Cameron's Cry for Help

[Phil D. Rolls]

What's people's thoughts? I wondered when he was going to tell us to "pay no attention to that man behind the curtain".

[Johnny0762]

It would appear that people are shy in coming forward with their views on the Tory policies since yesterday.

I'll pitch in and say Cameron is a rancid ***** with his McCoist style rant about fighting (in this case the referendum) with "all that we've got".

The Tories have only those who fund their party in mind.

I'm waiting on him addressing the Scottish nation to convince us how he is going to get us out of the hole that the Tories created. Never mind that the banking collapse happened under the Labour incumbents. The seeds were already sown.

[hibsbollah]

It bore no relation to reality at all. lots of touchy freely stuff about caring about the poor and the 'aspiring class' and he even managed a little sob in his throat about his son in a wheelchair. In reality, Theres only one thing you need to know about the Coalition's real underlying agenda, and it's the March budget when they dropped the top rate of tax for millionaires and paid for it by fleecing the pensioners.

[Phil D. Rolls]

It would appear that people are shy in coming forward with their views on the Tory policies since yesterday.

I'll pitch in and say Cameron is a rancid ***** with his McCoist style rant about fighting (in this case the referendum) with "all that we've got".

The Tories have only those who fund their party in mind.

I'm waiting on him addressing the Scottish nation to convince us how he is going to get us out of the hole that the Tories created. Never mind that the banking collapse happened under the Labour incumbents. The seeds were already sown.


It bore no relation to reality at all. lots of touchy freely stuff about caring about the poor and the 'aspiring class' and he even managed a little sob in his throat about his son in a wheelchair. In reality, Theres only one thing you need to know about the Coalition's real underlying agenda, and it's the March budget when they dropped the top rate of tax for millionaires and paid for it by fleecing the pensioners.

Had a real go at "leftist" councils - surely the left are in this together with the rest of us. It seems we're all in it together, if we do what we are told.

Whole thing was rabid flag waving, and battening down the hatches. I predict another hung parliament, with LibDems led by Vince Cable propping up "One Nation" labour.

By the way is "One Nation" the same as "Ein Reich, Ein Volk". The jingoistic tone of UK politicians is getting a bit worrying.

[PeeJay]

By the way is "One Nation" the same as "Ein Reich, Ein Volk". The jingoistic tone of UK politicians is getting a bit worrying.

If you're going to drop it in, it was actually "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer" - I think it's a long way away from being anywhere near the same myself ...


... mind you if it was Boris in the "Führer" role things could be so different ....:greengrin

[Johnny0762]

If you're going to drop it in, it was actually "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer" - I think it's a long way away from being anywhere near the same myself ...


... mind you if it was Boris in the "Führer" role things could be so different ....:greengrin


Nah it's not the same eh!! The UK wouldn't invade foreign lands to suit their own growth, would they? :greengrin

[Phil D. Rolls]

If you're going to drop it in, it was actually "Ein Volk, Ein Reich, Ein Führer" - I think it's a long way away from being anywhere near the same myself ...


... mind you if it was Boris in the "Führer" role things could be so different ....:greengrin

British fair play. I felt it would be classless to kick a man when he is down. The last thing he needs is a classless society.

[heretoday]

Miliband's "one nation" speech was meaningless rhetoric. Cameron's "aspiration nation" was rhetoric too. All hot air signifying nothing.

[marinello59]

Miliband's "one nation" speech was meaningless rhetoric. Cameron's "aspiration nation" was rhetoric too. All hot air signifying nothing.

In some ways yes, but it was a clear signal that Labour intend grabbing the centre ground again rather, than as many thought they would do under Milliband, lurch further to the left.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Miliband's "one nation" speech was meaningless rhetoric. Cameron's "aspiration nation" was rhetoric too. All hot air signifying nothing.

Pretty much the language of people who know that the control lies elsewhere.

