Moderators: richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 28421
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Thu Jan 12, 2023 5:54 pm

Kiwirob wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I guess the word "symbol" is lost on you.

Perhaps a better question: How many different world currencies is Liz's face on?

The answer, apparently, is 35 ( ref: https://qr.ae/pr2S2q ).

That's just pig headed ignorance on behalf of those who prefer to blame others for there own failings.

So you're suggesting it's not a symbol of colonialism to have one royal face on 34 other country's money?
 
Max Q
Posts: 9549
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 5:45 am

A101 wrote:
889091 wrote:
So, why even bring it up in the first place?

https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/c ... e2a92c931c

Shedding light on why he decided to share the details of his time in Afghanistan, he explained that it was a show of solidarity for other veterans.

“To the vets here, and to the civilians here — who may feel that this is slightly a weird conversation to have, especially on this show of all shows — I made a choice to share it because having spent nearly two decades working with veterans all around the world, I think the most important thing is to be honest and to give space to others to be able to share their experiences without any shame.

“Any my whole goal, my attempt with sharing that detail, is to reduce the number of suicides,” he added, to applause from the crowd.


Sharing it with fellow vets - fine, as you wore the same uniform and were fighting the same common enemy. Sharing it with the whole world, especially if you're someone that high profile? Then trying explain his way out by saying that he did it to reduce the number of suicides? Lost for words. I think he has completely lost the plot.



Agree

Some people are suggesting it was a way to get free extra security for his family as the ulterior motivation.

Security can only do so much. He is certainly coming across as being not the sharpest tool in the toolbox



Some people are idiots, fact is Harry served his country in combat and showed considerable bravery there whether you like it or not
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 14672
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 5:51 am

Revelation wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I guess the word "symbol" is lost on you.

Perhaps a better question: How many different world currencies is Liz's face on?

The answer, apparently, is 35 ( ref: https://qr.ae/pr2S2q ).

That's just pig headed ignorance on behalf of those who prefer to blame others for there own failings.

So you're suggesting it's not a symbol of colonialism to have one royal face on 34 other country's money?


That's up to the country who minted the coins to choose.
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 14672
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 5:54 am

Max Q wrote:
A101 wrote:
889091 wrote:
So, why even bring it up in the first place?

https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/c ... e2a92c931c



Sharing it with fellow vets - fine, as you wore the same uniform and were fighting the same common enemy. Sharing it with the whole world, especially if you're someone that high profile? Then trying explain his way out by saying that he did it to reduce the number of suicides? Lost for words. I think he has completely lost the plot.



Agree

Some people are suggesting it was a way to get free extra security for his family as the ulterior motivation.

Security can only do so much. He is certainly coming across as being not the sharpest tool in the toolbox



Some people are idiots, fact is Harry served his country in combat and showed considerable bravery there whether you like it or not


How many people do you know who served brag about how many people they killed? Publishing it in a book was stupid?
 
hh65man
Posts: 434
Joined: Fri Mar 01, 2013 7:52 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 5:59 am

Kiwirob wrote:
Max Q wrote:
A101 wrote:


Agree

Some people are suggesting it was a way to get free extra security for his family as the ulterior motivation.

Security can only do so much. He is certainly coming across as being not the sharpest tool in the toolbox



Some people are idiots, fact is Harry served his country in combat and showed considerable bravery there whether you like it or not


How many people do you know who served brag about how many people they killed? Publishing it in a book was stupid?


Maybe he has a death wish we’re unaware of, or he’s a simple adrenaline junkie… but you’re right, not something to brag about.
 
Max Q
Posts: 9549
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 6:06 am

Kiwirob wrote:
Max Q wrote:
A101 wrote:


Agree

Some people are suggesting it was a way to get free extra security for his family as the ulterior motivation.

Security can only do so much. He is certainly coming across as being not the sharpest tool in the toolbox



Some people are idiots, fact is Harry served his country in combat and showed considerable bravery there whether you like it or not


How many people do you know who served brag about how many people they killed? Publishing it in a book was stupid?



It’s not bragging if you really did it and the answer is more than one


Curious if you served yourself ?
 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 7:27 am

Max Q wrote:
A101 wrote:
889091 wrote:
So, why even bring it up in the first place?

https://www.news.com.au/entertainment/c ... e2a92c931c



Sharing it with fellow vets - fine, as you wore the same uniform and were fighting the same common enemy. Sharing it with the whole world, especially if you're someone that high profile? Then trying explain his way out by saying that he did it to reduce the number of suicides? Lost for words. I think he has completely lost the plot.



Agree

Some people are suggesting it was a way to get free extra security for his family as the ulterior motivation.

Security can only do so much. He is certainly coming across as being not the sharpest tool in the toolbox



Some people are idiots, fact is Harry served his country in combat and showed considerable bravery there whether you like it or not


Hold the phone mate, I am in no way casting aspirations on Harry's time in HM defence force and his valuable service overseas, after all I too have done my bit of service for Queen and country.

But I stand by what i said in the above description with the book just released.
 
bennett123
Posts: 11804
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 8:54 am

Max Q wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
Max Q wrote:


Some people are idiots, fact is Harry served his country in combat and showed considerable bravery there whether you like it or not


How many people do you know who served brag about how many people they killed? Publishing it in a book was stupid?



It’s not bragging if you really did it and the answer is more than one


Curious if you served yourself ?


My father was in Korea in 1952/3.

I knew that he/and others shot 1 Chinese soldier. If there were others, he never mentioned it.

As far as I know, he didn't talk about it outside.
 
GDB
Posts: 16847
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 9:26 am

Revelation wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I guess the word "symbol" is lost on you.

Perhaps a better question: How many different world currencies is Liz's face on?

The answer, apparently, is 35 ( ref: https://qr.ae/pr2S2q ).

That's just pig headed ignorance on behalf of those who prefer to blame others for there own failings.

So you're suggesting it's not a symbol of colonialism to have one royal face on 34 other country's money?


