812. 2
  1813. 2
  1814. 2
  1815. 2
  1816. 2
  1817. 2
  1818. 2
  1819. 2
  1820. 2
  1821. 2
  1822. 2
  1823. 2
  1824. 2
  1825. 2
  1826. 2
  1827. 2
  1828. 2
  1829. 2
  1830. 2
  1831. 2
  1832. 2
  1833. 2
  1834. 2
  1835. 2
  1836. 2
  1837. 2
  1838. 2
  1839. 2
  1840. 2
  1841. 2
  1842. 2
  1843. 2
  1844. 2
  1845. 2
  1846. 2
  1847. 2
  1848. 2
  1849. 2
  1850. 2
  1851. 2
  1852. 2
  1853. 2
  1854. 2
  1855. 2
  1856. 2
  1857. 2
  1858. 2
  1859. 2
  1860. 2
  1861. 2
  1862. 2
  1863. 2
  1864. 2
  1865. 2
  1866. 2
  1867. 2
  1868. 2
  1869. 2
  1870. 2
  1871. 2
  1872. 2
  1873. 2
  1874. 2
  1875. 2
  1876. 2
  1877. 2
  1878. 2
  1879. 2
  1880. 2
  1881. 2
  1882. 2
  1883. 2
  1884. 2
  1885. 2
  1886. 2
  1887. 2
  1888. 2
  1889. 2
  1890. 2
  1891. 2
  1892. 2
  1893. 2
  1894. 2
  1895. 2
  1896. 2
  1897. 2
  1898. 2
  1899. 2
  1900. 2
  1901. 2
  1902. 2
  1903. 2
  1904. 2
  1905. 2
  1906. 2
  1907. 2
  1908. 2
  1909. 2
  1910. 2
  1911. 2
  1912. 2
  1913. 2
  1914. 2
  1915. 2
  1916. 2
  1917. 2
  1918. 1
  1919. 1
  1920. 1
  1921. 1
  1922. 1
  1923. 1
  1924. 1
  1925. 1
  1926. 1
  1927. 1
  1928. 1
  1929. 1
  1930. 1
  1931. 1
  1932. 1
  1933. 1
  1934. 1
  1935. 1
  1936. 1
  1937. 1
  1938. 1
  1939. 1
  1940. 1
  1941. 1
  1942. 1
  1943. 1
  1944. 1
  1945. 1
  1946. 1
  1947. 1
  1948. 1
  1949. 1
  1950. 1
  1951. 1
  1952. 1
  1953. 1
  1954. 1
  1955. 1
  1956. 1
  1957. 1
  1958. 1
  1959. 1
  1960. 1
  1961. 1
  1962. 1
  1963. 1
  1964. 1
  1965. 1
  1966. 1
  1967. 1
  1968. 1
  1969. 1
  1970. 1
  1971. 1
  1972. 1
  1973. 1
  1974. 1
  1975. 1
  1976. 1
  1977. 1
  1978. 1
  1979. 1
  1980. 1
  1981. 1
  1982. 1
  1983. 1
  1984. 1
  1985. 1
  1986. 1
  1987. 1
  1988. 1
  1989. 1
  1990. 1
  1991. 1
  1992. 1
  1993. 1
  1994. 1
  1995. 1
  1996. 1
  1997. 1
  1998. 1
  1999. 1
  2000. 1
  2001. 1
  2002. 1
  2003. 1
  2004. 1
  2005. 1
  2006. 1
  2007. 1
  2008. 1
  2009. 1
  2010. 1
  2011. 1
  2012. 1
  2013. 1
  2014. 1
  2015. 1
  2016. 1
  2017. 1
  2018. 1
  2019. 1
  2020. 1
  2021. 1
  2022. 1
  2023. 1
  2024. 1
  2025. 1
  2026. 1
  2027. 1
  2028. 1
  2029. 1
  2030. 1
  2031. 1
  2032. 1
  2033. 1
  2034. 1
  2035. 1
  2036. ^ Spelling errors aside; dumping dozens of uncited statistics doesn't accomplish much, as an unreliable statistic, is worse than useless.* The claim about Tanks is demonstrably false, as in 1940 the UK was producing more Tanks than Germany, and in 1942, production had geared up so much - by more than 40% - that the UK achieved double the German production figures. In Aircraft the UK started the war behind Germany; yet as factories got going & standardization enforced (unlike in germany which was starkly inefficient), domestic production shot up. Having nearly doubled on the prior year's efforts, in 1940 the British produced over 15,040 warplanes, to Germany's 10,240. The UK at that point in the war was producing more domestic aircraft, than any other country on earth. Germany lost nearly 2,000 aircraft & over 2,500+ aircrew in the BoB alone, so their production figures are even weaker when accounting for such voids they had to fill. In WWII the Germans produced 120,000 aircraft, compared to the British 131,000+. The latter wasn't far off the Soviet figure of about 158,000 (and unlike the USSR or the Germans the British had modern Heavy Bombers & in quantity), with the US's production making the total allied figure 0.6 Million aircraft, five times that of Germany. The USSR protecting their Oil from the Germans prevented a wholesale Russian collapse, but they Still requested the allies send them oil, suggesting they still had shortages thereof. Oil is also useless to a country without hardware to put it in; which the Russians were desperate for the allies to send them, and we did. In four years the UK sent the USSR, among other material: Over 4,000 Trucks Over 5,000 Tanks Over 6,700 Aircraft & 12 Warships Unlike Germany the UK had a stable supply of oil thoughout the war, with the Autarky loving Germans failing wholesale in attempting to sever the UK's trade networks in the Battle of the Atlantic. To illustrate this: in 1940 alone the UK outbuilt Germany in naval vessels, by 20 to 1. Bare in mind also that despite being noted for Submarines, the Germans started WWII with only 57, whilst the RN had at least 74. During WWII the UK & the USA would demonstrate greater capacity for producing Submarines, and superior designs for long range use. (U Boats are more widely thought of, but the onboard ergonomics were abismal, so much so one was even lost... to a toilet malfunction) The Kreigsmarine Sub' casualty figures relative to their RN opposites illustrates quite well, how hard the Germans lost the war at sea. At D Day the British provided nearly 900 of the 1,100+ vessels (of all types & sizes), and over 3,200 of the 4,070+ Landing Craft. The RAF & USAAF also outnumbered the Luftwaffe on the day by a factor of over 30 to 1. The point re' coal is also meaningless; as Germany had mostly poor quality Brown Coal; demonstrably inferior lb for lb when compared to the deposits under the UK. Unlike in WWI too Germany was heavily reliant on oil to wage war, and no amount of coal conversion efforts could negate that. Coal was also by then useless for Warships... though brown coal was not well suited for even in the last war. (the Germans almost being handed several major defeats at sea back then due to the coal quality gap) *Statistics sourced from the BBC, War Factories S1, and the ONS.
