Author Topic: Britain's Greatest Enemy (Read 7233 times)

Scout26 · « **on:** April 16, 2012, 10:35:15 AM »

George Washington.

The National Army Museum conducts a poll asking who is the greatest enemy commander the British have ever faced.

http://news.yahoo.com/george-washington-voted-britains-greatest-enemy-commander-153037718.html

makattak · « **Reply #1 on:** April 16, 2012, 10:44:27 AM »

Over Rommel and Bonaparte?

He obviously was more successful than they were, but I'm not sure I'd say he was greater. (Kind of like, although Hannibal lost, I'd say he was very likely the greatest ancient general.)

RevDisk · « **Reply #2 on:** April 16, 2012, 12:57:24 PM »

Quote

None of the five is particularly pleasant ideologically," Hughes added, saying that even Washington was a slave owner whose newly forged country then went on to try to destroy its native population.

...

What a tool. We really should do a surprise invasion on the UK. You know, bring them democracy by destroying their infrastructure, killing plenty of the locals and installing a puppet government.

Although honestly, I'd put Rommel as being more personal moral than Washington. But Washington's independence overall goal was better than the Nazi regime Rommel supported, even though Rommel personally loathed it. OTOH, Washington turned into a filthy Hamilton supporter, which damns him quite a bit. Rommel at least went out trying to kill Hitler. Tricky.

Hrm. Need to have a beer and ponder that one.

BlueStarLizzard · « **Reply #3 on:** April 16, 2012, 01:02:11 PM »

I'd go with bonaparte. If he could have made it over the channel, no more Britain as we know it.

Those wars lasted a long time, plus produced some of Britains greatest hero's, Wellington and Nelson.
A couple generations of men fought napolean and company, not just one.

Plus, he was short and french.

SADShooter · « **Reply #4 on:** April 16, 2012, 01:10:24 PM »

Dependent on our definition of Britain, might not William of Normandy deserve mention? Or perhaps Aulus Plautius? Two guys who, you know, successfully invaded the island?

Tallpine · « **Reply #5 on:** April 16, 2012, 01:13:10 PM »

Quote from: SADShooter on April 16, 2012, 01:10:24 PM

Dependent on our definition of Britain, might not William of Normandy deserve mention? Or perhaps Aulus Plautius? Two guys who, you know, successfully invaded the island?

Same sort of thing that I was thinking. Not to mention the Saxons.

SADShooter · « **Reply #6 on:** April 16, 2012, 01:15:13 PM »

Quote from: Tallpine on April 16, 2012, 01:13:10 PM

Same sort of thing that I was thinking. Not to mention the Saxons.

Sure. Couldn't recall a specific leader, though.

makattak · « **Reply #7 on:** April 16, 2012, 01:43:23 PM »

Quote from: SADShooter on April 16, 2012, 01:10:24 PM

Dependent on our definition of Britain, might not William of Normandy deserve mention? Or perhaps Aulus Plautius? Two guys who, you know, successfully invaded the island?

The list was limited to the period being displayed in the National Army Museum:

Quote

To qualify, each commander had to come from the 17th century onwards – the period covered by the museum's collection – and had to have led an army in the field against the British, thus excluding political enemies, like Adolf Hitler.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9204961/George-Washington-named-Britains-greatest-ever-foe.html

BlueStarLizzard · « **Reply #8 on:** April 16, 2012, 02:01:20 PM »

Quote from: SADShooter on April 16, 2012, 01:10:24 PM

Dependent on our definition of Britain, might not William of Normandy deserve mention? Or perhaps Aulus Plautius? Two guys who, you know, successfully invaded the island?

As the contributations of the romans, the normans and the saxons have become a large part of the modern english idendity, I would say "no".

And if bonaparte HAD managed to conquer and HOLD england, he wouln't count either. They stop being evil when they are also your leaders and your history. (for the most part)

SADShooter · « **Reply #9 on:** April 16, 2012, 02:28:52 PM »

Quote from: makattak on April 16, 2012, 01:43:23 PM

The list was limited to the period being displayed in the National Army Museum:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9204961/George-Washington-named-Britains-greatest-ever-foe.html

Roger. Didn't read full article.

MillCreek · « **Reply #10 on:** April 16, 2012, 04:01:41 PM »

Especially if you take into consideration the loss of America as a British colony and the economic impact thereto, as opposed to military successes only against the British, I can see how Washington got the nod.

Tallpine · « **Reply #11 on:** April 16, 2012, 04:34:33 PM »

Quote from: bluestarlizzard on April 16, 2012, 02:01:20 PM

As the contributations of the romans, the normans and the saxons have become a large part of the modern english idendity, I would say "no".

And if bonaparte HAD managed to conquer and HOLD england, he wouln't count either. They stop being evil when they are also your leaders and your history. (for the most part)

So Hitler would be a good guy by now if he had conquered Britain

Scout26 · « **Reply #12 on:** April 16, 2012, 05:09:27 PM »

I'll put this here since it kinda goes with the theme in this thread (like any thread on APS has a "theme")

Quote

Goodbye to my England , So long my old friend
Your days are numbered, being brought to an end

To be Scottish, Irish or Welsh that's fine
But don't say you're English, that's way out of line.
...
The French and the Germans may call themselves such
So may Norwegians, the Swedes and the Dutch
You can say you are Russian or maybe a Dane
But don't say you're English ever again.

