British History Lessons

by Utopian Reformist 19 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  Utopian Reformist

  I desparately tried to avoid this thread about anglo & american superiority. I truly did, until I read the "poppycock" about the British War Efforts in the last century.

  Perhaps anglophiles should refresh their ancient and modern memories a bit before launching such laughable tirades of triviality and supposed triumph.

  First, did not the English employ mercenaries during the Battle of Hastings to win the 100 years war? (Since "expatbrit" is correcting me--I am modifying this)-- excuse me for my trivial error)

  That pattern of hiding behind mercenaries was set long ago and continued even to the Malvinas Campaign. YES, I called those Argentinian Islands MALVINAS because they DO NOT belong to you and never will, despite your monarchial tyrranical presence.

  Consider the American Revolutionary War, and the use of Hessians, onto WWI and the use of Australians and Canadians, and then WWII saw the use of Ghurkas, Indian Sikhs, Berbers in the desert, etc..etc..etc..

  Monty was a pompous coward and that was known to Patton, Rommel and others. While British officers "dined" foreign troops faced the Afrika Korps, and the same occurred at Monte Cassino.

  Therefore, whether you discuss Football (which was NOT invented in England -- only modern day rules were) or you choose to discuss military history, the FINAL CONCLUSION IS:

  The British are NOT superior to anyone, in fact, apart from slavery, colonialism, royal treachery and the exploitation of numerous countries, there is not much to recount in a positive light.

  Several things that will never come from England:

  FINE WINE
  GOURMET CUISINE
  CLASSICAL SYMPHONY COMPOSERS
  FINE ART (unless they steal it from somewhere)

  **********************************************************************
  IN ENGLAND'S DEFENSE:

  They did give us the:

  Rolling Stones
  Cream
  Yardbirds
  Led Zeppelin
  Beatles
  The Who

  And who could forget:

  Simon Templar
  James Bond
  The Avengers
  Benny Hill
  Vicar of Dibley
  Dr. Who
  Monty Python's Flying Circus

  Just my two cents....
• 

  expatbrit

  UR:

  First, did not the English employ mercenaries during the Battle of Hastings to win the 100 years war?

  The Battle of Hastings occured in 1066 when Duke William of Normandy successfully invaded England and defeated Harold Godwinson. It was not part of the Hundred Years War, which began when Edward III claimed the French throne in 1337, and ended in 1453 when Henry VI gave up all French possessions except for Calais.

  If you cannot get even the most basic of facts about English history correct, do not be surprised if your somewhat extreme opinions are met with skepticism.

  Expatbrit
• 

  Utopian Reformist

  Thank you for correcting my history. However, the point is about the use of "mercenaries" while bragging about military exploits.

  Again, your correction of me is duly noted, acknowledged and recognized! Now, why do Brits brag about the accomplishments of subjugated people under their control and take credit?
• 

  expatbrit

  A brief blurb on Hessians:

  During the American Revolution, Germany was divided into over 300 principalities. Many of these tiny countries supplied soldiers to the British army in its fight against America, but by far the largest group came from Hesse-Cassel. As a consequence, during the war and ever since, all of the Germans fighting with the British were lumped together and called Hessians.

  The Hessians' services were bought and paid for by George III, who simply did not have enough soldiers in his own army to supply the needs of his commanders in America. German soldiers had served many European nations in a similar fashion for years, but they were not true mercenaries. Most of the Hessians received no compensation for their services beyond their daily bread. It was the Prince of Hesse-Cassel, Frederick II, who made off like a bandit in his dealings with George III. He sold the services of 12,000 Hessians to the English at [sterling]7 4s. a head.

  In total, nearly 30,000 German soldiers fought for the British in North America. Once there, they discovered a thriving German-American community of almost 200,000 people. For many Hessians, the possibilities in this rich, new land with its growing German population was a great enticement to desertion---a fact that Americans worked hard to promote with promises of free land for Hessians willing to switch sides. An estimated 5,000 Germans stayed in this country, when their fellow countrymen returned home.

  As for the Canadians and Australians fighting during WWI and II, they were proud to do so, and Britain has acknowledged and appreciated their contributions ever since. Canadian servicemen I've met have invariably recounted their wartime experiences in Britain with pride and pleasure. At the outbreak of the war, I believe that both Canada and Australia were self-governing, and they freely volunteered their support of Britain.

  The Ghurka regiment is a proud group of men. I suggest if you ever meet a current or previous Ghurka you do not speak of them as a subjugated mercenary. Again, former soldiers from empire lands have always remembered their service with pride, in my experience.