    1
  2037. 1
  2038. ^ Says a wehrboo grade A moron, whom clearly hasn't actually watched either 'tuber, and is just pissing in the wind after being repeatedly disproved on all points proffered XD. The UK & USA swamped NSDAP Germany with a tide of mass production, and kept the only planned economy in the allied camp - the USSR - from collapsing. #GetOverIt  Chris_Wooden_Eye  Overall I'd agree. Germany had only three credible ways to win the war: A. Win the Battle of the Atlantic, forcing a conditional or unconditional negotiated peace with the UK. (ultimately impossible, due to the NSDAP having spent too little on Sub' R&D and building; though in retrospect the Germans certainly Could have produced Sub's of comperable quality to the Oberons or Gato's, with enough political dedication) B. Somehow defeat both the RAF & the RN's Home Fleet, so as to facilitate an sustainable invasion. (being outnumbered more than 8 to 1 in naval assets alone & having lost the BoB; that was seriously unlikely to ever happen) C. Develop an Atomic Bomb first, and force a conditional or unconditional diplomatic settlement with the UK. (politicial disinterest in the project & thus inadequate human & material resources ensured that was not going to happen; whilst the UK was putting much more into their project) In hindsight: a German conquest of Russia was only really viable if Germany had possessed a reliable oil supply, and because their trade link with Venesuela was severed by the British in 1939, they simply didn't have one. (given the defence pact with Poland; the UK & France were unlikely to have ever agreed to Labensraum, and the NSDAP knew it)
    1
  2039. 1
  2040. 1
  2041. 1
  2042. 1
  2043. 1
  2044. 1
  2045. 1
  2046. 1
  2047. 1
  2048. 1
  2049. 1
  2050. 1
  2051. 1
  2052. 1
  2053. 1
  2054. 1
  2055. 1
  2056. 1
  2057. 1
  2058. 1
  2059. 1
  2060. 1
  2061. 1
  2062. 1
  2063. 1
  2064. 1
  2065. 1
  2066. 1
  2067. 1
  2068. 1
  2069. 1
  2070. 1
  2071. 1
  2072. 1
  2073. 1
  2074. 1
  2075. 1
  2076. 1
  2077. 1
  2078. 1
  2079. 1
  2080. 1
  2081. 1
  2082. 1
  2083. 1
  2084. 1
  2085. 1
  2086. 1
  2087. 1
  2088. 1
  2089. 1
  2090. 1
  2091. 1
  2092. 1
  2093. 1
  2094. 1
  2095. 1
  2096. 1
  2097. 1
  2098. 1
  2099. 1
  2100. 1
  2101. 1
  2102. 1
  2103. 1
  2104. 1
  2105. 1
  2106. 1
  2107. 1
  2108. 1
  2109. 1
  2110. 1
  2111. 1
  2112. 1
  2113. 1
  2114. 1
  2115. 1
  2116. 1
  2117. 1
  2118. 1
  2119. 1
  2120. 1
  2121. 1
  2122. 1
  2123. 1
  2124. 1
  2125. 1
  2126. 1
  2127. 1
  2128. 1
  2129. 1
  2130. 1
  2131. 1
  2132. 1
  2133. 1
  2134. 1
  2135. 1
  2136. 1
  2137. 1
  2138. 1
  2139. 1
  2140. 1
  2141. 1
  2142. 1
  2143. 1
  2144. 1
  2145. 1
  2146. 1
  2147. 1
  2148. 1
  2149. 1
  2150. 1
  2151. 1
  2152. 1
  2153. 1
  2154. 1
  2155. 1
  2156. 1
  2157. 1
  2158. 1
  2159. 1
  2160. 1
  2161. 1
  2162. 1
  2163. 1
  2164. 1
  2165. 1
  2166. 1
  2167. 1
  2168. 1
  2169. 1
  2170. 1
  2171. 1
  2172. 1
  2173. 1
  2174. 1
  2175. 1
  2176. 1
  2177. 1
  2178. 1
  2179. 1
  2180. 1
  2181. 1
  2182. 1
  2183. 1
  2184. 1
  2185. 1
  2186. 1
  2187. 1
  2188. 1
  2189. 1
  2190. 1
  2191. 1
  2192. 1
  2193. 1
  2194. 1
  2195. 1
  2196. 1
  2197. 1
  2198. 1
  2199. 1
  2200. 1
  2201. 1
  2202. 1
  2203. 1
  2204. 1
  2205. 1
  2206. 1
  2207. 1
  2208. 1
  2209. 1
  2210. 1
  2211. 1
  2212. 1
  2213. 1
  2214. 1
  2215. 1
  2216. 1
  2217. 1
  2218. 1
  2219. 1
  2220. 1
  2221. 1
  2222. 1
  2223. 1
  2224. 1
  2225. 1
  2226. 1
  2227. 1
  2228. 1
  2229. 1
  2230. 1
  2231. 1
  2232. 1
  2233. 1
  2234. 1
  2235. 1
  2236. 1
  2237. 1
  2238. 1
  2239. 1
  2240. 1
  2241. 1
  2242. 1
  2243. 1
  2244. 1
  2245. 1
  2246. 1
  2247. 1
  2248. 1
  2249. 1
  2250. 1
  2251. 1
  2252. 1
  2253. 1
  2254. 1
  2255. 1
  2256. 1
  2257. 1
  2258. 1
  2259. 1
  2260. 1
  2261. 1
  2262. 1
  2263. 1
  2264. 1
  2265. 1
  2266. 1
  2267. 1
  2268. 1
  2269. 1
  2270. 1
  2271. 1
  2272. 1
  2273. 1
  2274. 1
  2275. 1
  2276. 1
  2277. 1
  2278. 1
  2279. 1
  2280. 1
  2281. 1
  2282. 1
  2283. 1
  2284. 1
  2285. 1
  2286. 1
  2287. 1
  2288. 1
  2289. 1
  2290. 1
  2291. 1
  2292. 1
  2293. 1
  2294. 1
  2295. 1
  2296. ^ Complete nonsense. Blaming Thatcher for Bliarism, is as absurd as blaming Douglas Hume for the economic illiteracy of Harold Wilson. Labour knew they couldn't win on the same platform as they'd had pre-1979, thus started parodying the Tories. The result of that was Bliar. Implying that Thatcherism is Centrist is also blatantly false. As for the Left and nationalism; demonstrably false. Socialism has Always had an Internationalist bent, and only styled itself in [faux] patriotism when the situation suited the regime doing so [see Stalin's Communism in One Nation ], or some overriding ideological bent [see NSDAP era Germany]. Labour's ping ponged itself between a psuedo-nationalist & internationalist position repeatedly since its inception in the late-victorian era. Michael Foot's generation had some genuine patriotic sentiment for their home nation, yet by the 1960's and Wilson, a cynical Internationalist position had taken root, with Wilson and his cronies siding with the Pro-Marketeers of Heath & co on joining the EEC and lying to parliament & people as to the purpose of the "European Project". By the late-1980's Labour had flipped to a distinctly Internationalist, Anti-Patriotic & Pro-EU position, ironically sparking a partial opposite flip to nationalism for the mainstream right. I'd also refute that there is any other natural state of being for a high street Bank, than private ownership. Just look at Communist countries - and their consistent history of failure - for a case in point of why.
