[frearsghost]

My dustbin lorry has a huge poppy in its front grill all year round.

[Wooden Spoon]

calvin plummers socks said:

1542239048[/url]' post='1430874']
But you honour your Grandads as humans by visiting their graves

An astonishingly naive comment.

[Wooden Spoon]

Siberian Spireite said:

1542356026[/url]' post='1431040']
Fair points. Food for thought, though.

Well, if you were to try to take the positives from it, I’d say -

Europe moved from a general “autocratic monarchical society” to a democratic one. Obviously there are some exceptions, mainly the UK and France which had parliamentary democracy, and the Soviet Union which, after a brutal civil war descended into a Stalinist dictatorship.

Generally the end of empires and freedom for smaller suppressed states. (Granted it took WW2 for UK to see the light)

Women rights being massively improved, they had done men’s jobs for the first time, and done them well under great stress.

Universal suffrage.

A great improvement in social housing. The so called homes for heroes building programme - the Becontree estate, at the time the biggest in Europe replaced the slums


All of that came from a defeat of the old school. The absolute monarchies had gambled and lost.


The reasons are many and complex. I’d be arrogant and incorrect to claim to know all and provide a definitive list here, so in brief, and in my opinion it comprises-


The naval blockade. Shortages of food and raw material meant that German victories were paid for in blood, while in the uk at least. the post 1916 mantra was materiel instead of blood. It’s worth noting that the final successful assaults on the Siegfried line had similar casualty rates to offensives 2 or 3 years earlier, yet achieved advances measures in miles, and not yards.


After that there are many and none in any particular order.

A wearing down of Axis man power and materiel. There wasn’t an endless supply of either. On both sides. (See above blood quote)

A desire to only go on the offensive for strategise not political reasons.

Co operation between France and Britain under field marshal foche - often n underestimated change in cooperation and tactics.


New technology - tanks, acoustic targeting, creeping barrage, armoured personnel carriers, motorised artillery

New tactical thinking that combined and made best use of new technology- the idea of artillery barrages moving in time with the advance of tanks, which in turn moved with the infantry supported by aircraft, straffing, bombing and reporting back enemy positions was a previously unheard of military innovation


I really don’t see the rent strikes of Glasgow as even being worthy of mention, not in the bigger picture. I say that as a trade unionist and a person who has interest in history.

The only relevant reference would be the Germans fasciltating the transit of Lenin from Switzerland to Russia - which did nothing to help the allied side....so I don’t get this guys argument.

[Wooden Spoon]

DEATH said:

1542401699[/url]' post='1431136']
Well, if you were to try to take the positives from it, I'd say -

Europe moved from a general "autocratic monarchical society" to a democratic one. Obviously there are some exceptions, mainly the UK and France which had parliamentary democracy, and the Soviet Union which, after a brutal civil war descended into a Stalinist dictatorship.

Generally the end of empires and freedom for smaller suppressed states. (Granted it took WW2 for UK to see the light)

Women rights being massively improved, they had done men's jobs for the first time, and done them well under great stress.

Universal suffrage.

A great improvement in social housing. The so called homes for heroes building programme - the Becontree estate, at the time the biggest in Europe replaced the slums


All of that came from a defeat of the old school. The absolute monarchies had gambled and lost.


The reasons are many and complex. I'd be arrogant and incorrect to claim to know all and provide a definitive list here, so in brief, and in my opinion it comprises-


The naval blockade. Shortages of food and raw material meant that German victories were paid for in blood, while in the uk at least. the post 1916 mantra was materiel instead of blood. It's worth noting that the final successful assaults on the Siegfried line had similar casualty rates to offensives 2 or 3 years earlier, yet achieved advances measures in miles, and not yards.


After that there are many and none in any particular order.

A wearing down of Axis man power and materiel. There wasn't an endless supply of either. On both sides. (See above blood quote)

A desire to only go on the offensive for strategise not political reasons.

Co operation between France and Britain under field marshal foche - often n underestimated change in cooperation and tactics.


New technology - tanks, acoustic targeting, creeping barrage, armoured personnel carriers, motorised artillery

New tactical thinking that combined and made best use of new technology- the idea of artillery barrages moving in time with the advance of tanks, which in turn moved with the infantry supported by aircraft, straffing, bombing and reporting back enemy positions was a previously unheard of military innovation


I really don't see the rent strikes of Glasgow as even being worthy of mention, not in the bigger picture. I say that as a trade unionist and a person who has interest in history.