No one has or ever would stop them from changing it, colonialism and that sort of consent/hands off nature don’t go together. Choice does not really come into colonial rule, over a hundred years for what were called the ‘Dominion’ nations and over 60 for the rest, plenty of time to change that.
Unlike say grabbing the remnants of the old Spanish empire for a nation ‘untainted’ by such things.
Independence did not follow there. Some are still US territories not states.
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 14672
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 9:50 am

Max Q wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
Max Q wrote:


Some people are idiots, fact is Harry served his country in combat and showed considerable bravery there whether you like it or not


How many people do you know who served brag about how many people they killed? Publishing it in a book was stupid?



It’s not bragging if you really did it and the answer is more than one


Curious if you served yourself ?


Nope but my dad, uncle, cousin, grandfather and great uncles who did. Only one of my great uncles ever talked about his war, he was a mosquito bomber pilot, he had some great tales, his brothers wouldn't talk about there experiences. My wife two brother served, one in K force and the other did three rotations to Afghanistan. So I know plenty of people who have but only one who liked talking about it.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 28421
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 2:02 pm

Kiwirob wrote:
That's up to the country who minted the coins to choose.

Sure, if they feel it benefits them to display their colonial heritage, they should go for it.

Kiwirob wrote:
Nope but my dad, uncle, cousin, grandfather and great uncles who did. Only one of my great uncles ever talked about his war, he was a mosquito bomber pilot, he had some great tales, his brothers wouldn't talk about there experiences. My wife two brother served, one in K force and the other did three rotations to Afghanistan. So I know plenty of people who have but only one who liked talking about it.

So your great uncle's stories are great tales, yet Harry should shut up?
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 14672
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 5:11 pm

Revelation wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
That's up to the country who minted the coins to choose.

Sure, if they feel it benefits them to display their colonial heritage, they should go for it.

Kiwirob wrote:
Nope but my dad, uncle, cousin, grandfather and great uncles who did. Only one of my great uncles ever talked about his war, he was a mosquito bomber pilot, he had some great tales, his brothers wouldn't talk about there experiences. My wife two brother served, one in K force and the other did three rotations to Afghanistan. So I know plenty of people who have but only one who liked talking about it.

So your great uncle's stories are great tales, yet Harry should shut up?


Different kind of tales and he never talked about killing anyone. He could talk for hours about the Mosquito.
 
Max Q
Posts: 9549
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 5:30 pm

Kiwirob wrote:
Max Q wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:

How many people do you know who served brag about how many people they killed? Publishing it in a book was stupid?



It’s not bragging if you really did it and the answer is more than one


Curious if you served yourself ?


Nope but my dad, uncle, cousin, grandfather and great uncles who did. Only one of my great uncles ever talked about his war, he was a mosquito bomber pilot, he had some great tales, his brothers wouldn't talk about there experiences. My wife two brother served, one in K force and the other did three rotations to Afghanistan. So I know plenty of people who have but only one who liked talking about it.




So Harry talked about what he did in combat, that doesn’t lessen the contribution he made


In WW2 aircraft had stencils on the side to show how many fighters pilots had shot down or how many bombing missions they’d been on, those were lives taken in a noble cause


No one disparaged that and it’s the same thing, nothing wrong with Harry saying what he did either
 
889091
Posts: 1007
Joined: Sat Apr 06, 2019 7:56 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 6:07 pm

 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 8:56 pm

Max Q wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
Max Q wrote:


It’s not bragging if you really did it and the answer is more than one


Curious if you served yourself ?


Nope but my dad, uncle, cousin, grandfather and great uncles who did. Only one of my great uncles ever talked about his war, he was a mosquito bomber pilot, he had some great tales, his brothers wouldn't talk about there experiences. My wife two brother served, one in K force and the other did three rotations to Afghanistan. So I know plenty of people who have but only one who liked talking about it.




So Harry talked about what he did in combat, that doesn’t lessen the contribution he made


In WW2 aircraft had stencils on the side to show how many fighters pilots had shot down or how many bombing missions they’d been on, those were lives taken in a noble cause


No one disparaged that and it’s the same thing, nothing wrong with Harry saying what he did either


Not everyone died in an air-to-air kill except for the plane.


I imagine not all those that harry killed would be the foot soldiers of the Taliban, how many new terrorists has he created?

All he has achieved is increased the security for him and his own family and members of the defence force for reprisal attacks, we are not talking about soldiers from allied v axis powers in WWII Korea Dhofar Konfrontasi Falklands, but people who believe in a certain ideology, all he has achieved with the comment is open the door to every jihadist and nutjob out there looking for reprisals against himself and members of the defence force let alone the propaganda now coming from that arena

https://twitter.com/AnasHaqqani313/stat ... 2018543616



Taliban leader accuses Prince Harry of ‘war crimes’ after he admits killing 25 insurgents in Afghanistan



https://uk.news.yahoo.com/does-prince-h ... 02502.html
 
bluecrew
Posts: 782
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:13 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 8:58 pm

Kiwirob wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
That's up to the country who minted the coins to choose.

Sure, if they feel it benefits them to display their colonial heritage, they should go for it.

Kiwirob wrote:
Nope but my dad, uncle, cousin, grandfather and great uncles who did. Only one of my great uncles ever talked about his war, he was a mosquito bomber pilot, he had some great tales, his brothers wouldn't talk about there experiences. My wife two brother served, one in K force and the other did three rotations to Afghanistan. So I know plenty of people who have but only one who liked talking about it.

So your great uncle's stories are great tales, yet Harry should shut up?


Different kind of tales and he never talked about killing anyone. He could talk for hours about the Mosquito.

Well, modern warfare is very different when you're a celebrity writing a book, and the consultant tells you it would really hit well if you wrote a bit about that.

Also a lot different to recall it when your war experience was 14x zoom on a gunner cam, watching your 30mm obliterate a couple of trucks.

Did you ever see Generation Kill? I feel like it did a good job of documenting some of those early differences when we started sending 22-year-old lieutenants to run towns in Iraq and stuff. There's also been a lot of studies, documentaries, etc. exploring how Afghanistan and Iraq War veterans coped with these wars specifically. It's a very different experience when the war is being shared real-time on social media, you have constant interconnectedness with your families, etc.

