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.

Windmills? No, we do Deltaworks!

The BBC News webpage made me happy.



Automatically Appended Next Post:

purplefood wrote:

thenoobbomb wrote:

airsoftmanic wrote:

thenoobbomb wrote:Ah, well, take a look at TV in your country.. Anyways, the French are a bunch of wine-drunk, bread wielding c*cks.

Okay the bread-wielding has got me in stitches. i need to stop before my boss sees me choking on my orangina.

Dont forget their cool hats! [dont laugh]

Nah, the French are worse then Brittish. They are mostly a bit.. well, discriminating to other European countries.. Oh! Wait thats the Wallonia part of Belgium!

The French are worse than who? I don't recognise that country... where is it?

Its a little island in the Atlantic ocean. Its full of canibals, eating eachother!

@purplefood

I think you're taking the whole 'don't call us Great Britain' thing a bit far. It's a legitimate point that said country doesn't exist, but I believe it is still perfectly acceptable to refer to the citizens of the United Kingdom as 'the British'.... after all, said Kingdom originally spanned the entirety of the isles and I doubt that the Irish want to be sullied by a name commonly associated with their Anglo-led oppressors.

thenoobbomb wrote:

purplefood wrote:

thenoobbomb wrote:

airsoftmanic wrote:

thenoobbomb wrote:Ah, well, take a look at TV in your country.. Anyways, the French are a bunch of wine-drunk, bread wielding c*cks.

Okay the bread-wielding has got me in stitches. i need to stop before my boss sees me choking on my orangina.

Dont forget their cool hats! [dont laugh]

Nah, the French are worse then Brittish. They are mostly a bit.. well, discriminating to other European countries.. Oh! Wait thats the Wallonia part of Belgium!

The French are worse than who? I don't recognise that country... where is it?

Its a little island in the Atlantic ocean. Its full of canibals, eating eachother!

Sounds like a rubbish place to live then.

Well, they all dont have work and are now rioting! Maybe I cant go there on holiday next week! I was just hungry for the flesh from there..

thenoobbomb wrote:Well, they all dont have work and are now rioting! Maybe I cant go there on holiday next week! I was just hungry for the flesh from there..

That sounds bad... i'd avoid it. It would be an awful awful shame to see you get eaten.

I think it's because he keeps saying "Brittish" rather than "British". abit grammar nazi-ish but i suppose it does take additional effort to add the extra "t".

anyway, back on topic. the French have great places to fish. some of the carp and catfish are proper whoppers over there.

Its more that they get eaten...


Automatically Appended Next Post:

airsoftmanic wrote:I think it's because he keeps saying "Brittish" rather than "British". abit grammar nazi-ish but i suppose it does take additional effort to add the extra "t".

anyway, back on topic. the French have great places to fish. some of the carp and catfish are proper whoppers over there.

It seems half of the UK goes to there, albeit it is their hated nemesis.

The north of France is pretty okay, nice and friendly. the south are where the stereotypes live.

hey its just like america! ........... don't beat me.

Henners91 wrote:@purplefood

I think you're taking the whole 'don't call us Great Britain' thing a bit far. It's a legitimate point that said country doesn't exist, but I believe it is still perfectly acceptable to refer to the citizens of the United Kingdom as 'the British'.... after all, said Kingdom originally spanned the entirety of the isles and I doubt that the Irish want to be sullied by a name commonly associated with their Anglo-led oppressors.

I'm fine with calling us British. It's the first thing i use. The reason i'm doing this is because of the reason below. I despise it when people spell a name consistently wrong especially when they claim to see so much of out television.

airsoftmanic wrote:I think it's because he keeps saying "Brittish" rather than "British". abit grammar nazi-ish but i suppose it does take additional effort to add the extra "t".

anyway, back on topic. the French have great places to fish. some of the carp and catfish are proper whoppers over there.

airsoftmanic wrote:The north of France is pretty okay, nice and friendly. the south are where the stereotypes live.

hey its just like america! ........... don't beat me.

QFT!

@purplefood

British television has some nice series! (docter Who, that Robin Hood serie and Spooks, for instance.)

Well at least we get something right...

It's not British, it's Bri'ish.

Dude......you forgot top gear!
it ain't British if it ain't top gear!

I dont like cars that much

Only if you're from south end.

I dislike everyone equally, ive no distaste for our French cousins.

I dislike British people the most. Especially scousers, geordies, mackems, cockneys and Scots.

Monkey hangers are alright though.

Slarg232 wrote:

dogma wrote: Napoleon was awesome too.

France is awesome, but their problem is that they know they are awesome, and are therefore full of themselves and not fun to hang out with...

Half French

Stormrider wrote:
Half French

Entirely French. Napoleon spent his formative years in Corsica, which was French territory as of they year of his birth. Not that its relevant to his leadership of France, and the French army.

Well yes, some of the 'Founding Fathers' were British-born. Are they not American?


Don't tell Palin.

The few french people I have met are actually pretty nice people. Granted they have heavy accents, but then I immagine if I were to learn french I would have one too. As far as their country I wouldn't know, never been there.

Albatross wrote:Well yes, some of the 'Founding Fathers' were British-born. Are they not American?


Don't tell Palin.

All of their families were weren't they? I read a book once that said the war for independance was "essentially a civil war"

So George Washington is from the North East of England really.. thats why he could fight.

Its not really a loss if we lost to other English people surely?

Score another in the win box!

