Unpopular opinions.

[T_S_A_R]

so you think that GB on it's own could have held out for six years? nae chance

[renton]

so you think that GB on it's own could have held out for six years? nae chance

Held out against what? Remember we went on to win the Battle of the Atlantic and thus a blockade to starve Britain out wouldn't have worked either.

The thing about the alliance that you should remember is that no one nation could win it on it's own, left to ourselves there would have been stalemate and eventually somekind of armistice with Britain as a sovereign nation but unable to wrest control of europe form the nazis and them unable to invade us.

The soviets needed lend lease to keep going, that materiale was made in the US and shipped to Russia by the Royal Navy, without the UK their could be no succesful invasion of western europe by the US. Essentially Britain can't win the war on it's own but the others can't win it without us, or they themselves either.

Edited September 1, 2010 by renton

[T_S_A_R]

Held out against what? Remember we went on to win the Battle of the Atlantic and thus a blockade to starve Britain out wouldn't ahve worked either.

The thing about the alliance that you should remember is that no one nation could win it on it's own, left to ourselves their would have been stalemate and eventually somekind of armistice with britain as a sovereign nation but unable to wrest control of europe form the nazis and them unable to invade us.

The soviets needed lend lease to keep going, that materiale was made in the US and shipped to Russia by the Royal Navy, without the UK their could be no succesful invasion of western europe by the US. Essentially Britain can't win the war on it's own but the others can't win it without us, or they themsleves either.

i don't really disagree with any of that but i do think that without an eastern front the industrial capacity of the nazis would have been so great that they would eventually conquer GB by mass invasion or otherwise. if GB was the only resistance in europe then they could have massively increased u boat and fighter plane production and have either have overwhelmed us or starved us.

[renton]

i don't really disagree with any of that but i do think that without an eastern front the industrial capacity of the nazis would have been so great that they would eventually conquer GB by mass invasion or otherwise. if GB was the only resistance in europe then they could have massively increased u boat and fighter plane production and have either have overwhelmed us or starved us.

In the latter scenario, the US, not russia is the more important ally due to thier industrial capabilities, replacing shipping tonnage during the BoA was important, in the end it was a battle they lost on tehcnical merits as the RN became adept at sub hunting, submarine technology would not be mature until nuclear reactors became the norm, only then could huge numbers make a massively telling difference.

On the former, it's just very difficult to see how Germany manages to produce enough stuff in a short period of time. Bare in mind that the gemrans did not adopt a proper war economy until 43/44. It's very liekly that they owuld ahve sought an armistice rather than f**k their economy - they'd built their entire armed forces on the idea of short wars on land. They just didn't ahve the capacity for taking us on, on our own patch. I think you would have seen some form of cold war between the two later. However, Hitler was always going to go east.

It's just worng to imagine that the events of 1940/1941 had no baring on the overall result, indeed, not only did they save the UK, but continued British resistance delayed the start of Barbarrosa to the point where eventually the Germans ran out of good weather and got bogged down outside of Moscow.

[stimpy]

Can Godwin's law actually be invoked?

[Ad Lib]

Can Godwin's law actually be invoked?

It's a law like that of Gravity. It's constantly invoked.

[mattydfc]

I'm a very sexy chap.

[Ad Lib]

I'm a very sexy chap.

Unpopular and inaccurate are not synonyms.

Just saying, likes.

[mattydfc]

Unpopular and inaccurate are not synonyms.

Just saying, likes.

I'm from Dundee, don't use big words, please. X

[Karpaty]

London's miles better than Glasgow.

[Karpaty]

Most places are miles better than Glasgow.

Would be the correct answer

[Fudge]

If you live in a nice area of Glasgow it's as nice as anywhere in any city in the UK If you're from a less nice area you're going to think that other cities you've visted are better because you're likely to have only seen the shiney, interesting touristy bits.

[Karpaty]

If you live in a nice area of Glasgow it's as nice as anywhere in any city in the UK If you're from a less nice area you're going to think that other cities you've visted are better because you're likely to have only seen the shiney, interesting touristy bits.

Every city in the world has shite areas, granted, but if streets like Buchanan Street is really one of the main in the city then it doesn't say much. I walk from Central Station to Queen Street every Friday from 8.30 at night, and yes I'm fully aware it's only around the corner, but the amount of pissed up idiots and jakeballs I pass is really off putting.

