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.

Medium of Death wrote:Manchu, just for you.

I get that the bit is a wink at Scotland but it just doesn't work for me because it requires me being repulsed at the idea of deep fried pizza.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Mr Hyena wrote:One-sided satire isn't funny and is a problem in the UK.

Look, you can't fool me. Even over here we know the English don't rally around Prince Phillip talking about boozy natives and going slitty-eyed.

Mr Hyena wrote:

Manchu wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

Manchu wrote:That explains why you don't think Philip's funny.

I don't think discriminatory comments are quite funny.

You're right of course. The archaic dry wit of a nonagenarion is serious business, no satire value whatsoever. I think you'd be very at home in the States, incidentally.

One-sided, discrimination-based satire isn't funny and is a problem in the UK. This isn't something like a funny comedian.

Everyone in the country makes the same jokes...

purplefood wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

Manchu wrote:

Mr Hyena wrote:

Manchu wrote:That explains why you don't think Philip's funny.

I don't think discriminatory comments are quite funny.

You're right of course. The archaic dry wit of a nonagenarion is serious business, no satire value whatsoever. I think you'd be very at home in the States, incidentally.

One-sided, discrimination-based satire isn't funny and is a problem in the UK. This isn't something like a funny comedian.

Everyone in the country makes the same jokes...

There is a difference between having a laugh with someone and out-and-out saying they are an alcoholic based on nothing but nationality.

Alright, I didn't think I would need to spell it out but the joke is at Philip's expense, not at the expense of the Scottish.

mattyrm wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

SilverMK2 wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:Wow. The Queen, showed up for a wedding. The Monarchy makes no decisions in policy making or controlling the Country. We don't even need them, make Australia a republic. The Queen has the time to go to weddings because she has no work to do. She is a celebrity.

You don't pay anything towards having her as your head honcho (other than security etc for state visits, which you pay for any visiting dignitary), so what is eating your shorts?

Last visit we paid $20 000 000. Technically under the System, the Queen actually has authority over my Government, she could get a Government sacked theoretically until she gets what she desires. Also, shouldn't Australians have rights to have our own head of State in our own Country. The point is the system is flawed and we would like to move to a more stable form of government where we have our own Head of State and we don't have to be treated like colonial slaves anymore.

Mate.. everything you have said is just, at odds with how the world is. Its all "technically" this and "possibly" that..

At the end of the day, Australia is a perfectly healthy, normal democracy, the Queen wont "sack" your government, has no authority over your government, and this...

rockerbikie wrote:we don't have to be treated like colonial slaves anymore.

Is just flat out wrong.

Also, didn't you guys vote to keep her anyway?!

http://whitlamdismissal.com/ She has no authority to sack Governments?

I'm not saying that all Scots are massive drinkers (or that this would be a bad thing), but...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7903584.stm

BBC wrote:Scotland has the eighth-highest level of alcohol consumption in the world, according to statistics analysed for the Scottish Government.

Drinkers consumed almost 50 million litres of pure alcohol in 2007.

People aged over 16 sank the equivalent of 11.8 litres of pure alcohol per person. The figure for England and Wales was 9.9 litres.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2009/02/20161722

The Scottish Government wrote:It is more than double the consumption level in Scandinavian countries like Sweden (6.0 litres) and Norway (5.5 litres) where the relative price of alcohol is considerably higher and the sale of alcohol is more restricted.

It was also much higher than the United States (8.6 litres), Canada (7.8 litres), Australia (9.0 litres), China (5.2 litres) Japan (7.6 litres) and even Russia (10.3 litres), where alcohol-related deaths have cut the average life expectancy for men to 59.

Looks like Phil might have a point. Just sayin'.

Albatross wrote:

rockerbikie wrote: Also, shouldn't Australians have rights to have our own head of State in our own Country.

You do! Heartfelt congratulations! Not only that, but you get to have probably the most distinguished head of state currently alive, as well as a living, breathing reminder of your country's roots and the bond of brotherhood between our nations.

Failing that, you're well within your rights to have a referendum and become a republic should you wish. We're certainly not stopping you.

The point is the system is flawed and we would like to move to a more stable form of government where we have our own Head of State and we don't have to be treated like colonial slaves anymore.

Wait...which one are you again? Aren't you the fascist/nazi bloke? Would you prefer a national socialist dictatorship to the current set-up, or something? Australia is one of the most stable and prosperous nations in the world. It looks like the Westminster System and constitutional monarchy has treated you guys pretty well from where I'm sitting. Plus, you've got the weather.

A monarch which can't connect to Australians. The point of having a head of state in the country is to have one which can connect to us. Even if I am a Nazi. I would prefer a republic where I can vouice my opinion with ammendments to make me safe. Great Britain also left us for dust in WW2 and basically left us to defend against the Japanese. We also have closer ties to USA than Great Britain now.