At Broadcasting House the word is taboo
In Brussels it's scrapped, in Parliament too
Even schools are affected. Staff do as they're told
They must not teach children about England of old.

Writers like Shakespeare, Milton and Shaw
The pupils don't learn about them anymore
How about Agincourt, Hastings , Arnhem or Mons ?
When England lost hosts of her very brave sons.

We are not Europeans, how can we be?
Europe is miles away, over the sea
We're the English from England , let's all be proud
Stand up and be counted - Shout it out loud!

Let's tell our Government and Brussels too
We're proud of our heritage and the Red, White and Blue
Fly the flag of Saint George or the Union Jack
SO THATS WHY WE WANT OUR ENGLAND BACK

lee n. field · « **Reply #13 on:** April 16, 2012, 05:29:28 PM »

Quote from: scout26 on April 16, 2012, 10:35:15 AM

George Washington.

The National Army Museum conducts a poll asking who is the greatest enemy commander the British have ever faced.

http://news.yahoo.com/george-washington-voted-britains-greatest-enemy-commander-153037718.html

Scout26 · « **Reply #14 on:** April 16, 2012, 05:36:46 PM »

Quote from: lee n. field on April 16, 2012, 05:29:28 PM

Never fought the Brits....Sorry...

Ron · « **Reply #15 on:** April 16, 2012, 05:44:57 PM »

One would think that their greatest enemy was one who wanted to conquer and crush them, raping and pillaging their women and lands.

instead they chose a guy who led the rebellion of those who wanted to be left alone, or at least have some modicum of self determination.

BlueStarLizzard · « **Reply #16 on:** April 16, 2012, 06:12:58 PM »

Quote from: Tallpine on April 16, 2012, 04:34:33 PM

So Hitler would be a good guy by now if he had conquered Britain

First, I had added in () "for the most part" and second, it's kinda one of those who wrote the history books things.

But, had he won, eventually, to those he had conquered, he probably would have been, depending on how well they were treated and how "germanized" their culture became.

Perd Hapley · « **Reply #17 on:** April 16, 2012, 06:21:06 PM »

Quote from: RevDisk on April 16, 2012, 12:57:24 PM

Quote
None of the five is particularly pleasant ideologically," Hughes added, saying that even Washington was a slave owner whose newly forged country then went on to try to destroy its native population.

What a tool.

Tool is putting it kindly. He ought to know that the Revolution was not fought over the issue of slavery, and the British would not adopt an anti-slavery stance until some decades later. Nor do the British have any room to talk, when it comes to oppressing and killing natives.

Tool, ignorant, misleading, at least two of those apply.

seeker_two · « **Reply #18 on:** April 16, 2012, 06:44:16 PM »

Why not Gandhi? He pretty much signalled the end of the Empire.....

Scout26 · « **Reply #19 on:** April 16, 2012, 08:08:24 PM »

Quote from: seeker_two on April 16, 2012, 06:44:16 PM

Why not Gandhi? He pretty much signalled the end of the Empire.....

Did not lead on the field of battle.

SADShooter · « **Reply #20 on:** April 16, 2012, 08:46:45 PM »

Quote from: scout26 on April 16, 2012, 08:08:24 PM

Did not lead on the field of battle.

Technically true for purposes of this assessment, but interesting to ponder in a Bruce Lee "fighting without fighting" sense. The Brit military certainly applied "Rule .303" to plenty of Gandhi's adherents.

Tallpine · « **Reply #21 on:** April 16, 2012, 08:51:37 PM »

Quote from: bluestarlizzard on April 16, 2012, 06:12:58 PM

First, I had added in () "for the most part" and second, it's kinda one of those who wrote the history books things.

But, had he won, eventually, to those he had conquered, he probably would have been, depending on how well they were treated and how "germanized" their culture became.

Funny, the Angles and Saxons were "germans" and a lot of the "Anglish" language consists of german words.

BlueStarLizzard · « **Reply #22 on:** April 16, 2012, 09:14:38 PM »

Quote from: Tallpine on April 16, 2012, 08:51:37 PM

Funny, the Angles and Saxons were "germans" and a lot of the "Anglish" language consists of german words.

Same source, diffrent evolution of culture. I was speaking of the more modern german culture.

Regolith · « **Reply #23 on:** April 16, 2012, 09:46:20 PM »

Quote from: scout26 on April 16, 2012, 05:09:27 PM

I'll put this here since it kinda goes with the theme in this thread (like any thread on APS has a "theme")

I tried to read that to the tune of Walla Walla, but the meter wasn't right. That would have been awesome if it had...

French G. · « **Reply #24 on:** April 17, 2012, 05:48:44 AM »

The limitations of the poll are vexing. First I'd argue that Rommel and Washington never posed a threat to Britain itself, only its fighting men. Then I'd argue with his micro-managing style Hitler did indeed lead an army against Britain.
Go pre 17th century? Pick a pillager. Although as previously noted assimilation got us where we are. My solidly English ancestors that came here bore a surname that passes through Ireland but has nordic etymology. Go figger.

Also in the Hitler vein, what of him and Goering and the Battle of Britain? Laid far more waste to the mothership than Rommel.

Another vote for Ghandi, he lost the British a jewel in the crown probably more valuable than those pesky American colonies.

And finally, in my war on appeasing peacenik isolationists, I vote for Neville Chamberlain.

News:

Author Topic: Britain's Greatest Enemy (Read 7233 times)