Leaving the ECHR would cost the Tories dear – politicalbetting.com

SandyRentool said:

This discussion is so fecking pointless.

People who only speak English looking to work in another country favour those where they speak ENGLISH.

Totally mind-blowing.

Pensioners can get away with moving to Spain, as they can stay in their immigrant ghettos, reading the Daily Mail and drinking Watney's Red Barrel.

Anabobazina said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

.

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

Brexit is dead.
We just haven’t figured out how to dispose of the body yet.

For the moment, we have to put up with this grotesque “Weekend at Bernie’s” style politics where people pretend it makes any sense whatsoever.

Brexit is done.

Being a part of history now, it is neither living nor dead, its simply a part of the past.

As a philosophy it’s dead. The majority now see what we’ve lost and want to get most of it back. A journey that will end up with us becoming politically what we always have been cultural and geographically - European - rather than this insane nostalgia for a brief period of attachment to countries literally on the other side of the globe we have nothing in common with.

We are as European as Canadians are American.

And you should know full well the UK has much in common with New Zealand and other nations, the idea we have nothing in common with New Zealand is just preposterous.

Canadians are, literally, American, yes. As for Aotearoa, we play a certain number of sports in common and speak English. That is it. We don't even have the same legal system anymore given they've largely abandoned common law. Aotearoa is a Polynesian culture. We are a European one. We are nothing but a rebellious province of a European whole. We have culturally far more in common with the rest of Europe than Aotearoa or Australia and we have been part of unions with European nations far longer than our brief dalliance with them.

Canadians are on the continent of America, but tell them they are American and you're liable to get punched.

Or a scowl at the very least, because Canadians unlike Americans are generally too polite to go around punching people for saying something stupid.

We are a neither rebellious nor European except in a geographic sense, we have far more culturally in common with Canada or Australia or New Zealand than we do with Germany or Bulgaria or Romania.

Who do you think more Brits would rather listen to: Kylie Minogue or Elena Gheorghe?

Which do you think more Brits are more likely to read: Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, or Olga Tokarczuk's Empuzjon?

Are Brits more likely to eat spaghetti bolognese or poutine? Paella or lamingtons?

Are Brits more likely to holiday in Ibiza or Vancouver Island?
Both of
Are Brits more likely to watch "The Bridge" or "The Brokenwood"?

We could do this all day.

Are Brits more likely to emigrate to Australia or Austria?

Even with free movement, Brits who chose to move abroad overwhelmingly chose to go across the world to our more culturally similar cousin nations, than to our neighbours (excluding Ireland, which is sui generis and we still have free movement with).

Spain is more popular than Ireland, despite it speaking a different language.

Interesting.

viewcode said:

Everybody stop talking and go watch The Thick Of It on BBC4.

SandyRentool said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

Anabobazina said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

Brexit is dead.
We just haven’t figured out how to dispose of the body yet.

For the moment, we have to put up with this grotesque “Weekend at Bernie’s” style politics where people pretend it makes any sense whatsoever.

Brexit is done.

Being a part of history now, it is neither living nor dead, its simply a part of the past.

As a philosophy it’s dead. The majority now see what we’ve lost and want to get most of it back. A journey that will end up with us becoming politically what we always have been cultural and geographically - European - rather than this insane nostalgia for a brief period of attachment to countries literally on the other side of the globe we have nothing in common with.

We are as European as Canadians are American.

And you should know full well the UK has much in common with New Zealand and other nations, the idea we have nothing in common with New Zealand is just preposterous.

Canadians are, literally, American, yes. As for Aotearoa, we play a certain number of sports in common and speak English. That is it. We don't even have the same legal system anymore given they've largely abandoned common law. Aotearoa is a Polynesian culture. We are a European one. We are nothing but a rebellious province of a European whole. We have culturally far more in common with the rest of Europe than Aotearoa or Australia and we have been part of unions with European nations far longer than our brief dalliance with them.

No we have culturally much more in common with Australia and New Zealand than continental Europe

That's what used to be said, before Gallipoli, Tobruk and Singapore.

Just ask the Australians.

Yes they voted 55% to keep the monarchy in 1999 and Australia remains the main emigration destination for Brits.

So the ties that bound us together to defeat the Nazis and Japanese in WW2 remain

And lots of UK people emigrate to Spain and Thailand, but I don't see you proclaiming the ties that bind the UK to them.

Fewer UK people emigrate to Spain than Australia, despite Spain being far closer.

Thailand is not even in the top 10 UK emigration destinations unlike Australia at no 1, Canada at no 3 and New Zealand at no 6.
https://www.movehub.com/blog/top-10-countries-brits-choose/

Spain and France feature remarkably highly, given they speak different languages to us.

Interesting.

Given France is our closest neighbour only 7th is not high at all

Ireland (5th) are our closest neighbour.

Dover is closer to Calais than GB to the Republic of Ireland

Nice to know that the Shinners can now rely on your vote!

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

rcs1000 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

Brexit is dead.
We just haven’t figured out how to dispose of the body yet.

For the moment, we have to put up with this grotesque “Weekend at Bernie’s” style politics where people pretend it makes any sense whatsoever.

Brexit is done.

Being a part of history now, it is neither living nor dead, its simply a part of the past.

As a philosophy it’s dead. The majority now see what we’ve lost and want to get most of it back. A journey that will end up with us becoming politically what we always have been cultural and geographically - European - rather than this insane nostalgia for a brief period of attachment to countries literally on the other side of the globe we have nothing in common with.

We are as European as Canadians are American.

And you should know full well the UK has much in common with New Zealand and other nations, the idea we have nothing in common with New Zealand is just preposterous.

Canadians are, literally, American, yes. As for Aotearoa, we play a certain number of sports in common and speak English. That is it. We don't even have the same legal system anymore given they've largely abandoned common law. Aotearoa is a Polynesian culture. We are a European one. We are nothing but a rebellious province of a European whole. We have culturally far more in common with the rest of Europe than Aotearoa or Australia and we have been part of unions with European nations far longer than our brief dalliance with them.