  My grandfather served under Monty in North Africa. He certainly did not dine while foreign troops faced the Afrika Korp. Indeed, I have never been able to get him to speak of some of the experiences he endured during that campaign.

  It is true that Britain "takes the credit" as you put it for many military victories in which large numbers of non-British soldiers fought. This is not uncommon for any country, since generally the victory is ascribed to the main protagonist country and it's military commanders. What you ascribe with negativity to the British is a routine occurence through thousands of years.

  I'm curious now though. Why your Anglophobia?

  Expatbrit
• 

  Utopian Reformist

  I am not AFRAID of the british. The british, like any group in history have left behind good and evil. What I do not personally appreciate is the british propensity for braggadocio!

  Yes, many volunteered their services for the "Queen". And, I would never insult a Ghurka , much less a Highlander, Candian Mounty, or Autralian Light Cavalry, however, the history of england at war is not as innocent as you presume.

  There were many atrocities committed in India, South Africa, and in the Desert. To this very day, I regularly converse with several older immigrants from Eritrea and Ethiopia who remember the english dismantling their schools and factories and buildings and shipping the spoils back to England. British liberation from oppression at it's best.

  Let's not mention the revisionist history written after the war. The topic is too large and requires so much time and effort, but I have been thru this so many times before, suffice it to say I am glad I did more reading than american history books alone.
• 

  expatbrit

  Also on the subject of bad things the British did in Africa, they pretty much invented concentration camps in South Africa.

  I certainly would agree that the British are not superior in morals or practices to anyone else. British people have indeed committed crimes and atrocities in other countries, and because the British have had a more active world history than probably any other country, there are many examples of both good and bad, intelligent and stupid, efficient and muddled actions carried out by British people.

  I enjoy history. It has huge value and relevance to the present day. But, if in reading history we allow past and unchangeable events to create division, dislike and even hatred, then history becomes a trap, not a beneficial educational tool.

  Btw, I live in Canada. It bugs the hell out of me when I see fellow Brits walking around indulging in braggadocio and "we won the war" bullshit. It irritates and shames me when British tourists misbehave and are rude to the people whose country they are guests in. I try always to be conscious that modern Canadians views of Britain will be formed largely by the British they meet in Canada.

  It's said that "history is written by the victors". Not accurate history. You're right about not just reading history books from one perspective. As usual, the "truth" lies somewhere in the middle!

  Expatbrit
• 

  bboyneko

  The british gave us kit-kat bars, crunchie bars and yummy nutella. Plus they have the best techno next to germany. Recently, they have treated us to the white guy shaven head look which for some reason just about everybody in england seems to wear. You guys trying to look like bruce willis??
• 

  JanH

  expatbrit,

  Also on the subject of bad things the British did in Africa, they pretty much invented concentration camps in South Africa.

  Yes, and no. This statement, while factually true, is grossly misleading. The British set up concentration camps in the Boer war in South Africa, true. Like most wars, it was a cruel one. The boer guerillas were using the population to hide, and relied on them for supplies. The British developed a (militarily) very good counter-strategy. They moved the sparse population into tightly controlled areas. These camps were not places for neither forced slave labour nor punishment, and they were certainly not extermination camps.

  Most people associate the expression "concentration camp" with the slave labour camps, and later, extermination camps used in the Nazi ethnic cleansing. This expression was typical Nazi officialese that hid a horrible truth behind a very neutral-sounding term. Of course, when the truth came out, the term "concentration camp" would came to be associated with these extreme horrors. It is thus misleading to apply it to what the British did in SA, without a quite extensive caveat.

  - Jan
  --
  "Doctor how can you diagnose someone with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder and then act like I had some choice about barging in here right now?" -- As Good As It Gets
• 

  expatbrit

  Jan:

  I thought you were goin' on vacation!

  You are correct about the caveat. Unfortunately just about everything in history requires a gazillion caveats. So yes, the British did have concentration camps, no they were not like the Nazi ones. For all I know, we served 'em afternoon tea.

  Hey! This thread is nine posts long. Isn't it about time we started calling each other names?

  Expatbrit
• 

  Julie

  Oh come on, in all fairness everybody used mercenaries (except Willliam the Conquerer at Hastings *lol* ). What I want to point out to all you history buffs is poor Harold. I think Harold Godwinson is short-changed in the credit department. It is remarkable he was able to fend off Tostig and his Viking buddies and it is no small wonder he wasn't able to turn around right away and beat back the Normans. He made a remarkable effort but of course his failure changed England forever, likely for the better, but I still give the guy an A for effort.

  Julie, who feels bad for unsung heroes and even the unsung almost-heroes