[WindyMiller]

It would appear that people are shy in coming forward with their views on the Tory policies since yesterday.

I'll pitch in and say Cameron is a rancid ***** with his McCoist style rant about fighting (in this case the referendum) with "all that we've got".

The Tories have only those who fund their party in mind.

I'm waiting on him addressing the Scottish nation to convince us how he is going to get us out of the hole that the Tories created. Never mind that the banking collapse happened under the Labour incumbents. The seeds were already sown.


His comments on the WWI Centenary plans, couldn't possibly be aimed at us Scots, in the lead up to the independence vote?


A commemoration that captures our national spirit in every corner of the country, from our schools and workplaces, to our town halls and local communities.
"A commemoration that, like the diamond jubilee celebrations this year, says something about who are as a people. Remembrance must be the hallmark of our commemorations.

Surely no one would stoop so low ?

[Johnny0762]

His comments on the WWI Centenary plans, couldn't possibly be aimed at us Scots, in the lead up to the independence vote?


A commemoration that captures our national spirit in every corner of the country, from our schools and workplaces, to our town halls and local communities.
"A commemoration that, like the diamond jubilee celebrations this year, says something about who are as a people. Remembrance must be the hallmark of our commemorations.

Surely no one would stoop so low ?

Yes, the Tories (and the other unionists) will stoop to any level. It's a black affront to the real heroes who fought to save us from invasion whilst 'his' troops are illegally overseas buying UK companies oil contracts which of course swell their party coffers.

It's ****ing sick.

[One Day Soon]

His comments on the WWI Centenary plans, couldn't possibly be aimed at us Scots, in the lead up to the independence vote?


A commemoration that captures our national spirit in every corner of the country, from our schools and workplaces, to our town halls and local communities.
"A commemoration that, like the diamond jubilee celebrations this year, says something about who are as a people. Remembrance must be the hallmark of our commemorations.

Surely no one would stoop so low ?


Hmm, good question. Surely no one would stoop so low in the lead up to the Separatism referendum. Certainly not a smug fat Yam planning to go completely radge with the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn in 2014. Oh no, definitely not.

I'm guessing Cameron has made up this whole malarkey about the First World War. It just didn't take place at all and it definitely didn't start 100 years ago come 2014. It's all spin.

None of our army regiments would ever want to see us honouring the war dead in this way and no-one I know lost grandfathers or great-grandfathers in this fictitious war.

It's a disgrace and a big unionist plot. I reckon they have been planning this conspiracy for 100 years just to to undermine the Dear Leader.

[Johnny0762]

Hmm, good question. Surely no one would stoop so low in the lead up to the Separatism referendum. Certainly not a smug fat Yam planning to go completely radge with the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn in 2014. Oh no, definitely not.

I'm guessing Cameron has made up this whole malarkey about the First World War. It just didn't take place at all and it definitely didn't start 100 years ago come 2014. It's all spin.

None of our army regiments would ever want to see us honouring the war dead in this way and no-one I know lost grandfathers or great-grandfathers in this fictitious war.

It's a disgrace and a big unionist plot. I reckon they have been planning this conspiracy for 100 years just to to undermine the Dear Leader.

Jesus I never ceased to be amazed.

See post 12.

[One Day Soon]

Jesus I never ceased to be amazed.

See post 12.


It is fascinating to see just how allergic to the truth Independistas can be.

What's the army and the squaddie's view on how the 100th anniversary should be commemorated? In silence and behind closed doors? Take your tartan blinkers off.

[One Day Soon]

Yes, the Tories (and the other unionists) will stoop to any level. It's a black affront to the real heroes who fought to save us from invasion whilst 'his' troops are illegally overseas buying UK companies oil contracts which of course swell their party coffers.

It's ****ing sick.


What invasion are you referring to?

[Johnny0762]

It is fascinating to see just how allergic to the truth Independistas can be.

What's the army and the squaddie's view on how the 100th anniversary should be commemorated? In silence and behind closed doors? Take your tartan blinkers off.