Canadians are on the continent of America, but tell them they are American and you're liable to get punched.

Or a scowl at the very least, because Canadians unlike Americans are generally too polite to go around punching people for saying something stupid.

We are a neither rebellious nor European except in a geographic sense, we have far more culturally in common with Canada or Australia or New Zealand than we do with Germany or Bulgaria or Romania.

Who do you think more Brits would rather listen to: Kylie Minogue or Elena Gheorghe?

Which do you think more Brits are more likely to read: Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, or Olga Tokarczuk's Empuzjon?

I should warn you that my 15 year old daughter is obsessed by the Moldovan entry into last year's Eurovision:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9RJQPZsj8E

Just be thankful, that they did NOT allow TRANSnistria to participate in EV22!

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Stuartinromford said:

HYUFD said:

Stuartinromford said:

Casino_Royale said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

Brexit is dead.
We just haven’t figured out how to dispose of the body yet.

For the moment, we have to put up with this grotesque “Weekend at Bernie’s” style politics where people pretend it makes any sense whatsoever.

Brexit is done.

Being a part of history now, it is neither living nor dead, its simply a part of the past.

As a philosophy it’s dead. The majority now see what we’ve lost and want to get most of it back. A journey that will end up with us becoming politically what we always have been cultural and geographically - European - rather than this insane nostalgia for a brief period of attachment to countries literally on the other side of the globe we have nothing in common with.

Odd. Brits think they have far more in common with Aussies, Kiwis and Canadians than they do with the French, Czechs and Slovenians and they vote with their feet accordingly.

The British position has been the same for centuries: we are a maritime trading nation that trades both globally and continentally and has a strong interest in a maintaining a balance of power in Europe and secure global sea routes in order to prosper.

Geography is key but not all in one direction like you think it is.

And yet, despite all of that (which isn't false but I do think it is more complicated than that), Brexit is unpopular and increasingly so.

It's really not my job to work out why, or what to do about that. Which is probably for the best, because I haven't got a clue where to begin.

(I suspect the answer is that there's nothing to be done about it. The mental map for those who grew up after about 1973 is just different to that of those who grew up post war but pre-EEC membership. And changing people's mental maps is damn difficult.)

It isn't that much, most of even under 40s would be fine with EFTA membership at most, they don't have a desperate desire to be part of the Eurozone and an EU superstate which is where the EU is heading.

Over 65 upper middle class LD voters are much keener on rejoining the full EU than most under 40s would be if EFTA was an option too (and plenty of the former on PB)

But even that- some variant of what Norway or Switzerland do- is a much closer arrangement than we have right now. In an annexe with a separate front door, but still in the same building. Which is not what eurosceptics are talking about this evening.

One final thought before I wander off to water the corguettes. (Half of me wants them to die so I don't have to keep harvesting them, but that wouldn't be on.) Some of the chat this evening has been about how the UK can't be fully European, because of the Anglosphere. Spaniards don't bang on about the Hispanidad in the same way, or France about the Francophonie. They just get on with having multiple overlapping identities. Why do Brits find that so difficult?

Most of Latin America is mixed race, only really Argentina or Chile come close to white Spanish ancestry majority. The Philippines are not majority white Spanish ancestry either. No French ex colonies or current colonies are majority white French ancestry, indeed Quebec in Canada comes closest to that (and I exclude Quebec from the Anglosphere).

New Zealand, Australia and Canada however are majority of white British isles ancestry

The "British" aren't mixed race? Revolutionary, often literally so in the form of the Irish.

Most British are not mixed race.

Though I would say the average Englishman is closer to the average Australian or New Zealander than the average Scottish Nationalist

Ah, I see you are denying even the "Our Island Story" approved story.

Given the history fo emigration to Australia and NZ, that would considerably surprise many people thjere.

Most of them not Scottish Nationalists either. Scottish Nationalists of course closer ideologically to the EU and even France than the Anglosphere

OnlyLivingBoy said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

OnlyLivingBoy said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

Brexit is dead.
We just haven’t figured out how to dispose of the body yet.

For the moment, we have to put up with this grotesque “Weekend at Bernie’s” style politics where people pretend it makes any sense whatsoever.

Brexit is done.

Being a part of history now, it is neither living nor dead, its simply a part of the past.

As a philosophy it’s dead. The majority now see what we’ve lost and want to get most of it back. A journey that will end up with us becoming politically what we always have been cultural and geographically - European - rather than this insane nostalgia for a brief period of attachment to countries literally on the other side of the globe we have nothing in common with.

We are as European as Canadians are American.

And you should know full well the UK has much in common with New Zealand and other nations, the idea we have nothing in common with New Zealand is just preposterous.

Canadians are, literally, American, yes. As for Aotearoa, we play a certain number of sports in common and speak English. That is it. We don't even have the same legal system anymore given they've largely abandoned common law. Aotearoa is a Polynesian culture. We are a European one. We are nothing but a rebellious province of a European whole. We have culturally far more in common with the rest of Europe than Aotearoa or Australia and we have been part of unions with European nations far longer than our brief dalliance with them.

Canadians are on the continent of America, but tell them they are American and you're liable to get punched.

Or a scowl at the very least, because Canadians unlike Americans are generally too polite to go around punching people for saying something stupid.

We are a neither rebellious nor European except in a geographic sense, we have far more culturally in common with Canada or Australia or New Zealand than we do with Germany or Bulgaria or Romania.

Who do you think more Brits would rather listen to: Kylie Minogue or Elena Gheorghe?

Which do you think more Brits are more likely to read: Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, or Olga Tokarczuk's Empuzjon?

We are not European? I'm sorry, that is one of the most absurd statements I've ever heard, even on here, and that is saying something.

In what specific ways are we "European" apart from geographically, in a meaningful cultural sense that does not apply to other nations like Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

Unless you think they're European too, to which a case could be made, but I think its more politically accurate to say "western" nowadays (even though Australia and NZ are in the East).