I've heard way too much from him than I ever wanted to, so I agree that I'm just sorta... tuned out on Harry lol. But, the character and candor of the Afghanistan War have lent it to many battlefield recounts that are a lot more graphic than what Harry put up. His chessboard analogy made him sound like a psychopath, though.
 
Max Q
Posts: 9549
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Fri Jan 13, 2023 11:56 pm

A101 wrote:
Max Q wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:

Nope but my dad, uncle, cousin, grandfather and great uncles who did. Only one of my great uncles ever talked about his war, he was a mosquito bomber pilot, he had some great tales, his brothers wouldn't talk about there experiences. My wife two brother served, one in K force and the other did three rotations to Afghanistan. So I know plenty of people who have but only one who liked talking about it.




So Harry talked about what he did in combat, that doesn’t lessen the contribution he made


In WW2 aircraft had stencils on the side to show how many fighters pilots had shot down or how many bombing missions they’d been on, those were lives taken in a noble cause


No one disparaged that and it’s the same thing, nothing wrong with Harry saying what he did either


Not everyone died in an air-to-air kill except for the plane.


I imagine not all those that harry killed would be the foot soldiers of the Taliban, how many new terrorists has he created?

All he has achieved is increased the security for him and his own family and members of the defence force for reprisal attacks, we are not talking about soldiers from allied v axis powers in WWII Korea Dhofar Konfrontasi Falklands, but people who believe in a certain ideology, all he has achieved with the comment is open the door to every jihadist and nutjob out there looking for reprisals against himself and members of the defence force let alone the propaganda now coming from that arena

https://twitter.com/AnasHaqqani313/stat ... 2018543616



Taliban leader accuses Prince Harry of ‘war crimes’ after he admits killing 25 insurgents in Afghanistan



https://uk.news.yahoo.com/does-prince-h ... 02502.html



Seriously ?

You think WW2 pilots didn’t kill other pilots in combat ?

You’re making a distinction that doesn’t exist

The enemy is the enemy whether it’s Nazis or the Taliban, plenty of veterans have described their combat experiences that ended with fatalities on the other side


Once again good for Harry, he put himself in harm’s way showing great bravery when he didn’t have to

You’re just looking for any way to criticize him
 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sat Jan 14, 2023 12:51 am

Max Q wrote:
A101 wrote:
Max Q wrote:



So Harry talked about what he did in combat, that doesn’t lessen the contribution he made


In WW2 aircraft had stencils on the side to show how many fighters pilots had shot down or how many bombing missions they’d been on, those were lives taken in a noble cause


No one disparaged that and it’s the same thing, nothing wrong with Harry saying what he did either


Not everyone died in an air-to-air kill except for the plane.


I imagine not all those that harry killed would be the foot soldiers of the Taliban, how many new terrorists has he created?

All he has achieved is increased the security for him and his own family and members of the defence force for reprisal attacks, we are not talking about soldiers from allied v axis powers in WWII Korea Dhofar Konfrontasi Falklands, but people who believe in a certain ideology, all he has achieved with the comment is open the door to every jihadist and nutjob out there looking for reprisals against himself and members of the defence force let alone the propaganda now coming from that arena

https://twitter.com/AnasHaqqani313/stat ... 2018543616



Taliban leader accuses Prince Harry of ‘war crimes’ after he admits killing 25 insurgents in Afghanistan



https://uk.news.yahoo.com/does-prince-h ... 02502.html



Seriously ?

You think WW2 pilots didn’t kill other pilots in combat ?

You’re making a distinction that doesn’t exist

The enemy is the enemy whether it’s Nazis or the Taliban, plenty of veterans have described their combat experiences that ended with fatalities on the other side


Once again good for Harry, he put himself in harm’s way showing great bravery when he didn’t have to

You’re just looking for any way to criticize him


You do not seem to read too well, do you?

Not everyone died in an air-to-air kill except for the plane.


And they certainly are not boasting about the number of individuals killed but the resources that they have eliminated that could inflict serious damage on the homeland hence why you see all different symbols like flags tanks trucks ships and even trains that have been destroyed.



And once again you are talking out of context, I'm not criticiseing his service record, just his judgement in revealing such information considering the security risk to himself and his family. After all he was the one demanding additional security on return trips back to the UK.....YES or NO?
 
Max Q
Posts: 9549
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sat Jan 14, 2023 3:43 am

A101 wrote:
Max Q wrote:
A101 wrote:

Not everyone died in an air-to-air kill except for the plane.


I imagine not all those that harry killed would be the foot soldiers of the Taliban, how many new terrorists has he created?

All he has achieved is increased the security for him and his own family and members of the defence force for reprisal attacks, we are not talking about soldiers from allied v axis powers in WWII Korea Dhofar Konfrontasi Falklands, but people who believe in a certain ideology, all he has achieved with the comment is open the door to every jihadist and nutjob out there looking for reprisals against himself and members of the defence force let alone the propaganda now coming from that arena

https://twitter.com/AnasHaqqani313/stat ... 2018543616





https://uk.news.yahoo.com/does-prince-h ... 02502.html



Seriously ?

You think WW2 pilots didn’t kill other pilots in combat ?

You’re making a distinction that doesn’t exist

The enemy is the enemy whether it’s Nazis or the Taliban, plenty of veterans have described their combat experiences that ended with fatalities on the other side


Once again good for Harry, he put himself in harm’s way showing great bravery when he didn’t have to

You’re just looking for any way to criticize him


You do not seem to read too well, do you?

Not everyone died in an air-to-air kill except for the plane.


And they certainly are not boasting about the number of individuals killed but the resources that they have eliminated that could inflict serious damage on the homeland hence why you see all different symbols like flags tanks trucks ships and even trains that have been destroyed.



And once again you are talking out of context, I'm not criticiseing his service record, just his judgement in revealing such information considering the security risk to himself and his family. After all he was the one demanding additional security on return trips back to the UK.....YES or NO?



