Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Brexit

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by m kenny View Post
    Germany pre-WW1 better voting rights and social welfare schemes than the UK. True Hitler destroyed all that 1933-45 but since then the Germans have reclaimed their spot as the leading European economy, a Europe that includes the UK.
    The same Germans who clawed their way back to the top of the hill post 1945 were the same Germans climbing it in 1910. The 2 wars delayed the German rise but they could never stop it happening.
    The Brexiteer hatred of Germany is deep-rooted but basically it is nothing more than a desire for revenge on those they think stole their spot on the world stage.
    One of the most risible posts I've read this year.

    The two world wars represented the apogee of Germany on the world stage.

    Now Germany = <5% of global GDP

    Comment


    • Originally posted by ljadw View Post

      If it was not an alliance of close coordination, it was not an alliance .
      Yes it was, it was the still alliance in effect in 1914. It was the basis of French calculations about a possible war with Germany all along. The Franco-Russian alliance was an absolute game-changer in continental European politics, since it meant the potential for situations where the French could envisage defeating Germany was at hand again.

      What's throwing you off is that the alliance system didn't require close coordination, or common policies, and had secret clauses, meaning everyone's calculations of the effects of their actions would be more or less off kelter all the time since no one could be exactly sure what everyone had agreed to, or not. Like in 1914. It could have started in 1912 too, except it didn't.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by BF69 View Post

        I would have thought the possession of oil & gas resources that would belong to an independent Scottish nation was a pretty handy benefit.
        Technically most of the oil and gas would belong to the Shetland Islanders.

        Comment


        • Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
          Jeremy Hunt's comparison of the EU to the Soviet prisons. Which is kind of peculiar to say the least since the UK is leaving the EU.
          “The EU was set up to protect freedom – it was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving. The lesson from history is clear – if you turn the EU club into a prison, the desire to get out of it won’t diminish, it will grow, and we won’t be the only prisoner that wants to escape…”

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Gooner View Post
            The two world wars represented the apogee of Germany on the world stage.
            Perhaps this holds true for those with more of a superficial view and whose resentment for the German nation is their blind spot.

            In any case.

            I would say the first apegee onto the world stage took place in the years between the unification and the outbreak of WWI.

            In which she in a short few years achieved leading position economically, militarily, culturally and scientifically, the unification also helped bring stability to a continent previously ravaged by war, and at which point it truly began to prosper.

            A shame she couldn't be left alone.

            Germany's second apogee onto the world stage I would say was the technological breakthroughs and achievements she contributed with during and after the war, and how that knowledge, and the intellectual theft of it, helped advance other nations as well as take us into space and beyond.

            I was somewhat reluctant to include the second apogee because it took place under a regime that I absolutely loathe, a regime that crushed the German nation emotionally, spiritually and of course morally.

            Thou It so easily could have been avoided in the first place had it not been for a treaty designed to humiliate and crush her, which should have been understood at the time.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Gooner View Post
              “The EU was set up to protect freedom – it was the Soviet Union that stopped people leaving. The lesson from history is clear – if you turn the EU club into a prison, the desire to get out of it won’t diminish, it will grow, and we won’t be the only prisoner that wants to escape…”
              Yet the problem in that is how exactly is the UK (or any one) stopped from leaving from the EU? The whole statement show fundamental lack of understanding of how the EU works (and how the Soviet Union worked - see comments from Latvians and Polish for example) and even less of what the Article 50 is.
              It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion, it is by the beans of Java that thoughts acquire speed. The hands acquire shaking, the shaking becomes a warning. It is by caffeine alone I set my mind in motion

              Comment


              • Originally posted by walle

                In which she in a short few years achieved leading position economically, militarily, culturally and scientifically, the unification also helped bring stability to a continent previously ravaged by war, and at which point it truly began to prosper.

                A shame she couldn't be left alone.
                A shame Germany couldn't be left alone to do what? Invade Belgium? Conquer France? Seize the Ukraine?


                Germany's second apogee onto the world stage I would say was the technological breakthroughs and achievements she contributed with during and after the war, and how that knowledge, and the intellectual theft of it, helped advance other nations as well as take us into space and beyond.

                I was somewhat reluctant to include the second apogee because it took place under a regime that I absolutely loathe, a regime that crushed the German nation emotionally, spiritually and of course morally.