And now, Russ Abbot is less a gak comedian and more a biting social satirist...



See You Jimmah!!!! etc etc.

So how do you rate Billy Connolly, MGS?

rockerbikie wrote:
Great Britain also left us for dust in WW2 and basically left us to defend against the Japanese.

We might have had some problems of our own, mate...





I'm quite sure if Nazi Germany hadn't been bombing seven shades of gak out of us and planning to invade, then we'd have been straight over there.

Do remind me of the Australian cities that were leveled by the Japanese? Because I've got a list of the ones the Luftwaffe turned to bloody rubble.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:So how do you rate Billy Connolly, MGS?

I like him a lot, I'm not so keen on all the weird psychoanalysis/'smells of profiteering' bit his wife's been doing with books about his deeply private history and problems though.

Mr Hyena wrote:

Manchu wrote:That explains why you don't think Philip's funny.

I don't think discriminatory comments are quite funny.

No one? Fine I'll say it: I do.

Albatross wrote:I'm not saying that all Scots are massive drinkers (or that this would be a bad thing), but...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/7903584.stm

BBC wrote:Scotland has the eighth-highest level of alcohol consumption in the world, according to statistics analysed for the Scottish Government.

Drinkers consumed almost 50 million litres of pure alcohol in 2007.

People aged over 16 sank the equivalent of 11.8 litres of pure alcohol per person. The figure for England and Wales was 9.9 litres.

http://www.scotland.gov.uk/News/Releases/2009/02/20161722

The Scottish Government wrote:It is more than double the consumption level in Scandinavian countries like Sweden (6.0 litres) and Norway (5.5 litres) where the relative price of alcohol is considerably higher and the sale of alcohol is more restricted.

It was also much higher than the United States (8.6 litres), Canada (7.8 litres), Australia (9.0 litres), China (5.2 litres) Japan (7.6 litres) and even Russia (10.3 litres), where alcohol-related deaths have cut the average life expectancy for men to 59.

Looks like Phil might have a point. Just sayin'.

Its about as accurate as looking at how well Scotland's higher education system is and suddenly saying its the best country within the UK for Education: Regardless what it is, it does nothing but stir up hatred.

rockerbikie wrote:
Even if I am a Nazi. I would prefer a republic where I can vouice my opinion with ammendments to make me safe.

You have that, apart from the republic part - and once again, no-one is stopping Australia from having a referendum on becoming a republic apart from the Australians.

Great Britain also left us for dust in WW2 and basically left us to defend against the Japanese.

My grandad served in the pacific theatre, as did many thousands of Commonwealth and Allied servicemen. Your tribute to them is to expound the very ideologies they were fighting against. From what you've said on this forum in the past, it seems like you would have welcomed the Japanese and the Germans with open arms, so I think you hardly have any room to make implications about betrayal.

We also have closer ties to USA than Great Britain now.

Both your head of state and prime minister were born in the UK, plus Australians are allowed to serve in our military. Yeah, no.

MeanGreenStompa wrote: I'm quite sure if Nazi Germany hadn't been bombing seven shades of gak out of us and planning to invade, then we'd have been straight over there.

Do remind me of the Australian cities that were leveled by the Japanese? Because I've got a list of the ones the Luftwaffe turned to bloody rubble.

Darwin.

And...er....Darwin?

I don't see how saying we drink quite a lot and are quite partial to terrible food, 'stirs up hatred'?

I think it's quite funny and it's healthy to have a laugh at it.

To be fair it's ten times better than the old 'I hate the English!' 'Why?' 'Because they hate us!' nonsense that is spouted by a great many Scottish people.

Listen I'm not saying that the Scottish are a bunch of drunken, pasty, and often Ginger stereotypes. I'm just saying lay off the sauce, get a tan, drive the Gingers out and you'll be doing fine.

I was hoping this was going to be about the band. THAT would have been cool...

Mr Hyena wrote:
Its about as accurate as looking at how well Scotland's higher education system is and suddenly saying its the best country within the UK for Education: Regardless what it is, it does nothing but stir up hatred.

You could cite evidence for that claim and make a good case for it - that wouldn't necessarily stir up hatred. You have to remember that we don't hate you guys anywhere near as much as you hate us - you're forgetting the English motto, old bean: 'No-one likes us, we don't care.'

At the end of the day, what Prince Philip said was pretty unfair and discriminatory if you're of a sensitive disposition, or a cheeky 'dig' if you aren't. Most British people float around the middle point of that spectrum. Most British people also have Grandads who crack similar jokes, many of them about the English. He doesn't have the monopoly on being loveable embittered racist old codger, you're just being chippy.

All that said, it's pretty well-known throughout the UK that Scotland has difficulties with alcohol abuse - whether or not you think that's a suitable subject for comedy is entirely down to one's temperament.