We are European in the sense that we are in Europe, we speak a European language, the majority of our population has European ancestry, we have a European culture, we fight in European wars... I mean, we are European in every sense of the term. As a major European power, and like other major European powers like France and Spain, we established colonies in the modern period, and many Europeans travelled to settle in those colonies. Unsurprisingly, we have a lot in common with these European settlers who came from this country and speak our language, but that does not stop us being European any more than it stops the French being European because they have more in common with Quebecois than with Bulgarians.
Christ, I can't believe I'm even having to say this. No wonder this country is circling the drain.

IanB2 said:

rcs1000 said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

Brexit is dead.
We just haven’t figured out how to dispose of the body yet.

For the moment, we have to put up with this grotesque “Weekend at Bernie’s” style politics where people pretend it makes any sense whatsoever.

Brexit is done.

Being a part of history now, it is neither living nor dead, its simply a part of the past.

As a philosophy it’s dead. The majority now see what we’ve lost and want to get most of it back. A journey that will end up with us becoming politically what we always have been cultural and geographically - European - rather than this insane nostalgia for a brief period of attachment to countries literally on the other side of the globe we have nothing in common with.

We are as European as Canadians are American.

And you should know full well the UK has much in common with New Zealand and other nations, the idea we have nothing in common with New Zealand is just preposterous.

Canadians are, literally, American, yes. As for Aotearoa, we play a certain number of sports in common and speak English. That is it. We don't even have the same legal system anymore given they've largely abandoned common law. Aotearoa is a Polynesian culture. We are a European one. We are nothing but a rebellious province of a European whole. We have culturally far more in common with the rest of Europe than Aotearoa or Australia and we have been part of unions with European nations far longer than our brief dalliance with them.

Canadians are on the continent of America, but tell them they are American and you're liable to get punched.

Or a scowl at the very least, because Canadians unlike Americans are generally too polite to go around punching people for saying something stupid.

We are a neither rebellious nor European except in a geographic sense, we have far more culturally in common with Canada or Australia or New Zealand than we do with Germany or Bulgaria or Romania.

Who do you think more Brits would rather listen to: Kylie Minogue or Elena Gheorghe?

Which do you think more Brits are more likely to read: Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, or Olga Tokarczuk's Empuzjon?

I should warn you that my 15 year old daughter is obsessed by the Moldovan entry into last year's Eurovision:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C9RJQPZsj8E

Remind me of Interrailling in communist Yugoslavia. Without the dancing on the tables, obvs.

HYUFD said:

Anabobazina said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

.

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

Brexit is dead.
We just haven’t figured out how to dispose of the body yet.

For the moment, we have to put up with this grotesque “Weekend at Bernie’s” style politics where people pretend it makes any sense whatsoever.

Brexit is done.

Being a part of history now, it is neither living nor dead, its simply a part of the past.

As a philosophy it’s dead. The majority now see what we’ve lost and want to get most of it back. A journey that will end up with us becoming politically what we always have been cultural and geographically - European - rather than this insane nostalgia for a brief period of attachment to countries literally on the other side of the globe we have nothing in common with.

We are as European as Canadians are American.

And you should know full well the UK has much in common with New Zealand and other nations, the idea we have nothing in common with New Zealand is just preposterous.

Canadians are, literally, American, yes. As for Aotearoa, we play a certain number of sports in common and speak English. That is it. We don't even have the same legal system anymore given they've largely abandoned common law. Aotearoa is a Polynesian culture. We are a European one. We are nothing but a rebellious province of a European whole. We have culturally far more in common with the rest of Europe than Aotearoa or Australia and we have been part of unions with European nations far longer than our brief dalliance with them.

Canadians are on the continent of America, but tell them they are American and you're liable to get punched.

Or a scowl at the very least, because Canadians unlike Americans are generally too polite to go around punching people for saying something stupid.

We are a neither rebellious nor European except in a geographic sense, we have far more culturally in common with Canada or Australia or New Zealand than we do with Germany or Bulgaria or Romania.

Who do you think more Brits would rather listen to: Kylie Minogue or Elena Gheorghe?

Which do you think more Brits are more likely to read: Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, or Olga Tokarczuk's Empuzjon?

Are Brits more likely to eat spaghetti bolognese or poutine? Paella or lamingtons?

Are Brits more likely to holiday in Ibiza or Vancouver Island?
Both of
Are Brits more likely to watch "The Bridge" or "The Brokenwood"?

We could do this all day.

Are Brits more likely to emigrate to Australia or Austria?

Even with free movement, Brits who chose to move abroad overwhelmingly chose to go across the world to our more culturally similar cousin nations, than to our neighbours (excluding Ireland, which is sui generis and we still have free movement with).

Spain is more popular than Ireland, despite it speaking a different language.

Interesting.

Both of Catholic majority heritage unlike Protestant majority heritage the UK, New Zealand and Australia

Anabobazina said:

HYUFD said:

Anabobazina said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

.

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

Brexit is dead.
We just haven’t figured out how to dispose of the body yet.

For the moment, we have to put up with this grotesque “Weekend at Bernie’s” style politics where people pretend it makes any sense whatsoever.

Brexit is done.

Being a part of history now, it is neither living nor dead, its simply a part of the past.

As a philosophy it’s dead. The majority now see what we’ve lost and want to get most of it back. A journey that will end up with us becoming politically what we always have been cultural and geographically - European - rather than this insane nostalgia for a brief period of attachment to countries literally on the other side of the globe we have nothing in common with.

We are as European as Canadians are American.

And you should know full well the UK has much in common with New Zealand and other nations, the idea we have nothing in common with New Zealand is just preposterous.

Canadians are, literally, American, yes. As for Aotearoa, we play a certain number of sports in common and speak English. That is it. We don't even have the same legal system anymore given they've largely abandoned common law. Aotearoa is a Polynesian culture. We are a European one. We are nothing but a rebellious province of a European whole. We have culturally far more in common with the rest of Europe than Aotearoa or Australia and we have been part of unions with European nations far longer than our brief dalliance with them.