                Thou It so easily could have been avoided in the first place had it not been for a treaty designed to humiliate and crush her, which should have been understood at the time, and perhaps it was understood.

                I can understand why you would be reluctant to count the achievements of NAZI Germany as a national apogee.

                Still, you think Hitler was Britains fault so that's alright then

                Comment


                • Originally posted by Vaeltaja View Post
                  Yet the problem in that is how exactly is the UK (or any one) stopped from leaving from the EU? The whole statement show fundamental lack of understanding of how the EU works (and how the Soviet Union worked - see comments from Latvians and Polish for example) and even less of what the Article 50 is.
                  Less a statement and more a speech to the Party faithful. Why on earth you would take an interest I don't know.

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Gooner View Post

                    Less a statement and more a speech to the Party faithful. Why on earth you would take an interest I don't know.
                    If so it's still weirdness of the first order, since it's not as if the UK is some kind of closed shop, and these statements off the record behind closed doors. Anything said must be assumed to be listened to, rather intently given the circumstances, thus it's as much a message to the EU. Except, weirdly, you might be right that there might be no actual connection in the MINDS of the UK Tories, who somehow don't seem to think continental Europe is actually really real...

                    To them the Nazis and the Soviets and the lessons of history clearly aren't really real as well. They're rhetorical devices for make-believe-policies, personal identity politics posturing, that no one outside their own in-group are supposed to be listening too. Except they are currently the British government, so...

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by Gooner View Post

                      A shame Germany couldn't be left alone to do what? :
                      To prosper together with the rest of Europe, the unification had created stability on the continent. That said, a nation that is being threatend by three oher powers surrounding her might lash out.


                      Originally posted by Gooner View Post
                      I can understand why you would be reluctant to count the achievements of NAZI Germany as a national apogee.
                      It’s always nice to see signs of understanding,

                      It was achievements made under the regime, not achievements made by the regime, therefore I included them, albeit reluctantly.

                      The regime used the nations know-how and drive to forward its own agenda.

                      Originally posted by Gooner View Post
                      Still, you think Hitler was Britains fault so that's alright then
                      I guess that depends on how you define fault and where you assign blame, the English and the French designed the treaty to humiliate and crush her, it wasn't drafted in a way that suggests intent of preventing and or minimizing the risk for any future conflicts.

                      There were suggestions made of how to achieve this but those were ignored.

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by walle

                        To prosper together with the rest of Europe, the unification had created stability on the continent. That said, a nation that is being threatend by three oher powers surrounding her might lash out.
                        You really are hilarious. There was stability on the continent before Prussia had decided on German unification as well.
                        The various Balkan wars make a mockery of 'stability on the continent'

                        No one was threatening Germany in 1914 - it started the war because its leadership thought time was running out for when it could win a European war.


                        It’s always nice to see signs of undersanding,

                        It was achievements made under the regime, not achievements made by the regime, therefore I included them, albeit reluctantly.

                        The regime used the nations know-how and drive to forward its own agenda.
                        Meh. Their achievements weren't that special.


                        I guess that depends on how you define fault and where you assign blame,
                        Yes, and if you are of the insanely Teutonophillic persuasion Britain and France are of course to blame.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by Gooner
                          You really are hilarious.There was stability on the continent before Prussia had decided on German unification as well.
                          The various Balkan wars make a mockery of 'stability on the continent'
                          As I’ve mentioned already, the unification brought stability to the continent as well as to Germany, and the continent began to prosper.
                          The Balkan wars doesn’t make a mockery of the fact at all, unless you start counting history from 1912 and onward.

                          Last time there were a conflict was in the 1990’s, I would say the European continent was stable at that point as well.

                          We could of course argue what constitutes as stable, we could look at Ireland in your own backyard and immediate sphere of influence.

                          Originally posted by Gooner
                          it started the war because its leadership thought time was running out for when it could win a European war
                          It was in leading position, had no interest in a European war. It had nothing to gain from it.

                          Originally posted by Gooner
                          Yes, and if you are of the insanely Teutonophillic persuasion Britain and France are of course to blame.
                          Yes what a preposterous thing to say, to even suggest that England and France who dictated and drafted the treaty had any responsibility for what were to follow 20 years later.



