America - its all a bit odd...

Well, I am just stating my own experiences...loved the fact the there was an ASDA super store, a Tesco Express and a Waitrose in close vicinity. And a nice pub called the "Gun."

No, never felt unsafe...

This were my typical images from the place...I even nick named one of the places "the beach" as it was sandy and pebbley ...an old empire era dock landing place..

View attachment 410320

View attachment 410321
I’ll post you a picture of where your average tower hamlets person lives....... Isle of Dogs is the posh bit. Cats have tails there
 
One strange outcome of America’s oddness is a US national seemingly sad and concerned that we hung a traitorous Nazi some seventy years ago. And expressing it on a quasi-military British website.

And carrying the butthurt of several hundred years ago.

Maybe he was dry bummed by some nasty Booties on an exchange visit to San Diego.
 

endure

GCM
One strange outcome of America’s oddness is a US national seemingly sad and concerned that we hung a traitorous Nazi some seventy years ago. And expressing it on a quasi-military British website.

And carrying the butthurt of several hundred years ago.

Maybe he was dry bummed by some nasty Booties on an exchange visit to San Diego.

It's not the fact that he was dry bummed that's the problem. It's the fact that he secretly enjoyed it...
 
You can say that. I couldn’t possibly comment.

Sounds about right though.
 
Was it bollox. Neither side won.

Washington was burned (please can you conduct a re-run in the near future?), and British invasions of Maryland, Louisiana and New England were all repulsed. The peace treaty restored borders back to what they had been prior to the war, therefore no territory was won or lost.

Even Wellington, when asked to go to British North America basically told Whitehall that it was a draw:



Above quote from Wikipedia, which has an interesting section on the relevant page (quoted below), which explains why some people claim it as a win for either side, when it was in fact a draw. The Indians were the real losers.


Militarily, it was a draw. But it did remove any question fo the survival of the USA as a nation, and established the postwar terms of peace, which flourished.
I guess by your standards then Italy fought you to a draw in WWII.

During the Napoleonic Wars Britain was tied up fighting (wait for it ...) Napoleon, and wasn't looking to get involved in pointless colonial squabbles with banana republics. Britain's war objectives with respect to the US was to kick your arses back to your side of the border.

The US initiated the war, and their main effort was directed against Canada. As discussed numerous times on this site, the American strategy was to take Quebec City and then Halifax. The former was the strategic key to Canada and provided the only practical route to get to the latter, given that Britain had overwhelming superiority at sea. With the capture of Halifax Britain would lose their main naval base in the north-west Atlantic, a base that dominated the trade routes. This would somewhat ease the American disadvantage at sea.

Napoleon's Grand Army would then march to Moscow in 1812, the Russians would surrender, Britain would be forced to either sue for peace or face being crushed by the might of the French, and the great people's revolution would finally triumph over the reactionary monarchists both in Europe and in North America.

It wasn't a bad plan in theory. There however were two problems in practice. The first was that despite having overwhelming numerical superiority the American army was so pathetic that they were utterly crushed by much smaller local Canadian forces together with a core of British regulars.

The other problem was that while the French did indeed reach Moscow, the Russians didn't surrender, and in the end it was France who were defeated by an alliance of Britain, Russia, and Prussia, leaving the US without anyone to win their war for them.

It was like the rehearsal for WWII, but with Napoleon playing the part of Hitler and the US playing the part of Italy.

And yet even though it's 200 years later, we see one of the "it's a bit odd" features of the US, which is an inability to admit they got their arse handed to them in a war they started. Despite repeated explanations of history on this site in various threads we get Americans repeatedly acting out the part of the Black Knight in Monty Python and shouting out "but I'm invincible!" regardless of how obviously nonsensical this is to everyone else.

Just admit you lost and move on instead of making yourselves look silly. Any country that gets involved in enough wars with major opponents will lose a few from time to time. Being able to pick yourselves up, dust yourselves off, and learning from the experience is what marks out a mature country.

 
I’ll post you a picture of where your average tower hamlets person lives....... Isle of Dogs is the posh bit. Cats have tails there
Trust me, Isle of Dogs was pretty "dodgy" as well, as you got to the "center" part of it...but still safe...


All the so called posh people lived around the river..
 
Trust me, Isle of Dogs was pretty "dodgy" as well, as you got to the "center" part of it...but still safe...


All the so called posh people lived around the river..
Try the council flats in Stepney Green if you want to live.....
 

Goatman

ADC
Book Reviewer
Pardon me...not really familiar with nautical terms..
Red - that puts you level with a hefty proportion of this site then.

re your pic:
1565733265084.png

  • The big grey thing to the right of pic 1 is, at a guess, a Type 23 frigate.
  • If it is then the pointy thing at the front fires 24 x four and a half inch shells a minute.
  • The twin tubes behind the gun fire Sea Ceptor anti-aircraft missiles - they have a range of >25Km from the ship and do Mach3.


Same class as HMS Montrose - over to @jrwlynch or @Ninjastoker as I can't make out the pennant number.

1565731136707.png


Both British and foreign warships continue to visit the Pool of London, usually berthing outboard of HMS Belfast, although in this instance I suspect the big grey thing is there in support of a trade exhibition (DSEI) at the Excel Centre.

Just upstream is my old RNR unit , HMS President *.















* Um..... Commemorates the gallant defense (sic) of a USN vessel of the same name which the RN captured during Mister Madison's Wah
 
Last edited:
I guess by your standards then Italy fought you to a draw in WWII.

During the Napoleonic Wars Britain was tied up fighting (wait for it ...) Napoleon, and wasn't looking to get involved in pointless colonial squabbles with banana republics. Britain's war objectives with respect to the US was to kick your arses back to your side of the border.