Fortunately we don't live in a military state, so the actual views of squaddies, especially those taking a wage from illegal warmongering, really have no influence over the rest of the country who outnumber them by some margin.

Those who fought for real wars will be turning in their graves.

[Eyrie]

Yes, the Tories (and the other unionists) will stoop to any level. It's a black affront to the real heroes who fought to save us from invasion whilst 'his' troops are illegally overseas buying UK companies oil contracts which of course swell their party coffers.

It's ****ing sick.

I'm not quite sure how anyone could stoop so low as to deliberately state that Britain was under threat of invasion in WW1, so I'll assume that you are simply ignorant of the history when attempting to make your point.

[Johnny0762]

What invasion are you referring to?

I think you mean which invasion.

There was no invasion, which is why I referred to our great heroes as having fought to "save us from invasion".

Actually that's not quite true as German bombers came to Britain, and let's not forget the Battle of Britain which was our very last line of defence.

Does that not count?

[Johnny0762]

I'm not quite sure how anyone could stoop so low as to deliberately state that Britain was under threat of invasion in WW1, so I'll assume that you are simply ignorant of the history when attempting to make your point.

How ironic that you would question anyone's intelligence or knowledge with an assumption.

[Eyrie]

How ironic that you would question anyone's intelligence or knowledge with an assumption.

Particularly when you then post this about World War One.


I think you mean which invasion.

There was no invasion, which is why I referred to our great heroes as having fought to "save us from invasion".

Actually that's not quite true as German bombers came to Britain, and let's not forget the Battle of Britain which was our very last line of defence.

Does that not count?

We're discussing the commemoration of World War One, remember? You'll need to explain to .net "which invasion" was planned.

[One Day Soon]

I think you mean which invasion.

There was no invasion, which is why I referred to our great heroes as having fought to "save us from invasion".

Actually that's not quite true as German bombers came to Britain, and let's not forget the Battle of Britain which was our very last line of defence.

Does that not count?


I think you are confused here.

The Kaiser never had any invasion plans for Britain in WW1, which is the centenary we are discussing.

The Battle of Britain took place in September of 1941 during WW2, an altogether different conflict. So no, the Battle of Britain - in this context - does not count.

[One Day Soon]

Fortunately we don't live in a military state, so the actual views of squaddies, especially those taking a wage from illegal warmongering, really have no influence over the rest of the country who outnumber them by some margin.

Those who fought for real wars will be turning in their graves.


I really think you should recant that statement.

British service personnel from all four nations go where they are sent and perform their duty. They don't pick the conflicts. Of course they should have a strong say in how their fellow servicemen and women are honoured and remembered.

[Johnny0762]

I think you are confused here.

The Kaiser never had any invasion plans for Britain in WW1, which is the centenary we are discussing.

The Battle of Britain took place in September of 1941 during WW2, an altogether different conflict. So no, the Battle of Britain - in this context - does not count.

So, it's only WW1 that we're planning commemorating, why do you refer to (current) serving squaddies? What have they got to do with WW1?

[Johnny0762]

I really think you should recant that statement.

British service personnel from all four nations go where they are sent and perform their duty. They don't pick the conflicts. Of course they should have a strong say in how their fellow servicemen and women are honoured and remembered.

Oh really? So you think they should have a strong say in who should be remembered, but should be exempt from views on the legitimacy of the conflicts they take part in?

They are either entitled to their own views, or not?

[One Day Soon]

Oh really? So you think they should have a strong say in who should be remembered, but should be exempt from views on the legitimacy of the conflicts they take part in?

They are either entitled to their own views, or not?


I'm sorry, I'm not understanding you here.

Are you saying that service personnel DO have a choice about where they serve? Or are you saying that they should refuse to serve in conflicts they don't approve of?

Are you seriously saying that you think serving personnel should not have their views taken into account when considering how to commemorate their fallen predecessors in past wars?