Of course they were boasting they’d killed the enemy, none of those opposing aircraft were empty you know


That’s what war is, you’re implying that combat in WW2 was somehow more ‘gentlemanly’ which is nonsense


Interesting you don’t criticize their judgment


All members of the royal family should have security whether you like them or not
 
Max Q
Posts: 9549
Joined: Wed May 09, 2001 12:40 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sat Jan 14, 2023 5:58 am

Kiwirob wrote:
Max Q wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:

How many people do you know who served brag about how many people they killed? Publishing it in a book was stupid?



It’s not bragging if you really did it and the answer is more than one


Curious if you served yourself ?


Nope but my dad, uncle, cousin, grandfather and great uncles who did. Only one of my great uncles ever talked about his war, he was a mosquito bomber pilot, he had some great tales, his brothers wouldn't talk about there experiences. My wife two brother served, one in K force and the other did three rotations to Afghanistan. So I know plenty of people who have but only one who liked talking about it.



All of us should be grateful for those who served, it’s up to them whether they choose to speak about it or not and not our place to judge or criticize them whatever choice they make, it’s the height of hypocritical arrogance to do so
 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sat Jan 14, 2023 6:19 am

Max Q wrote:
A101 wrote:
Max Q wrote:


Seriously ?

You think WW2 pilots didn’t kill other pilots in combat ?

You’re making a distinction that doesn’t exist

The enemy is the enemy whether it’s Nazis or the Taliban, plenty of veterans have described their combat experiences that ended with fatalities on the other side


Once again good for Harry, he put himself in harm’s way showing great bravery when he didn’t have to

You’re just looking for any way to criticize him


You do not seem to read too well, do you?

Not everyone died in an air-to-air kill except for the plane.


And they certainly are not boasting about the number of individuals killed but the resources that they have eliminated that could inflict serious damage on the homeland hence why you see all different symbols like flags tanks trucks ships and even trains that have been destroyed.



And once again you are talking out of context, I'm not criticiseing his service record, just his judgement in revealing such information considering the security risk to himself and his family. After all he was the one demanding additional security on return trips back to the UK.....YES or NO?



Of course they were boasting they’d killed the enemy, none of those opposing aircraft were empty you know


So, are you saying that every ariel victory resulted in killing the pilot or persons on board?

Victory markings are the number of planes shot down or ships sunk, I haven't seen one yet denote how many people were killed in the action taken place.

Max Q wrote:

That’s what war is, you’re implying that combat in WW2 was somehow more ‘gentlemanly’ which is nonsense


No not suggesting that at all. All I am saying is a victory marking stenciled on the side of a plane is saying they were successful in destroying the enemy plane, as I explained before every plane shot down does not mean that a person was killed.

Does the name Ensign George Gaye ring a bell


Max Q wrote:
Interesting you don’t criticize their judgment


Of course not they are not member of the Royal Family deride the fact they want additional security in a book.





Max Q wrote:
All members of the royal family should have security whether you like them or not


The level of security is subjective to ones standing within the Royal family, and if one wants to be a working royal.....which Harry declared his intention to leave so therefore he is no longer eligible for taxpayer funded security.

Pretty simple isn't it
 
majano
Posts: 490
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:45 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sat Jan 14, 2023 2:06 pm

Max Q wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
Max Q wrote:


It’s not bragging if you really did it and the answer is more than one


Curious if you served yourself ?


Nope but my dad, uncle, cousin, grandfather and great uncles who did. Only one of my great uncles ever talked about his war, he was a mosquito bomber pilot, he had some great tales, his brothers wouldn't talk about there experiences. My wife two brother served, one in K force and the other did three rotations to Afghanistan. So I know plenty of people who have but only one who liked talking about it.



All of us should be grateful for those who served, it’s up to them whether they choose to speak about it or not and not our place to judge or criticize them whatever choice they make, it’s the height of hypocritical arrogance to do so

Are you really defending the dehumanisation of people, which Harry claims was how the British military trained him? This is something military officers have denied to be true. My preference would be that this line of discussion be stopped or it will lead to bickering.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 28421
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sat Jan 14, 2023 3:59 pm

A101 wrote:
So, are you saying that every ariel victory resulted in killing the pilot or persons on board?

So, are you saying that every enemy flag or outline of ship/tank/whatever came with zero deaths?

Those noble WWII pilots did not get to claim "kills" for equipment they strafed on the ground.

And note the verbiage, "kill". It's not about the equipment being made un-serviceable.

It's all at best a subterfuge, a device to provide some "plausible deniability" for what everyone knows actually happened.

Too bad Harry was out in the field killing Taliban instead of back home lobbying to end that useless war.
 
bennett123
Posts: 11804
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sat Jan 14, 2023 4:23 pm

Revelation wrote:
A101 wrote:
So, are you saying that every ariel victory resulted in killing the pilot or persons on board?

So, are you saying that every enemy flag or outline of ship/tank/whatever came with zero deaths?

Those noble WWII pilots did not get to claim "kills" for equipment they strafed on the ground.

And note the verbiage, "kill". It's not about the equipment being made un-serviceable.

It's all at best a subterfuge, a device to provide some "plausible deniability" for what everyone knows actually happened.

Too bad Harry was out in the field killing Taliban instead of back home lobbying to end that useless war.


Clearly not.

However the kill was the aircraft.

AFAIK it still counted if the crew survived.
 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sat Jan 14, 2023 6:47 pm

Revelation wrote:
A101 wrote:
So, are you saying that every ariel victory resulted in killing the pilot or persons on board?

So, are you saying that every enemy flag or outline of ship/tank/whatever came with zero deaths?

Those noble WWII pilots did not get to claim "kills" for equipment they strafed on the ground.

And note the verbiage, "kill". It's not about the equipment being made un-serviceable.

It's all at best a subterfuge, a device to provide some "plausible deniability" for what everyone knows actually happened.

Too bad Harry was out in the field killing Taliban instead of back home lobbying to end that useless war.