The US initiated the war, and their main effort was directed against Canada. As discussed numerous times on this site, the American strategy was to take Quebec City and then Halifax. The former was the strategic key to Canada and provided the only practical route to get to the latter, given that Britain had overwhelming superiority at sea. With the capture of Halifax Britain would lose their main naval base in the north-west Atlantic, a base that dominated the trade routes. This would somewhat ease the American disadvantage at sea.

Napoleon's Grand Army would then march to Moscow in 1812, the Russians would surrender, Britain would be forced to either sue for peace or face being crushed by the might of the French, and the great people's revolution would finally triumph over the reactionary monarchists both in Europe and in North America.

It wasn't a bad plan in theory. There however were two problems in practice. The first was that despite having overwhelming numerical superiority the American army was so pathetic that they were utterly crushed by much smaller local Canadian forces together with a core of British regulars.

The other problem was that while the French did indeed reach Moscow, the Russians didn't surrender, and in the end it was France who were defeated by an alliance of Britain, Russia, and Prussia, leaving the US without anyone to win their war for them.

It was like the rehearsal for WWII, but with Napoleon playing the part of Hitler and the US playing the part of Italy.

And yet even though it's 200 years later, we see one of the "it's a bit odd" features of the US, which is an inability to admit they got their arse handed to them in a war they started. Despite repeated explanations of history on this site in various threads we get Americans repeatedly acting out the part of the Black Knight in Monty Python and shouting out "but I'm invincible!" regardless of how obviously nonsensical this is to everyone else.

Just admit you lost and move on instead of making yourselves look silly. Any country that gets involved in enough wars with major opponents will lose a few from time to time. Being able to pick yourselves up, dust yourselves off, and learning from the experience is what marks out a mature country.

What a pile of agenda-driven shite.

If Britain's war objectives were to push the US back to their side of the border, WTF were they doing in Washington and Baltimore? And indeed ultimately being driven back to their side of the border.

Granted the US kicked it off and ended up not achieving its aims, but what exactly did the British gain, in order to claim it as a victory? I would suggest fcuk all, as did Wellington, of all people. Peace was in everyone's interests, and they reached that peace in Ghent.

Your underlying Anti-American sentiment seems to come out in just about every post you make that concerns the USA. Did an American mug you for your lunch money as a kid or something?
 

Helm

MIA
Moderator
Book Reviewer
What a pile of agenda-driven shite.

If Britain's war objectives were to push the US back to their side of the border, WTF were they doing in Washington and Baltimore? And indeed ultimately being driven back to their side of the border.

Granted the US kicked it off and ended up not achieving its aims, but what exactly did the British gain, in order to claim it as a victory? I would suggest fcuk all, as did Wellington, of all people. Peace was in everyone's interests, and they reached that peace in Ghent.

Your underlying Anti-American sentiment seems to come out in just about every post you make that concerns the USA. Did an American mug you for your lunch money as a kid or something?

Would rather imply a victory, I would have thought.
 
What a pile of agenda-driven shite.

If Britain's war objectives were to push the US back to their side of the border, WTF were they doing in Washington and Baltimore? And indeed ultimately being driven back to their side of the border.

Granted the US kicked it off and ended up not achieving its aims, but what exactly did the British gain, in order to claim it as a victory? I would suggest fcuk all, as did Wellington, of all people. Peace was in everyone's interests, and they reached that peace in Ghent.

Your underlying Anti-American sentiment seems to come out in just about every post you make that concerns the USA. Did an American mug you for your lunch money as a kid or something?
He didn’t even have much anyways, the damn cheap RA...
 

Would rather imply a victory, I would have thought.
If that were the case, so would this:



But that wasn't the case either...
 
If Britain's war objectives were to push the US back to their side of the border, WTF were they doing in Washington and Baltimore? And indeed ultimately being driven back to their side of the border.
By landing raiding forces at various points along the US coast and causing panic, Britain could force the US to tie down troops and equipment defending their long and vulnerable coastline instead of being used to invade Canada. This is classic use of naval power.

Granted the US kicked it off and ended up not achieving its aims,
Or in simpler words, "the US lost the war".

but what exactly did the British gain, in order to claim it as a victory?
Britain kept Canada, which is all that Britain really wanted in the first place, given that it was the US, not Britain who started the war.

Various punitive proposals were considered with regards to the US, but ultimately Britain was happy with the status quo ante bellum and didn't want to tie up forces in pointless and expensive colonial wars when the main event in Europe was still to be settled. Napoleon had abdicated but the political situation in France was still volatile.

The Treaty of Ghent was signed at the end of 1814 (and none of the US casus belli were even addressed). Six months later was the Battle of Waterloo, which Britain was able to focus on without having any significant part of their army or navy tied up in North America.

British North America (Canada, and the Atlantic colonies) were sources of timber, fish, and wheat for Britain, which had become important given the French attempts at blocking traditional sources in Europe. Halifax was a key naval base which dominated trade routes across the northern Atlantic. So long as Britain could continue deriving these advantages in the course of their war with France, they were succeeding. War with the US wasn't on their agenda and any return to the status quo ante bellum was to Britain's advantage and achieved everything they wanted.
 
Not at all

you lot are confused that we owed you anything to join your inbred queen vicky nephews spat in 14 , or in 39 (39 is so funny for you to rage about, when you lot did dick to help the Poles in 39)

Sad thing is even the russians turned out to be better credit risks than deadbeat UK
Actually, sunshine, my Corps took casualties in Poland, right at the very start of hostilities.

By the way, credit risk, us? the UK is known to honour and has honoured the treaties it makes and made.

Can the US of A state the same?

No? O dear, how sad, never mind, now fcek off.
 
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
Goatman Charities and Welfare 0
Mr_C_Hinecap US 11
POGscribbler The NAAFI Bar 156

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top