The only relevant reference would be the Germans fasciltating the transit of Lenin from Switzerland to Russia - which did nothing to help the allied side....so I don't get this guys argument.

Add acoustic targeting to artillery against enemy artillery batteries, ie, the first target was enemy artillery batteries. WW1 was, after all, an artillery war.

[fishini]

DEATH, on 16 November 2018 - 03:45 PM, said:

An astonishingly naive comment.

Not just naive but ignorant. No graves for me to visit,no photos to look at. Just two names at the thiepval memorial along with 72000 other names of the fallen in battle, missing and no graves. Which my family and myself have visited. So I will honour them my own way and I don't need approval from anyone let alone a person like cps

[Wooden Spoon]

fishini said:

1542403517[/url]' post='1431144']
Not just naive but ignorant. No graves for me to visit,no photos to look at. Just two names at the thiepval memorial along with 72000 other names of the fallen in battle, missing and no graves. Which my family and myself have visited. So I will honour them my own way and I don't need approval from anyone let alone a person like cps

Well I didn’t want to assume, hence niave rather than ignorant. But yeah I pretty much guessed where you’d be coming from next.

I’d guess Tyne cot or menin gate, are just words he doesn’t know, hence his ignorant comments

[Wooden Spoon]

KevinArnottsGoldenBoot said:

1542221346[/url]' post='1430791']
All of that bears no relation to anything I've said. Or indeed think. You're slapping on a coat of the Goebbels.

Nice touch.

That’s the third time you’ve referenced the nazis in relation to wearing a poppy.


Nice touch.

[calvin plummers socks]

DEATH, on 16 November 2018 - 10:01 PM, said:

Well I didn’t want to assume, hence niave rather than ignorant. But yeah I pretty much guessed where you’d be coming from next.

I’d guess Tyne cot or menin gate, are just words he doesn’t know, hence his ignorant comments

Been to both actually

[Wooden Spoon]

calvin plummers socks, on 17 November 2018 - 01:36 PM, said:

Been to both actually

Why the silly comment about humans visiting graves?

[fishini]

DEATH, on 17 November 2018 - 03:41 PM, said:

Why the silly comment about humans visiting graves?

You don't really expect an answer to your question do you? He's not doing himself any favours with silly graves quotes is he? Almost forgot his fat quote.

This post has been edited by fishini: 17 November 2018 - 06:17 PM

[calvin plummers socks]

DEATH, on 17 November 2018 - 03:41 PM, said:

Why the silly comment about humans visiting graves?

Didn't think it was silly really but obvs you do so there we go.

fishini, on 17 November 2018 - 06:14 PM, said:

You don't really expect an answer to your question do you? He's not doing himself any favours with silly graves quotes is he? Almost forgot his fat quote.

What about the fat quote?

[fishini]

calvin plummers socks, on 17 November 2018 - 06:24 PM, said:

Didn't think it was silly really but obvs you do so there we go.



What about the fat quote?

Would you have mentioned it if he had been a tall, short, thin etc etc bloke? No of course you wouldn't. So why mention that he was and I quote 'some fat bloke'?

[calvin plummers socks]

fishini, on 17 November 2018 - 09:28 PM, said:

Would you have mentioned it if he had been a tall, short, thin etc etc bloke? No of course you wouldn't. So why mention that he was and I quote 'some fat bloke'?

Ah I see what you mean- basically because the military guys and me were a mixture of talk, short and thin but he was the only fat bloke and was referred to as such by those there working

[fishini]

calvin plummers socks, on 17 November 2018 - 11:41 PM, said:

Ah I see what you mean- basically because the military guys and me were a mixture of talk, short and thin but he was the only fat bloke and was referred to as such by those there working

No you mentioned he was fat

[Wooden Spoon]

calvin plummers socks said:

1542479048[/url]' post='1431475']
Didn't think it was silly really but obvs you do so there we go

Saying visit the grave instead of wearing a poppy when -


A) there’s a chance there isn’t one to visit?


B) there is a very high chance the grave is in another country?


That’s not silly?

[jack'smyboy]

DEATH, on 18 November 2018 - 11:01 AM, said:

Saying visit the grave instead of wearing a poppy when -


A) there’s a chance there isn’t one to visit?


B) there is a very high chance the grave is in another country?


That’s not silly?

Did the family tree a while back. Most are names on memorials, the only one with a grave is in Basra.