Jump to content








'Thank You' - Queen Elizabeth and world leaders applaud D-Day veterans


webfact

Recommended Posts


11 minutes ago, Basil B said:

Churchill's speech, We shall fight them on the beaches actually originated from 1940 Dunkirk I am sure it was one of the many quotes read out yesterday.

 

A great statesman and orator also said:

"If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can."

September 19, 1946, University of Zurich

 

He must be turning in his grave as he sees Britain so disunited and his beloved Tory Party goes into meltdown.  

Yes-i am fully aware just as to when Churchill made his famous speech..

 

But their defiant stand is,of course, the necessary precursor to the famous invasion.

 

Without the first there would not have been the second act.

 

Have you read Alistair Horne's well known book;

'To Lose a Battle-France 1940'?

Edited by Odysseus123
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, Odysseus123 said:

Yes-i am fully aware just as to when Churchill made his famous speech..

I was not intending to "pull you up", I was referring to the point that I was sure it was one of the readings read out yesterday, even though first quoted in 1940 (BEF & Dunkirk) it was very appropriate for D-Day.  

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 hours ago, Basil B said:

Churchill's speech, We shall fight them on the beaches actually originated from 1940 Dunkirk I am sure it was one of the many quotes read out yesterday.

 

A great statesman and orator also said:

"If at first all the States of Europe are not willing or able to join the Union, we must nevertheless proceed to assemble and combine those who will and those who can."

September 19, 1946, University of Zurich

 

He must be turning in his grave as he sees Britain so disunited and his beloved Tory Party goes into meltdown.  

But to complete those words:

"The salvation of the common people of every race and of every land from war or servitude must be established on solid foundations and must be guarded by the readiness of all men and women to die rather than submit to tyranny. In all this urgent work, France and Germany must take the lead together. Great Britain, the British Commonwealth of Nations, mighty America, and I trust Soviet Russia—for then indeed all would be well—must be the friends and sponsors of the new Europe and must champion its right to live and shine.” 

 

On 11th May, 1953, he also said:

“We have our own dream and our own task. We are with Europe, but not of it. We are linked but not combined. We are interested and associated but not absorbed. If Britain must choose between Europe and the open sea, she must always choose the open sea.”

--

So Winston might be turning in his grave for different reasons.

RIP.

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, billd766 said:

I have one also.

 

Long Service and Good Conduct after 18 years service.

 

Several of Prince Charles medals come with the position as King in waiting.

 

Many of his titles are honorary and unpaid.

 

 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_titles_and_honours_of_Charles,_Prince_of_Wales

You earned any medals you have Bill, Prince Charles was born into them.

  • Like 1
  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 minutes ago, usviphotography said:

The UK was never threatened in WWII. Germany offered them unconditional peace

Hitler liked the Brits and we probably didn't have to go to war, but let's not get all silly; the bloke invaded, pretty threatening if you ask me.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎6‎/‎6‎/‎2019 at 10:12 AM, webfact said:

Prime Minister Theresa May was joined for the commemorative events in Portsmouth by U.S. President Trump, 

I wonder if May and other British government politicians realise the Irony of thanking the veterans of what would be the greatest British military ever, when they and all their post BAOR ilk have reduced it to virtual impotence?

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, possum1931 said:

We do agree on almost everything, but have to disagree on this, I have no time for the British Royal Family, sorry Bill.

 

I do thank the deity that our head of state is her and not some horrid president that we had to spend money on to elect. We have to pay enough for all the rest of the time wasters as it is. Don't need another.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2019 at 5:12 AM, webfact said:

Trump read a prayer given by Franklin D. Roosevelt in 1944: "The enemy is strong. He may hurl back our forces but we shall return again and again; and we know that by Thy grace, and by the righteousness of our cause, our sons will triumph

 

“...and their sons too, ‘cause there’s some very fine people on both sides,” he added.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

I do believe that but for Churchill, Britain would have been occupied/ surrendered/ whatever. The German military was the best in the world, and only lost because Hitler was insane and decided to invade Russia before conquering Britain. Without Britain, the US would never have been able to invade Europe.

Beyond the troops, Britain and our world was lucky to have Churchill, R J Mitchell, Tommy Flowers and Alan Turing to help win the war for us.

This betrays a fundamental misconception of World War II. Hitler had on interest whatsoever in the West, and in fact France and England declaring war against him was highly inconvenient to his plans. The idea that Germany should have invaded Great Britain instead of Russia during WWII is like saying the US should have invaded Guatemala instead of Japan. There was nothing Germany wanted in the UK. This invasion that you envision would have tied up the bulk of the German Army on a side adventure on the opposite side of the continent from where their actual enemy was located. Most importantly, it would have taken time which the Germans simply didn't have. In retrospect, they were a few years too late in attacking the Soviets as it was. To give the Soviets another year to build on their already considerable advantage in tanks would have been sheer madness. 

 

Without Churchill, the UK surely would have made peace. They would not have been occupied because the peace Hitler offered Churchill was unconditional. And since the German Armistice with France called for a full with withdrawal of German forces once UK made peace France would have been fully unoccupied by this peace as well. UK would have saved the lives of hundreds of thousands of men and instead of wreaking their economy, they would have thrived during the war years. And Germany still would have lost the war! 

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎6‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 3:35 AM, usviphotography said:

Without Churchill, the UK surely would have made peace. They would not have been occupied because the peace Hitler offered Churchill was unconditional.

and you apparently believe that. Tell that to Stalin who apparently believed the pact with Germany was real.

 

Perhaps you can tell me which military authority thinks it is acceptable to fight a war on two fronts at the same time?

 

You are of course entitled to your opinion, but I am profoundly thankful that Churchill fought on.

 

On ‎6‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 3:35 AM, usviphotography said:

And Germany still would have lost the war! 

Seriously?

Russia won the war, despite American movie makers propaganda, and had Britain surrendered there would have been no convoys to Russia, and the full might of the German war machine- the best in the world- against Stalin's armies which were demoralised by years of officer purges.

Even so, the best weapon the allies had against Germany was Hitler, who was probably insane. Even at the end, the Battle of the Bulge could have triumphed, which says much about the quality of the German military.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎6‎/‎8‎/‎2019 at 7:31 AM, bartender100 said:

"peace Hitler offered Churchill was unconditionall"

 

So you would take the word of Hitler? plenty found out to their cost it meant nothing to him

I have a piece of paper!

Chamberlain believed Hitler, and millions may have died because of it. Had Britain gone to war then, they might have succeeded, as apparently the German military was not ready.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2019 at 6:42 AM, Odysseus123 said:

Yes indeed- the world owes Great Britain (and her Commonwealth) a debt of gratitude for standing firm during their "darkest hour" and equally so to the "New World-with all it's power and might" stepping forth to the rescue of the Old World.

 

Probably owe  bigger thanks to the Ruskies where the real show was  going on.

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/6/2019 at 8:38 PM, daveAustin said:

Hitler liked the Brits and we probably didn't have to go to war, but let's not get all silly; the bloke invaded, pretty threatening if you ask me.

Hitler had plans To invade Britain,

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...