Canadians are on the continent of America, but tell them they are American and you're liable to get punched.

Or a scowl at the very least, because Canadians unlike Americans are generally too polite to go around punching people for saying something stupid.

We are a neither rebellious nor European except in a geographic sense, we have far more culturally in common with Canada or Australia or New Zealand than we do with Germany or Bulgaria or Romania.

Who do you think more Brits would rather listen to: Kylie Minogue or Elena Gheorghe?

Which do you think more Brits are more likely to read: Margaret Atwood's The Handmaid's Tale, or Olga Tokarczuk's Empuzjon?

Are Brits more likely to eat spaghetti bolognese or poutine? Paella or lamingtons?

Are Brits more likely to holiday in Ibiza or Vancouver Island?
Both of
Are Brits more likely to watch "The Bridge" or "The Brokenwood"?

We could do this all day.

Are Brits more likely to emigrate to Australia or Austria?

Even with free movement, Brits who chose to move abroad overwhelmingly chose to go across the world to our more culturally similar cousin nations, than to our neighbours (excluding Ireland, which is sui generis and we still have free movement with).

Spain is more popular than Ireland, despite it speaking a different language.

Interesting.

Both of Catholic majority heritage unlike Protestant majority heritage the UK, New Zealand and Australia

Spain is also majority Catholic, in case you were unaware.

Odd.

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Stuartinromford said:

HYUFD said:

Stuartinromford said:

Casino_Royale said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

Brexit is dead.
We just haven’t figured out how to dispose of the body yet.

For the moment, we have to put up with this grotesque “Weekend at Bernie’s” style politics where people pretend it makes any sense whatsoever.

Brexit is done.

Being a part of history now, it is neither living nor dead, its simply a part of the past.

As a philosophy it’s dead. The majority now see what we’ve lost and want to get most of it back. A journey that will end up with us becoming politically what we always have been cultural and geographically - European - rather than this insane nostalgia for a brief period of attachment to countries literally on the other side of the globe we have nothing in common with.

Odd. Brits think they have far more in common with Aussies, Kiwis and Canadians than they do with the French, Czechs and Slovenians and they vote with their feet accordingly.

The British position has been the same for centuries: we are a maritime trading nation that trades both globally and continentally and has a strong interest in a maintaining a balance of power in Europe and secure global sea routes in order to prosper.

Geography is key but not all in one direction like you think it is.

And yet, despite all of that (which isn't false but I do think it is more complicated than that), Brexit is unpopular and increasingly so.

It's really not my job to work out why, or what to do about that. Which is probably for the best, because I haven't got a clue where to begin.

(I suspect the answer is that there's nothing to be done about it. The mental map for those who grew up after about 1973 is just different to that of those who grew up post war but pre-EEC membership. And changing people's mental maps is damn difficult.)

It isn't that much, most of even under 40s would be fine with EFTA membership at most, they don't have a desperate desire to be part of the Eurozone and an EU superstate which is where the EU is heading.

Over 65 upper middle class LD voters are much keener on rejoining the full EU than most under 40s would be if EFTA was an option too (and plenty of the former on PB)

But even that- some variant of what Norway or Switzerland do- is a much closer arrangement than we have right now. In an annexe with a separate front door, but still in the same building. Which is not what eurosceptics are talking about this evening.

One final thought before I wander off to water the corguettes. (Half of me wants them to die so I don't have to keep harvesting them, but that wouldn't be on.) Some of the chat this evening has been about how the UK can't be fully European, because of the Anglosphere. Spaniards don't bang on about the Hispanidad in the same way, or France about the Francophonie. They just get on with having multiple overlapping identities. Why do Brits find that so difficult?

Most of Latin America is mixed race, only really Argentina or Chile come close to white Spanish ancestry majority. The Philippines are not majority white Spanish ancestry either. No French ex colonies or current colonies are majority white French ancestry, indeed Quebec in Canada comes closest to that (and I exclude Quebec from the Anglosphere).

New Zealand, Australia and Canada however are majority of white British isles ancestry

The "British" aren't mixed race? Revolutionary, often literally so in the form of the Irish.

Most British are not mixed race.

Though I would say the average Englishman is closer to the average Australian or New Zealander than the average Scottish Nationalist

Ah, I see you are denying even the "Our Island Story" approved story.

Given the history fo emigration to Australia and NZ, that would considerably surprise many people thjere.

Most of them not Scottish Nationalists either. Scottish Nationalists of course closer ideologically to the EU and even France than the Anglosphere

Oh, my. And am I also to understand that most Australians aren't members of the Epping Primrose League?

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Malmesbury said:

DavidL said:

Cyclefree said:

In your now near-daily reminder:-

"Scotland Yard was braced for fresh scandal on Tuesday after it missed at least eight opportunities to remove a police officer who went on to rape two women."

Adam Provan.

"Judge Lucas said the “persistence and seriousness of Provan’s offending was clear when set out in the starkest terms”, adding that his actions have “brought disgrace on the police force”. The judge said he was troubled by how the Met handled the female officer’s initial complaints about Provan’s behaviour, in 2005. He told Provan: “While this cannot be laid at your door, I find it highly troubling that [the female officer’s] colleagues in the Metropolitan Police in 2004 and 2005 were more concerned about looking out for ‘one of their own’ than in taking her seriously and investigating her complaints about you.”

It's going to be exceedingly hard to judge this year's winner of the No Shit, Sherlock! Awards. Some really excellent contenders this year and, doubtless, more to come.

I'm co-opting @ydoethur onto the judging panel.

So the winner is someone in the Department of Education? Good clue.

DfE and OFSTED are excluded from the competition for the same reason that aircraft built by Blackburn are excluded from Worlds Ugliest Aircraft completions. There would be no fun with immediate and obvious winners.

https://www.baesystems.com/en/heritage/blackburn-r1-blackburn

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Stuartinromford said:

HYUFD said:

Stuartinromford said:

Casino_Royale said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

Brexit is dead.
We just haven’t figured out how to dispose of the body yet.