    1
  2297. 1
  2298. 1
  2299. 1
  2300. 1
  2301. 1
  2302. 1
  2303. 1
  2304. 1
  2305. 1
  2306. 1
  2307. 1
  2308. 1
  2309. 1
  2310. 1
  2311. 1
  2312. 1
  2313. 1
  2314. 1
  2315. 1
  2316. 1
  2317. 1
  2318. 1
  2319. 1
  2320. 1
  2321. 1
  2322. 1
  2323. 1
  2324. 1
  2325. 1
  2326. 1
  2327. 1
  2328. 1
  2329. 1
  2330. 1
  2331. 1
  2332. 1
  2333. 1
  2334. 1
  2335. 1
  2336. 1
  2337. 1
  2338. 1
  2339. 1
  2340. 1
  2341. 1
  2342. 1
  2343. 1
  2344. 1
  2345. 1
  2346. 1
  2347. 1
  2348. 1
  2349. 1
  2350. 1
  2351. 1
  2352. 1
  2353. 1
  2354. 1
  2355. 1
  2356. 1
  2357. 1
  2358. 1
  2359. 1
  2360. 1
  2361. 1
  2362. 1
  2363. 1
  2364. 1
  2365. 1
  2366. 1
  2367. 1
  2368. 1
  2369. 1
  2370. 1
  2371. 1
  2372. 1
  2373. 1
  2374. 1
  2375. 1
  2376. 1
  2377. 1
  2378. 1
  2379. 1
  2380. 1
  2381. 1
  2382. 1
  2383. 1
  2384. 1
  2385. 1
  2386. 1
  2387. 1
  2388. 1
  2389. 1
  2390. 1
  2391. 1
  2392. 1
  2393. 1
  2394. 1
  2395. 1
  2396. 1
  2397. 1
  2398. 1
  2399. 1
  2400. 1
  2401. 1
  2402. 1
  2403. 1
  2404. 1
  2405. 1
  2406. 1
  2407. 1
  2408. 1
  2409. 1
  2410. 1
  2411. 1
  2412. 1
  2413. 1
  2414. 1
  2415. 1
  2416. 1
  2417. 1
  2418. 1
  2419. 1
  2420. 1
  2421. 1
  2422. 1
  2423. 1
  2424. 1
  2425. 1
  2426. 1
  2427. 1
  2428. 1
  2429. 1
  2430. 1
  2431. 1
  2432. 1
  2433. 1
  2434. 1
  2435. 1
  2436. 1
  2437. 1
  2438. 1
  2439. 1
  2440. 1
  2441. 1
  2442. 1
  2443. 1
  2444. 1
  2445. 1
  2446. 1
  2447. 1
  2448. 1
  2449. 1
  2450. 1
  2451. 1
  2452. 1
  2453. 1
  2454. 1
  2455. 1
  2456. 1
  2457. 1
  2458. 1
  2459. 1
  2460. 1
  2461. 1
  2462. 1
  2463. 1
  2464. 1
  2465. 1
  2466. 1
  2467. 1
  2468. 1
  2469. 1
  2470. 1
  2471. 1
  2472. 1
  2473. 1
  2474. 1
  2475. 1
  2476. 1
  2477. 1
  2478. 1
  2479. 1
  2480. 1
  2481. 1
  2482. 1
  2483. 1
  2484. 1
  2485. 1
  2486. 1
  2487. 1
  2488. 1
  2489. 1
  2490. 1
  2491. 1
  2492. 1
  2493. 1
  2494. 1
  2495. 1
  2496. 1
  2497. 1
  2498. 1
  2499. 1
  2500. 1
  2501. 1
  2502. 1
  2503. 1
  2504. 1
  2505. 1
  2506. 1
  2507. 1
  2508. 1
  2509. 1
  2510. 1
  2511. 1
  2512. 1
  2513. 1
  2514. 1
  2515. 1
  2516. 1
  2517. 1
  2518. 1
  2519. 1
  2520. 1
  2521. 1
  2522. 1
  2523. 1
  2524. 1
  2525. 1
  2526. 1
  2527. 1
  2528. 1
  2529. 1
  2530. 1
  2531. 1
  2532. ^ False, on all points. Carriers replaced nothing, and nearly died out after WWII, until multiple innovations by the UK (Angled Flight Deck, Mirrored Landing Sight & Steam Catapult) saved it from oblivion. What was rendered obsolete by WWII was the Torpedo Bomber, when its painfully slow attack airspeed - limited by the laws of physics - made attacking warships with Air Search Radar, Radar Direction for the AAA, and Proximity Fuses... well suicidal. Battleships by contrast: the west made none after 1946 not because they were redundant or not wanted... but because the only threat country left [the USSR] lacked the ability - for various reasons - to build any. That, and the west had plenty of modern ones in service anyway. Politically though: everyone wanted Atom Bombs after WWII: Navies ended up in a solid 2nd place re' funding priority, apart from where nukes were includable. A~and no: there are various instances of warships having Spotter 'planes onboard for gunnery spotting against other ships (as well against shore targets), though Radar would see greater use as events played out. Examples of this are HMS Exeter during the Battle of River Plate (tried to launch the 'plane, only for enemy fire to scupper it), the Bismarck (which had one, yet due to an engine defect couldn't use it), and HMS Warspite during the Battle of Narvik, where the Spotter 'plane both bombed a U Boat, as well as performing recon' and fire spotting of shot for Warspite. (said battle led to Warspite sinking a group of Kreigsmarine Destroyers)
    1
  2533. 1
  2534. 1
  2535. 1
  2536. 1
  2537. 1
  2538. 1
  2539. 1
  2540. 1
  2541. 1
  2542. 1
  2543. 1
  2544. 1
  2545. 1
  2546. 1
  2547. 1
  2548. 1
  2549. 1
  2550. 1
  2551. 1
  2552. 1
  2553. 1
  2554. 1
  2555. 1
  2556. 1
  2557. 1
  2558. 1
  2559. 1
  2560. 1
  2561. 1
  2562. 1
  2563. 1
  2564. 1
  2565. ^ Well that's a lot of tired guardian cliches you've recited... but nothing more. 1. The Falklands was a significant conflict in the eyes of all whom mattered. Not acting would have been a national humiliation, and demonstrated that the UK wasn't committed to protecting her territory or people. By all means call Falklanders worthless to their faces... but you'll need a lot more insurance if you do :P . 2. Overstatement much?. UK Manufacturing had been in decline for twenty years prior to 1979. From Cars to Shipbuilding, most of it was already dead in all but name. (or does the detail that Labour closed more coal mines, railways & shipyards between 1964 - '70 than Thatcher in twice as much time not fit your narrative? :P ) 3. False. Thatcher got the UK the rebate, whilst Bliar gave most of it away for nothing. By 1986 the penny had dropped on the EEC's cronies trying to woo the Labour Party (successfully) to Euro-Federalism, which they'd regret as Thatcher theteafter kickstarted euroskepticism on the center-right, where hitherto there'd been little. (the founder of UKIP himself [the only reason we finally got an EU Referendum] admitted that one of her speeches started the precursor to said party) 4. Rioting Miners*. That latter aspect is always overlooked. They came looking for a fight (literally, as most were bused in far-left radicals), and got one. The government runs the country, not mob rule. That; and simce when were Cops not "armed"?. (even in Victorian times they were armed, albeit with Swords instead of Truncheons) 5. Community Charge*, and technically not a creation of Thatcher's. The same government replaced it with the Council Tax we still use today... so... big deal.
    1
  2566. 1
  2567. 1
  2568. Translation: You're just another Toryphobe, out for an argument, reality and facts be damned. (debunking basically everything you've stated hasn't been difficult) A~and really, "liars all" is the best you can come up with?. You do know that's what ALL politicians do as part of their job... right? :P . (not heard the ", his lips are moving!" joke I see, among other things) As for claiming I don't know you're claiming to being in the leave camp, you missed this: 'Ironic though that you say she should've gotten us out of the EEC (no easy feat at the time), yet belittle the UK and its overseas commitments, as all remoaners do.' Ironic also; because Thatcher would admit after leaving office (and its proverbial hall of mirrors concealing daggers), that we should leave the EEC. It wouldn't be until the latter turned into the EU though, that the grounds for another referendum - which Bliar considered as a public rubber stamping exercise but then chickened out on after fearing he'd lose - were there. Having two Referendums on the EEC was simply not going to happen, nor should've (neverendum situation much?). Gaining a pro-leaving majority on parliament though (as Peter Hitchens stated as his preference) and leaving the EEC manually, that would've worked... at MP's dissillusioned with the EEC made up enough of parliament in the late-'80's / '90's, which it didn't :/ . P.S. I voted Brexit Party once, when it suited to do so. After all I don't consider any MP that doesn't believe in the UK being an independent nation, or at least put the will of their electorate above personal ideology, as worthy of being an MP at all. In short: If the leave MP for my constituency most likely to win is blue, light blue, purple or otherwise; they'll get my vote :P . (said candidate probably will be tory, as they aren't stupid; my area voted out with a firm majority and over 80% turnout)
