Current Affairs EU In or Out

[Kurt.]

Greggs stockpiles pork for sausage rolls ahead of Brexit

The bakery chain wants to make sure that ingredients for its sausage rolls are safeguarded.

www.bbc.co.uk

How would the Brexit gammons survive without their sausage rolls?

@MarcelsGoat i’ll leave this one to you

 

[Charlie Sweet]

No grown man of dignity would ever eat a sausage roll unless forced to. Meat paste wrapped up in saturated fat laden pastry from a tube.

 

[tsubaki]

How's he performing against his xVotes?

I am sure his ex votes Labour now.

 

[orchard]

No grown man of dignity would ever eat a sausage roll unless forced to. Meat paste wrapped up in saturated fat laden pastry from a tube.

Make your own?

 

[Old Blue 2]

I'm prepared to see how the endgame pans out before I make that call. But in terms of incompetent acts of long term national self harm he's going to be right up there with Home and Chamberlain. In terms of general bufoonery and inability to govern he's already sidled past Callaghan.

He's definitely a contender.

In September 1938 Chamberlain bought us 12 valuable months...

 

[roydo]

In September 1938 Chamberlain bought us 12 valuable months...

With the benefit of hindsight, or because of his cunning? Serious question cos I know you have studied in depth the subject.

 

[Old Blue 2]

With the benefit of hindsight, or because of his cunning? Serious question cos I know you have studied in depth the subject.

In 1938, the German military machine was far more advanced than ours and the French. Their airforce had turned their 'civilian passenger aircraft' (Heinkel He 111 & Dornier Do 17) into bombers, that had been the intention all along. We still had biplane fighters with front-line units whereas the Germans had the monoplane Messerschmitt Bf 109, and the emerging Bf 110. Aerially, we would have been slaughtered had war broken out in 1938.

Chamberlain, unwittingly, bought us those 12 months, and by the time of the Dunkirk evacuation in late-May/early-June 1940, Fighter Command had the Spitfires and Hurricanes in sufficient quantities with front-line units, together with the most modern defensive aerial set-up in the world at that time, upon which the Luftwaffe were broken in the following months of the Battle of Britain.

But 12 months earlier...

Apologies for digressing, but Chamberlain should be seen in the above light, even though he was not to know it at the time.

 

[tsubaki]

In 1938, the German military machine was far more advanced than ours and the French. Their airforce had turned their 'civilian passenger aircraft' (Heinkel He 111 & Dornier Do 17) into bombers, that had been the intention all along. We still had biplane fighters with front-line units whereas the Germans had the monoplane Messerschmitt Bf 109, and the emerging Bf 110. Aerially, we would have been slaughtered had war broken out in 1938.

Chamberlain, unwittingly, bought us those 12 months, and by the time of the Dunkirk evacuation in late-May/early-June 1940, Fighter Command had the Spitfires and Hurricanes in sufficient quantities with front-line units, together with the most modern defensive aerial set-up in the world at that time, upon which the Luftwaffe were broken in the following months of the Battle of Britain.

But 12 months earlier...

Apologies for digressing, but Chamberlain should be seen in the above light, even though he was not to know it at the time.

Not sure about that at all - the reason we still had biplane fighters in 1938 because Chamberlain (and Baldwin before him, but Chamberlain was the chancellor) had not put sufficient resources in to rearmament despite what Germany was clearly doing. His policy was to appease Hitler, if necessary against his own Foriegn Secretary's advice and he did not want to antagonize him or upset his own political situation (even though he had a huge majority) by matching the Germans.

Also lets not forget that "buying us those 12 months" also gave the German armed forces the biggest armaments plant in the world at the time, 400 extra (and then) modern tanks, an extra twelve months to build more fighters, bombers and armoured vehicles and to develop their proper use. During the Anchluss, if the Austrians had properly resisted (at least according to Guderian) they would have kicked the Germans out; a year later that army was capable of beating Poland and then turning on the rest of Western Europe. They used that time productively; we did not.

Chamberlain (and Baldwin) deserved the condemnation the men of their time gave them.

 

[Old Blue 2]

Not sure about that at all - the reason we still had biplane fighters in 1938 because Chamberlain (and Baldwin before him, but Chamberlain was the chancellor) had not put sufficient resources in to rearmament despite what Germany was clearly doing. His policy was to appease Hitler, if necessary against his own Foriegn Secretary's advice and he did not want to antagonize him or upset his own political situation (even though he had a huge majority) by matching the Germans.

Also lets not forget that "buying us those 12 months" also gave the German armed forces the biggest armaments plant in the world at the time, 400 extra (and then) modern tanks, an extra twelve months to build more fighters, bombers and armoured vehicles and to develop their proper use. During the Anchluss, if the Austrians had properly resisted (at least according to Guderian) they would have kicked the Germans out; a year later that army was capable of beating Poland and then turning on the rest of Western Europe. They used that time productively; we did not.

Chamberlain (and Baldwin) deserved the condemnation the men of their time gave them.

Can't agree. In the 12 months, the gap between the two countries with regard to aviation narrowed considerably. Developing of both the Spitifre and the Hurricane was continuing towards fruition, following maiden flights years previously. Ultimately resulting in the situation that I outlined in my previous post.

The Austrian air force was in no way comparable to the strength of the German air force in 1938. To believe they would have successfully resisted against the Luftwaffe is simply not correct. And the consequence of air superiority, as we know, is that the opposing ground forces would have been hammered. I do not believe Austria would have successfully stood up against a German military onslaught.

But you may believe differently...

 

[Connor]

Getting Project Fear in first to start Brexit response bingo

 

[tsubaki]

Can't agree. In the 12 months, the gap between the two countries with regard to aviation narrowed considerably. Developing of both the Spitifre and the Hurricane was continuing towards fruition, following maiden flights years previously. Ultimately resulting in the situation that I outlined in my previous post.

The Austrian air force was in no way comparable to the strength of the German air force in 1938. To believe they would have successfully resisted against the Luftwaffe is simply not correct. And the consequence of air superiority, as we know, is that the opposing ground forces would have been hammered. I do not believe Austria would have successfully stood up against a German military onslaught.

But you may believe differently...

Again, the reason why were behind is down to Chamberlain though. Germany in 1933 possessed no air force.

 

[Old Blue 2]

Again, the reason why were behind is down to Chamberlain though. Germany in 1933 possessed no air force.

So the speed of development of both the Spitfire & Hurricane was down to Chamberlain? It was held back by him...?

Read up on the clandestine development of the German airforce in Russia at Lipetsk.

 

[Ruairi77]

Getting Project Fear in first to start Brexit response bingo

na man, that kind of news goes in to the 'conveniently gloss over it and hope another point we can actually argue against comes up' bin.

 

[tsubaki]

So the speed of development of both the Spitfire & Hurricane was down to Chamberlain? It was held back by him...?

Read up on the clandestine development of the German airforce in Russia at Lipetsk.

No, because the state of the armed forces of the UK was not defined by the state of development of the Spitfire and Hurricane. Everything - Army, Navy and RAF- was neglected during his time as Chancellor and as PM - he did catch up (a bit), but it was not enough and people at the time told him this.

 

[Old Blue 2]

No, because the state of the armed forces of the UK was not defined by the state of development of the Spitfire and Hurricane. Everything - Army, Navy and RAF- was neglected during his time as Chancellor and as PM - he did catch up (a bit), but it was not enough and people at the time told him this.

There had been what one might call 'inertia' towards the military following the end of WW1. It was not all down to Chamberlain...

Read up on it...