For the moment, we have to put up with this grotesque “Weekend at Bernie’s” style politics where people pretend it makes any sense whatsoever.

Brexit is done.

Being a part of history now, it is neither living nor dead, its simply a part of the past.

As a philosophy it’s dead. The majority now see what we’ve lost and want to get most of it back. A journey that will end up with us becoming politically what we always have been cultural and geographically - European - rather than this insane nostalgia for a brief period of attachment to countries literally on the other side of the globe we have nothing in common with.

Odd. Brits think they have far more in common with Aussies, Kiwis and Canadians than they do with the French, Czechs and Slovenians and they vote with their feet accordingly.

The British position has been the same for centuries: we are a maritime trading nation that trades both globally and continentally and has a strong interest in a maintaining a balance of power in Europe and secure global sea routes in order to prosper.

Geography is key but not all in one direction like you think it is.

And yet, despite all of that (which isn't false but I do think it is more complicated than that), Brexit is unpopular and increasingly so.

It's really not my job to work out why, or what to do about that. Which is probably for the best, because I haven't got a clue where to begin.

(I suspect the answer is that there's nothing to be done about it. The mental map for those who grew up after about 1973 is just different to that of those who grew up post war but pre-EEC membership. And changing people's mental maps is damn difficult.)

It isn't that much, most of even under 40s would be fine with EFTA membership at most, they don't have a desperate desire to be part of the Eurozone and an EU superstate which is where the EU is heading.

Over 65 upper middle class LD voters are much keener on rejoining the full EU than most under 40s would be if EFTA was an option too (and plenty of the former on PB)

But even that- some variant of what Norway or Switzerland do- is a much closer arrangement than we have right now. In an annexe with a separate front door, but still in the same building. Which is not what eurosceptics are talking about this evening.

One final thought before I wander off to water the corguettes. (Half of me wants them to die so I don't have to keep harvesting them, but that wouldn't be on.) Some of the chat this evening has been about how the UK can't be fully European, because of the Anglosphere. Spaniards don't bang on about the Hispanidad in the same way, or France about the Francophonie. They just get on with having multiple overlapping identities. Why do Brits find that so difficult?

Most of Latin America is mixed race, only really Argentina or Chile come close to white Spanish ancestry majority. The Philippines are not majority white Spanish ancestry either. No French ex colonies or current colonies are majority white French ancestry, indeed Quebec in Canada comes closest to that (and I exclude Quebec from the Anglosphere).

New Zealand, Australia and Canada however are majority of white British isles ancestry

The "British" aren't mixed race? Revolutionary, often literally so in the form of the Irish.

Most British are not mixed race.

Though I would say the average Englishman is closer to the average Australian or New Zealander than the average Scottish Nationalist

Ah, I see you are denying even the "Our Island Story" approved story.

Given the history fo emigration to Australia and NZ, that would considerably surprise many people thjere.

Most of them not Scottish Nationalists either. Scottish Nationalists of course closer ideologically to the EU and even France than the Anglosphere

Oh, my. And am I also to understand that most Australians aren't members of the Epping Primrose League?

Most Australians are more supportive of links to the UK and the King than Scottish Nationalists like you certainly.

Of course until the Act of Union England had fought more wars against Scotland than any other nation except France

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Pagan2 said:

OldBasing said:

CorrectHorseBat said:

Still think we will see one 30 point lead between now and the election, who wants to call me thick?

@CorrectHorseBat I reckon sometime around when the Online Safety Bill becomes law and the tech firms turn off Whatsapp and Messenger in the UK....

Apart from labour are even more in favour of the os bill than the tories. The bill needs to be buried full stop

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

Stuartinromford said:

HYUFD said:

Stuartinromford said:

Casino_Royale said:

DougSeal said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

Gardenwalker said:

Brexit is dead.
We just haven’t figured out how to dispose of the body yet.

For the moment, we have to put up with this grotesque “Weekend at Bernie’s” style politics where people pretend it makes any sense whatsoever.

Brexit is done.

Being a part of history now, it is neither living nor dead, its simply a part of the past.

As a philosophy it’s dead. The majority now see what we’ve lost and want to get most of it back. A journey that will end up with us becoming politically what we always have been cultural and geographically - European - rather than this insane nostalgia for a brief period of attachment to countries literally on the other side of the globe we have nothing in common with.

Odd. Brits think they have far more in common with Aussies, Kiwis and Canadians than they do with the French, Czechs and Slovenians and they vote with their feet accordingly.

The British position has been the same for centuries: we are a maritime trading nation that trades both globally and continentally and has a strong interest in a maintaining a balance of power in Europe and secure global sea routes in order to prosper.

Geography is key but not all in one direction like you think it is.

And yet, despite all of that (which isn't false but I do think it is more complicated than that), Brexit is unpopular and increasingly so.

It's really not my job to work out why, or what to do about that. Which is probably for the best, because I haven't got a clue where to begin.

(I suspect the answer is that there's nothing to be done about it. The mental map for those who grew up after about 1973 is just different to that of those who grew up post war but pre-EEC membership. And changing people's mental maps is damn difficult.)

It isn't that much, most of even under 40s would be fine with EFTA membership at most, they don't have a desperate desire to be part of the Eurozone and an EU superstate which is where the EU is heading.

Over 65 upper middle class LD voters are much keener on rejoining the full EU than most under 40s would be if EFTA was an option too (and plenty of the former on PB)

But even that- some variant of what Norway or Switzerland do- is a much closer arrangement than we have right now. In an annexe with a separate front door, but still in the same building. Which is not what eurosceptics are talking about this evening.

One final thought before I wander off to water the corguettes. (Half of me wants them to die so I don't have to keep harvesting them, but that wouldn't be on.) Some of the chat this evening has been about how the UK can't be fully European, because of the Anglosphere. Spaniards don't bang on about the Hispanidad in the same way, or France about the Francophonie. They just get on with having multiple overlapping identities. Why do Brits find that so difficult?