[Johnny0762]

I'm sorry, I'm not understanding you here.

Are you saying that service personnel DO have a choice about where they serve? Or are you saying that they should refuse to serve in conflicts they don't approve of?

Are you seriously saying that you think serving personnel should not have their views taken into account when considering how to commemorate their fallen predecessors in past wars?

I'm saying that military personnel who fund their lifestyles through illegal occupations of foreign countries have a cheek taking the moral high ground.

[(((Fergus)))]

His comments on the WWI Centenary plans, couldn't possibly be aimed at us Scots, in the lead up to the independence vote?


A commemoration that captures our national spirit in every corner of the country, from our schools and workplaces, to our town halls and local communities.
"A commemoration that, like the diamond jubilee celebrations this year, says something about who are as a people. Remembrance must be the hallmark of our commemorations.

Surely no one would stoop so low ?


Yes, the Tories (and the other unionists) will stoop to any level. It's a black affront to the real heroes who fought to save us from invasion whilst 'his' troops are illegally overseas buying UK companies oil contracts which of course swell their party coffers.

It's ****ing sick.

Do people consider the Labour Party to be Unionist, with the slogan "One Nation"? How would Scottish independence affect their prospects in Westminster?

[WindyMiller]

Hmm, good question. Surely no one would stoop so low in the lead up to the Separatism referendum. Certainly not a smug fat Yam planning to go completely radge with the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn in 2014. Oh no, definitely not.

I'm guessing Cameron has made up this whole malarkey about the First World War. It just didn't take place at all and it definitely didn't start 100 years ago come 2014. It's all spin.

None of our army regiments would ever want to see us honouring the war dead in this way and no-one I know lost grandfathers or great-grandfathers in this fictitious war.

It's a disgrace and a big unionist plot. I reckon they have been planning this conspiracy for 100 years just to to undermine the Dear Leader.

I'd be more impressed if he was planning for the Centenary of the end of the war.
The cynic in me thinks this is more of a "We were all in it together" ploy in the year leading up to the referendum and the General Election of 2015.

[Johnny0762]

Do people consider the Labour Party to be Unionist, with the slogan "One Nation"? How would Scottish independence affect their prospects in Westminster?

Well Labour can only be pro unionist or pro independence, and they certainly aren't making plans for a free Scotland.

I don't care how it would affect their prospects in Westminster if we gained independence. I wouldn't even look to find out.

[WindyMiller]

Do people consider the Labour Party to be Unionist, with the slogan "One Nation"? How would Scottish independence affect their prospects in Westminster?


I don't think Labour want us to leave the Union.
Their prospects,in most elections,would be poorer, but with the potential collapse of the L.Dem vote things will be a bit up in the air next time.

[Johnny0762]

I don't think Labour want us to leave the Union.
Their prospects,in most elections,would be poorer, but with the potential collapse of the L.Dem vote things will be a bit up in the air next time.

Well have a gander at what Scottish Labour's Patricia Ferguson has to say on the SNP. This tells you all you need to know.

Back stabbing cretin.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-19913753

[marinello59]

Well have a gander at what Scottish Labour's Patricia Ferguson has to say on the SNP. This tells you all you need to know.

Back stabbing cretin.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-19913753

:confused:

[Johnny0762]

:confused:

:agree:

[RyeSloan]

I'm saying that military personnel who fund their lifestyles through illegal occupations of foreign countries have a cheek taking the moral high ground.

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Your trolling is extremely pathetic.

[Johnny0762]

:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Your trolling is extremely pathetic.

Your "trolling" approach to each and every single post you disagree with is what's pathetic. Do however, carry on.

[Phil D. Rolls]

His comments on the WWI Centenary plans, couldn't possibly be aimed at us Scots, in the lead up to the independence vote?


