Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

You Europeans can throw some nice parties too, I see France, Greece, and England there.

Albatross wrote:Is that seriously all you've got?

Considering I have no problem with people peacefully protesting against the government, Sarah Palin, or Glenn Beck, I figure that's all I need.

I also have a problem with living in a monarchy. But this might be inherited since I had ancestors fight in the Revolutionary War. It's possible I could learn to live with it. Being part of the same Empire as Canada might pose a problem.

biccat wrote:

Albatross wrote:Is that seriously all you've got?

I also have a problem with living in a monarchy. But this might be inherited since I had ancestors fight in the Revolutionary War. It's possible I could learn to live with it. Being part of the same Empire as Canada might pose a problem.

Lol.

So your against Monarchy because you (might) have had ancestors fight in the revolutionary war?!

Thats an awesome reason!

Your great great great great great great great Grandad might have been a pro British fighter for all you know. He probably was. Maybe your a distant relative of the Queen of England!

I love to remind all the historically inept plaggy paddies I meet in bars across the states of this fact all the time!

mattyrm wrote:So your against Monarchy because you (might) have had ancestors fight in the revolutionary war?!

Actually my dislike of the English Monarchy is (mostly) tongue in cheek. It's a silly antiquated notion that your country has, but there's nothing really wrong with it. It's not like the nobility still runs the country.

mattyrm wrote:Lol.

So your against Monarchy because you (might) have had ancestors fight in the revolutionary war?!

Thats an awesome reason!

Your great great great great great great great Grandad might have been a pro British fighter for all you know. He probably was. Maybe your a distant relative of the Queen of England!

I love to remind all the historically inept plaggy paddies I meet in bars across the states of this fact all the time!

Once you go back past about 8 generations you are probably related to just about everyone in Europe (assuming you are of European ancestry).

Yeah well exactly Silver, its why i think people with such ridiculous notions of loyalty going back 100s of years is so ridiculous. You get brainwashed sectarian gakkers fighting over nonsense, when clearly were all related anyway. Once you go back a few hundred years, its all a big mish mash.

gak, Ive probably even got some French in me somewhere!

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:So your against Monarchy because you (might) have had ancestors fight in the revolutionary war?!

Actually my dislike of the English Monarchy is (mostly) tongue in cheek. It's a silly antiquated notion that your country has, but there's nothing really wrong with it. It's not like the nobility still runs the country.

I'm more against it because unlike the whole King Arthur king thing which seemed cool, Current Brit royalty looks a little stuffy and inbred.

Maybe if they started wearing chainmail again and carried swords or something...

CT GAMER wrote:

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:So your against Monarchy because you (might) have had ancestors fight in the revolutionary war?!

Actually my dislike of the English Monarchy is (mostly) tongue in cheek. It's a silly antiquated notion that your country has, but there's nothing really wrong with it. It's not like the nobility still runs the country.

I'm more against it because unlike the whole King Arthur king thing which seemed cool, Current Brit royalty looks like they bred with their sister.

Maybe if they started wearing chainmail again and carried swords or something...

Hey, im all for some transatlantic banter, but leave off the monarchy! I took a vow to protect them with my life and I cannot carry out hideous acts of violence against anybody via an internet forum.

I feel so helpless and yet filled with rage at the same time!?!

Arg! My poorly evolved primate brain is struggling to deal with these insults from afar!

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:So your against Monarchy because you (might) have had ancestors fight in the revolutionary war?!

Actually my dislike of the English Monarchy is (mostly) tongue in cheek. It's a silly antiquated notion that your country has, but there's nothing really wrong with it. It's not like the nobility still runs the country.

That's not strictly true - in any case, it seems to have worked out pretty well for us these last 1500+ years...

In any case, this thread isn't a USA vs. UK thread - it's about US imperialism. Let's discuss that. Incidentally, it should be noted that I'm not using the 'term' imperialist as a pejorative.

mattyrm wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:So your against Monarchy because you (might) have had ancestors fight in the revolutionary war?!

Actually my dislike of the English Monarchy is (mostly) tongue in cheek. It's a silly antiquated notion that your country has, but there's nothing really wrong with it. It's not like the nobility still runs the country.

I'm more against it because unlike the whole King Arthur king thing which seemed cool, Current Brit royalty looks like they bred with their sister.

Maybe if they started wearing chainmail again and carried swords or something...

Hey, im all for some transatlantic banter, but leave off the monarchy! I took a vow to protect them with my life and I cannot carry out hideous acts of violence against anybody via an internet forum.

