He's probably just mentioning what the Queen represents.

What stenotypes was I highlighting? None. Stenotypes are for minor jokes, not for making serious points.

Stenotypes? mmmh



British humor is weird seriously

WwI: France doing the main job alongside Russia in the allies side, whereas Britain timidly helping and contributing, in the western front, 3/4 of the armies fighting were French, 1/4 were British (before America started the war) French losses: 2 millions soldiers died and 5 millions soldiers wounded,plus half a million of civilian casualties. This bloodshed will greatly impact the French for the following war.

Ww2: The British cowardly stop fighting before France even surrendered, leaving their allies alone, and then flee the fight during Operation Dynamo.

I think that's very unfair and this is not a topic to argue about.

WW1: Paris likely would have fallen without British intervention during the German invasion. The British only had a 100,000 professional expeditionary force at first. Without British help, you may not have been able to defend Paris and then the country would have fallen most likely, like WW2.

timidly helping and contributing

that is disgusting that you think that. Figures are estimated at 8,841,541 British and 8,660,000 French over the course of the war. 1.38 million French soldier deaths and around 400,000 civilian deaths, bearing in mind the war was in France. The French were fighting on home soil. British deaths a little less around 700,000 but Britain could easily have made a deal with Germany and escape the fight. Without British help, France would have fallen. That is pure ignorance.

WW2: Yet again...

Stenotypes? mmmh

Yes, you spotted a typo, you know I meant Stereotypes though.

Figures are estimated at 8,841,541 British and 8,660,000 French over the course of the war. 1.38 million French soldier deaths and around 400,000 civilian deaths, bearing in mind the war was in France. The French were fighting on home soil. British deaths a little less around 700,000 but Britain could easily have made a deal with Germany and escape the fight. Without British help, France would have fallen. That is pure ignorance.

Piechart showing percentage of military deaths during World War I for the Entente Powers:




1) Population (millions)
2 )Combat deaths
3) Civilian deaths
4) Total
5) Military wounded

France
1)39,6
2)1 397 800
3)300 000
4)1 697 800
5)4 266 000

UK
1)45,4
2)885 138
3)109 000
4)994 138
5)1 663 435


Sources: 1. Commonwealth War Graves Commission, 2. Statistics of the Military Effort of the British Empire During the Great War 1914-1920, War Office; 3. Official Medical History of the War; 4. Michel Huber, La Population de la France pendant la guerre, Paris, 1931; 4. Giorgo Mortara, La Salute pubblica in Italia durante e dopo la Guerra, New Haven: Yale University Press, 1925; 5. Boris Urlanis, Wars and Population, Moscow, 1971; 6. Heeres-Sanitätsinspektion im Reichskriegsministeriums, Sanitätsbericht über das deutsche Heer, (Deutsches Feld- und Besatzungsheer), im Weltkriege 1914-1918, Volume 3, Sec. 1, Berlin, 1934


Apollo, you will have to tell me where are your figures coming from?

Ok then, I did no research (off the top of my head)

I said 1.38 million French military deaths, actual figures = 1 397 800 (very close, in comparison to your figure of 2 million military deaths)

I said 400,000 for civilian deaths, actual figures = 300,000 (100,000 out compared to your half a million...)

I said 700,000 British deaths, actual figures = 800,000 (100,000 out, you with no figure, probably because you thought British effort was so insignificant)

3/4 of the armies fighting were French, 1/4 were British

Where did you get this from?

This post ^^ has just made you more hypocritical and ignorant than the first. Where did your first figures come from, you clearly had to re research.

sources? (you are not even able to show them)

No need to say I am an ignorant all the time, those first figures came from wikipedia.
Always a pleasure to debate with British jingoists.

You are digging yourself into a deeper hole Panda.

sources? (you are not even able to show them)

I said "I did no research (off the top of my head)"

No need to say I am an ignorant all the time, those first figures came from Wikipedia.

Hypocrite, you've called various people including me ignorant many times yourself...and also Wikipedia is actually correct if you look: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_I_casualties Not sure where you getting this from?

Always a pleasure to debate with British jingoists

I like a lot of places and people around the world actually. I would be too ignorant myself to hate people/places when I don't know a lot about them. I don't dislike you Panda, you just come up with very annoyingly arguable wrong comments sometimes.

you just come up with very annoyingly arguable wrong comments sometimes.

Mmmh when I am giving my view and opinion about Great Britain particularly when it is bad (cf cuisine thread) or answering Attlee and his various french bashing comments, yes I guess I am getting annoying, listen take your British pride aside, and let's discuss like gentlemen.

Fair enough, what we should gather from this topic. The world wars were horrific and no one deserved to endure such a crisis. The wars were both faults of governments and horrible leaders/dictators, as a consequence the whole the world suffered from it.

Why, did it end up in stenotype(s)...?

(By "Rest of Britain" shown in statistics I mean England, Wales, and Ireland)

Scotland's population at the beginning of The Great War: 4,747,000 (estimate)
Rest of Britain's population at the beginning of The Great War: 41,342,000 (estimate)

Scottish military deaths in The Great War: 147,609
Rest of Britain's military deaths in The Great War: 679,137

Scotland lost 3% of its population in The Great War, the rest of Britain lost 1.6% of its population.

Do you know why Scotland lost more than double the rate of their military than the rest of Britain?

Because the cowardly English shove the brave Scottish warriors in the front lines, because they call us "expandable". They think a decent Scot is worth to be gunned down by the Germans in the Western Front! That is why Scottish toilet roll has pictures of the queen on it.

Can't we all just agree that both France and Britain are bad?

And Americans. Especially Kansans.

Better a proud Briton, instead of a French bastard!

Edited 4/17/2015 22:20:51

Better to be American then get killed in a soccer riot or stabbed in a blood fued

Can't we all just agree that both France and Britain are bad?

I agree with you Juq: France, Britain, Germany and Russia were all bad during WWI.

Better a proud Briton, instead of a French bastard!

Was that really necessary?

Edited 4/17/2015 22:32:02

Angry piss back to basket land!

basket land!

Learn how to spell it correctly first Kurd!

Ox don't be butthurt that Scotland didn't get independence, get over it. Majority wanted to stay. Britain includes Scotland whether you like it or not. Now stop trying to represent Scotland like this.

Wow this is turning into patriotic wars.

Edited 4/17/2015 22:39:23