    1
  2569. 1
  2570. 1
  2571. 1
  2572. 1
  2573. 1
  2574. 1
  2575. 1
  2576. 1
  2577. 1
  2578. 1
  2579. 1
  2580. 1
  2581. 1
  2582. 1
  2583. 1
  2584. 1
  2585. 1
  2586. 1
  2587. 1
  2588. 1
  2589. 1
  2590. 1
  2591. 1
  2592. 1
  2593. 1
  2594. 1
  2595. 1
  2596. 1
  2597. 1
  2598. 1
  2599. 1
  2600. 1
  2601. 1
  2602. 1
  2603. 1
  2604. 1
  2605. 1
  2606. 1
  2607. 1
  2608. 1
  2609. 1
  2610. 1
  2611. 1
  2612. 1
  2613. 1
  2614. 1
  2615. 1
  2616. 1
  2617. 1
  2618. 1
  2619. 1
  2620. 1
  2621. 1
  2622. 1
  2623. 1
  2624. 1
  2625. 1
  2626. 1
  2627. 1
  2628. 1
  2629. 1
  2630. 1
  2631. 1
  2632. 1
  2633. 1
  2634. 1
  2635. 1
  2636. 1
  2637. 1
  2638. 1
  2639. 1
  2640. 1
  2641. 1
  2642. 1
  2643. 1
  2644. 1
  2645. 1
  2646. 1
  2647. 1
  2648. 1
  2649. 1
  2650. 1
  2651. 1
  2652. 1
  2653. 1
  2654. 1
  2655. 1
  2656. 1
  2657. 1
  2658. 1
  2659. 1
  2660. 1
  2661. 1
  2662. 1
  2663. 1
  2664. 1
  2665. 1
  2666. 1
  2667. 1
  2668. 1
  2669. 1
  2670. 1
  2671. 1
  2672. 1
  2673. 1
  2674. 1
  2675. 1
  2676. 1
  2677. 1
  2678. 1
  2679. 1
  2680. 1
  2681. 1
  2682. 1
  2683. 1
  2684. 1
  2685. 1
  2686. 1
  2687. 1
  2688. 1
  2689. 1
  2690. 1
  2691. 1
  2692. 1
  2693. 1
  2694. 1
  2695. 1
  2696. 1
  2697. 1
  2698. 1
  2699. 1
  2700. 1
  2701. 1
  2702. 1
  2703. 1
  2704. 1
  2705. 1
  2706. 1
  2707. 1
  2708. 1
  2709. 1
  2710. 1
  2711. 1
  2712. 1
  2713. 1
  2714. 1
  2715. 1
  2716. 1
  2717. 1
  2718. 1
  2719. 1
  2720. 1
  2721. 1
  2722. 1
  2723. 1
  2724. 1
  2725. 1
  2726. 1
  2727. 1
  2728. 1
  2729. 1
  2730. 1
  2731. 1
  2732. 1
  2733. 1
  2734. 1
  2735. 1
  2736. 1
  2737. 1
  2738. 1
  2739. 1
  2740. 1
  2741. 1
  2742. 1
  2743. 1
  2744. 1
  2745. 1
  2746. 1
  2747. 1
  2748. 1
  2749. 1
  2750. 1
  2751. 1
  2752. 1
  2753. 1
  2754. 1
  2755. 1
  2756. 1
  2757. 1
  2758. 1
  2759. 1
  2760. 1
  2761. 1
  2762. 1
  2763. 1
  2764. 1
  2765. 1
  2766. 1
  2767. 1
  2768. 1
  2769. 1
  2770. 1
  2771. 1
  2772. 1
  2773. 1
  2774. 1
  2775. 1
  2776. 1
  2777. 1
  2778. 1
  2779. 1
  2780. 1
  2781. 1
  2782. 1
  2783. 1
  2784. 1
  2785. 1
  2786. 1
  2787. 1
  2788. 1
  2789. 1
  2790. 1
  2791. 1
  2792. 1
  2793. 1
  2794. 1
  2795. 1
  2796. 1
  2797. 1
  2798. 1
  2799. 1
  2800. 1
  2801. ^ You certainly should be ignored (normally), as that diatribe is mostly contrarian, vacuous and over-generalized 🥱 . Fact is that manned Jet Bombers still operate at altitude (some opting to fly lower at points in the mission, but usually only in the strike phase), and that both the USAF & Russian Airforce operate them, and others like the PLAAF & Indian AF have operated them, and have explored domestic successors. The Missile lobby has overplayed their capabilities for nearly eight decades now, and yet isn't called out on their nonsense anywhere near often enough. Fact is that Chaff (strips of tinfoil) was still effective on Missiles in 1982, as it was at blinding/confusing German ASR in WWII. In several joint exercises, Vulcan B.2's with ostensibly ancient avionics not only penetrated US airspace, but successfully conducted their simulated gravity nuke drops... on the USA. (a country with far better & more modern air defences than the then usual targets in Soviet Russia) And don't even get me started on the F-111, a crap aircraft with a misleading designation, born of a nonsensical & engineering sense bereft program (the TFX) that only existed because politician & prize moron Robert Macnamara couldn't accept that Carriers needed two types of aircraft, and that any hypothetical aircraft built to do both would be substandard at both. The F-111 was inferior even to the F4 Phantom at being a Bomber, so much so that the 111's were withdrawn from Vietnam, converted into secondary roles, and the B1 Lancer ultimately introduced to fill the role of Tactical Bomber that the 111 had failed in absolutely. (to say nothing of what a badly designed & badly made deathtrap the 111 was) A~and as for the TU-22M & TU-160; funny; NATO certainly takes them seriously, alongwith the old but well armed TU-95MS's that periodically drone around, reminding everybody that Bombers are still relevant in the Tactical & Nuclear strike roles, as part of the wider deterrent force. (the US after all tried to persuade the UK Government to keep the RAF's Strategic & Tactical nuke deterrent, as a Twin Prong compliment to the SSBN's)
    1
  2802. 1
  2803. 1
  2804. 1
  2805. 1
  2806. 1
  2807. 1
  2808. 1
  2809. 1
  2810. 1
  2811. 1
  2812. 1
  2813. 1
  2814. 1
  2815. 1
  2816. 1
  2817. 1
  2818. 1
  2819. 1
  2820. 1
  2821. 1
  2822. 1
  2823. 1
  2824. 1
  2825. 1
  2826. 1
  2827. 1
  2828. 1
  2829. 1
  2830. 1
  2831. 1
  2832. 1
  2833. 1
  2834. 1
  2835. 1
  2836. 1
  2837. 1
  2838. 1
  2839. 1
  2840. 1
  2841. 1
  2842. 1
  2843. 1
  2844. 1
  2845. 1
  2846. 1
  2847. 1
  2848. 1
  2849. 1
  2850. 1
  2851. 1
  2852. 1
  2853. 1
  2854. 1
  2855. 1
  2856. 1
  2857. 1
  2858. 1
  2859. 1
  2860. 1
  2861. 1
  2862. 1
  2863. 1
  2864. 1
  2865. 1
  2866. 1
  2867. 1
  2868. 1
  2869. 1
  2870. 1
  2871. 1
  2872. 1
  2873. 1
  2874. 1
  2875. 1
  2876. 1
  2877. 1
  2878. 1
  2879. 1
  2880. 1
  2881. 1
  2882. 1
  2883. 1
  2884. 1
  2885. 1
  2886. 1
  2887. 1
  2888. 1
  2889. 1
  2890. 1
  2891. 1
  2892. 1
  2893. 1
  2894. 1
  2895. 1
  2896. 1
  2897. 1
  2898. 1
  2899. 1
  2900. 1
  2901. 1
  2902. 1
  2903. 1
  2904. 1
  2905. 1
  2906. 1
  2907. 1
  2908. 1
  2909. 1
  2910. ^ Ah the typical ad hominem diatribe, thinly disguised with nonsensical word salad. The first resort of those with nothing worth stating. Also a laughable case of hypocrisy & projection on your part, as you clearly don't know dogshite about the topic you're typing upon, and have shown me no respect at all. Good job too in proving you're a Plastic Veteran by wheeling out the meaningless "Durr Hurr 'ave you surved!?!?" question / accusation. [an asinine notion; as by that logic nobody whom isn't 1,500+ years old can talk about the Roman Legions] The key detail to take away from HMS Sheffield is Don't have your Radar switched off while in a combat zone*, not that the Exocet was somehow noteworthy because it locked onto the Wrong Target, having been confused by *Strips of TinFoil . [yup; that's all Chaff is... #SoMuchForModernTechnology XD] The Sheffield's C/O was court-marshalled for losing his ship, and found guilty of negligence in command thereof; for had the Sheff's Radar been switched on and chaff used, no loss would have occurred. Destroyer design was revised after the war, adding superior Active Sensors and ECM equipment which made the Exocet doubly redundant as a credible threat to a competently commanded vessel. Worth noting too that the only achievements of any note in the Exocets' entire history have been by Aircraft mounted weapons. The Shipboard version was of no useful application in the Falklands conflict, was poorly regarded by the RN even before the war, and was replaced by Harpoon less than a decade after it.