A commemoration that captures our national spirit in every corner of the country, from our schools and workplaces, to our town halls and local communities.
"A commemoration that, like the diamond jubilee celebrations this year, says something about who are as a people. Remembrance must be the hallmark of our commemorations.

Surely no one would stoop so low ?

I certainly think its a great opportunity for Scotland to make it clear we were never shy when it came to defending the UK. IIRC 1 in 5 war dead were Scottish in the Great War.

Personally, I don't want to think of myself as part of country that is good at offering up the lives of its people in conflicts.

[RyeSloan]

Your "trolling" approach to each and every single post you disagree with is what's pathetic. Do however, carry on.

Talking to yourself now Johnny, good stuff!

[Beefster]

I certainly think its a great opportunity for Scotland to make it clear we were never shy when it came to defending the UK. IIRC 1 in 5 war dead were Scottish in the Great War.

Personally, I don't want to think of myself as part of country that is good at offering up the lives of its people in conflicts.

Offering up the lives of its people?

[One Day Soon]

Well have a gander at what Scottish Labour's Patricia Ferguson has to say on the SNP. This tells you all you need to know.

Back stabbing cretin.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-19913753


I have read that twice now. I can't work out who's back you think she is stabbing.

[Hibrandenburg]

Hmm, good question. Surely no one would stoop so low in the lead up to the Separatism referendum. Certainly not a smug fat Yam planning to go completely radge with the 700th anniversary of the Battle of Bannockburn in 2014. Oh no, definitely not.

I'm guessing Cameron has made up this whole malarkey about the First World War. It just didn't take place at all and it definitely didn't start 100 years ago come 2014. It's all spin.

None of our army regiments would ever want to see us honouring the war dead in this way and no-one I know lost grandfathers or great-grandfathers in this fictitious war.

It's a disgrace and a big unionist plot. I reckon they have been planning this conspiracy for 100 years just to to undermine the Dear Leader.

We should be celebrating the end of a conflict that cost 200000 Scottish lives and not the bloody beginning. Yes I believe that this is a cynical plan by the Tories to up pro British feeling among the population just in time for elections and to ensure that it all takes place on his watch.

The Great war ended in 1918 and has been remembered since on the 11th of the 11th at 11:00. Why should we now want to celebrate its start all of a sudden. ****ing Tories make me sick. The ONLY way to ensure these leeches never again have a say in our lives, is to vote for independance.

[Eyrie]

We should be celebrating the end of a conflict that cost 200000 Scottish lives and not the bloody beginning. Yes I believe that this is a cynical plan by the Tories to up pro British feeling among the population just in time for elections and to ensure that it all takes place on his watch.

The Great war ended in 1918 and has been remembered since on the 11th of the 11th at 11:00. Why should we now want to celebrate its start all of a sudden. ****ing Tories make me sick. The ONLY way to ensure these leeches never again have a say in our lives, is to vote for independance.
Agree with this. It would be appropriate to hold a special service of remembrance on 4 August 2014 to commemorate the declaration of war, but the main focus should be delayed until the centenary of the end of the war in 2018.

Still, it's no more cynical than Salmond delaying his referendum until autumn 2014 so that the official period of campaigning will start immediately after he celebrates the slaughter of the English seven hundred years ago.

[One Day Soon]

We should be celebrating the end of a conflict that cost 200000 Scottish lives and not the bloody beginning. Yes I believe that this is a cynical plan by the Tories to up pro British feeling among the population just in time for elections and to ensure that it all takes place on his watch.

The Great war ended in 1918 and has been remembered since on the 11th of the 11th at 11:00. Why should we now want to celebrate its start all of a sudden. ****ing Tories make me sick. The ONLY way to ensure these leeches never again have a say in our lives, is to vote for independance.

Bit difficult to 'up pro-British feeling' any higher than it already is in Scotland given the springboard of the Team GB performance in the Olympics and the current standing in the opinion polls of Scottish views on separation.

