European army backed

China. We sailed around there in the 19th century and did what we pleased. History has a habit of repeating itself, but not exactly as before.

Originally posted by stumason
China cannot do that today or in the future, in fact, if the US were hostile even they would have a hard time of it too.

I suspect that the Chinese in the 18th century thought the concept of Europeans being able to dominate China in the next century impossible to imagine.

Originally posted by stumason
Then I am afraid to say you clearly have no idea about British history.

You are right enough. There was also the Spanish Armada. My apologises. Ironically, the Spanish commander thought the whole expedition doomed to failure. He was right.

reply to post by ollncasino


Do explain the first comment...

As for the second, the Chinese were a nats whisker away from being nuked in Korea as it happens, plus they were somewhat more "mental" back then with nothing to lose.

These days, they're a world power with a lot to lose. If the genuinely believed they could take on the West, they would have taken Taiwan back years ago and would be much more forceful over the South China Sea. As it happens, they are treading quite lightly over both, with the occasional sabre rattle but that isn't scaring anyone, just making a point.

reply to post by ollncasino

China.

If China was ever to pose a direct military threat to the UK then I suspect that battle lines would already have been drawn up and necessary alliances already been made - same as they always have been.
And as has been mentioned, the UK is more than capable of giving China more than just a bloody nose all by itself if it had to.

But let's face it, that's all if's and but's and a scenario where MAD could be more than just a possibility.

China plays the long game - I don't think their own destruction comes into their calculations.

The elites refuse to allow a referendum because they don't care what the people think. They would also probably lose.

More common ground.

But why do they seem to want a United Europe?

France in the 19th century also threatened the UK. I can't think of anything much in between since 1066.

The Spanish on a couple of occassions and even the Dutch once.

And France several times during our thousand year on and off little spat.

A greatly respected statesman who fought to prevent German domination of Europe in two world wars and to maintain the British Empire was a believer in a united Europe.

I certainly never intended to be disrepectful or dismissive of Churchill - but what he envisaged and what we have are two completely different things and I hardly think it's fair to use one to support the other.

Again, I agree with you. But is the alternative better?

The UK outside of Europe? I'm not sure it is.

But we ARE outside Europe - we have a completely different mindset and culture to continental Europeans.

And let's face it - a very high proportion of Europeans absolutely despise us - or is it a jealousy that they can't admit to?

Personally I'd feel much more comfortable with a closer relationship with our Aussie, Kiwi and Canadian friends.

I don't suppose to have all the answers - but I do know that the EU as it is and increased integration with it is not in the best interests of the UK and it's people..

There's not much point arguing which Nations have the bigger Sabre to rattle, what this all really comes down to is Europe and the lack of need for a centeralised army. China and Russia are the only two threats that have any chance of attacking Europe and they would both fail as both Armies are not expeditionary and lack the ability to extend their power beyond their own borders,especially China. What we need to concerntrate on is stopping the people of Europe sleepwalking into a fully bought and paid for Dictatorship. Because thats where we are heading and faster than we all think.

Originally posted by ollncasino

Originally posted by stumason
China's strength lies in a relatively small number of highly industrialised cities, remove those and they become nothing more than a marauding mass of rice farmers.

True 30 years ago. Not true today.

By the way, the USA having Nuclear weapons didn't prevent China attacking the USA in North Korea. I suspect that you over-estimate the geo-politcal influence of nuclear weapons and the Chinese attitude to their opponents possessing them.

It depends on who is making the decisions, if it was for Douglas MacArthur, he would have flattened half of China and North Korea, i guess that was the reason he got his resignation around then..

Originally posted by ollncasino
I suspect that the Chinese in the 18th century thought the concept of Europeans being able to dominate China in the next century impossible to imagine.

This isn't the 18th century, matey. Our Navy may be small (still one of the worlds largest though) but technologically it is leaps and bounds ahead of the Chinese.

Originally posted by ollncasino
You are right enough. There was also the Spanish Armada. My apologises. Ironically, the Spanish commander thought the whole expedition doomed to failure. He was right.

There were many wars with France on either side of the Armada, some with the Dutch in the 17th and 18th, several more with Spain, wars against Scotland (backed by the French), Russia... You need to brush up.

It would appear that you find the concept of the Chinese dominating the UK and Europe in the future as unthinkable as the Chinese no doubt felt, in the century before the Opium wars, the concept of Europe dominating China.

Originally posted by stumason
As for the second, the Chinese were a nats whisker away from being nuked in Korea as it happens, plus they were somewhat more "mental" back then with nothing to lose.

These days, they're a world power with a lot to lose. If the genuinely believed they could take on the West, they would have taken Taiwan back years ago and would be much more forceful over the South China Sea. As it happens, they are treading quite lightly over both, with the occasional sabre rattle but that isn't scaring anyone, just making a point.

I have a deep knowledge of China and how its people think.

They are deeply nationalist and aggressive as a group and they bear a deep grudge against the UK and the West in general.

It is also a mistake to assume that the Chinese people think like you.

reply to post by ollncasino


But China is irrelevant right now as they lack the logistical ability to project their Military power any further than their local region. China are irrelevant and with social mobility taking hold, they will soon lose their grip on power as the Chinese people want more consumption.

Originally posted by Freeborn
But we ARE outside Europe - we have a completely different mindset and culture to continental Europeans.