I suggest you go back and read the posts on the subject matter
 
bluecrew
Posts: 782
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2014 3:13 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sat Jan 14, 2023 9:16 pm

majano wrote:
Max Q wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:

Nope but my dad, uncle, cousin, grandfather and great uncles who did. Only one of my great uncles ever talked about his war, he was a mosquito bomber pilot, he had some great tales, his brothers wouldn't talk about there experiences. My wife two brother served, one in K force and the other did three rotations to Afghanistan. So I know plenty of people who have but only one who liked talking about it.



All of us should be grateful for those who served, it’s up to them whether they choose to speak about it or not and not our place to judge or criticize them whatever choice they make, it’s the height of hypocritical arrogance to do so

Are you really defending the dehumanisation of people, which Harry claims was how the British military trained him? This is something military officers have denied to be true. My preference would be that this line of discussion be stopped or it will lead to bickering.

The dehumanized approach was endemic among US forces both in Iraq and Afghanistan, so it's not exactly a stretch to me.

Both wars, we enjoyed overwhelming battlefield dominance and fought the enemy on our terms, not theirs. It's a bit of a natural situation that forces get cocky, it turns into "tangoes down," etc.
It doesn't help that we also raised a lot of those kids on Call of Duty titles and then gave them a real gun and sent them to war.

I don't have an issue with his comments about the war - I know a lot of people that served in either or both, and they probably would have used similar terms if pressed to speak on it. I think he has a distinct lack of challenging thoughts or ideas though. The one most-prominent example I can think of in my friend group is an OIF vet who doesn't look charitably on that war or that period of his life.
 
majano
Posts: 490
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:45 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sun Jan 15, 2023 4:36 am

bluecrew wrote:
majano wrote:
Max Q wrote:


All of us should be grateful for those who served, it’s up to them whether they choose to speak about it or not and not our place to judge or criticize them whatever choice they make, it’s the height of hypocritical arrogance to do so

Are you really defending the dehumanisation of people, which Harry claims was how the British military trained him? This is something military officers have denied to be true. My preference would be that this line of discussion be stopped or it will lead to bickering.

The dehumanized approach was endemic among US forces both in Iraq and Afghanistan, so it's not exactly a stretch to me.

Both wars, we enjoyed overwhelming battlefield dominance and fought the enemy on our terms, not theirs. It's a bit of a natural situation that forces get cocky, it turns into "tangoes down," etc.
It doesn't help that we also raised a lot of those kids on Call of Duty titles and then gave them a real gun and sent them to war.

I don't have an issue with his comments about the war - I know a lot of people that served in either or both, and they probably would have used similar terms if pressed to speak on it. I think he has a distinct lack of challenging thoughts or ideas though. The one most-prominent example I can think of in my friend group is an OIF vet who doesn't look charitably on that war or that period of his life.

Fair enough. I am well out of my depth here. I was basing my view on the comments by British military officers who had denied that they train soldiers to think in this way.
 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sun Jan 15, 2023 5:33 am

majano wrote:
bluecrew wrote:
majano wrote:
Are you really defending the dehumanisation of people, which Harry claims was how the British military trained him? This is something military officers have denied to be true. My preference would be that this line of discussion be stopped or it will lead to bickering.

The dehumanized approach was endemic among US forces both in Iraq and Afghanistan, so it's not exactly a stretch to me.

Both wars, we enjoyed overwhelming battlefield dominance and fought the enemy on our terms, not theirs. It's a bit of a natural situation that forces get cocky, it turns into "tangoes down," etc.
It doesn't help that we also raised a lot of those kids on Call of Duty titles and then gave them a real gun and sent them to war.

I don't have an issue with his comments about the war - I know a lot of people that served in either or both, and they probably would have used similar terms if pressed to speak on it. I think he has a distinct lack of challenging thoughts or ideas though. The one most-prominent example I can think of in my friend group is an OIF vet who doesn't look charitably on that war or that period of his life.

Fair enough. I am well out of my depth here. I was basing my view on the comments by British military officers who had denied that they train soldiers to think in this way.



I think every force has a different concept.in relation to training and its place within, I know from my own training.in the late 70's it was so much as dehuminising the enemy more of desensitisation of killing the enemy. it was also drummed into us that it's better to maim than kill outright as the logistical trail is greater treating a wounded person than killing outright, but when it came to reality training and desire to help your mates is what gets you through.


This gives an insight to how many do not fire their weapon in combat.

Hope on the Battlefield

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/articl ... attlefield
 
bennett123
Posts: 11804
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sun Jan 15, 2023 8:28 am

A101 wrote:
majano wrote:
bluecrew wrote:
The dehumanized approach was endemic among US forces both in Iraq and Afghanistan, so it's not exactly a stretch to me.

Both wars, we enjoyed overwhelming battlefield dominance and fought the enemy on our terms, not theirs. It's a bit of a natural situation that forces get cocky, it turns into "tangoes down," etc.
It doesn't help that we also raised a lot of those kids on Call of Duty titles and then gave them a real gun and sent them to war.

I don't have an issue with his comments about the war - I know a lot of people that served in either or both, and they probably would have used similar terms if pressed to speak on it. I think he has a distinct lack of challenging thoughts or ideas though. The one most-prominent example I can think of in my friend group is an OIF vet who doesn't look charitably on that war or that period of his life.

Fair enough. I am well out of my depth here. I was basing my view on the comments by British military officers who had denied that they train soldiers to think in this way.



I think every force has a different concept.in relation to training and its place within, I know from my own training.in the late 70's it was so much as dehuminising the enemy more of desensitisation of killing the enemy. it was also drummed into us that it's better to maim than kill outright as the logistical trail is greater treating a wounded person than killing outright, but when it came to reality training and desire to help your mates is what gets you through.


This gives an insight to how many do not fire their weapon in combat.

Hope on the Battlefield

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/articl ... attlefield


Well worth reading right to the end.

Particularly in view of the 'mass shooting events' we are frequently commenting on other topics.
 
GDB
Posts: 16847
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sun Jan 15, 2023 1:03 pm

Max Q wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
Max Q wrote:


It’s not bragging if you really did it and the answer is more than one


Curious if you served yourself ?