And since the vast majority of this money will be spent outside Scotland it is hardly a laser guided intervention in the Referendum. Does that mean we can start complaining now about Scotland not getting it's fair share?

[Hibrandenburg]

Agree with this. It would be appropriate to hold a special service of remembrance on 4 August 2014 to commemorate the declaration of war, but the main focus should be delayed until the centenary of the end of the war in 2018.

Still, it's no more cynical than Salmond delaying his referendum until autumn 2014 so that the official period of campaigning will start immediately after he celebrates the slaughter of the English seven hundred years ago.

Don't see the problem with celebrating Bannockburn, it was the symbolical end to English oppression in Scotland that insured Scottish independance until the Union. Likewise the end of WW1 was the end of the German expansion under the Kaiser.

Both IMO good reasons to have a shindig. It's the independance and not the wars that will be celebrated.

[Hibrandenburg]

Bit difficult to 'up pro-British feeling' any higher than it already is in Scotland given the springboard of the Team GB performance in the Olympics and the current standing in the opinion polls of Scottish views on separation.

And since the vast majority of this money will be spent outside Scotland it is hardly a laser guided intervention in the Referendum. Does that mean we can start complaining now about Scotland not getting it's fair share?
Think we'll find the pro British propaganda machine in full swing between now and the elections. The pro Nats have a much more difficult task in that it's much easier to spin on the positives that the Union has brought than it is to ask people what might have been.

[Eyrie]

Don't see the problem with celebrating Bannockburn, it was the symbolical end to English oppression in Scotland that insured Scottish independance until the Union. Likewise the end of WW1 was the end of the German expansion under the Kaiser.

Both IMO good reasons to have a shindig. It's the independance and not the wars that will be celebrated.
The symbolic end of English oppression back then was our declaration of independence in 1320. Treating Bannockburn as the symbolic end is like saying that the symbolic end of World War One was the American declaration of war in response to Germany declaring unrestricted submarine warfare.

However my point was that Salmond has cynically chosen to hold his referendum in 2014 to coincide with the 700th anniversary, rather than whether it should be marked. Personally I regard the anniverary of a war's end as a time for reflection and commemoration rather than an excuse for a shindig, but each to their own.

And World War One was not fought to end German expansionism, but as a result of series of treaties that drew the major powers into a war declared by Austria-Hungary on Serbia - itself a localised power struggle in the Balkans.

[Hibrandenburg]

The symbolic end of English oppression back then was our declaration of independence in 1320. Treating Bannockburn as the symbolic end is like saying that the symbolic end of World War One was the American declaration of war in response to Germany declaring unrestricted submarine warfare.

However my point was that Salmond has cynically chosen to hold his referendum in 2014 to coincide with the 700th anniversary, rather than whether it should be marked. Personally I regard the anniverary of a war's end as a time for reflection and commemoration rather than an excuse for a shindig, but each to their own.

And World War One was not fought to end German expansionism, but as a result of series of treaties that drew the major powers into a war declared by Austria-Hungary on Serbia - itself a localised power struggle in the Balkans.


I'd disagree with you on both points mate. IMO the symbolic end to Longshank's expansionism came at Bannockburn. There was no stomach for a fight from London after the crushing defeat imposed upon them. The Arbroath declaration was political insurance that the Vatican would finally agree that Scotland was a sovereign nation and English claims to it's throne we're false.

Likewise the killing didn't finish after Nov 11th 1918, the killing went on for a little while afterwards. The old cliche that the guns fell silent at 11:00 on the 11th is simply not true.

As for the real reason behind WW1, well historians will always be split on this. What went down in Sarajevo may have been the spark that ignited the whole affair, but the real reasons lie with the Germans arriving late to the colonial table. Prussia had been observing the new industrial kind of warfare in the US civil war and their observers soon put their experience to good use by writing what was to become the German military manual on military strategy. They put this to good use soon afterwards and battered the French into submission in the Franco-German war. Soon afterwards it became possible to unite the many different German states for the first time ever under mainly Prussian leadership. Kaiser Wilhelm the new all German Kaiser was itching for a scrap and to flex his new found muscle. As stated Sarajevo was that what gave him the chance to do so.