I was on a coach from London a few weeks back and the paths around Hyde Park and the like had tourists at quater to midnight during the week taking photos etc. Had that of been George Square at the time chances are they'd be lucky to get out of the square with their camera still in their possession.

That's not to say London doesn't have idiots, I would very much assume they have some too, just not to the scale of Glasgow.

I've been in other towns and citys in England particularly over the last few months and have found almost everybody more friendlier than Glasgow/Scotland, which was disapointing to see. I love Scotland as a country, but some of the people can be right off putting animals.

[Unleash The Nade]

So what are you saying? Are you saying that you are "successfuly" disguising your true nature? Because while you can camouflage your nature with mannerisms and spelling, your overall personality tends to come shining though. So what do you do to disguise your nature? Do you pretend to be thicker than you are? Do you deliberately blunder through logical arguments? Because if so, why?

Apologies XBL,I wasn't deliberately avoiding your questions, which I never realised you had posted until I came back online .

I know you didn't respond, but if you look at my original post on this thread,do you honestly think suggesting dog nappies,banning pensioners from shopping at weekends and prison sentences for litter louts were serious suggestions?

Maybe I'm guilty of committing the heinous crime of being too frivolous on P&B at times, but it has to be said, there are those also who take things and themselves far too seriously.

I could go on a Lawstud style rant about my personal achievements, but won't as they're simply that, personal.

There are certain subjects some posters could tie me in knots,Vikington for instance, on his knowledge of history, which at times I must admit is impressive.

However,the reverse could also be said on topics in which I would have a superior knowledge than them,but it doesn't make them thick ,or me any better than them.

I don't have to prove a point or myself to anyone,but can't help but get the feeling some posters do and as a result are all too quick at picking up on others who they don't think are on an equal "level", as themselves.

I think trying to judge a persons true nature or personality from an internet forum is exceptionally naive and is more a reflection on the person casting judgement than those they judge.

Edited September 2, 2010 by Unleash The Nade

[Fudge]

I was on a coach from London a few weeks back and the paths around Hyde Park and the like had tourists at quater to midnight during the week taking photos etc. Had that of been George Square at the time chances are they'd be lucky to get out of the square with their camera still in their possession.

You've compared a attractive park and tourist attraction to a busy city centre square full of people on a night out. If you went to a similar loaction in London you'd have seen drunken arseholes acting like prats.

[forehead7]

complete freedom of speech should be allowed at all times (including singing songs at the fitba) by law. so the police can't stop the billy boys or boys of the old brigade but the owners of the grounds would be allowed to decide what was allowed on their property.

All rights comes with a responsibility. The responsibilty that comes with free speech is that you don't use it to spread lies and such.

After reading through this thread, which like all Clyde threads could do with a good edit and removal of all of Unleash The Nade's comments, I have to steal some other people opinions, which are my own aswell.

Legalise marijuana, don't really care about the other ones tbh.

Bring back in the death penalty, don't think it's been mentioned yet. Only for crimes with DNA evidence or the murderer pleas guilty. No reduced sentences for admitting it or giving information on other people either.

Downloading music should not be illegal, when downloading music, your IP takes money as it eats up your monthly allowance so they are making money off your downloads.

Pro Evolution Soccer, not PES or pro evo!!, is better than FIFA.

Travelling by train is better than the bus.

People who go to private, fee-paying schools are not automatically "snobs". But alot are.

The same applies for OF fans being "bigots".

Can't think of any atm

[StewartyMac]

Travelling by train is better than the bus.

In what way is that an unpopular opinion?

[forehead7]

In what way is that an unpopular opinion?

Most people, in the real life, that I've talked to prefer the bus.

Maybe it's like the best league in the world. Depends what group yer with. For the record, I think it's the Spanish.

edit to say what I really meant to type

Edited September 1, 2010 by forehead7

[Jimmy85]

Most people, in the real life, prefer the bus.

Maybe it's like the best league in the world. Depends what group yer with. For the record, I think it's the Spanish.

Do they?

I don't think I know anyone that would choose to travel by bus insread of train. Imagine getting a fucking bus to London. No thanks.

[forehead7]

Do they?

I don't think I know anyone that would choose to travel by bus insread of train. Imagine getting a fucking bus to London. No thanks.

I have edited it to say that the people I was refering to were people I had talked to, not just people in general.

I did just mean around the city. You could probably get the bus cheaper, if going to somewhere like London.