Nope but my dad, uncle, cousin, grandfather and great uncles who did. Only one of my great uncles ever talked about his war, he was a mosquito bomber pilot, he had some great tales, his brothers wouldn't talk about there experiences. My wife two brother served, one in K force and the other did three rotations to Afghanistan. So I know plenty of people who have but only one who liked talking about it.




So Harry talked about what he did in combat, that doesn’t lessen the contribution he made


In WW2 aircraft had stencils on the side to show how many fighters pilots had shot down or how many bombing missions they’d been on, those were lives taken in a noble cause


No one disparaged that and it’s the same thing, nothing wrong with Harry saying what he did either


RAF aircraft in the 1991 Gulf War also displayed missions on them, along with WW2 style idealized pictures of women, though some had characters from the adult satirical comic Viz.
While I don’t think Harry should have quoted numbers, what do people think an Apache gunship helicopter is for?
In Afghanistan they acted under strict rules of engagement, were used as direct support for ground forces and escort, particularly for medical evacuation helicopters.
Unlike WW2, the range of optics and fire control on the machine meant the crew had a better idea of what they were engaging and the results.

As stated, some have said all along he was not on operations at all really, usually from the Stop The War group, who if they sound laudable haven’t had a thing to say about Ukraine other than to blame NATO, which proves what some of us thought about them all along, since they have form being selective about which conflicts they oppose.
For all that, one reviewer of the book thought the terminology Harry used, this stuff about ‘removing them from the chessboard’ sounded like the American ghost writer not something a British Army veteran would use.
A result of no longer being bound not only by Royal Protocol but also his new surroundings and peer group.
 
User avatar
Aesma
Posts: 16287
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 6:14 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sun Jan 15, 2023 5:59 pm

Isn't the dehumanization to be expected regardless of the training ? Do the Talibans using IED etc. think of the evil Americans as humans ? Don't seem they see their women as humans...
 
majano
Posts: 490
Joined: Sun Oct 14, 2018 10:45 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sun Jan 15, 2023 6:32 pm

bennett123 wrote:
A101 wrote:
majano wrote:
Fair enough. I am well out of my depth here. I was basing my view on the comments by British military officers who had denied that they train soldiers to think in this way.



I think every force has a different concept.in relation to training and its place within, I know from my own training.in the late 70's it was so much as dehuminising the enemy more of desensitisation of killing the enemy. it was also drummed into us that it's better to maim than kill outright as the logistical trail is greater treating a wounded person than killing outright, but when it came to reality training and desire to help your mates is what gets you through.


This gives an insight to how many do not fire their weapon in combat.

Hope on the Battlefield

https://greatergood.berkeley.edu/articl ... attlefield


Well worth reading right to the end.

Particularly in view of the 'mass shooting events' we are frequently commenting on other topics.

Read it as well, the reference to Figure II being most relevant. The unfortunate reality of a violent winner-takes-all male dominated world.
 
User avatar
Mortyman
Posts: 6253
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 8:26 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sun Jan 15, 2023 8:03 pm

Revelation wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I guess the word "symbol" is lost on you.

Perhaps a better question: How many different world currencies is Liz's face on?

The answer, apparently, is 35 ( ref: https://qr.ae/pr2S2q ).

That's just pig headed ignorance on behalf of those who prefer to blame others for there own failings.

So you're suggesting it's not a symbol of colonialism to have one royal face on 34 other country's money?


The US Dollar is used as offical currency in 21 countries / territories ... Colonialism ?
 
johns624
Posts: 6457
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Sun Jan 15, 2023 11:39 pm

Mortyman wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
That's just pig headed ignorance on behalf of those who prefer to blame others for there own failings.

So you're suggesting it's not a symbol of colonialism to have one royal face on 34 other country's money?


The US Dollar is used as offical currency in 21 countries / territories ... Colonialism ?
No. Most of those are independent countries that have never been occupied by the US. Zimbabwe really surprised me. If you want to really expand it out--how many countries is the USD or GBP the best currency to have to bribe your way out of a "tight" situation? Probably the great majority of the Third World.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 28421
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 1:27 am

Mortyman wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
That's just pig headed ignorance on behalf of those who prefer to blame others for there own failings.

So you're suggesting it's not a symbol of colonialism to have one royal face on 34 other country's money?

The US Dollar is used as offical currency in 21 countries / territories ... Colonialism ?

a) You don't see the difference between "we print our own money but choose to put the UK royalty onto it" vs "we don't print our own money, we use the US dollar"?
b) What does this have to do with Harry and his family?
 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 3:11 am

Revelation wrote:
Mortyman wrote:
Revelation wrote:
So you're suggesting it's not a symbol of colonialism to have one royal face on 34 other country's money?

The US Dollar is used as offical currency in 21 countries / territories ... Colonialism ?

a) You don't see the difference between "we print our own money but choose to put the UK royalty onto it" vs "we don't print our own money, we use the US dollar"?
b) What does this have to do with Harry and his family?



A) They choose to place the official portrait of the monarchy on coins and banknotes, Commonwealth countries are not obligated to put the reigning monarch on its coins/banknotes. I'm certainly lost how by choosing its colonialism.


B) nothing it was you who brought it up as a symbol of colonialism. not sure if you have remembered the territories of the United States.

Organised U.S. territories
Puerto Rico,
The Virgin Islands,
Guam,
The Northern Mariana Islands,

Unorganised U.S. territories

American Samoa (Pacific)
Palmyra Atoll (Pacific)
Baker Island (Pacific)
Howland Island (Pacific)
Jarvis Island (Pacific)
Johnston Atoll (Pacific)
Kingman Reef (Pacific)
Midway Islands (Pacific)
Wake Island (Pacific)
Bajo Nuevo Bank (Caribbean)
Navassa Island (Caribbean)
Serranilla Bank (Caribbean)
 
User avatar
Kiwirob
Posts: 14672
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 2:16 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 5:50 am

A101 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
Mortyman wrote:
The US Dollar is used as offical currency in 21 countries / territories ... Colonialism ?

a) You don't see the difference between "we print our own money but choose to put the UK royalty onto it" vs "we don't print our own money, we use the US dollar"?
b) What does this have to do with Harry and his family?