Can't change your opinion on whether the end of a war is something to celebrate, but I personally will be bowing my head with reflection and gratitude to all those who paid the ultimate sacrifice for my freedom on Nov the 11th like I always do and celebrating an end to the killing in 1918 in 2018. You can bet your shirt that I'll be cracking open a special malt in 2014 as well should the vote go the right way.

[yeezus.]

Another nauseating speech from Cameron. Are Labour going to come up with an alternative to the current economic path!?!?

[Phil D. Rolls]

Offering up the lives of its people?

Is my grammar wrong?

[Betty Boop]

Ha ha, Osbourne caught on the train, in First Class, with a standard ticket. Pleb ! :greengrin

[Phil D. Rolls]

Ha ha, Osbourne caught on the train, in First Class, with a standard ticket. Pleb ! :greengrin

Except he got his "man" to pay for it. Toffs don't carry money.

[Beefster]

Is my grammar wrong?

I'm not an English teacher.

I was wondering how the UK "offers up the lives of its people" and what countries are not guilty of this crime?

[Phil D. Rolls]

I'm not an English teacher.

I was wondering how the UK "offers up the lives of its people" and what countries are not guilty of this crime?

I would say the number of war memorials in the UK compared to what I've seen in other countries, is a fair indicator of how willing our rulers have been to send "Our Boys" to war. Possibly more advanced democracies have shied away from 19th Century attitudes?

[Hibrandenburg]

I would say the number of war memorials in the UK compared to what I've seen in other countries, is a fair indicator of how willing our rulers have been to send "Our Boys" to war. Possibly more advanced democracies have shied away from 19th Century attitudes?

Either that or enough morals to show respect to our war dead. Probably a mixture of both.

[Phil D. Rolls]

Either that or enough morals to show respect to our war dead. Probably a mixture of both.

Be interested to hear your experiences. Are you saying there are countries where the war dead are ignored?

[Hibrandenburg]

Germany is almost like that. Most small towns have memorials to those who fell in the 1st WW and have the names of those who died in the 2nd plastered on somewhere. But huge memorials like we know are reserved for the Allied dead. Some of the Russian ones are absolutely enormous. There are several large war memorials that celebrate victories that pre-date 1914 however.

[greenlex]

The symbolic end of English oppression back then was our declaration of independence in 1320. Treating Bannockburn as the symbolic end is like saying that the symbolic end of World War One was the American declaration of war in response to Germany declaring unrestricted submarine warfare.

However my point was that Salmond has cynically chosen to hold his referendum in 2014 to coincide with the 700th anniversary, rather than whether it should be marked. Personally I regard the anniverary of a war's end as a time for reflection and commemoration rather than an excuse for a shindig, but each to their own.

And World War One was not fought to end German expansionism, but as a result of series of treaties that drew the major powers into a war declared by Austria-Hungary on Serbia - itself a localised power struggle in the Balkans.

Another viewpoint is he will cynically take advantage of the Commonwealth Games and a Ryder Cup both being successful from a Scottish perspective. A scottish feelgood factor to go to the polls with. Of course both could go tits up and he will have the yolk and the white full on around his coupon and we will be stuck with the same old stale political geography for the rest of my life. :cb

[(((Fergus)))]

Germany is almost like that. Most small towns have memorials to those who fell in the 1st WW and have the names of those who died in the 2nd plastered on somewhere. But huge memorials like we know are reserved for the Allied dead. Some of the Russian ones are absolutely enormous. There are several large war memorials that celebrate victories that pre-date 1914 however.

:agree: Plus British losses in WWII were about 400,000 while the Germans lost 5.5 million. In both World Wars, British losses as a percentage of population were relatively low.