Can Russia be stopped?

[srb7677]

So what im saying is its wrong to say or hint england hasnt been invaded since 1066

Ok, I accept that. But my more general point stands with the exception being our fellow occupants of this island. The French could not invade us under Napolean. The Germans could not under Hitler. And only because of the sea. Both would certainly have defeated us had they been able to cross.

It is certainly the case that our nations have been invaded a lot less frequently - except by each other - than they would have been were we not an island. Anyway - nominally at least - against Napoleon and Hitler were not your lot on our side?

[Thomas]

Yes I do not dispute that. For centuries the English and the Scots were at each other's throats. When we were not invading you, you were invading us.

So what im saying is its wrong to say or hint england hasnt been invaded since 1066. Not only did we fight on scottish and english soil , but we fought in ireland and france as well against each other.

The french still celebrate the day scotland saved france at the battle of bauge .

England was in terror in the modern times of scotland being used as a staging area for France to invade ,especially in the latter centuries.

[Thomas]

Very true.

But that is because we have a land border. The sea and our navy could not protect us from you lot, .

Thats correct. But i was addressing where you were saying "we" ( dont know if you meant engerlund or uk or were conflating) hadnt been invaded beacuse you are an island , and i was merely pointing out the flaws in this arguemnt.

The concept of an island nation that many english think of is a relatively modern concept , and obviously prior to 1707 , scotland was an independent state , and further back  , wales was as well.

So you have been invaded , many a time , both by land and by sea , just not in modern times the last being 1745.

I do still wonder, when your lot got as far south as Derby with not much available to stop you cos most of our lot was fighting a war in Europe at the time - why did you apparently get bored with the whole thing and start going north again?

we will never know , and can only repeat modern speculation.

Sadly, once the English got their act together, they didn't, and set out to destroy the last Scottish army capable of opposing them, as well as eradicating the culture of the clans themselves

The gaidhlig culture had been on the wane for centirue beforhand , and this in part was why the remaining clans decided to throw in thier lot with the hated stuarts in a last bid to throw off the anglo culture and language and take scotland to independence in return for the stuarts regaining the throne.

[srb7677]

In fact srb i can't think of a century that england hasnt been invaded by scotland ( and vice versa) between the founding ( and before) of both countries in the 9th and 10th centuries and the 18th century.

So while its true the last successfull invasion and conquest of engerlund was of course 1066 , when the french gubbed you  , we have done our bit for the war effort over the years too. so its not true to say as an island that helped stop invasion historically.

Yes I do not dispute that. For centuries the English and the Scots were at each other's throats. When we were not invading you, you were invading us.

[srb7677]

We invaded you in 1745.

Very true. 

But that is because we have a land border. The sea and our navy could not protect us from you lot, .

I do still wonder, when your lot got as far south as Derby with not much available to stop you cos most of our lot was fighting a war in Europe at the time - why did you apparently get bored with the whole thing and start going north again? The English regime was certain to have found the Jacobites an existential threat by now. There was always going to be a Culloden after you scared the crap out of the Westminster elites - unless your lot carried on to victory first. You had the means to change the course of history in your favour and utterly defeat the English. But you just apparently gave up. Sadly, once the English got their act together, they didn't, and set out to destroy the last Scottish army capable of opposing them, as well as eradicating the culture of the clans themselves.

[Thomas]

In fact srb i cant think of a century that england hasnt been invaded by scotland ( and vice versa) between the founding ( and before) of both countries in the 9th and 10th centuries and the 18th century.

So while its true the last successfull invasion and conquest of engerlund was of course 1066 , when the french gubbed you  , we have done our bit for the war effort over the years too. so its not true to say as an island that helped stop invasion historically.

[Thomas]

Indeed. My Latvian friend has told me that they refer to themselves as the in betweeners, constantly invaded from the east and from the west throughout history. The Teutonic Knights, the Prussians, the Swedes, the Russians, and the Germans have all had a go.

Historically, we benefitted a lot from being an island. To invade us, any invader had to cross the sea. Other nations had to invest in large armies to protect them from their neighbours so could not outspend us on a large navy as well. We were able to spend on a large navy with a smaller army because no one could invade us without getting past our navy.

Had the English Channel not existed and had we had a land border with Europe, I can think of three times when we would definitely have been invaded. The 1580s by the Spanish, the early 1800s by the French, and 1940 by the Germans. We'd probably have been defeated by all three.

We invaded you in 1745.

[srb7677]

What we maybe don't take in to account is we're one of the few nations not successfully invaded and occupied in modern times

Indeed. My Latvian friend has told me that they refer to themselves as the in betweeners, constantly invaded from the east and from the west throughout history. The Teutonic Knights, the Prussians, the Swedes, the Russians, and the Germans have all had a go.

Historically, we benefitted a lot from being an island. To invade us, any invader had to cross the sea. Other nations had to invest in large armies to protect them from their neighbours so could not outspend us on a large navy as well. We were able to spend on a large navy with a smaller army because no one could invade us without getting past our navy.

Had the English Channel not existed and had we had a land border with Europe, I can think of three times when we would definitely have been invaded. The 1580s by the Spanish, the early 1800s by the French, and 1940 by the Germans. We'd probably have been defeated by all three.

[Thomas]

I'm blind? you witter on about whataboutery then indulge in it not stop.

i dont mind whataboutery. I said earlier in the thread its the twin sister of  hypocrisy.the two go hand in hand , and i also said to you before , untill the world confronts western hypocrisy then the endless cycle of war and violence will continue.