                          I just read the thread title, it would appear as if thou we are slightly off topic.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by BF69 View Post

                            I would have thought the possession of oil & gas resources that would belong to an independent Scottish nation was a pretty handy benefit. The availability of that resource to the English dominated UK government over generations has provided benefits that are ongoing and would have been unavailable otherwise.

                            I'm not claiming everyone in the three smaller nations is hostile to English rule, but it is not and has not been a partnership of equals. However enthusiastic Scots, Welsh, Irish or even Cornish might have been about Empire, it was still fundamentally an English project.

                            In any case, I'm simply providing a counterpoint to the patently ridiculous claims of one of our resident Brexiteers, who appears to suffer the affliction of so many of his kind - an obsession with Britain's role in WW2.
                            A fair point, if you are alleging that the English have inevitably dominated the UK Government, but note the ethnic origin of following names: Cameron, Brown ,Blair, Callaghan, Douglas -Home, Macmillan ,MacDonald, Bonar Law, Lloyd-George ,Balfour, Campbell-Bannerman,

                            Does anything strike you ?
                            "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
                            Samuel Johnson.

                            Comment


                            • Originally posted by walle View Post

                              Perhaps this holds true for those with more of a superficial view and whose resentment for the German nation is their blind spot.

                              In any case.

                              I would say the first apegee onto the world stage took place in the years between the unification and the outbreak of WWI.

                              In which she in a short few years achieved leading position economically, militarily, culturally and scientifically, the unification also helped bring stability to a continent previously ravaged by war, and at which point it truly began to prosper.

                              A shame she couldn't be left alone.

                              Germany's second apogee onto the world stage I would say was the technological breakthroughs and achievements she contributed with during and after the war, and how that knowledge, and the intellectual theft of it, helped advance other nations as well as take us into space and beyond.

                              I was somewhat reluctant to include the second apogee because it took place under a regime that I absolutely loathe, a regime that crushed the German nation emotionally, spiritually and of course morally.

                              Thou It so easily could have been avoided in the first place had it not been for a treaty designed to humiliate and crush her, which should have been understood at the time.
                              Germany ? "A shame she couldn't be left alone " ?

                              Who left who alone ?


                              Surely the tragedy of Germany in the first half of the 20th.century was ,through bullying diplomacy and rampant militarism, that she was the author of her own defeat.

                              Not content with achieving striking progress economically, culturally and scientifically-as you say- she had to try to dominate the continent through military means as well. Witness the famous "Blank Cheque"issued in support of Austria- Hungary, her declaration of war against Russia (she needn't have done), her invasion of France (it could have been avoided), and her totally unprovoked attack on neutral Belgium.

                              It need not have been that way.

                              As for the Treaty of Versailles, despite what Keynes wrote ,it was not the imposition some people seem to think. The Indemnities were fully in line with those imposed by Germany herself upon France after the Fronco-Prussian War and at the Treaty of Best-Litovsk. Territorially Germany remained fairly intact, and the land lost ,arguably, put Germany in a better strategic position than that of 1914.
                              Last edited by BELGRAVE; 02 Oct 18, 01:55.
                              "I dogmatise and am contradicted, and in this conflict of opinions and sentiments I find delight".
                              Samuel Johnson.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by walle View Post

                                As I’ve mentioned already, the unification brought stability to the continent as well as to Germany, and the continent began to prosper.
                                The Balkan wars doesn’t make a mockery of the fact at all, unless you start counting history from 1912 and onward.

                                Last time there were a conflict was in the 1990’s, I would say the European continent was stable at that point as well.

                                We could of course argue what constitutes as stable, we could look at Ireland in your own backyard and immediate sphere of influence.
                                After three wars begun by Prussia against her neighbours, Europe enjoyed stability for 43 years until Germany started a war against her neighbours again, is what you mean.

                                The various Balkan conflicts provided the necessary spark for a Great Power conflict.

                                It was in leading position, had no interest in a European war. It had nothing to gain from it.
                                Germanys was running out of time as the leading power in Europe. Russia was on course to succeed it as the continents leading economy and military power. That is why Germany started the war - preventative.

                                Yes what a preposterous thing to say, to even suggest that England and France who dictated and drafted the treaty had any responsibility for what were to follow 20 years later.
                                No need to speculate who YOU would have voted for in 1920s-30s Germany

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X