    1
  2911. 1
  2912. 1
  2913. 1
  2914. 1
  2915. 1
  2916. 1
  2917. 1
  2918. 1
  2919. 1
  2920. 1
  2921. 1
  2922. 1
  2923. 1
  2924. 1
  2925. 1
  2926. 1
  2927. 1
  2928. 1
  2929. 1
  2930. 1
  2931. 1
  2932. 1
  2933. 1
  2934. 1
  2935. 1
  2936. 1
  2937. 1
  2938. 1
  2939. 1
  2940. 1
  2941. 1
  2942. 1
  2943. 1
  2944. 1
  2945. 1
  2946. 1
  2947. 1
  2948. 1
  2949. 1
  2950. 1
  2951. 1
  2952. 1
  2953. 1
  2954. 1
  2955. 1
  2956. 1
  2957. 1
  2958. 1
  2959. 1
  2960. 1
  2961. 1
  2962. 1
  2963. 1
  2964. 1
  2965. 1
  2966. 1
  2967. 1
  2968. 1
  2969. 1
  2970. 1
  2971. 1
  2972. 1
  2973. 1
  2974. 1
  2975. 1
  2976. 1
  2977. 1
  2978. 1
  2979. 1
  2980. 1
  2981. 1
  2982. 1
  2983. 1
  2984. 1
  2985. 1
  2986. 1
  2987. 1
  2988. 1
  2989. 1
  2990. 1
  2991. 1
  2992. 1
  2993. 1
  2994. 1
  2995. 1
  2996. 1
  2997. 1
  2998. 1
  2999. 1
  3000. 1
  3001. 1
  3002. 1
  3003. 1
  3004. 1
  3005. 1
  3006. 1
  3007. 1
  3008. 1
  3009. 1
  3010. 1
  3011. 1
  3012. 1
  3013. 1
  3014. 1
  3015. 1
  3016. 1
  3017. 1
  3018. 1
  3019. 1
  3020. 1
  3021. 1
  3022. 1
  3023. 1
  3024. 1
  3025. 1
  3026. 1
  3027. 1
  3028. 1
  3029. 1
  3030. 1
  3031. 1
  3032. 1
  3033. 1
  3034. 1
  3035. 1
  3036. 1
  3037. 1
  3038. 1
  3039. 1
  3040. 1
  3041. 1
  3042. 1
  3043. 1
  3044. 1
  3045. 1
  3046. 1
  3047. 1
  3048. 1
  3049. 1
  3050. 1
  3051. 1
  3052. 1
  3053. 1
  3054. 1
  3055. 1
  3056. 1
  3057. 1
  3058. 1
  3059. 1
  3060. 1
  3061. 1
  3062. 1
  3063. 1
  3064. 1
  3065. 1
  3066. 1
  3067. 1
  3068. 1
  3069. 1
  3070. 1
  3071. 1
  3072. 1
  3073. 1
  3074. 1
  3075. 1
  3076. 1
  3077. 1
  3078. 1
  3079. 1
  3080. 1
  3081. 1
  3082. 1
  3083. 1
  3084. 1
  3085. 1
  3086. 1
  3087. 1
  3088. 1
  3089. 1
  3090. 1
  3091. 1
  3092. 1
  3093. 1
  3094. 1
  3095. 1
  3096. 1
  3097. 1
  3098. 1
  3099. 1
  3100. 1
  3101. 1
  3102. 1
  3103. 1
  3104. 1
  3105. 1
  3106. 1
  3107. 1
  3108. 1
  3109. 1
  3110. 1
  3111. 1
  3112. 1
  3113. 1
  3114. 1
  3115. 1
  3116. 1
  3117. 1
  3118. 1
  3119. 1
  3120. 1
  3121. 1
  3122. 1
  3123. 1
  3124. 1
  3125. 1
  3126. 1
  3127. 1
  3128. 1
  3129. 1
  3130. 1
  3131. 1
  3132. 1
  3133. 1
  3134. 1
  3135. 1
  3136. 1
  3137. 1
  3138. 1
  3139. 1
  3140. 1
  3141. 1
  3142. 1
  3143. 1
  3144. 1
  3145. 1
  3146. 1
  3147. 1
  3148. 1
  3149. 1
  3150. 1
  3151. 1
  3152. 1
  3153. 1
  3154. 1
  3155. 1
  3156. 1
  3157. 1
  3158. 1
  3159. 1
  3160. 1
  3161. 1
  3162. 1
  3163. 1
  3164. 1
  3165. 1
  3166. 1
  3167. 1
  3168. 1
  3169. 1
  3170. 1
  3171. 1
  3172. 1
  3173. 1
  3174. 1
  3175. 1
  3176. 1
  3177. 1
  3178. 1
  3179. 1
  3180. 1
  3181. 1
  3182. 1
  3183. 1
  3184. 1
  3185. 1
  3186. 1
  3187. 1
  3188. 1
  3189. 1
  3190. 1
  3191. 1
  3192. 1
  3193. 1
  3194. 1
  3195. 1
  3196. 1
  3197. 1
  3198. 1
  3199. 1
  3200. 1
  3201. 1
  3202. 1
  3203. 1
  3204. 1
  3205. 1
  3206. 1
  3207. 1
  3208. 1
  3209. 1
  3210. 1
  3211. 1
  3212. 1
  3213. 1
  3214. 1
  3215. 1
  3216. 1
  3217. 1
  3218. 1
  3219. 1
  3220. 1
  3221. 1
  3222. 1
  3223. 1
  3224. 1
  3225. 1
  3226. 1
  3227. 1
  3228. 1
  3229. 1
  3230. 1
  3231. 1
  3232. 1
  3233. 1
  3234. 1
  3235. 1
  3236. 1
  3237. 1
  3238. 1
  3239. 1
  3240. 1
  3241. 1
  3242. 1
  3243. 1
  3244. 1
  3245. 1
  3246. 1
  3247. 1
  3248. 1
  3249. 1
  3250. 1
  3251. 1
  3252. 1
  3253. 1
  3254. 1
  3255. 1
  3256. 1
  3257. 1
  3258. 1
  3259. 1
  3260. 1
  3261. 1
  3262. 1
  3263. 1
  3264. 1
  3265. 1
  3266. 1
  3267. 1
  3268. 1
  3269. 1
  3270. 1
  3271. 1
  3272. 1
  3273. 1
  3274. 1
  3275. 1
  3276. 1
  3277. 1
  3278. 1
  3279. 1
  3280. 1
  3281. 1
  3282. 1
  3283. 1
  3284. 1
  3285. 1
  3286. 1
  3287. 1
  3288. 1
  3289. 1
  3290. 1
  3291. 1
  3292. 1
  3293. 1
  3294. 1
  3295. 1
  3296. 1
  3297. 1
  3298. 1
  3299. 1
  3300. 1
  3301. 1
  3302. 1
  3303. 1
  3304. 1
  3305. 1
  3306. 1
  3307. 1
  3308. 1
  3309. 1
  3310. 1
  3311. 1
  3312. 1
  3313. 1
  3314. 1
  3315. 1
  3316. 1
  3317. 1
  3318. 1
  3319. 1
  3320. 1
  3321. 1
  3322. 1
  3323. 1
  3324. 1
  3325. 1
  3326. 1
  3327. 1
  3328. 1
  3329. 1
  3330. 1
  3331. 1
  3332. 1
  3333. 1
  3334. 1
  3335. 1
  3336. 1
  3337. 1
  3338. 1
  3339. 1
  3340. 1
  3341. 1
  3342. 1
  3343. 1
  3344. 1
  3345. 1
  3346. 1
  3347. 1
  3348. 1
  3349. 1
  3350. 1
  3351. 1
  3352. 1
  3353. 1
  3354. 1
  3355. 1
  3356. 1
  3357. 1
  3358. 1
  3359. 1
  3360. 1
  3361. 1
  3362. 1
  3363. 1
  3364. 1
  3365. 1
  3366. 1
  3367. 1
  3368. 1
  3369. 1
  3370. 1
  3371. 1
  3372. 1
  3373. 1
  3374. 1
  3375. 1
  3376. 1
  3377. 1
  3378. 1
  3379. 1
  3380. 1
  3381. 1
  3382. 1
  3383. 1
  3384. 1
  3385. 1
  3386. 1
  3387. 1
  3388. 1
  3389. ^ As cliche a rebuke as it is dishonest, denialist and factually bereft XD. "Democratic" doesn't carry the same meaning in Communist lexicon as in actually Democratic societies; rather like how Central Banks actively use the word "Inflation" inaccurately. And bringing Fascist Italy into it is meaningless; as the NSDAP & Italian Fascism had little in common. Mussolini was left of center though, as was his regime; so good job failing at making a point twice over there XD. The Reality: • Just like the USSR Nazi-Germany attempted economic autarky; even less successfully as the Germans had no oil. • Just like Stalin's "Communism in one nation; the NSDAP was a non-internationalist, totalitarian socialism; with the emphasis upon Race instead of Class." • The NSDAP persecuted all other political groups after attaining power. "Nothing above The State; Nothing outside the state." - Hitler The notion that Socialism is one big happy family that doesn't infight is comically absurd; with the reality being an ever schism'ing gaggle of sects, eager to sideline or otherwise eliminate their rivals. Just like Monothiest Religion really. • To the NSDAP the Race was the prime focus of Nationalization; as Hitler himself repeatedly stated. That said whilst nationalizing banks & factories ideologically took a back seat to the populace itself; it still happened. All businesses which weren't officially state owned had to submit to perpetual state oversight and follow the german civil service's draconian resource allocation rules. Private Property was [under the NSDAP] only so for as long as They permitted you to have it. If anyone from a small town baker to a leading industrialist was deemed to be publically stating / acting against the state; everything would be taken (stolen) from them. • As mentioned afore the German Civil Service exploded in size under the NSDAP; whilst in a Capitalist state it would have shrunk. • Alongwith the former: German government spending also exploded under the NSDAP. From the various Make Work Schemes to the vast state institution that was the KDF. The NSDAP were entirely left of center when it came to taxation, and the spending thereof. Then again you're in-denial on the whole topic; so all this demonstrable fact upon the NSDAP is clearly over your shampoo deprived head XD.
