Royal Family to be proud of

29 Aug 2012

Quote by Geordiecpl2001
He might get a taste for this exhibitionist stuff and before long there may be a new member on here !!
Username; GingerPrince.
Or if he gets into watersports could be username; TheRoyalWee
John

That's a half-chewed Minstrel hits keyboard moment.
Hate the Royals, up the revolution.....
Except if Harry one day won the crown, he'd make an excellent king.
I'd vote for him, anyway. Oh. Wait.......

29 Aug 2012

Quote by VoyeurJ
Think you will find Prince Andrew was an ambulance driver (Sea King Pilot) in the Falklands

The Prince flew missions that included anti-submarine and anti-surface warfare, as a decoy aircraft to draw the fire of Exocet missiles, casualty evacuation, transport, and search and rescue.

Quote by VoyeurJ
Prince Harry was a FOB operator in Afghanistan

No, He was a forward air controller.

1 Sep 2012

There is no such thing as a royal family to be proud of .... any royal family is a demonstration of our lack of social evolution and should by definition be an embarassment to us ... it is nice to see ours fulfilling that task so well

1 Sep 2012

I do love our Royal Family wink

1 Sep 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009
I do love our Royal Family

wb blue :thumbup:

1 Sep 2012

Quote by Bluefish2009
I do love our Royal Family

Blue, this is bizarre. I was trawling through one of your threads about the badger cull not five minutes ago trying to find something I wanted out of it, and blow me if not five minutes later you turn up right outta the blue. Uncanny! Welcome back, trust you're all good down your way?

1 Sep 2012

wb blue... Missed you!

2 Sep 2012

'Kin 'ell Blue you defused my masterstroke there, there I was allowing everyone to get on with it only to wade in at the last minute to undercut the whole arguement with a sharp pithy and supremely witty truth..... and you bloody stroll in and ruin the moment .... that's it we are no longer on speaking terms
:flounces off in a huff (or hough)
Oh and hello and welcome back B.T.W.

3 Sep 2012

Quote by foxylady2209
I don`t care much for the Royal family but I think anybody that takes naked photos of people without permission and sells them to reporters and the people who print them should all be arrested.
Don`t care who the subject is.

:thumbup::thumbup::thumbup:
I consider the publication of the pictures an invasion of privacy. If he was standing up in public saying how such things were immoral; then yes the pictures could be claimed as in the public interest. That is not the case; he is just this guy you know, who happens to have the parents he has.
What does surprise me is how much he has got away with till now. There was always going to be someone seeing $$$$$$$$$$$$ sooner or later.

3 Sep 2012

Quote by
I consider the publication of the pictures an invasion of privacy.

under the circumstances of these pictures i cannot see how it is an invasion of his privavcy. This guy is certainly not your average young guy out there on the street. He has had a privalidged background with all sorts of people at his disposal, advising him on courses of action he must take bearing in mind his position in the Royal household.
if he had been partying with a group of established friends in a private house in the country, then yes i would agree with you on his privacy, BUT this was in a hotel in Vegas, the girls in most cases were unknown to him and i am sure there were others there also unknown to him. he has security people at his call 24 hours a day, and yet he found himself in a situation of stripping naked in a foreign hotel, with people he did not know. come on t,mann, hardly the actions of someone looking to protect his privacy.
he and his security people messed up and i do not buy the " young guy having a good time " crap. he is in a position of trust and diplomacy being part of the Windsor house, and with that comes responsibility and all the other stuff that being 3rd in line to the throne entails. breaching a persons privacy in normal circumstances is one thing, but getting your cock out in a hotel room with women you have not met before, is hardly a wise and mature thing to do. he acted like a twat and was made to look like a twat, and should have known better. i bet this will not happen again to him.

Quote by
What does surprise me is how much he has got away with till now. There was always going to be someone seeing $$$$$$$$$$$$ sooner or later.

you could also use the £££££££ signs also. yes always someone ready to make a quick buck, which makes what he did even more silly. innocent

sometimes a privileged upbringing makes you an open target in the " real world ", where most of us hang out. maybe he has been hanging out with too many hangers on and hooray henrys for his own good.

4 Sep 2012

forward air controller work in the FOB lol .. i spoke to a mate in the blues there with him and he did his shift on sentry too .. Top man and good to see him clothed and taking the piss out of himself too ..
He is never Charles though ... exocets are for ships and andy in a sea king wouldnt work as a decoy .. now Prince harry flys apache .. thats front line pain bringing kit ... give him a break ... isnt that why people visit vegas too!!
We should scrap Westminster and let Harry sort us out eh!! Has there ever been a ginger PM then?
But being serious for once ... fought for the queen and proud to have swore my oath too. People still visit GB just to see her house and hope Prince Phil gets better too .. he says some great things too ...
Its part of what makes here Great and apart from Edward they work bloody hard to promote us too.
It was an invasion of privacy and wrong to be printed i reckon ... boy needs a tan though surely
Night and im off my soap box now .. just feel passionately about my Great Britain and left wing social conscience whingers going on about how unfair it is for the poor .. stop whingeing get to work and join us .. Big Dave is trying to fix the labour mess and cant do any worse surely ... so get spending and help out ..
If we stopped paying dole dwellers after a year and taxed them .... maybe they would get to work and stop whingeing about proper peoples tax rate being dropped from 50 .. feckin labour .. ooops back on box but hey ....
im passionate about being successfull and cant stand whinging tree hugging lefties who go on anti capitalist marches then go to mcdonalds on the way home ...
greed is good and recession only cleans out the crap and makes way for new growth ..
PS ive recently done charity so not a complete ranting twat ... anyone want some life coaching .. I've a good one here ... god save the queen and make Britain great again .. if he isnt busy of course ... lol
Right feel better now and hope ive not offended anyone then .. just meant to say about the FOB too

5 Sep 2012

Quote by VoyeurJ
exocets are for ships and andy in a sea king wouldnt work as a decoy

Yes I know they are a shipkiller missile but the defence boffins believed at the time that they could seriously outsmart the weapons with basic techniques.
The Navy had to make a cube but with only three side (called a corner reflector), so much like a cone, and mount it out ahead of a helicopter and fly fairly low somewhere behind the ship. The cone was fixed using a long girder mounted from a weapons hard point which managed to get the device to be sturdy enough to actually be airworthy (of a sort). Off they flew every day from both Hermes and Invincible.
If the pilot pointed the thing in the direction of the threat the radar return of the cone appeared bigger than the ship and the Exocet would go after the Helo. When the pilot saw it coming he simply hauled up on the collective and climbed above the missile which simply passed beneath.
Whether it actually ever seduced a missile I don't know. After a few weeks of use they actually received some electronic gear which was fitted to a couple of Lynx which then took over the duty.

6 Sep 2012

....... but getting your cock out in a hotel room with women you have not met before, is hardly a wise and mature thing to do. he acted like a twat and was made to look like a twat, and should have known better. i bet this will not happen again to him.
.............
So I am not wise and mature, o dear. Many here have done just what he did. I don't see who they are makes much diff as to how their privacy should be measured.

7 Sep 2012

Quote by Trevaunance
exocets are for ships and andy in a sea king wouldnt work as a decoy

Yes I know they are a shipkiller missile but the defence boffins believed at the time that they could seriously outsmart the weapons with basic techniques.
The Navy had to make a cube but with only three side (called a corner reflector), so much like a cone, and mount it out ahead of a helicopter and fly fairly low somewhere behind the ship. The cone was fixed using a long girder mounted from a weapons hard point which managed to get the device to be sturdy enough to actually be airworthy (of a sort). Off they flew every day from both Hermes and Invincible.
If the pilot pointed the thing in the direction of the threat the radar return of the cone appeared bigger than the ship and the Exocet would go after the Helo. When the pilot saw it coming he simply hauled up on the collective and climbed above the missile which simply passed beneath.
Whether it actually ever seduced a missile I don't know. After a few weeks of use they actually received some electronic gear which was fitted to a couple of Lynx which then took over the duty.