I feel so helpless and yet filled with rage at the same time!?!

Arg! My poorly evolved primate brain is struggling to deal with these insults from afar!

Ok relax, I have a Prince Henry poster on my bedroom wall too...

CT GAMER wrote:

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:So your against Monarchy because you (might) have had ancestors fight in the revolutionary war?!

Actually my dislike of the English Monarchy is (mostly) tongue in cheek. It's a silly antiquated notion that your country has, but there's nothing really wrong with it. It's not like the nobility still runs the country.

I'm more against it because unlike the whole King Arthur king thing which seemed cool, Current Brit royalty looks a little stuffy and inbred.

Maybe if they started wearing chainmail again and carried swords or something...

Whilst I appreciate that a little bit of banter might have hurt your feelings, I think that insulting our monarchy is completely out of order. I take it as a grave personal insult.


Just knock it the feth off.

Albatross wrote:In any case, this thread isn't a USA vs. UK thread - it's about US imperialism. Let's discuss that. Incidentally, it should be noted that I'm not using the 'term' imperialist as a pejorative.

Well, the US isn't really imperialist, we're like imperialist-lite. We'll let you behave however you want, but once you start threatening to disrupt the capitalist worldwide trade network, we'll cut you off. If you keep acting like a beligerant arse, we'll either send you money and ask you nicely to hide in your palace, or send in the Air Force to drop high explosives on you.

Sometimes one will follow the other.

Really, we're the guardians of capitalism (the current president being a notable exception), freedom is a secondary objective.

Albatross wrote:

CT GAMER wrote:

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:So your against Monarchy because you (might) have had ancestors fight in the revolutionary war?!

Actually my dislike of the English Monarchy is (mostly) tongue in cheek. It's a silly antiquated notion that your country has, but there's nothing really wrong with it. It's not like the nobility still runs the country.

I'm more against it because unlike the whole King Arthur king thing which seemed cool, Current Brit royalty looks a little stuffy and inbred.

Maybe if they started wearing chainmail again and carried swords or something...

Whilst I appreciate that a little bit of banter might have hurt your feelings, I think that insulting our monarchy is completely out of order. I take it as a grave personal insult.


Just knock it the feth off.

Wait he has a point. I'd be way more cool with royalty if they were epic cool Arthur like.

Albatross wrote:
Whilst I appreciate that a little bit of banter might have hurt your feelings, I think that insulting our monarchy is completely out of order. I take it as a grave personal insult.

In all seriousness, why are English people so emotionally invested in the monarchy? Feeling so emotionally attached to someone who achieved thier position just by being born seems strange to me. I seriously mean no offense, I just can't relate to it.

Frazzled wrote:Wait he has a point. I'd be way more cool with royalty if they were epic cool Arthur like.

Or even like this:


There's a man who knew how to protect the Crown Jewels.

Who needs a suit of armour when Prince Harry commands a tank?



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-522913/Harry-came-minutes-Taliban-roadside-bomb.html

Story from the daily fail, so take it with a pinch of salt

Which one's the prince, sir coolguy on the right or mister needsachin on the left?

ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:

Albatross wrote:
Whilst I appreciate that a little bit of banter might have hurt your feelings, I think that insulting our monarchy is completely out of order. I take it as a grave personal insult.

In all seriousness, why are English people so emotionally invested in the monarchy? Feeling so emotionally attached to someone who achieved thier position just by being born seems strange to me. I seriously mean no offense, I just can't relate to it.

It's a cornerstone of our national consciousness, and a tradition that stretches back over a millenium. It's part of who we are.

A useful comparison might be the the reverence of the 'Founding Fathers' - to me they're just a bunch of normal human blokes, with a bunch of not entirely original ideas, which in any case weren't properly implemented in spirit. In fact, from the British point of view they are traitors. Yet they, and the documents they drafted, are accorded mythical status by you folks - and that's cool, they mean a lot to you. I wouldn't intentionally go out of my way to insult them, and I hope you don't take any of what I posted in that way. Of course they don't mean anything to me, they're not part of the bedrock of my national identity. I CAN still respect the fact that they are part of yours though, and I would expect the same in return.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SilverMK2 wrote:Who needs a suit of armour when Prince Harry commands a tank?



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-522913/Harry-came-minutes-Taliban-roadside-bomb.html

Story from the daily fail, so take it with a pinch of salt

Hal (Sir Coolguy) looks fairly badass there, like!

Albatross wrote:

biccat wrote:

mattyrm wrote:So your against Monarchy because you (might) have had ancestors fight in the revolutionary war?!

Actually my dislike of the English Monarchy is (mostly) tongue in cheek. It's a silly antiquated notion that your country has, but there's nothing really wrong with it. It's not like the nobility still runs the country.

That's not strictly true - in any case, it seems to have worked out pretty well for us these last 1500+ years...

In any case, this thread isn't a USA vs. UK thread - it's about US imperialism. Let's discuss that. Incidentally, it should be noted that I'm not using the 'term' imperialist as a pejorative.

I thought this thread was about being belligerent.

ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:

Albatross wrote:
Whilst I appreciate that a little bit of banter might have hurt your feelings, I think that insulting our monarchy is completely out of order. I take it as a grave personal insult.

In all seriousness, why are English people so emotionally invested in the monarchy? Feeling so emotionally attached to someone who achieved thier position just by being born seems strange to me. I seriously mean no offense, I just can't relate to it.

They dont mate, its personal preference. Just like the repubs and the dems, so are the British. Some love em, some hate em and think we should have a "president" instead.

Yeah, cos politicians are way better people than selfless monarchs who happily go to war alongside the lads in Afghanistan.

So some hate, and some love, but when you love, you really love.

I met Harry in the Gan, ive got the utmost respect for the bloke. Tony Blair sent his gak bag son to a top US uni, while his wife cried at the airport. This made many service wives go "eh? I didnt cry when Dave went to Iraq"

I hate politicians, I love the monarchy, but YMMV.

Albatross wrote:A useful comparison might be the the reverence of the 'Founding Fathers' - to me they're just a bunch of normal human blokes, with a bunch of not entirely original ideas, which in any case weren't properly implemented in spirit. In fact, from the British point of view they are traitors. Yet they, and the documents they drafted, are accorded mythical status by you folks - and that's cool, they mean a lot to you. I wouldn't intentionally go out of my way to insult them, and I hope you don't take any of what I posted in that way. Of course they don't mean anything to me, they're not part of the bedrock of my national identity. I CAN still respect the fact that they are part of yours though, and I would expect the same in return.

I guess I can appreciate the tradition. And I wouldn't and would expect my fellow Americans not to trash the traditions of a people so close to us. Maybe every now in the in good fun .

It's just hard for us to appreciate royalty I think because the people we look up to, we look up to because they opposed the royalty. The values of the founding fathers in a lot aways are in opposition to a more traditional monarchy. My understanding is the monarchy in England is mostly just ceremonial at this point so as two democratic societies or values are a lot closer than in the past, but 250 years ago I think our mindsets were really incompatible (hence the rebellion). Just my two cents. Nice having a little friendly off shoot with you!

ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:

Albatross wrote:
Whilst I appreciate that a little bit of banter might have hurt your feelings, I think that insulting our monarchy is completely out of order. I take it as a grave personal insult.

In all seriousness, why are English people so emotionally invested in the monarchy? Feeling so emotionally attached to someone who achieved thier position just by being born seems strange to me. I seriously mean no offense, I just can't relate to it.

Because in the old days a Monarch was a true bad ass. You didn't become ruler and hold on to your kingdom if you were some inbred wimp. These guys and gals, upto probaly the 1500's were the real deal. Queen Bess, no messing. Her dad Henry VIII? Ignore the fat bloke image, in his youth he was a real bad ass and took the whole Knight thing really seriously. Henry V did the business. Was Henry II in Braveheart? He was a ruthless SoB. Don't forget Richard the Lion Heart, went stomping off to the middle east and killed everything. His great granddaddy set the ball rolling for the nation that was to become the United Kingdom, and with a name ending Bastich, you've got to be impressed. Oh, don't forget good old Harold who gave the Vikings a bloody good slap (got mixed feelings about that out come!) then marched down south to repel the invaders. If he'd not be killed it could of been 2 for 2.

All this probably explains why we are like we are, it's bred into us for hundreds of generations. You got the buggers when they's started to go off

Wolfstan wrote: You got the buggers when they's started to go off

I have no idea what that expression means. It's cold in here, I need to find my jumper.

ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:

Wolfstan wrote: You got the buggers when they's started to go off

I have no idea what that expression means. It's cold in here, I need to find my jumper.

Basically means go rotten. You got to know then when the inbreeding had started to take hold and were a bunch of useless fethers.