    1
  3390. 1
  3391. 1
  3392. 1
  3393. 1
  3394. 1
  3395. 1
  3396. 1
  3397. 1
  3398. 1
  3399. 1
  3400. 1
  3401. 1
  3402. 1
  3403. 1
  3404. 1
  3405. 1
  3406. 1
  3407. 1
  3408. 1
  3409. 1
  3410. 1
  3411. 1
  3412. 1
  3413. 1
  3414. 1
  3415. 1
  3416. 1
  3417. 1
  3418. 1
  3419. 1
  3420. 1
  3421. 1
  3422. 1
  3423. 1
  3424. 1
  3425. 1
  3426. 1
  3427. 1
  3428. 1
  3429. 1
  3430. 1
  3431. 1
  3432. 1
  3433. 1
  3434. 1
  3435. 1
  3436. 1
  3437. 1
  3438. 1
  3439. 1
  3440. 1
  3441. 1
  3442. 1
  3443. 1
  3444. 1
  3445. 1
  3446. 1
  3447. 1
  3448. 1
  3449. 1
  3450. 1
  3451. 1
  3452. 1
  3453. 1
  3454. 1
  3455. 1
  3456. 1
  3457. 1
  3458. 1
  3459. 1
  3460. 1
  3461. 1
  3462. 1
  3463. 1
  3464. 1
  3465. 1
  3466. 1
  3467. 1
  3468. 1
  3469. 1
  3470. 1
  3471. 1
  3472. 1
  3473. 1
  3474. 1
  3475. 1
  3476. 1
  3477. 1
  3478. 1
  3479. 1
  3480. 1
  3481. 1
  3482. 1
  3483. 1
  3484. 1
  3485. 1
  3486. 1
  3487. 1
  3488. 1
  3489. 1
  3490. 1
  3491. @airplane1831  You're welcome, though I do not agree. The reason why is that the pre-grouping rail companies managed quite well to sustain themselves. The reason why was minimal government interference, which insured they could be competitive on both passenger and - most importantly of all - Freight traffic. Most railways - excluding those built specifically to deliver coal to ports or power stations- had mixed traffic of both types, with Freight being the main factor in why the Railways had enough cash for R&D and service expansion in passenger terms. I think TIK's point was chiefly that it was the government's meddling that destroyed that balance, and turned the railways from prosperity to loss making embarrassment. I also wouldn't be surprised if he lives in part of the railway desert areas of the country, which are due to the mad chopping of Macmillain, Beeching and Wilson. No amount of cuts would've solved BR's underlying woes, just like more government interference is just beating the long dead corpse of a goose, that once laid golden eggs. It's worth noting that subsidy technically doesn't make anything less expensive, it just hides the true cost by making the passenger pay twice through their taxes; which was the main reason why BR was always a fundamentally unethical idea. (perhaps I'm old fashioned, but I don't believe in paying twice for a one time service rendered, let alone being double charged by stealth) The railways could be saved, but it would require the government to accept that politicians and civil servants can't - and shouldn't - run a railway, nor have any role short of: • Final approval for planning permission. • Oversight of [now extremely rare] major accidents. • Ensuring safety regulations are adhered to (in which the Germans wholesale failed in the '90's).
    1
  3492. 1
  3493. 1
  3494. 1
  3495. 1
  3496. 1
  3497. 1
  3498. 1
  3499. 1
  3500. 1
  3501. 1
  3502. 1
  3503. 1
  3504. 1
  3505. 1
  3506. 1
  3507. 1
  3508. 1
  3509. 1
  3510. 1
  3511. 1
  3512. 1
  3513. 1
  3514. 1
  3515. 1
  3516. 1
  3517. 1
  3518. 1
  3519. 1
  3520. 1
  3521. 1
  3522. 1
  3523. 1
  3524. 1
  3525. 1
  3526. 1
  3527. 1
  3528. 1
  3529. 1
  3530. 1
  3531. 1
  3532. 1
  3533. 1
  3534. 1
  3535. 1
  3536. 1
  3537. 1
  3538. 1
  3539. 1
  3540. 1
  3541. 1
  3542. 1
  3543. 1
  3544. 1
  3545. 1
  3546. 1
  3547. 1
  3548. 1
  3549. 1
  3550. 1
  3551. 1
  3552. 1
  3553. 1
  3554. 1
  3555. 1
  3556. 1
  3557. 1
  3558. 1
  3559. 1
  3560. 1
  3561. 1
  3562. 1
  3563. 1
  3564. 1
  3565. 1
  3566. 1
  3567. 1
  3568. 1
  3569. 1
  3570. 1
  3571. 1
  3572. 1
  3573. 1
  3574. 1
  3575. 1
  3576. 1
  3577. 1
  3578. 1
  3579. 1
  3580. 1
  3581. 1
  3582. 1
  3583. 1
  3584. 1
  3585. 1
  3586. 1
  3587. 1
  3588. 1
  3589. 1
  3590. 1
  3591. 1
  3592. 1
  3593. 1
  3594. 1
  3595. 1
  3596. 1
  3597. 1
  3598. 1
  3599. 1
  3600. 1
  3601. 1
  3602. 1
  3603. 1
  3604. 1
  3605. 1
  3606. 1
  3607. 1
  3608. 1
  3609. 1
  3610. 1
  3611. 1
  3612. 1
  3613. 1
  3614. 1
  3615. 1
  3616. 1
  3617. 1
  3618. 1
  3619. 1
  3620. 1
  3621. 1
  3622. 1
  3623. 1
  3624. 1
  3625. 1
  3626. 1
  3627. 1
  3628. 1
  3629. 1
  3630. 1
  3631. 1
  3632. 1
  3633. 1
  3634. 1
  3635. 1
  3636. 1
  3637. 1
  3638. 1
  3639. 1
  3640. 1
  3641. 1
  3642. 1
  3643. 1
  3644. 1
  3645. 1
  3646. 1
  3647. 1
  3648. 1
  3649. 1
  3650. 1
  3651. 1
  3652. 1
  3653. 1
  3654. 1
  3655. 1
  3656. 1
  3657. 1
  3658. 1
  3659. 1
  3660. 1
  3661. 1
  3662. 1
  3663. 1
  3664. 1
  3665. 1
  3666. 1
  3667. 1
  3668. 1
  3669. 1
  3670. 1
  3671. 1
  3672. 1
  3673. 1
  3674. 1
  3675. 1
  3676. 1
  3677. 1
  3678. 1
  3679. 1
  3680. 1
  3681. 1
  3682. 1
  3683. 1
  3684. 1
  3685. 1
  3686. 1
  3687. 1
  3688. 1
  3689. 1
  3690. 1
  3691. 1
  3692. 1
  3693. 1
  3694. 1
  3695. 1
  3696. 1
  3697. 1
  3698. 1
  3699. 1
  3700. 1
  3701. 1
  3702. 1
  3703. 1
  3704. 1
  3705. 1
  3706. 1
  3707. 1
  3708. 1
  3709. 1
  3710. 1
  3711. 1
  3712. 1
  3713. 1
  3714. 1
  3715. 1
  3716. 1
  3717. 1
  3718. 1
  3719. 1
  3720. 1
  3721.  @susannamarker2582  Well people tend to focus on the NSDAP getting into power as the key detail in Germany rearming... yet the Communists had similar ambitions, and Weimar Germany had already been putting some of its US loans into rearming. (case in point the secret Tank, Aircraft & Submarine development pacts with third party countries like the USSR, and a certain class of overgunned Cruisers) Germany only got enough arms to be a threat again though, because the countries supposed to enforce the treaty were so divided: • The French favoured a hard line, and did where they could. • The British were less & less eager to be firm on Germany (until being blindsighted in 1938), and opposed French measures in the '20's. • The USA pretty much did nothing after the early '20's , favouring isolationism. • Italy did basically nothing, as only Austria remaining seperate from Germany really mattered to them. (until Hitler won Mussolini over to letting that happen) • Russia was by then communist and thus was shunned by most, and had no baring on the treaty. • Belgium wanted Germany kept weak but also didn't want to be on bad relations... plus had no teeth to enforce anything. • Romania had not had any real say at the peace talks and thus was external to it all, was more concerned with Hungary, and had gained a lot from Bulgaria. ...which all led to a weak front re' German rearmament and re-expansionism; despite Germany being relatively weak for most of the interwar period re' Oil supplies and actual fighting power.