I dont really have anything against the french other than when i was there some people were rude to me, but there are rude people all over the world and it is wrong to base an opinion of a country off a few D***wads.

As for history, USA would not be around if not for them, but WWII would have had a very different outcome without the US where we played a major role in their liberation, so we have helped eachother out. As for liquor, Beer is great(go to school in wisconsin), Rum is good, Gin is crazy, wines alright, whiskey is great, thank you Ireland and Scotland!

also, Dogma, do you EVER say anything good about theUS? I know it is your right to talk crap about the US, what i tell people at school who talk crap about the US is "STFU or GTFO(shut the feth up or get the feth out)"

mattyrm wrote:

Albatross wrote:Well yes, some of the 'Founding Fathers' were British-born. Are they not American?


Don't tell Palin.

All of their families were weren't they? I read a book once that said the war for independance was "essentially a civil war"

So George Washington is from the North East of England really.. thats why he could fight.

Its not really a loss if we lost to other English people surely?

Score another in the win box!

We can concur. Which makes me wonder, when did the different regions start developing different accents? Which one was closer to "British" at the time? I know there are regions in Appalachia that linguistically are supposedly closer to 1700s English than current British.

Frazzled wrote:

mattyrm wrote:

Albatross wrote:Well yes, some of the 'Founding Fathers' were British-born. Are they not American?


Don't tell Palin.

All of their families were weren't they? I read a book once that said the war for independance was "essentially a civil war"

So George Washington is from the North East of England really.. thats why he could fight.

Its not really a loss if we lost to other English people surely?

Score another in the win box!

We can concur. Which makes me wonder, when did the different regions start developing different accents? Which one was closer to "British" at the time? I know there are regions in Appalachia that linguistically are supposedly closer to 1700s English than current British.

Was actually discussing this with my girlfriend on the way to work this morning. Short answer is: nobody knows. It was thought for a while that the Southern US accents were descended from Northern English accents, but this is thought to be bunkum now. Various mixtures of nationalities in the various regions no doubt played a part. One interesting thing, many words that differ in US and UK English date back to the split. For example, around the time of the revolution, it was popular in Britain and it's colonies to use the word 'Fall' for Autumn. After the split, the Americans kept on using it, whereas the British went back to saying Autumn.

lol...he said autumn...

I saw some unit from the French army when I was in Haiti after the earthquake last year.

The were driving around in their flatbed trucks in tanktops, shorts, and boots....

And as silly as they looked, we looked like even bigger dumbasses in long sleeve jackets with under shirts and pants tucked into our boots when it was 110+ F*

I must admit that i don't mind the French (for shame!).

The first time went to Paris without family it was cool, in a we were 14 attending a business studies seminar and spent the whole weekend drinkin and carousing. We only got thrown out of one bar which was quite friendly of them IMHO.

The last time I went was for both of the Rugby World Cup semi finals. And even though we kicked french arse they were still a good laugh. Highlight was a load of french kids calling me Chabal on the tube, since I had longish har and a beard.

Unless they were calling me a Cheval? Hang on a minute those little wa.........

Charlemagne is actually Karl der Grosse (the Great) and he was German. Not only was he born around Aachen, but almost all scholars agree that he spoke a form of Germanic idiom, most likely Old Ripuarian Franconian. So yeah... Germans get KARL the Great, not the French.

However, as a toss to the French, not only should they receive credit for Napoleon (debatable I guess), but they should also receive Napoleon III (who was actually quite a good monarch, right up until he became addicted to drugs due to a bladder stone the size of a golf ball, which in turn played negatively on the fact that he had managed to concentrate so much power on himself) and Andre the Giant.

GO ANDRE!

Manstein wrote:Charlemagne is actually Karl der Grosse (the Great) and he was German. Not only was he born around Aachen, but almost all scholars agree that he spoke a form of Germanic idiom, most likely Old Ripuarian Franconian. So yeah... Germans get KARL the Great, not the French.

However, as a toss to the French, not only should they receive credit for Napoleon (debatable I guess), but they should also receive Napoleon III (who was actually quite a good monarch, right up until he became addicted to drugs due to a bladder stone the size of a golf ball, which in turn played negatively on the fact that he had managed to concentrate so much power on himself) and Andre the Giant.

GO ANDRE!

Well according to Wikipedia Francia (486AD) is considered the first formation of France and the Holy Roman Empire (962AD) is considered Germany's first. But if you want to be completely honest neither France nor Germany as a nation existed until the 1800's. So to call Charlemagne either would be incorrect.

Cheesecat wrote:

Manstein wrote:Charlemagne is actually Karl der Grosse (the Great) and he was German. Not only was he born around Aachen, but almost all scholars agree that he spoke a form of Germanic idiom, most likely Old Ripuarian Franconian. So yeah... Germans get KARL the Great, not the French.

However, as a toss to the French, not only should they receive credit for Napoleon (debatable I guess), but they should also receive Napoleon III (who was actually quite a good monarch, right up until he became addicted to drugs due to a bladder stone the size of a golf ball, which in turn played negatively on the fact that he had managed to concentrate so much power on himself) and Andre the Giant.

GO ANDRE!

Well according to Wikipedia Francia (486AD) is considered the first formation of France and the Holy Roman Empire (962AD) is considered Germany's first. But if you want to be completely honest neither France nor Germany as a nation existed until the 1800's. So to call Charlemagne either would be incorrect.

I was speaking from a purely ethnic point of view, not national identification.