Most of Latin America is mixed race, only really Argentina or Chile come close to white Spanish ancestry majority. The Philippines are not majority white Spanish ancestry either. No French ex colonies or current colonies are majority white French ancestry, indeed Quebec in Canada comes closest to that (and I exclude Quebec from the Anglosphere).

New Zealand, Australia and Canada however are majority of white British isles ancestry

The "British" aren't mixed race? Revolutionary, often literally so in the form of the Irish.

Most British are not mixed race.

Though I would say the average Englishman is closer to the average Australian or New Zealander than the average Scottish Nationalist

Ah, I see you are denying even the "Our Island Story" approved story.

Given the history fo emigration to Australia and NZ, that would considerably surprise many people thjere.

Most of them not Scottish Nationalists either. Scottish Nationalists of course closer ideologically to the EU and even France than the Anglosphere

Oh, my. And am I also to understand that most Australians aren't members of the Epping Primrose League?

Most Australians are more supportive of links to the UK and the King than Scottish Nationalists like you certainly.

Of course until the Act of Union England had fought more wars against Scotland than any other nation except France

That's only because you deny that Ireland is a nation.

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Where did you learn your history?

(a) wars of extermination and conquest against the Aboriginals of Australia and Tasmania
(b) New_Zealand_Wars
(c) wars against the First Nations, with or without French and Dutch involvement, ditto US involvement
(d) Red River War

And that is off the top of my head.

rottenborough said:

What happened to @IanB2 ?

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

So what? Most Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders are now of white British ancestry and we did not fight them (although we did fight the French at Quebec under Wolfe).

We never even fought a War of Independence against Australia, Canada or New Zealand unlike we did against the US colonists and Catholic Irish

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

See that IanB2 has been banned - anyone got a clue why?

rottenborough said:

carnforth said:

rottenborough said:

What happened to @IanB2 ?

He libelled another poster, in a very bad way. Or once and future poster, I suppose.

When? I can't see anything. Maybe I am being thick???

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

So what? Most Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders are now of white British ancestry and we did not fight them (although we did fight the French at Quebec under Wolfe).

We never even fought a War of Independence against Australia, Canada or New Zealand unlike we did against the US colonists and Catholic Irish

I almost added to my original post "unless you are going to say that wars only count against white people". And here you are...

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

So what? Most Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders are now of white British ancestry and we did not fight them (although we did fight the French at Quebec under Wolfe).

We never even fought a War of Independence against Australia, Canada or New Zealand unlike we did against the US colonists and Catholic Irish

I almost added to my original post "unless you are going to say that wars only count against white people". And here you are...

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Where did you learn your history?

(a) wars of extermination and conquest against the Aboriginals of Australia and Tasmania
(b) New_Zealand_Wars
(c) wars against the First Nations, with or without French and Dutch involvement, ditto US involvement
(d) Red River War

And that is off the top of my head.

Australia, Canada and New Zealand did not exist as independent nations then

Weren't you and Bart talking about wars with France and the Anglo-Dutch wars? We've not fought a war against France or the Netherlands (or Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Poland, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, Slovenia etc.) since Australia, Canada and New Zealand became independent.

If you're going to look at a narrow time period for wars against Aus, Can and NZ, you need to apply the same time period to European nations.

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

So what? Most Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders are now of white British ancestry and we did not fight them (although we did fight the French at Quebec under Wolfe).

We never even fought a War of Independence against Australia, Canada or New Zealand unlike we did against the US colonists and Catholic Irish

I almost added to my original post "unless you are going to say that wars only count against white people". And here you are...

Australia, New Zealand and Canada did not exist as nations when we colonised them. Indeed most of the ancestors of most of the current population of those nations came from the British Isles over the next few centuries

Foxy said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

Also both the Rum Rebellion and Eureka Stockade were fights between British government forces and white Australians.

HYUFD said:

Foxy said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

Also both the Rum Rebellion and Eureka Stockade were fights between British government forces and white Australians.

On that basis we may as well class the Battle of Orgreave, the Poll Tax riots and Peterloo Massacre as international conflicts

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

So what? Most Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders are now of white British ancestry and we did not fight them (although we did fight the French at Quebec under Wolfe).

We never even fought a War of Independence against Australia, Canada or New Zealand unlike we did against the US colonists and Catholic Irish

My Canadian daughter in law would challenge your statement that most white Canadians are of white British Ancestry not least as her family are Ukrainian and indeed emigration into Canada came from across Europe

Sunil_Prasannan said:

Foxy said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Where did you learn your history?

(a) wars of extermination and conquest against the Aboriginals of Australia and Tasmania
(b) New_Zealand_Wars
(c) wars against the First Nations, with or without French and Dutch involvement, ditto US involvement
(d) Red River War

And that is off the top of my head.

Australia, Canada and New Zealand did not exist as independent nations then

Weren't you and Bart talking about wars with France and the Anglo-Dutch wars? We've not fought a war against France or the Netherlands (or Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Poland, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, Slovenia etc.) since Australia, Canada and New Zealand became independent.

If you're going to look at a narrow time period for wars against Aus, Can and NZ, you need to apply the same time period to European nations.

Our last battle against France was in 1942.

Puppet government of Nazi Germany.

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

So what? Most Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders are now of white British ancestry and we did not fight them (although we did fight the French at Quebec under Wolfe).

We never even fought a War of Independence against Australia, Canada or New Zealand unlike we did against the US colonists and Catholic Irish

My Canadian daughter in law would challenge your statement that most white Canadians are of white British Ancestry not least as her family are Ukrainian and indeed emigration into Canada came from across Europe

Foxy said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Where did you learn your history?

(a) wars of extermination and conquest against the Aboriginals of Australia and Tasmania
(b) New_Zealand_Wars
(c) wars against the First Nations, with or without French and Dutch involvement, ditto US involvement
(d) Red River War

And that is off the top of my head.