    1
  3722. 1
  3723. 1
  3724. 1
  3725. 1
  3726. 1
  3727. 1
  3728. 1
  3729. 1
  3730. 1
  3731. 1
  3732. 1
  3733. 1
  3734. 1
  3735. 1
  3736. 1
  3737. 1
  3738. 1
  3739. 1
  3740. 1
  3741. 1
  3742. 1
  3743. 1
  3744. 1
  3745. 1
  3746. 1
  3747. 1
  3748. 1
  3749. 1
  3750. 1
  3751. 1
  3752. 1
  3753. 1
  3754. 1
  3755. 1
  3756. 1
  3757. 1
  3758. 1
  3759. 1
  3760. 1
  3761. 1
  3762. 1
  3763. 1
  3764. 1
  3765. 1
  3766. 1
  3767. 1
  3768. 1
  3769. 1
  3770. 1
  3771. 1
  3772. 1
  3773. 1
  3774. 1
  3775. 1
  3776. 1
  3777. 1
  3778. 1
  3779. 1
  3780. 1
  3781. 1
  3782. 1
  3783. 1
  3784. 1
  3785. 1
  3786. 1
  3787. 1
  3788. 1
  3789. 1
  3790. 1
  3791. 1
  3792. 1
  3793. 1
  3794. 1
  3795. 1
  3796. 1
  3797. 1
  3798. 1
  3799. 1
  3800. 1
  3801. 1
  3802. 1
  3803. 1
  3804. 1
  3805. 1
  3806. 1
  3807. 1
  3808. 1
  3809. 1
  3810. 1
  3811. 1
  3812. 1
  3813. 1
  3814. 1
  3815. 1
  3816. 1
  3817. 1
  3818. 1
  3819. 1
  3820. 1
  3821. 1
  3822. 1
  3823. 1
  3824. 1
  3825. 1
  3826. 1
  3827. 1
  3828. 1
  3829. 1
  3830. 1
  3831. 1
  3832. 1
  3833. 1
  3834. 1
  3835. 1
  3836. 1
  3837. 1
  3838. 1
  3839. 1
  3840. 1
  3841. 1
  3842. 1
  3843. 1
  3844. 1
  3845.  @AdamMGTF  I state all this as a Brit' that's worked in both the public sector and private, and has had plenty of family that've done the same. There's no golden goose, no prosperous success story of this nation, that the government hasn't found a way to run into ruin or zealously strangle. As an example: ask anyone whom worked for Handley Page Aviation; the company was straight-up blacklisted from military and public sector airline orders by the civil service because the company refused to be merged into the government mandated British Aircraft Corperation or Hawker Siddeley aerospace combines... as such what had been a highly successful company that'd given the V Force its most successful member and pioneered successful civilian aircraft as well, was reduced through strangulation into bankruptcy. Another would be the Railways, which in 1924 were one of Britain's most successful businesses and a healthy employer, yet by 1954 was a loss making government owned basketcase, and by 1974 had been butchered harder by shortsighted and economically illogical cuts than Luftwaffe bombs ever could have. By 2024, the government was trying to gaslight us into thinking more government intervention in the railways would solve its problems, yet in the past 76+ years (yes, ""privatisation"" in 1994 was nothing of the sort, rather a demented Swedish derived system of leasing by another name) they have been wholly to blame for its failings, at our considerable expense and inconvenience. Hope this communicates the point across well, as I believe it's an important one.
    1
  3846. 1
  3847. 1
  3848. 1
  3849. ^ As nonsensical an argument as its SPaG is lacking. If I was seen to order military hardware from abroad as a civilian, my home nation would [quite reasonably] have concerns long before I would over delivery XD. As for what I assume your metaphor was aiming for: nope. the PRC's companies really doesn't give a damn about honouring deals with individuals abroad, as the latter can do nothing about it. (same thing with IP Infringement, which the PRC ignores all the time, with even wealthy corperations like BMW getting nowhere legally) Within the legal framework of the 1910's, Turkey lost the ships thrice over, by: • Reacting in bad faith to the building nation stating they would temporarily be appropriating the ships for national defence (as is the right of any nation re' stuff in her shipyards), but would reimburse the Turks and re-offer them for sale at a later date. • Later going to war with the building nation, ensuring all agreements with the latter no longer had to be honoured at all, as no sane goverent supplies completed weapon systems to the enemy, during nor after a war therewith. • Losing the war they'd started with the building nation (enough in itself to invalidate any prewar arms deals) and then ceasing to exist as a state. By contrast no other nations the UK was building ships for behaved so, and got their orders after the war, with Chile being compensated in cash after one of the 'Admirale Cochrane' couldn't be delivered, and political disagreement in Chile itself over what to buy instead led to cash being chosen instead. A~and as such; only the Turks hold any blame for the collapse of the deal, and paid the price for it too, as the Greeks and [pre-revolution] Russians foisted any naval ambitions they may have had during the war.