A) They choose to place the official portrait of the monarchy on coins and banknotes, Commonwealth countries are not obligated to put the reigning monarch on its coins/banknotes. I'm certainly lost how by choosing its colonialism.


B) nothing it was you who brought it up as a symbol of colonialism. not sure if you have remembered the territories of the United States.

Organised U.S. territories
Puerto Rico,
The Virgin Islands,
Guam,
The Northern Mariana Islands,

Unorganised U.S. territories

American Samoa (Pacific)
Palmyra Atoll (Pacific)
Baker Island (Pacific)
Howland Island (Pacific)
Jarvis Island (Pacific)
Johnston Atoll (Pacific)
Kingman Reef (Pacific)
Midway Islands (Pacific)
Wake Island (Pacific)
Bajo Nuevo Bank (Caribbean)
Navassa Island (Caribbean)
Serranilla Bank (Caribbean)


You forgot Hawaii which should also be decolonised.
 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 6:37 am

Kiwirob wrote:
A101 wrote:
Revelation wrote:
a) You don't see the difference between "we print our own money but choose to put the UK royalty onto it" vs "we don't print our own money, we use the US dollar"?
b) What does this have to do with Harry and his family?



A) They choose to place the official portrait of the monarchy on coins and banknotes, Commonwealth countries are not obligated to put the reigning monarch on its coins/banknotes. I'm certainly lost how by choosing its colonialism.


B) nothing it was you who brought it up as a symbol of colonialism. not sure if you have remembered the territories of the United States.

Organised U.S. territories
Puerto Rico,
The Virgin Islands,
Guam,
The Northern Mariana Islands,

Unorganised U.S. territories

American Samoa (Pacific)
Palmyra Atoll (Pacific)
Baker Island (Pacific)
Howland Island (Pacific)
Jarvis Island (Pacific)
Johnston Atoll (Pacific)
Kingman Reef (Pacific)
Midway Islands (Pacific)
Wake Island (Pacific)
Bajo Nuevo Bank (Caribbean)
Navassa Island (Caribbean)
Serranilla Bank (Caribbean)


You forgot Hawaii which should also be decolonised.


No I deliberately left it off as Hawaii is a State that gives them full voting rights in the US federal elections. whilst the others have the same rights as other Americans, but they cannot vote in US federal elections.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 28421
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 2:33 pm

A101 wrote:
not sure if you have remembered the territories of the United States.

This is classic whataboutism.

The topic of discussion is not the United States, it is the so-called royal family of the United Kingdom.

I could counter by asserting Russia is imperialist, but that too would be off topic.

By asserting others are imperialist you're tacitly admitting the UK is imperialist, so you're only weakening your point.
 
GDB
Posts: 16847
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 4:05 pm

Revelation wrote:
A101 wrote:
not sure if you have remembered the territories of the United States.

This is classic whataboutism.

The topic of discussion is not the United States, it is the so-called royal family of the United Kingdom.

I could counter by asserting Russia is imperialist, but that too would be off topic.

By asserting others are imperialist you're tacitly admitting the UK is imperialist, so you're only weakening your point.


What bugs many is when the fact that the US became an 'imperial power' at the end of the 19th Century, is somehow not applicable in any discussion on the effects of imperialism, the status of occupants of some of the US overseas possessions, the ones with no power to vote in a Federal Election for example, sound remarkably similar to how it is for those in say the British Commonwealth.
Not just grabbing the remnants of the Spanish Empire but also not backward in getting in there as European nations put down in effect colonies in China.

Can you say, hand on heart, that if a US overseas territory, in particular one with strategic significance, wanted to be fully independent it would be a non issue, no action would be taken?
Because it is with members of the Commonwealth, in fact it's had recent voluntary additions in the past few decades, from a former Francophone/Belgium and Portuguese ex colony.
Bizarre but true. I don't get that either, still their choice to join and others to leave.

The Royals and Commonwealth was the source of the row that was leaked in 1986 between the Queen and then government of Thatcher, the Queen was apparently all for tightening sanctions on the racist regime in South Africa, in part to prevent an ugly split along the lines of race, (the UK was the first to embargo arms, 15 years before the UN got around to making it worldwide - which Israel broke), Thatcher not at all on further economic sanctions. She said such a thing would affect the poorest the most, not that their own people said that, they wanted the sanctions. Thatcher's husband a former director of an oil company with business interests there on the other hand.....

Apparently, the PM was shocked to see the Queen at Commonwealth meetings (which the PM hated), getting on very well with various African leaders in particular Kenneth Kaunda on the dance floor. Well she'd known them for many years in most cases, often been there for the independence hand overs.
Despite being PM, Thatcher could never quite leave her provincial, parochial small mindedness behind.
What a contrast to 25 years before, when another Tory PM, had told the South African Parliament that for White minority rule in Africa, the game was up.

I use this slice of fairly recent history to disentangle this whole narrative of the Royal Family being the sole link with the Imperial past, not when they've had no executive power for centuries.
Which also of course kills the idea that having even now a mere constitutional monarchy is always linked to imperial pasts, when the US has done imperialism themselves, what was the counter insurgency campaign the US fought in the Philippines in the early 20th century about?
The US Marines into Haiti not long after and there for many years? I won't link an infamous pic of a Haitian man lynched by them.
 
johns624
Posts: 6457
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 4:33 pm

A101 wrote:

Unorganised U.S. territories

American Samoa (Pacific)
Palmyra Atoll (Pacific)
Baker Island (Pacific)
Howland Island (Pacific)
Jarvis Island (Pacific)
Johnston Atoll (Pacific)
Kingman Reef (Pacific)
Midway Islands (Pacific)
Wake Island (Pacific)
Bajo Nuevo Bank (Caribbean)
Navassa Island (Caribbean)
Serranilla Bank (Caribbean)

Other than Samoa, none of them have a permanent population.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 28421
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 4:44 pm

GDB wrote:
What bugs many is when the fact that the US became an 'imperial power' at the end of the 19th Century, is somehow not applicable in any discussion on the effects of imperialism, the status of occupants of some of the US overseas possessions, the ones with no power to vote in a Federal Election for example, sound remarkably similar to how it is for those in say the British Commonwealth.
Not just grabbing the remnants of the Spanish Empire but also not backward in getting in there as European nations put down in effect colonies in China.