Australia, Canada and New Zealand did not exist as independent nations then

Weren't you and Bart talking about wars with France and the Anglo-Dutch wars? We've not fought a war against France or the Netherlands (or Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Poland, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, Slovenia etc.) since Australia, Canada and New Zealand became independent.

If you're going to look at a narrow time period for wars against Aus, Can and NZ, you need to apply the same time period to European nations.

Our last battle against France was in 1942.

Andy_JS said:

GB News has just named Liz Truss as their greatest Briton of the day.

Andy_JS said:

GB News has just named Liz Truss as their greatest Briton of the day.

HYUFD said:

Foxy said:

HYUFD said:

Foxy said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

Also both the Rum Rebellion and Eureka Stockade were fights between British government forces and white Australians.

On that basis we may as well class the Battle of Orgreave, the Poll Tax riots and Peterloo Massacre as international conflicts

No, those were domestic, not international conflicts.

If you are not going to count wars before independence then neither can we count the Mau Mau War, nor Malayan Emergency, 1857 Indian War of Independence, as those were all before independence against British subjects.

No you can't count the Mau Mau war, not least as the Mau Mau fought other Kenyans not just the British. Nor can you count the Malayan Emergency where the Federation of Malaya fought with the British against the Communists.

The 1857 Indian War of Independence you might be able to have fair enough but there was no Canadian, Australian or New Zealand War of Independence

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Where did you learn your history?

(a) wars of extermination and conquest against the Aboriginals of Australia and Tasmania
(b) New_Zealand_Wars
(c) wars against the First Nations, with or without French and Dutch involvement, ditto US involvement
(d) Red River War

And that is off the top of my head.

Australia, Canada and New Zealand did not exist as independent nations then

Weren't you and Bart talking about wars with France and the Anglo-Dutch wars? We've not fought a war against France or the Netherlands (or Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Poland, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, Slovenia etc.) since Australia, Canada and New Zealand became independent.

If you're going to look at a narrow time period for wars against Aus, Can and NZ, you need to a

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Where did you learn your history?

(a) wars of extermination and conquest against the Aboriginals of Australia and Tasmania
(b) New_Zealand_Wars
(c) wars against the First Nations, with or without French and Dutch involvement, ditto US involvement
(d) Red River War

And that is off the top of my head.

Australia, Canada and New Zealand did not exist as independent nations then

Weren't you and Bart talking about wars with France and the Anglo-Dutch wars? We've not fought a war against France or the Netherlands (or Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Poland, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, Slovenia etc.) since Australia, Canada and New Zealand became independent.

If you're going to look at a narrow time period for wars against Aus, Can and NZ, you need to apply the same time period to European nations.

We have fought a war against Germany and Italy however since they became independent and we had fought a war against virtually all those European nations you name before that.

If you look at the narrow time period since Australia, New Zealand and Canada were independent nations, then we've had wars with a small number of European nations, but not Australia, New Zealand and Canada.

If you look at the longer time period ("before that", as you say), then we've had wars against what became Australia, New Zealand and Canada and we've had wars with most (but not quite all) of Europe.

This does not appear to be a decisive case either way.

If we look at the British military today, there are more in Germany or Cyprus individually than there are in Australia, New Zealand and Canada put together. (There's a few in Canada and basically none in Australia/NZ.) We have close military ties with most of Europe + Canada, and weaker ones with Australia and New Zealand.

No as Australia or New Zealand and Canada did NOT exist as the ethnicity of the population at the time was completely different to now and they were not independent nations.

We have also just signed a defence pact with Australia and the US

HYUFD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

So what? Most Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders are now of white British ancestry and we did not fight them (although we did fight the French at Quebec under Wolfe).

We never even fought a War of Independence against Australia, Canada or New Zealand unlike we did against the US colonists and Catholic Irish

My Canadian daughter in law would challenge your statement that most white Canadians are of white British Ancestry not least as her family are Ukrainian and indeed emigration into Canada came from across Europe

She can challenge it, she would still be wrong. Outside Quebec certainly most Canadians' ancestry is from the British Isles

bondegezou said:

Foxy said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Where did you learn your history?

(a) wars of extermination and conquest against the Aboriginals of Australia and Tasmania
(b) New_Zealand_Wars
(c) wars against the First Nations, with or without French and Dutch involvement, ditto US involvement
(d) Red River War

And that is off the top of my head.

Australia, Canada and New Zealand did not exist as independent nations then

Weren't you and Bart talking about wars with France and the Anglo-Dutch wars? We've not fought a war against France or the Netherlands (or Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Poland, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, Slovenia etc.) since Australia, Canada and New Zealand became independent.

If you're going to look at a narrow time period for wars against Aus, Can and NZ, you need to apply the same time period to European nations.

Our last battle against France was in 1942.

I did wonder about mentioning the battles against Vichy France. I would contest that, at the time, we did not recognise them as the legitimate French government.

Foxy said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Where did you learn your history?

(a) wars of extermination and conquest against the Aboriginals of Australia and Tasmania
(b) New_Zealand_Wars
(c) wars against the First Nations, with or without French and Dutch involvement, ditto US involvement
(d) Red River War

And that is off the top of my head.

Australia, Canada and New Zealand did not exist as independent nations then

Weren't you and Bart talking about wars with France and the Anglo-Dutch wars? We've not fought a war against France or the Netherlands (or Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Poland, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, Slovenia etc.) since Australia, Canada and New Zealand became independent.

If you're going to look at a narrow time period for wars against Aus, Can and NZ, you need to apply the same time period to European nations.

Our last battle against France was in 1942.

kle4 said:

Andy_JS said:

GB News has just named Liz Truss as their greatest Briton of the day.

Who was named on each of the 364 other days of the year?

SeaShantyIrish2 said:

bondegezou said:

Foxy said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Where did you learn your history?

(a) wars of extermination and conquest against the Aboriginals of Australia and Tasmania
(b) New_Zealand_Wars
(c) wars against the First Nations, with or without French and Dutch involvement, ditto US involvement
(d) Red River War

And that is off the top of my head.