That hasn't been my experience at all and I work with people from all over Europe. Still, the French and Germans can be tricky to deal with. I'll grant you that.

Originally posted by Freeborn
And let's face it - a very high proportion of Europeans absolutely despise us - or is it a jealousy that they can't admit to?

Again, that hasn't been my experience.

Originally posted by stumason
reply to post by ollncasino

 

In which case, what's wrong with NATO and the Commonwealth?

Why the need to dissolve a national institution to placate the French and Germans who, once they have managed to get us to acquiesce to that, they can get us to do anything....

Besides, we can level China in half an hour, should the need arise and they know it. They would be mad to start throwing their weight around to the point we needed to go to War with them.

I would not be surprised if China could level the UK in half an hour as well, The might not feel the need to boast about how many ICBM's they have.

reply to post by purplemer

... Yes France was invaded in the war. But the people of France continued to offer a strong level of resistance against the German occupying forces...

I have no intention of disrepecting those French who offered resistance to Nazi Germany but that is a bit of a fallacy - the vast majority of French offered no resistance at all - in fact more actively collaborated with the Nazi's, something the French are exceptionally uncomfortable with.

In fact there was much in fighting and betrayal between different factions of the resistance forces - perhaps that's for another discussion.

That does not make us any better or worse than the French..

Indeed - neither are better or worse than the other - just different.

A perfect example is the difference in approach both nations took in light of imminent danger of invasion from the Nazi's.

France chose to surrender and protect Paris etc from being destroyed - yes, some escaped to the UK and continued to fight, but most didn't.

Britain chose to fight, to the last man if necessary, rather than surrender to the Nazi's - surrender simply wasn't an option.

That's not meant as a criticism but an acceptance of the reality that we are different.

reply to post by Freeborn


This is the difference between Britain and the rest of Europe.

Originally posted by stumason
There were many wars with France on either side of the Armada, some with the Dutch in the 17th and 18th, several more with Spain, wars against Scotland (backed by the French), Russia... You need to brush up.

The British had wars all over the world.

None of the wars you mention above threatened the UK's Independence, which I believe was your original criteria and why the wars with Germany and France were relevant to this thread.

Originally posted by stumason
If push comes to shove, the Ozzies, Cannadians and the UK always flock together. As you mentioned China, the Ozzies should know we have their back.

I have known quite a few Australians and a number of Canadians.

I don't know how to break this to you, but secretly the Aussies don't like the English very much and the Canadians are somewhat indifferent to us these days. The Canadians, as a whole, have no deep love for the UK. Not now.

Perhaps when push comes to shove they would 'flock' to us, but the ties are growing weaker, not stronger with time.

We are all forgetting that the issue with Europe has been dealt with before and one thing Maggie Thatcher did for us was beat the Europe machine back. This is what we need to do again.

Originally posted by stumason
Hahah, a seat at the head of the table?

Doesn't mean we get to join in with the conversation though and by removing our veto, we will become something even worse than "America's vassal" as we would have no say at all, being outvoted by the Franco-German bloc every time.

Like Wales, Northern Ireland and Scotland in the UK are outvoted by the English?

I take it you support Scottish Independence then?

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by Freeborn

 

This is the difference between Britain and the rest of Europe.

hehe, he actually "talks" and lisps like a bulldog.
Though you must not forget it is a lot more easier defending an Island than the large border of France, i reckon the British army in the early 40's would not have stand a change against the German blitzkrieg would the battle be on land.
Apart from that, the radar system and the RAF did an amazing job..

reply to post by Foppezao


I suspect you would be right, but then again our forces were not designed to protect land borders, but the Navy was more than capable of defending our Sea borders and they did that with great precision even when outnumbered so the point is a bit moot. However Britain did take a lot of help from our European partners to beat Germany, the Poles supplied us with the Enigma machine that our codebreakers cracked and our European partners provided great resistance and reconiscence. We are greatful for the help that we took, but Britain still wants to be Britain and I don't think that the majority of our European partners understand the way we work.

Originally posted by michael1983l
reply to post by Foppezao

 

I suspect you would be right, but then again our forces were not designed to protect land borders, but the Navy was more than capable of defending our Sea borders and they did that with great precision even when outnumbered so the point is a bit moot. However Britain did take a lot of help from our European partners to beat Germany, the Poles supplied us with the Enigma machine that our codebreakers cracked and our European partners provided great resistance and reconiscence. We are greatful for the help that we took, but Britain still wants to be Britain and I don't think that the majority of our European partners understand the way we work.

I agree, and i would probably think the same if i was born British.
But i do think the UK should not drift away too much from Europe, and solely go for the Transatlantic partnership as the US drags you in much more and dirtier wars than is good for you..

Reply to post by ollncasino

there maybe some who have this view, but blood is thicker than water, there are very very deep ties between aussies and canadians to the uk, mostly because we are descendents, usa as well, oliver cromwell said it best ' once a subject, always a subject'. we are all not as indifferent as some think.


Posted Via ATS Mobile: m.abovetopsecret.com

reply to post by Foppezao


I could get on board with a Europe if it wasn't for the politicians slowly erroding member states soverign power. If Europe just did what it was set up to do, free trading between members then it would be fine. But Brussels is hell bent on a one government Europe and nothing Britain can ever do will change that, hence the reason we as the British people should get given a referendum. I suspect if it did go to vote, somewhere around 70% would vote to leave the Union.