Point is, US's actions are irrelevant to the discussion of Harry and his family.
Even if one grants that the US is an evil empire, it adds nothing to this discussion.
Feel free to start another thread if you want to discuss the other topic.
 
bennett123
Posts: 11804
Joined: Sun Aug 15, 2004 12:49 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 5:29 pm

Revelation wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
Revelation wrote:
I guess the word "symbol" is lost on you.

Perhaps a better question: How many different world currencies is Liz's face on?

The answer, apparently, is 35 ( ref: https://qr.ae/pr2S2q ).

That's just pig headed ignorance on behalf of those who prefer to blame others for there own failings.

So you're suggesting it's not a symbol of colonialism to have one royal face on 34 other country's money?


If those countries wanted to change that, what is stopping them?.
 
PhilBy
Posts: 921
Joined: Tue Aug 06, 2013 11:44 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 5:40 pm

Revelation wrote:
Mortyman wrote:
Revelation wrote:
So you're suggesting it's not a symbol of colonialism to have one royal face on 34 other country's money?

The US Dollar is used as offical currency in 21 countries / territories ... Colonialism ?

a) You don't see the difference between "we print our own money but choose to put the UK royalty onto it" vs "we don't print our own money, we use the US dollar"?


For some of the countries that use the (ex)queens head on their currency it is a major economic blessing. If they had to remint their coins every time there was a change in government they would become bankrupt.
Imagine if the UK had the Prime Ministers head on the currency, or the US of A had the Presidents head. it would be chaos! Some of the recent leaders would insist on invalidating any currency bearing the likeness of their predecessors.
 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 7:10 pm

Revelation wrote:
A101 wrote:
not sure if you have remembered the territories of the United States.

This is classic whataboutism.

The topic of discussion is not the United States, it is the so-called royal family of the United Kingdom.

I could counter by asserting Russia is imperialist, but that too would be off topic.

By asserting others are imperialist you're tacitly admitting the UK is imperialist, so you're only weakening your point.



Yes that’s right the topic is about Harry, but it was you who changed the subject into colonialism and that is not just relevant to the UK
 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 7:18 pm

johns624 wrote:
A101 wrote:

Unorganised U.S. territories

American Samoa (Pacific)
Palmyra Atoll (Pacific)
Baker Island (Pacific)
Howland Island (Pacific)
Jarvis Island (Pacific)
Johnston Atoll (Pacific)
Kingman Reef (Pacific)
Midway Islands (Pacific)
Wake Island (Pacific)
Bajo Nuevo Bank (Caribbean)
Navassa Island (Caribbean)
Serranilla Bank (Caribbean)

Other than Samoa, none of them have a permanent population.


Which were not the only territory I listed but they do have at times temporary population
 
johns624
Posts: 6457
Joined: Mon Jul 07, 2008 11:09 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 7:25 pm

A101 wrote:
johns624 wrote:
A101 wrote:

Unorganised U.S. territories

American Samoa (Pacific)
Palmyra Atoll (Pacific)
Baker Island (Pacific)
Howland Island (Pacific)
Jarvis Island (Pacific)
Johnston Atoll (Pacific)
Kingman Reef (Pacific)
Midway Islands (Pacific)
Wake Island (Pacific)
Bajo Nuevo Bank (Caribbean)
Navassa Island (Caribbean)
Serranilla Bank (Caribbean)

Other than Samoa, none of them have a permanent population.


Which were not the only territory I listed but they do have at times temporary population
Military and scientists, which means there aren't any people who want to vote or claim independence. Puerto Rico doesn't want to become a state. They've had chances but like their current status more.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Topic Author
Posts: 28421
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 7:57 pm

A101 wrote:
Yes that’s right the topic is about Harry, but it was you who changed the subject into colonialism and that is not just relevant to the UK

Incorrect, the idea was introduced in post #95, before I said anything about it.

MaverickM11 wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
They recieved an award for speaking out against racism within the royal family.

Cognitive dissonance or blatant liars? The Duke and Duchess of Sussex's work fighting against racism around the world was celebrated at the 2022 Ripple of Hope Awards. Kerry Kennedy presented their award and explained that they were receiving this recognition because they spoke out against racism within the royal family.
Vanity Fair Dec 7, 2022


Not sure why it's such a stretch to believe the literal symbol of colonialism is racist and completely out of touch with reality.
 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 9:12 pm

johns624 wrote:
A101 wrote:
johns624 wrote:
Other than Samoa, none of them have a permanent population.


Which were not the only territory I listed but they do have at times temporary population
Military and scientists, which means there aren't any people who want to vote or claim independence. Puerto Rico doesn't want to become a state. They've had chances but like their current status more.


The point being you deliberately only responded to part of the post to make a point of difference to all US current overseas territory. to which I included ie Colonialism no different to the UK

If UK colonialism is bad than US colonialism is also bad
 
A101
Posts: 3740
Joined: Sun Dec 09, 2018 1:27 am

Re: Harry's New Book 'Spare': Scuffle between Harry and Willie

Mon Jan 16, 2023 9:18 pm

Revelation wrote:
A101 wrote:
Yes that’s right the topic is about Harry, but it was you who changed the subject into colonialism and that is not just relevant to the UK

Incorrect, the idea was introduced in post #95, before I said anything about it.

MaverickM11 wrote:
Kiwirob wrote:
They recieved an award for speaking out against racism within the royal family.



Not sure why it's such a stretch to believe the literal symbol of colonialism is racist and completely out of touch with reality.


My apologies I incorrectly attributed a reply from you being the protagonist in the colonialism debate.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Braybuddy, TangoandCash and 26 guests

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos