More bicyclists behaving badly

On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:56:01 +0700, John B. wrote:

On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 08:47:16 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:


Lol, Churchill's military 'career' consisted of him show boating in as
many military theatres as he could get himself into, usually by dint
of 'conections'. There was no 'military service' unless he could
write about it to advance his desired future political career.


Err... Winston Churchill attended the Royal Military College,
Sandhurst

After his father forced him to do so and he required multiple attempts
to enter.

Forced him? Do you have a reference?

Keep web searching, you'll find it.


You also left out his hand in the Gallipoli debacle (WW1) and the Norway
fiasco (WWII) and a number of other similar costly cock-ups.

Oh! and I thought we were talking about Churchill's military service.
Not his political career.

Think about it Johnny boy, why was he in the position that allowed him to
make the decision.


The one good thing he achieved was getting Australian noses out of
British Arseholes and thinking about their own nation by refusing to
release Australian troops then fighting in the Middle East. His failure
to adequately supply Singapore can be seen as a contribution to its
fall.


Well, as you were part of the British Empire why in the world would you
decline the opportunity to serve in their military? Fear?

Lol, you might like to look how long 'Australians' were supporting the
British Empire before it became clear to them that the poms didn't give a
toss about this country unless they could exploit it like every other
place theyd invaded.


As for Singapore you really do need to read some more history. The
Japanese had seized control of China, Hong Kong, French Indo China,
Thailand, Burma, Malaya, Indonesia, and a good portion of New Guinea.
The Japanese invaded Malaya on 8 December 1941 and on 27 1942 the Allied
forces retreated to Singapore and effectively, except for the Island of
Singapore the Japanese controlled all of S.E. Asia.

And you argue that had Singapore only been supplied that it could have
successfully fought the Japanese army?

Foolishness. Or perhaps daydreams.

Seriously, people need to really look at the fairy tales they are fed.

As above. You need to do a bit of deep reading about the full picture,
not just the glossy version they taught in school. OTOH, I had the
advantage of hearing directly from a few people who were there.

On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 05:07:59 -0700, Andre Jute wrote:

What a nasty piece of **** you are, Peter Howard, aka "news18", aka
"antitroll", aka etc, etc, etc.

The rest of Churchill's military service follows a similar pattern.

when he could be bothered being there so he coud write up gishing reports
of his supposed heroism. hmm, similar to some one who pops up on this
list.

The
thief Peter Howard lies about it to traduce a great man,
Lol, he wasn't.

because Howard
is scum of zero achievement.
This Peter must e a great person. he certainly is a great fisherman.

Unsigned out of contempt for a scumbag.

Lol, the **** and wind merchant is left speechless, except for his usual
drivel.

BTW, why do you need to change the oil in your bicycle gear box more
often than I've ever changed any car oil? Is it a grinder?.

On 9/23/2020 1:28 AM, news18 wrote:
On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:56:01 +0700, John B. wrote:

On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 08:47:16 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:


Lol, Churchill's military 'career' consisted of him show boating in as
many military theatres as he could get himself into, usually by dint
of 'conections'. There was no 'military service' unless he could
write about it to advance his desired future political career.


Err... Winston Churchill attended the Royal Military College,
Sandhurst

After his father forced him to do so and he required multiple attempts
to enter.

Forced him? Do you have a reference?

Keep web searching, you'll find it.


You also left out his hand in the Gallipoli debacle (WW1) and the Norway
fiasco (WWII) and a number of other similar costly cock-ups.

Oh! and I thought we were talking about Churchill's military service.
Not his political career.

Think about it Johnny boy, why was he in the position that allowed him to
make the decision.


The one good thing he achieved was getting Australian noses out of
British Arseholes and thinking about their own nation by refusing to
release Australian troops then fighting in the Middle East. His failure
to adequately supply Singapore can be seen as a contribution to its
fall.


Well, as you were part of the British Empire why in the world would you
decline the opportunity to serve in their military? Fear?

Lol, you might like to look how long 'Australians' were supporting the
British Empire before it became clear to them that the poms didn't give a
toss about this country unless they could exploit it like every other
place theyd invaded.


As for Singapore you really do need to read some more history. The
Japanese had seized control of China, Hong Kong, French Indo China,
Thailand, Burma, Malaya, Indonesia, and a good portion of New Guinea.
The Japanese invaded Malaya on 8 December 1941 and on 27 1942 the Allied
forces retreated to Singapore and effectively, except for the Island of
Singapore the Japanese controlled all of S.E. Asia.

And you argue that had Singapore only been supplied that it could have
successfully fought the Japanese army?

Foolishness. Or perhaps daydreams.

Seriously, people need to really look at the fairy tales they are fed.

As above. You need to do a bit of deep reading about the full picture,
not just the glossy version they taught in school. OTOH, I had the
advantage of hearing directly from a few people who were there.


I've never met a Boer War veteran, Have you?