I think Prince Phillip is just the British version of Vice-President Biden. Of course he has had more practice than his yank counterpart.

Philip wrote:To Cayman Islanders: “Aren’t most of you descended from pirates?

Phillip wrote:To wheelchair-bound nursing-home resident, 2002: “Do people trip over you?”

I love this guy!

Why can't American politicians be more like this?

Albatross wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:
Even if I am a Nazi. I would prefer a republic where I can vouice my opinion with ammendments to make me safe.

You have that, apart from the republic part - and once again, no-one is stopping Australia from having a referendum on becoming a republic apart from the Australians.

Great Britain also left us for dust in WW2 and basically left us to defend against the Japanese.

My grandad served in the pacific theatre, as did many thousands of Commonwealth and Allied servicemen. Your tribute to them is to expound the very ideologies they were fighting against. From what you've said on this forum in the past, it seems like you would have welcomed the Japanese and the Germans with open arms, so I think you hardly have any room to make implications about betrayal.

We also have closer ties to USA than Great Britain now.

Both your head of state and prime minister were born in the UK, plus Australians are allowed to serve in our military. Yeah, no.

The Japanese not so much because Imperial Japan was unrealistic. After the Battle of Singapore, the Brittish slowly retreated. The Germans had there good parts and bad parts. I disagree with the halocaust, I very much prefered the Israel Solution that Hitler came up with. The Germans were more subtle with there expansion, they were peaceful with the taking over of many nations. The Japanses prefered to pillage. Also, not a single Brit particpated in the Kokoda Trail Compaign. The Brittish and French were still colonalists. They were little better, the French treatment of the Vietnamese were terrible.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:
Great Britain also left us for dust in WW2 and basically left us to defend against the Japanese.

We might have had some problems of our own, mate...





I'm quite sure if Nazi Germany hadn't been bombing seven shades of gak out of us and planning to invade, then we'd have been straight over there.

Do remind me of the Australian cities that were leveled by the Japanese? Because I've got a list of the ones the Luftwaffe turned to bloody rubble.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:So how do you rate Billy Connolly, MGS?

I like him a lot, I'm not so keen on all the weird psychoanalysis/'smells of profiteering' bit his wife's been doing with books about his deeply private history and problems though.

Darwin and Sydney was close to be submarine shelled. If the Americans did not intervene we would be toast.

They didn't 'leave us' to fight the Japs. Be reasonable.



God did this thread ever go 'Serious Business' all of a sudden. We've got a great story about the Queen showing up to a random couple's wedding - a light-hearted story that gives you a sort of 'Awwwww!' reaction - and instead of that we've got a virulent Aussie republican screaming about Whitlam and the Japanese and an angry Scott annoyed at Prince Phillip (of all people!). Get some perspective people!

H.B.M.C has pretty much summed up all my thoughts at this thread...

It's an awesome story dammit! Why must we fight over irrelevant Off-Topic issues?

rockerbikie wrote:

Albatross wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:
Even if I am a Nazi. I would prefer a republic where I can vouice my opinion with ammendments to make me safe.

You have that, apart from the republic part - and once again, no-one is stopping Australia from having a referendum on becoming a republic apart from the Australians.

Great Britain also left us for dust in WW2 and basically left us to defend against the Japanese.

My grandad served in the pacific theatre, as did many thousands of Commonwealth and Allied servicemen. Your tribute to them is to expound the very ideologies they were fighting against. From what you've said on this forum in the past, it seems like you would have welcomed the Japanese and the Germans with open arms, so I think you hardly have any room to make implications about betrayal.

We also have closer ties to USA than Great Britain now.

Both your head of state and prime minister were born in the UK, plus Australians are allowed to serve in our military. Yeah, no.

The Japanese not so much because Imperial Japan was unrealistic. After the Battle of Singapore, the Brittish slowly retreated. The Germans had there good parts and bad parts. I disagree with the halocaust, I very much prefered the Israel Solution that Hitler came up with. The Germans were more subtle with there expansion, they were peaceful with the taking over of many nations. The Japanses prefered to pillage. Also, not a single Brit particpated in the Kokoda Trail Compaign. The Brittish and French were still colonalists. They were little better, the French treatment of the Vietnamese were terrible.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:
Great Britain also left us for dust in WW2 and basically left us to defend against the Japanese.

We might have had some problems of our own, mate...





I'm quite sure if Nazi Germany hadn't been bombing seven shades of gak out of us and planning to invade, then we'd have been straight over there.

Do remind me of the Australian cities that were leveled by the Japanese? Because I've got a list of the ones the Luftwaffe turned to bloody rubble.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:So how do you rate Billy Connolly, MGS?

I like him a lot, I'm not so keen on all the weird psychoanalysis/'smells of profiteering' bit his wife's been doing with books about his deeply private history and problems though.

Darwin and Sydney was close to be submarine shelled. If the Americans did not intervene we would be toast.

You don't think that perhaps the industrialized slaughter of millions of people outbalances the efficient train system and the well-cut uniforms just a little?

I think you might be over-rating the effectiveness of a submarine gun just a little as well.

Oh, amd the Germans were not 'oeaceful' in their colonialism, either in WW2 or before. Ask the Herero and Nama of Namibia how they feel about 'peaceful' German colonialism.

(Might be tricky, on account of most of them being herded into death camps.)

And now we're onto German colonialism in Africa.

How did we get here?
Why did we get here?

H.B.M.C. wrote:And now we're onto German colonialism in Africa.

How did we get here?

I'm pretty sure Hitler started it...

Actually it was a chap called Luderitz, and his emissary Vogelsang....

ArbeitsSchu wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:

Albatross wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:
Even if I am a Nazi. I would prefer a republic where I can vouice my opinion with ammendments to make me safe.

You have that, apart from the republic part - and once again, no-one is stopping Australia from having a referendum on becoming a republic apart from the Australians.

Great Britain also left us for dust in WW2 and basically left us to defend against the Japanese.

My grandad served in the pacific theatre, as did many thousands of Commonwealth and Allied servicemen. Your tribute to them is to expound the very ideologies they were fighting against. From what you've said on this forum in the past, it seems like you would have welcomed the Japanese and the Germans with open arms, so I think you hardly have any room to make implications about betrayal.

We also have closer ties to USA than Great Britain now.

Both your head of state and prime minister were born in the UK, plus Australians are allowed to serve in our military. Yeah, no.

The Japanese not so much because Imperial Japan was unrealistic. After the Battle of Singapore, the Brittish slowly retreated. The Germans had there good parts and bad parts. I disagree with the halocaust, I very much prefered the Israel Solution that Hitler came up with. The Germans were more subtle with there expansion, they were peaceful with the taking over of many nations. The Japanses prefered to pillage. Also, not a single Brit particpated in the Kokoda Trail Compaign. The Brittish and French were still colonalists. They were little better, the French treatment of the Vietnamese were terrible.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

MeanGreenStompa wrote:

rockerbikie wrote:
Great Britain also left us for dust in WW2 and basically left us to defend against the Japanese.

We might have had some problems of our own, mate...





I'm quite sure if Nazi Germany hadn't been bombing seven shades of gak out of us and planning to invade, then we'd have been straight over there.

Do remind me of the Australian cities that were leveled by the Japanese? Because I've got a list of the ones the Luftwaffe turned to bloody rubble.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Manchu wrote:So how do you rate Billy Connolly, MGS?

I like him a lot, I'm not so keen on all the weird psychoanalysis/'smells of profiteering' bit his wife's been doing with books about his deeply private history and problems though.

Darwin and Sydney was close to be submarine shelled. If the Americans did not intervene we would be toast.

You don't think that perhaps the industrialized slaughter of millions of people outbalances the efficient train system and the well-cut uniforms just a little?

I think you might be over-rating the effectiveness of a submarine gun just a little as well.

Oh, amd the Germans were not 'oeaceful' in their colonialism, either in WW2 or before. Ask the Herero and Nama of Namibia how they feel about 'peaceful' German colonialism.

(Might be tricky, on account of most of them being herded into death camps.)

We are talking WW2. German occupation of Africa was destroyed. They lost a majority of colonial posessions. Have you not considered Hitler's role in the revitlisation of the German economy after the betrayal at Versailles. The Germans were not peaceful but the French took colonialism to a new level. The Germans had Black Soldiers in africa.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

SilverMK2 wrote:

H.B.M.C. wrote:And now we're onto German colonialism in Africa.

How did we get here?

I'm pretty sure Hitler started it...

The German Empire started it... Most of German territory was taken from them in the Demands of Versailles.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

H.B.M.C. wrote:They didn't 'leave us' to fight the Japs. Be reasonable.



God did this thread ever go 'Serious Business' all of a sudden. We've got a great story about the Queen showing up to a random couple's wedding - a light-hearted story that gives you a sort of 'Awwwww!' reaction - and instead of that we've got a virulent Aussie republican screaming about Whitlam and the Japanese and an angry Scott annoyed at Prince Phillip (of all people!). Get some perspective people!

Please explain, how I am virulent? Also, it is a fair way to put a protest against the injustice of the past. Look how they treated us in the century. I out my opinion on the matter and people get upset. The fact is we do not need Great Britain and the facts about why we need a republic reform. Technically we are a protectorate of Great Britain.

y'know. If obama did this. The secret service would strip search the bride and send the husband to a darkly lit room with only on lamp and a galss of water.

This is why we can't have nice things.

Please stay on-topic, folks. It is a rule we have around here.