    1
  3850. 1
  3851. 1
  3852. 1
  3853. 1
  3854. 1
  3855. 1
  3856. 1
  3857. 1
  3858. 1
  3859. 1
  3860. 1
  3861. 1
  3862. 1
  3863. 1
  3864. 1
  3865. 1
  3866. 1
  3867. 1
  3868. 1
  3869. 1
  3870. 1
  3871. 1
  3872. 1
  3873. 1
  3874. 1
  3875. 1
  3876. 1
  3877. 1
  3878. 1
  3879. 1
  3880. 1
  3881. 1
  3882. 1
  3883. 1
  3884. 1
  3885. 1
  3886. 1
  3887. 1
  3888. 1
  3889. 1
  3890. 1
  3891. 1
  3892. 1
  3893. 1
  3894. 1
  3895. 1
  3896. 1
  3897. 1
  3898. 1
  3899. 1
  3900. 1
  3901. 1
  3902. 1
  3903. 1
  3904. 1
  3905. 1
  3906. 1
  3907. 1
  3908. 1
  3909. 1
  3910. 1
  3911. 1
  3912. 1
  3913. 1
  3914. 1
  3915. 1
  3916. 1
  3917. 1
  3918. 1
  3919. 1
  3920. 1
  3921. 1
  3922. 1
  3923. 1
  3924. 1
  3925. 1
  3926. 1
  3927. 1
  3928. 1
  3929. 1
  3930. 1
  3931. 1
  3932. 1
  3933. 1
  3934. 1
  3935. 1
  3936. 1
  3937. 1
  3938. 1
  3939. 1
  3940. 1
  3941. 1
  3942. 1
  3943. 1
  3944. 1
  3945. 1
  3946. 1
  3947. 1
  3948. 1
  3949. 1
  3950. 1
  3951. 1
  3952. 1
  3953. 1
  3954. 1
  3955. 1
  3956. 1
  3957. 1
  3958. 1
  3959. 1
  3960. 1
  3961. 1
  3962. 1
  3963. 1
  3964. 1
  3965. 1
  3966. 1
  3967. 1
  3968. 1
  3969. 1
  3970. 1
  3971. 1
  3972. 1
  3973. 1
  3974. 1
  3975. 1
  3976. 1
  3977. 1
  3978. 1
  3979. 1
  3980. 1
  3981. 1
  3982. 1
  3983. 1
  3984. 1
  3985. 1
  3986. 1
  3987. 1
  3988. 1
  3989. 1
  3990. 1
  3991. 1
  3992. 1
  3993. 1
  3994. 1
  3995. 1
  3996. 1
  3997. 1
  3998. 1
  3999. 1
  4000. 1
  4001. 1
  4002. 1
  4003. 1
  4004. 1
  4005. 1
  4006. 1
  4007. 1
  4008. 1
  4009. 1
  4010. 1
  4011. 1
  4012. 1
  4013. 1
  4014. 1
  4015. 1
  4016. 1
  4017. 1
  4018. 1
  4019. 1
  4020. 1
  4021. 1
  4022. 1
  4023. 1
  4024. 1
  4025. 1
  4026. 1
  4027. 1
  4028. 1
  4029. 1
  4030. 1
  4031. 1
  4032. 1
  4033. 1
  4034. 1
  4035. 1
  4036. 1
  4037. 1
  4038. 1
  4039. 1
  4040. 1
  4041. 1
  4042. 1
  4043. 1
  4044. 1
  4045. 1
  4046. 1
  4047. 1
  4048. 1
  4049. 1
  4050. 1
  4051. 1
  4052. 1
  4053. 1
  4054. 1
  4055. 1
  4056. 1
  4057. 1
  4058. 1
  4059. 1
  4060. 1
  4061. 1
  4062. 1
  4063. 1
  4064. 1
  4065. 1
  4066. 1
  4067. 1
  4068. 1
  4069. 1
  4070. 1
  4071. 1
  4072. 1
  4073. 1
  4074. 1
  4075. 1
  4076. 1
  4077. 1
  4078. 1
  4079. 1
  4080. 1
  4081. 1
  4082. 1
  4083. ^ That's a lot of words, for a disjointed assortment of overstated, misquoted and discontextualized "points" . Then again you do seem to think that pointing out that the Dutch lost the 4th war is a grave insult of some kind; when I was simply stating a fact. How effective Dutch troops were is also rather irrelevant, for reasons aforementioned. (can't send troops to another country's turf when they have naval superiority, among other advantages [various French & Spanish kings, Napoleon & Hitler both learned that the hard way]) Here's some hard facts though about the period: • The UK was the #1 economy, with the leading currency. The US had grown but was still smaller in both aspects, for various reasons. • The UK at the turn of century held 80% of the global Shipbuilding market; a record never surpassed by any nation since, nor likely to be. • The RN had a relatively high standard officer corps (especially those who'd been trained to use their own initiative); see the Russian Navy for an example of what you're thinking of. Also: By century's turn UK-German relations had not only started to sour, with Kaiser William II's poor diplomacy being mostly why, but the Kaiserlichemarine had started its expansion... a race that it lost, as the UK proved she could not only outbuild the boch, but stay ahead of them technologically. By WWI the RN was not only larger, but outmatched the Kaiserlichemarine in firepower, range, speed and how swiftly ships could be repaired / replaced. The previous Kaiser - aided by Bismarck - had been wiser, in keeping his navy chiefly small and mostly for coastal defence. (a period incidentally where the UK also was happy to build warships to order, for Germany)
    1
  4084. 1
  4085. 1
  4086. 1
  4087. 1
  4088. 1
  4089. 1
  4090. 1
  4091. 1
  4092. 1
  4093. 1
  4094. 1
  4095. 1
  4096. 1
  4097. 1
  4098. 1
  4099. 1
  4100. 1
  4101. 1
  4102. 1
  4103. 1
  4104. 1
  4105. 1
  4106. 1
  4107. 1
  4108. 1
  4109. 1
  4110. 1
  4111. 1
  4112. 1
  4113. 1
  4114. 1
  4115. 1
  4116. 1
  4117. 1
  4118. 1
  4119. 1
  4120. 1
  4121. 1
  4122. 1
  4123. 1
  4124. 1
  4125. 1
  4126. 1
  4127. 1
  4128. 1
  4129. 1
  4130. 1
  4131. 1
  4132. 1
  4133. 1
  4134. 1
  4135. 1
  4136. 1
  4137. 1
  4138. 1
  4139. 1
  4140. 1
  4141. 1
  4142. 1
  4143. 1
  4144. 1
  4145. 1
  4146. 1
  4147. 1
  4148. 1
  4149. 1
  4150. 1
  4151. 1
  4152. 1
  4153. 1
  4154. 1
  4155. 1
  4156. 1
  4157. 1
  4158. 1
  4159. 1
  4160. 1
  4161. 1
  4162. 1
  4163. 1
  4164. 1
  4165. 1
  4166. 1
  4167. 1
  4168. 1
  4169. 1
  4170. 1
  4171. 1
  4172. 1
  4173. 1
  4174. 1
  4175. 1
  4176. 1
  4177. 1
  4178. 1
  4179. 1
  4180. 1
  4181. 1
  4182. 1
  4183. 1
  4184. 1
  4185. 1
  4186. 1
  4187. 1
  4188. 1
  4189. 1
  4190. 1
  4191. 1
  4192. 1
  4193. 1
  4194. 1
  4195. 1
  4196. 1
  4197. 1
  4198. 1
  4199. 1
  4200. 1
  4201.  @GodPikachu  Technically the BAe Typhoon (Eurofighter was a politically conveniant marketing title, for what was [like Tornado] a British design, produced in part by smaller partners) predates the YF-22 & 23, with the BAe EAP project that led to Typhoon starting in the '80's, after yet another deal with the french fell through. Though a Brit' I've never heard of Typhoon being considered for a name like 'Spitfire II'. Rather like our naming conventions for people over here (with the exception of monarchs), it isn't RAF tradition to use numbers after names, with the sole exception being variant numbers. (like F.6, short for 'Fighter MK.6') The Germans certainly were salty over Typhoon, but mostly as I recall in a "Agh. Zee Could Var ist overh!. Vee vant to spengt lhess on defunse!" kind of way. This nearly led to the UK opting to go it alone, perhaps still with the Italians & Spanish as partners responsible for subcomponents. Is rather amusing that they were fine with Typhoon as a name though XD. The wholly seperate 'BAe Replica' - and no I've no idea why they chose that name - was the British project to produce a pure air superiority fighter of comperable generation to F-22, with much of the work being done in Cambridgeshire. That changed however when a certain Tony Bliar cancelled the project, about a year after coming to power. I suspect that the USAF's nsme for F-35 will be ignored by the RAF, assuming they don't name its UK specific variant something else. (a bit like how lend lease Warhawks were renamed Tomahawk for RAF service)
    1
  4202. 1
  4203. 1
  4204. 1
  4205. 1
  4206. 1
  4207. 1
  4208. 1
  4209. 1
  4210. 1
  4211. 1
  4212. 1
  4213. 1
  4214. 1
  4215. 1
  4216. 1
  4217. 1
  4218. 1
  4219. 1
  4220. 1
  4221. 1
  4222. 1
  4223. 1
  4224. 1
  4225. 1
  4226. 1
  4227. 1
  4228. 1
  4229. 1