Military cuts going to far... Navy losing carrier :(

Associate
Joined
17 May 2004
Posts
1,585
Just 35 people?

Your having a laugh.

thats one mod support personel (doing what, everything? this needs clarified) to 14,285 soldiers at a time.

It was when Frederick, Duke of York (song of George III, became William IV) ran the British Army from Horse Guards Parade and ran the Napoleonic Wars.
1790's-1815.
 
Man of Honour
Joined
1 Aug 2004
Posts
12,678
Location
Tyneside
* Braveheart Spoilers **

Also The Patriot :(

Never seen that.

I liked the film Braveheart but I have an interest and books on kings and queens of England, specifically Henry III and Edward I so the inaccuracies shine.

There were so many inaccuracies with regards to Edward I and timelines in the film, the most glaring one being that Isabella, played by Sophie Marceau, did not arrive in England until 1308 which is 3 years after Wallace was executed and a year after Edward died.

Also, when Edward dies of natural causes at the end of the film, it is at the same time and within earshot of Wallace being executed in London even though Wallace died in 1305, Edward in 1307 and Edward died in Burgh by Sands in Cumbria while en route to Scotland.

o/t though.
 
Permabanned
Joined
29 Aug 2003
Posts
31,330
Never seen that.

I liked the film Braveheart but I have an interest and books on kings and queens of England, specifically Henry III and Edward I so the inaccuracies shine.

There were so many inaccuracies with regards to Edward I and timelines in the film, the most glaring one being that Isabella, played by Sophie Marceau, did not arrive in England until 1308 which is 3 years after Wallace was executed and a year after Edward died.

Also, when Edward dies of natural causes at the end of the film, it is at the same time and within earshot of Wallace being executed in London even though Wallace died in 1305, Edward in 1307 and Edward died in Burgh by Sands in Cumbria while en route to Scotland.

o/t though.

It was a 'Scottish' film, and didn't exacly portray the events well on EITHER side.

I think the Battle of Stirling Bridge was assumed just too much for the English to take! :p
 
Permabanned
Joined
29 Aug 2003
Posts
31,330
All the 'surrender monkey' stuff is nonsense, Britain would have been crushed by the Germans in WW2 were it not for the sea.

That is how I see it.

In history France didn't do Scotland many favours quite the opposite on occasion, we haven't picked up such anti-French angst.

Just English!

:p
 
Man of Honour
Joined
1 Aug 2004
Posts
12,678
Location
Tyneside
The basis and foundation of a parliament and justices of the peace were products of Edward I. His treatment of the Scots was savage though, it has to be said. He also expelled Jews from England.

Anyway, I really do go off topic here.
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
5,000
w00t, you took 74 days to beat a bankrupt Latin American dictatorship barely out of "third world" status. /golfclap

Who else could have done it? China, Russia, USA, France and Germany spring to mind. Hell, I reckon even Australia was up for the job.



The RFA ship was entirely capable of intervening; they simply made the decision to hold back (due to concerns about the two civilians). But Iran enjoyed playing with Her Majesty's cheese eating surrender monkeys. ;)

Hate to spoil the party but China and Germany would in no way have been able to do it in 1982. France would not have been able to do with without Acension.

But really, you are just trolling. Perhaps you were drunk ?
 
Permabanned
Joined
29 Aug 2003
Posts
31,330
The battle was filmed on open ground with not a bridge in sight.

Robert the Bruce's father was portrayed as a lepor. They got that right at least.

'depiction' they called it, pure ******* laziness in my eyes.

Rubbish tbh, I'd have much rathered the Scots up in the hills descending down on English swine like a pack of hungo hippo's. Instead of made up battle movements. The whole things gash tbh. Apart from the music..

But naeless...
 
Soldato
Joined
11 Mar 2004
Posts
5,000
If you think Braveheart portrays the English in a bad light, you ain't seen nothing compared to this travesty - again with Mel Gibson putting the knife in.

It doesn't end there. The book "We were soldiers once, and young" based on the true events of a vietnam battle an English born American called Rick Riscorla was mentioned on dozens of pages. He lead a platoon and fearlessly lead from the front, saving many lives. He even was the picture on the cover of the book !

Later on 9/11 as head of security of Morgan Stanley he saved countless lives and died when the towers fell.

Yet when the film "We were soldiers" was made Gibson had him written entirely out, and his actions performed by other characters.

Gibson is an English hating anti-semite.

Yantis shared the story of Rick Riscola, a decorated former platoon leader in Vietnam, who was security chief for Morgan Stanley in the World Trade Center. He was responsible for "22 acres of desks and thousands of people. Riscola trained his people, and as a result all but six made it out alive." (Riscola didn't.)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rick_Rescorla

Retired Col Rick Rescorla, who plays an important role in the book, and whose photo is on the cover, was disappointed after reading the script to learn that he and his unit had been written out of the movie. In one key incident, the finding of a vintage French bugle on a dying Vietnamese soldier, Rescorla is replaced by a nameless Welsh—not Cornish—platoon leader.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/We_Were_Soldiers
 
Last edited:
Caporegime
Joined
30 Jun 2007
Posts
68,784
Location
Wales
God knows what Mel Gibson's problem is.

I believe it has something to do with his nipples.

263g13n.jpg
 
Caporegime
Joined
25 Jul 2005
Posts
28,851
Location
Canada
All this french love is all very well but the post quoted actually meant the Argentines, which is quite obvious if you read it in context. :p
 
Back
Top Bottom