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971

On Tuesday, September 22, 2020 at 2:57:40 PM UTC+1, jbeattie wrote:
On Tuesday, September 22, 2020 at 5:15:10 AM UTC-7, Andre Jute wrote:
On Mon, 21 Sep 2020 07:27:24 -0700 (PDT), jbeattie
Career politician! The guy never worked in private industry -- one government job after another. Drain the swamp!

-- Jay Beattie.

You're walking in the dark, Jay. When Churchill wasn't serving in the Army, he was a highly successful journalist and war correspondent, and an investor on the stock exchange. Later in life he was one of the best-selling and highest paid writers of history.

What are you going on about? Check your facts, man; you're looking like an idiot.

Andre Jute
Christ, even Wikipedia gets more right than the Donkey Party members of RBT
That's not working in industry -- that's being part of the Liberal elite. Writing stories for Lamestream Media and investing money. Plus, he was not an American. In fact, I've been told that he hated America -- people have told me that. Plus, he got captured. I like the guys who didn't get captured. And he got captured by boring people. And so what if he escaped. I escape boring people all the time. It's easy, really, really easy. I don't know why people think he's a hero.

-- Jay Beattie.

Sounds like the stress of all those "mostly peaceful" demonstrations are getting to you, Jay. -- AJ

What a worthless dirtbag the thief Peter Howard aka "news18" is. He's never built anything in his life and he thinks his lack of achievement gives him license to tear down those who have achieved something.

I've never met a Boer War veteran, Have you?

But I can answer your question. I knew plenty of Boer War veterans, including some in my own family. My lawyer for a while was one of the senior Boer kommandants -- roughly "generals" though today a kommandant in most armed services is a major. Of course, the Boers were all irregulars, so they basically had two ranks: leaders, and the men who elected the leaders, more often than not by acclaim. I never met a Boer War veteran who wasn't worthy of deep respect, on the British side simply for having come through the gauntlet of sharpshooters alive. That by itself took some smarts. Imagine a buck eighteen inches high to the top of its ears; it doesn't run, it jumps in leaps and bounds. The British were fighting men whose dinner for years on end depended on hitting that buck at five hundred yards with a single shot -- if he used two shots, that was tomorrow's dinner gone. I used to hunt with such men when I was a boy: I couldn't even see the buck they shot despite the fact that it moved violently. The British, ever realists, recognised the quality of these men by basically giving them the rest of South Africa only ten years after making war on them to add to their two "free states"; Jan Smuts, who was riding hard for Cape Town, nearly a thousand miles inside supposedly British territory, 75 miles from taking the undefended British HQ when the Peace of Vereeniging ended the war, was the only person who served in the inner British war cabinet in both world wars; he was also a very reliable general -- in fact a British Field MarshaI though he never used the title back home, being content with "General", a rank he earned in South African service. Smuts was the man who founded the Royal Air Force. -- AJ

On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 09:34:08 -0700 (PDT), Andre Jute
wrote:

I've never met a Boer War veteran, Have you?

But I can answer your question. I knew plenty of Boer War veterans, including
some in my own family....

Question: Why do the Boojers go to bed with their boots on?
Answer: To keep De Wet from defeat.

(Stolen from "The Boer War" by Thromas Pakenham, Random House 1979)


--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 12:00:35 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I believe that the practice of purchase of commissions was abolished
as part of the 1871 Cardwell reforms.

Correct:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchase_of_commissions_in_the_British_Army

But, it might be noted that Sir Arthur Wellesley, who starting his
career in 1787 as a commissioned officer in the infantry, purchased
his first 4 commissions. As was the practice at that time.

Most armies (and governments) tend to be top heavy with those unfit to
lead. A good example is the book "Eminent Victorian Soldiers, Seekers
of Glory" by Byron Farwell, 367 pages, Norton 1985. It covers eight
leading Victorian generals, including some from the Boer War, explains
how the system of purchasing commissions actually worked, and how some
really odd soldiers floated to the top:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Eminent+Victorian+Soldiers
https://www.alibris.com/booksearch?keyword=Eminent+Victorian+Soldiers%3A+S eekers+of+Glory

--
Jeff Liebermann
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558

On Friday, September 18, 2020 at 12:46:07 PM UTC-5, wrote:
On Friday, September 18, 2020 at 9:56:06 AM UTC-7, wrote:
Op vrijdag 18 september 2020 om 17:54:44 UTC+2 schreef :
On Friday, September 18, 2020 at 8:15:30 AM UTC-7, wrote:
On Friday, September 18, 2020 at 8:34:54 AM UTC-5, AMuzi wrote:
https://nypost.com/2020/09/17/maine-...ans-mailboxes/

--
Andrew Muzi
www.yellowjersey.org/
Open every day since 1 April, 1971
Some folks really don't like Trump

Deacon Mark
Joe Biden walks into a bar and sits next to a pretty young woman. He looks over at her and says, "Do I come here often?"
Tom, how old are you?
I am 75 years old, 2 years younger than Joe Biden, and I have watched a couple of members of our riding group die from Alzheimers. They were at the stage that Biden is now and within days they died. It isn't in the least funny that they have put some demented doofus who has never done one single thing in his entire life as a politicians that wasn't wrong and they run him as the best that the Democrats can produce. Then after the communist Bernie Sanders loses to Biden because no one wants a communist, Biden takes on the entire communist platform of Sanders.,

Tell us Lou - what do you think would happen to the world if Biden were to be elected? This country and the entire world would be mired in permanent war. The dollar would be reduced to nothing and the food supply for half of the world would disappear. Is that something you think should happen?

Trump is 74. Three years younger than Biden, one year younger than you. They are both old. And you too. Now I am sure you will claim that 2 or 3 years difference in age is an enormous amount. Its not. My parents are three years difference in age. I consider them to be the same age more or less. They lived in the exact same age. Now Melania... She is only 50 years old.

Why do you think Biden would send the USA to war?

On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 06:28:16 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 16:56:01 +0700, John B. wrote:

On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 08:47:16 -0000 (UTC), news18
wrote:


Lol, Churchill's military 'career' consisted of him show boating in as
many military theatres as he could get himself into, usually by dint
of 'conections'. There was no 'military service' unless he could
write about it to advance his desired future political career.


Err... Winston Churchill attended the Royal Military College,
Sandhurst

After his father forced him to do so and he required multiple attempts
to enter.

Forced him? Do you have a reference?

Keep web searching, you'll find it.


You also left out his hand in the Gallipoli debacle (WW1) and the Norway
fiasco (WWII) and a number of other similar costly cock-ups.

Oh! and I thought we were talking about Churchill's military service.
Not his political career.

Think about it Johnny boy, why was he in the position that allowed him to
make the decision.


The one good thing he achieved was getting Australian noses out of
British Arseholes and thinking about their own nation by refusing to
release Australian troops then fighting in the Middle East. His failure
to adequately supply Singapore can be seen as a contribution to its
fall.


Well, as you were part of the British Empire why in the world would you
decline the opportunity to serve in their military? Fear?

Lol, you might like to look how long 'Australians' were supporting the
British Empire before it became clear to them that the poms didn't give a
toss about this country unless they could exploit it like every other
place theyd invaded.


Well, to be blunt, why should they, other then a place to dump their
trash? After all what has Australia done other then to whine and
bitch? Your great Sydney Opera House, perhaps the greatest
architectural effort in the country... designed by a foreigner.
Probably your greatest tennis player, the member of a race that the
"white fellows" tried to eradicate and failed.

But your term "invaded" is rather self explanatory, isn't it. As it
could only logically be used by a member of the established race or
residents in an area subjected by an "outside" group.


As for Singapore you really do need to read some more history. The
Japanese had seized control of China, Hong Kong, French Indo China,
Thailand, Burma, Malaya, Indonesia, and a good portion of New Guinea.
The Japanese invaded Malaya on 8 December 1941 and on 27 1942 the Allied
forces retreated to Singapore and effectively, except for the Island of
Singapore the Japanese controlled all of S.E. Asia.

And you argue that had Singapore only been supplied that it could have
successfully fought the Japanese army?

Foolishness. Or perhaps daydreams.

Seriously, people need to really look at the fairy tales they are fed.

As above. You need to do a bit of deep reading about the full picture,
not just the glossy version they taught in school. OTOH, I had the
advantage of hearing directly from a few people who were there.

Well, I can't say that "I was there" but I was there about 10 years
later and I did talk to people who were there at the time and from
both historical reports as well as the memories of people that were
there the story was essentially what I reported.
--
Cheers,

John B.

On Wed, 23 Sep 2020 10:26:03 -0700, Jeff Liebermann
wrote:

On Tue, 22 Sep 2020 12:00:35 +0700, John B.
wrote:

I believe that the practice of purchase of commissions was abolished
as part of the 1871 Cardwell reforms.

Correct:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Purchase_of_commissions_in_the_British_Army

But, it might be noted that Sir Arthur Wellesley, who starting his
career in 1787 as a commissioned officer in the infantry, purchased
his first 4 commissions. As was the practice at that time.

Most armies (and governments) tend to be top heavy with those unfit to
lead. A good example is the book "Eminent Victorian Soldiers, Seekers
of Glory" by Byron Farwell, 367 pages, Norton 1985. It covers eight
leading Victorian generals, including some from the Boer War, explains
how the system of purchasing commissions actually worked, and how some
really odd soldiers floated to the top:
https://www.google.com/search?q=Eminent+Victorian+Soldiers
https://www.alibris.com/booksearch?keyword=Eminent+Victorian+Soldiers%3A+S eekers+of+Glory

Do you imply that Sir Arthur Wellesley was not, probably, the
greatest general of his generation?
--
Cheers,

John B.