[Thomas]

TOM, stop talking about it and have indy2.... Oh wait, you can't, because Seaweed won't pull the trigger cause she knows she'll lose. All the BS about "If she doesn't do it this tim blah blah blah", she isn't going to do it because her political career will be over. You know all this so stop with the "The U.K. won't let us". Do us all a favour and just break away and stick a fence up, we will all be much happier I can assure you.

2023 hopefully. 

Do us all a favour and just break away and stick a fence up, we will all be much happier I can assure you.

no problem.





According to our recent Panelbase poll, it turns out that a hard border at Berwick and Gretna is a price that Scottish voters are – by a margin of more than two to one – willing to pay to stay in the EU.

[cromwell]

We arent just talking about the past , unless of course you wish to hide behind what happened 5 seconds ago as "the past".

The chagos islands is something the uk is in violation of a un resolution about. Are we allwoed to talk about that or is that the past and as it involved your precious "britian" does it get brushed under the carpet while we talk about putin ?
i havent said you said i was pro russian, i was clearly generalising.

Nick was hinting a few posts back we were being brainswashed by russian nedia simply for not towing the msm line.
stop twisting my words. I havent said you did. I gave jim franklin as an example of someone on here accusing me of being pro american , and i qualified the russian bit in my sentence above.
nope another lie. Quote me where i said this?

I qualified my remark about your hypocrisy on what you virtue signal about earlier in this thread . Blind to the behaviour of the uk government while screamin about others for doing the same.

you are being ridiculous now. You can't take it cromwell as always thats your problem. Quick to bleat about vlad and russia or whoever your are told is bad , but blind to the horrors of your own nation past and present.

Bring up an uncomfortable truth , and you have a melt down.

I can't take it,what makes you say that, it is as you say the last twelve years.

Melt down,get over yourself just pointing out your form as many other posters will attest to.

I'm blind? you witter on about whataboutery then indulge in it not stop about how awful those English are forgetting that there were those from your country involve happily in it all.

I remember my old man telling me when he was in Egypt the locals killed a Scots soldier,they went ape wrecked the place and killed many Egyptians.....still all the fault of those awful English.

[Scott777]

Has that video passed nicks biased propaganda guidelines sampan?

Nick has a fact checking website, which has a direct hotline to God, so it must be right.  🤣

[Thomas]

Sampan ridiculed me?? Where was that? 😂 The ruling party is the Communist Party, but he says that's just a name!! When the country isn't communist surely the first thing they get rid of is the word communist. I'm not convinced he's actually ever lived in China with statements like that.
I've been to a lot of major cities between Hong Kong and Beijing over a 30 year period, I can remember when workers all wore a uniform with a number on it. The uniform and number has largely gone but the country is still the same. People disappear for speaking out against the government, if that's not communism I don't know what is. Do you not remember the scenes from last year in Hong Kong where student were on the streets to stop China taking over?

Make no mistake Tom, communism is alive and well in ole China, and until you've been and felt it you carry on believing the likes of Sampan.

https://youtu.be/JRcckYRWSVU

Its true i havent been to china. Its also true i dont know that great a deal about china either.

Clearly though , you dont have a clue what communism is either.

From what little i have humbly read on the matter , i dont think china could possibly be regarded as a communist country. Lets be fair here nick , anyone who is to the left of the hard right of your tory party is by your definition a communist.

Many years ago , i had the pleasure of actualy visiting a country , cuba , that was just coming out of the old style communism , by opening its doors to western tourists and allowing private business a foothold on its soil. So i have some expericence of communism , as well as knowledge of what communism as a poliical and economic system actually is from my days at school.

Medieval gaelic scotland , where private property ownership was banned was probably more fackin communist than modern day china.

[Scott777]

NATO is about grouping together against the biggest country in the world, 

Yeah, but northern Siberia isn't exactly bustling with people.

[Thomas]

This as you call it (not me) whataboutery,then when people are flinging statues in the water agree with all and sundry you can't be judged on the past.
Hypocrisy.....who said that?

We arent just talking about the past , unless of course you wish to hide behind what happened 5 seconds ago as "the past".

The chagos islands is something the uk is in violation of a un resolution about. Are we allwoed to talk about that or is that the past and as it involved your precious "britian" does it get brushed under the carpet while we talk about putin ?

There you go again making things up,please reference a post where I say you are pro Russian,you can't because I haven't.

i havent said you said i was pro russian, i was clearly generalising.

Nick was hinting a few posts back we were being brainswashed by russian nedia simply for not towing the msm line.

I've never accused you of being either pro or anti yank or Russian.

stop twisting my words. I havent said you did. I gave jim franklin as an example of someone on here accusing me of being pro american , and i qualified the russian bit in my sentence above.

Meanwhile you believe I'm personally responsible for the worlds worst excesses,

nope another lie. Quote me where i said this?

I qualified my remark about your hypocrisy on what you virtue signal about earlier in this thread . Blind to the behaviour of the uk government while screamin about others for doing the same.

anything you want to add The holocaust,Spanish inquisition,the bombs dropped on Japan the eradication of the indigenous south american indians,the worst excesses of the Roman empire perhaps.

you are being ridiculous now. You cant take it cromwell as always thats your problem. Quick to bleat about vlad and russia or whoever your are told is bad , but blind to the horrors of your own nation past and present.

Bring up an uncomfortable truth , and you have a melt down.