Australia, Canada and New Zealand did not exist as independent nations then

Weren't you and Bart talking about wars with France and the Anglo-Dutch wars? We've not fought a war against France or the Netherlands (or Spain, Portugal, Belgium, Denmark, Norway, Sweden, Poland, Malta, Cyprus, Greece, Slovenia etc.) since Australia, Canada and New Zealand became independent.

If you're going to look at a narrow time period for wars against Aus, Can and NZ, you need to apply the same time period to European nations.

Our last battle against France was in 1942.

I did wonder about mentioning the battles against Vichy France. I would contest that, at the time, we did not recognise them as the legitimate French government.

However, Vichy WAS recognized as legitimate French government by Canada up until Normandy invasion, while Australia recognized BOTH Vichy and Free French.

kjh said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Where did you learn your history?

(a) wars of extermination and conquest against the Aboriginals of Australia and Tasmania
(b) New_Zealand_Wars
(c) wars against the First Nations, with or without French and Dutch involvement, ditto US involvement
(d) Red River War

And that is off the top of my head.

Australia, Canada and New Zealand did not exist as independent nations then

So not surprisingly we fought more wars with countries that did exist than we did with countries that didn't exist. Surely that makes us natural allies with Narnia and Atlantis as we have never fought a war with them either.

BartholomewRoberts said:

.

Andy_JS said:

dixiedean said:

Canada is a lot less Anglo/British than a lot of folk on here blithely assume.

Indeed. They do things like using British spellings mainly as a way of being counter-American rather than pro-Britain.

It depends which province you're in. In the western provinces you'll find a lot of Union flags and British names added to things, and a lot of symbols of the monarchy.

But that's more a way of being counter-Ontario and counter-Quebecois than it is pro-British.

HYUFD said:

kjh said:

HYUFD said:

Carnyx said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Where did you learn your history?

(a) wars of extermination and conquest against the Aboriginals of Australia and Tasmania
(b) New_Zealand_Wars
(c) wars against the First Nations, with or without French and Dutch involvement, ditto US involvement
(d) Red River War

And that is off the top of my head.

Australia, Canada and New Zealand did not exist as independent nations then

So not surprisingly we fought more wars with countries that did exist than we did with countries that didn't exist. Surely that makes us natural allies with Narnia and Atlantis as we have never fought a war with them either.

Firstly they are fictional and secondly they did not mainly share the same ethnicity and ancestry as Australia and New Zealand do with the British Isles

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

Big_G_NorthWales said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

HYUFD said:

bondegezou said:

BartholomewRoberts said:

We fight in European wars - As do they. ANZAC troops literally fought in European wars too, in Gallipoli etc they were embedded with and led by our troops, on our side, rather than against us. Score another one for CANZUK.

Colonisation - Yes we colonised other nations. Including literally the other nations we're talking about, so we're closer to them as we colonised them, the Netherlands never colonised us or vice-versa. Score another one for CANZUK.

To simplify a long discussion, if I can tackle these two?

French, Polish, Belgian and Norwegian military personnel, among others, were embedded with and led by ours in World War II. Since WWII, the UK and France were together for Suez, without CANZUK, while Australia and New Zealand were together with the US for the Vietnam War without us.

In the 2003 invasion of Iraq, we were joined by Australia, but not by Canada and NZ. We were also joined by Albania, Bulgaria, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Hungary, Iceland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Portugal, Poland, Romania, Slovakia and Spain, but not by France, Germany, Norway and others.

In NATO's involvement in the Kosovo War, the UK fought along side the French, Italians, Danish, Belgians, Norwegian and Canadian... but there was no AUSNZ involvement.

I'm not seeing a "win" here for CANZUK.

Colonisation... you say the Netherlands never colonised us, although William and Mary comes close. Of course, the Romans did colonise us, as did the Anglo-Saxons.

Name one war we fought against Australia, New Zealand or Canada?

I can name multiple wars we fought against France, Germany and Spain.

We also fought the Dutch in the Anglo Dutch wars, we fought Russia in the Crimea War and indirectly the Cold War and Italy in WW2. Even the Americans we fought the War of Independence and War of 1812 against.

We also now have the Australia and US defence pact we are part of too

Australia, New Zealand and Canada are all pretty new as countries, but we fought plenty of wars with the peoples of those places.

Australia: Tasmanian War; Hawkesbury and Nepean Wars; Bathurst War; wars of the Liverpool Plains; the Mount Cottrell massacre; Eumeralla Wars

New Zealand: Flagstaff War; 1st Taranaki War; 2nd Taranaki War; East Cape War; Titokowaru's War

Canada: Seven Years' War; the Rebellions of 1837–1838; King William's War

So what? Most Australians, Canadians and New Zealanders are now of white British ancestry and we did not fight them (although we did fight the French at Quebec under Wolfe).

We never even fought a War of Independence against Australia, Canada or New Zealand unlike we did against the US colonists and Catholic Irish

My Canadian daughter in law would challenge your statement that most white Canadians are of white British Ancestry not least as her family are Ukrainian and indeed emigration into Canada came from across Europe

She can challenge it, she would still be wrong. Outside Quebec certainly most Canadians' ancestry is from the British Isles

You say, "Outside Quebec certainly most Canadians' ancestry is from the British Isles". I read that as, "Outside of the big portion of the Canadian population that proves me wrong, certainly most Canadians' ancestry is from the British Isles".

Let's look at the 2021 Canadian census, where people self-reported specific ethnic or cultural origins. Their answers were Canadian (15.6 percent of the population), followed by English (14.7 percent), Irish (12.1 percent), Scottish (12.1 percent), French (11.0 percent), German (8.1 percent), Chinese (4.7 percent), Italian (4.3 percent), Indian (3.7 percent), and Ukrainian (3.5 percent).

So, English + Scottish = 26.8%. Irish + French + German + Chinese + Italian + Indian + Ukrainian = 47.4%