I thought most of the inbreeding was in the Hapsburg family. I don't know why but I didn't think the English houses were as into that sort of thing.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Somehow we need to tie inbreeding to Obama to get back on topic... Any suggestions?

ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:

Albatross wrote:A useful comparison might be the the reverence of the 'Founding Fathers' - to me they're just a bunch of normal human blokes, with a bunch of not entirely original ideas, which in any case weren't properly implemented in spirit. In fact, from the British point of view they are traitors. Yet they, and the documents they drafted, are accorded mythical status by you folks - and that's cool, they mean a lot to you. I wouldn't intentionally go out of my way to insult them, and I hope you don't take any of what I posted in that way. Of course they don't mean anything to me, they're not part of the bedrock of my national identity. I CAN still respect the fact that they are part of yours though, and I would expect the same in return.

I guess I can appreciate the tradition. And I wouldn't and would expect my fellow Americans not to trash the traditions of a people so close to us. Maybe every now in the in good fun .

It's just hard for us to appreciate royalty I think because the people we look up to, we look up to because they opposed the royalty. The values of the founding fathers in a lot aways are in opposition to a more traditional monarchy. My understanding is the monarchy in England is mostly just ceremonial at this point so as two democratic societies or values are a lot closer than in the past, but 250 years ago I think our mindsets were really incompatible (hence the rebellion).

Y'see, that's a great misconception - Britain in the 1700s wasn't a despotism, it was a parliamentary democracy similar to how it is today. The Monarchy still has (theoretical) power, but doesn't exercise it anywhere near as much as it used too.

Just my two cents. Nice having a little friendly off shoot with you!

Aye, you too.

ShumaGorath wrote:I thought this thread was about being belligerent.

When I skimmed over your post (as I am often wont to do ), I thought the last word was 'intelligent'. Then I went back to read the first page and realised that couldn't possibly be the case.

Albatross wrote:

ArtfcllyFlvrd wrote:

Albatross wrote:
Whilst I appreciate that a little bit of banter might have hurt your feelings, I think that insulting our monarchy is completely out of order. I take it as a grave personal insult.

In all seriousness, why are English people so emotionally invested in the monarchy? Feeling so emotionally attached to someone who achieved thier position just by being born seems strange to me. I seriously mean no offense, I just can't relate to it.

It's a cornerstone of our national consciousness, and a tradition that stretches back over a millenium. It's part of who we are.

A useful comparison might be the the reverence of the 'Founding Fathers' - to me they're just a bunch of normal human blokes, with a bunch of not entirely original ideas, which in any case weren't properly implemented in spirit. In fact, from the British point of view they are traitors. Yet they, and the documents they drafted, are accorded mythical status by you folks - and that's cool, they mean a lot to you. I wouldn't intentionally go out of my way to insult them, and I hope you don't take any of what I posted in that way. Of course they don't mean anything to me, they're not part of the bedrock of my national identity. I CAN still respect the fact that they are part of yours though, and I would expect the same in return.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SilverMK2 wrote:Who needs a suit of armour when Prince Harry commands a tank?



http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-522913/Harry-came-minutes-Taliban-roadside-bomb.html

Story from the daily fail, so take it with a pinch of salt

Hal (Sir Coolguy) looks fairly badass there, like!

Everything said in this thread as far as banter is concerned was in jest, which i assumed everyone was up to speed with and since there was no shortage coming from the other direction either i figured all was in good fun.

Am I gonna have to turn in my Smiths albums now?

On the topic of inbreeding, consider this:

Tony Blair and George W. Bush were distantly related, and both were even more distantly related to the Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

100% true.

Just out of interest would good old George really of been that interested in spreading the revolution word? Or was he just the right man at the right time, to help create the nation that became the USA? I mean he appears to of had a vision / dream for creating a new nation, but would he of really been interested in this way of thinking spreading across the world?

As Albatross has already mentioned. at that time in history if you removed the Monarchy we would of basically been the same. Elected officials representing the country and to be honest at that time in history they were probably worse than any King / Queen could of been. I mean how long did it take for everyone to have the vote on either side of the Atlantic, probably about the same time.

Albatross wrote:On the topic of inbreeding, consider this:

Tony Blair and George W. Bush were distantly related, and both were even more distantly related to the Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II.

100% true.

If I recall correctly, Bush & Obama are seventh cousins (plus or minus a few "removeds").

Obviously the "having balls" side of the family split from the Obamas a few generations back.