Sounds like a quite simple solution, and often the best solutions are often simple, not foolproof but when a ship is in a danger area not to be dismissed, it would not have helped HMS Sheffield of course as the ship had it's radar switched off at the time the exocet was launched in order for them to contact GCHQ back in the UK.
Agree that it is good to see a Royal in the frontline and where the metal meets the flesh and not being restricted to Ship to Ship transfers and kept away from most of the dangerzone.
I understand that allowing any enemy to take out a Royal would be a massive coup for them and not worth risking but you do have to weigh that danger against the inspiration that can be created for a Nation, for example the Royal Family remaining in London during the Blitz.
I support our Royals, I believe they do generate an income similar to thier cost and they do represent something Britain can be proud of, I also thing there can be too many hangers on and it is a shame that The Queen has little control of her expenditure on staff and necessities, that is done by her staff and advisors, but I would rather that and the Queen at our head than Obhama, Stalin and many of the other knobheads and downright dangerous Heads of State around the world past and present.

7 Sep 2012

Quote by starlightcouple
sometimes a privileged upbringing makes you an open target in the " real world ", where most of us hang out. maybe he has been hanging out with too many hangers on and hooray henrys for his own good.

And here's me thinking you had an aversion to it all hanging out :grin:
There's hope for George Michael yet then :lol2:

7 Sep 2012

I see that the young Prince is starting a second tour of duty :thumbup:

7 Sep 2012

Terrible though that on the same day, an inquest into 'friendly fire' from a misdirected Apache which killed one and injured several others castigated the operation commanders.

7 Sep 2012

Quote by GnV
Terrible though that on the same day, an inquest into 'friendly fire' from a misdirected Apache which killed one and injured several others castigated the operation commanders.

Agreed, let us hope that the Prince is not left in such a position by his operational Commanders because a Pilot is only as good as the information he recieves, let us hope that the number of Pilots put in that position is minimal but sadly in such operational conditions some friendly fire incidents are inevitable, I am not condoning the case of inquest today as I know nothing about it, but sometimes it is inevitable and unavoidable and sometimes it is a catalogue of errors or just plain stupidity and in the worst cases it is a terrible judgement made by someone wishing to advance thier career.

7 Sep 2012

In this unfortunate case it was simple human error that snowballed. It is unfortunate and tragic, and hopefully will never be repeated. However the fog of war and instantaneous decision making makes me think that it will re-occur at some point.
Having said that, the number of friendly fire incidents is extremely low, yes it could be lower, but after years of working in a coalition we are able to integrate almost seamlessly now in comparison to the situation in Kuwait and Kosovo.

11 Sep 2012

All may not agree with being there but you have to admire someone with that level of privelege doing his duty on the front line ...
Good lucky Harry and deliver pain and suffering to those filthy 3rd world cowards ....
Not naked this time though chap .... great show by the queens grand child eh people.
Have to admire his cajones too ... takes some big ones to head into battle ..
Home safe I hope and in one piece Cpt Wales.
J

11 Sep 2012

Quote by flower411
All may not agree with being there but you have to admire someone with that level of privelege doing his duty on the front line ...
Good lucky Harry and deliver pain and suffering to those filthy 3rd world cowards ....
Not naked this time though chap .... great show by the queens grand child eh people.
Have to admire his cajones too ... takes some big ones to head into battle ..
Home safe I hope and in one piece Cpt Wales.
J

"Filthy 3rd world cowards" ?
Has it ever occured to you that these people may be defending themselves from an invading army that is trying to impose a completely alien political system on them !
It`s comments and attitudes like that that start wars and get people killed.
For once I agree with flower.
What god (or other) given right does the west have to interfere with the way other nations live their lives?
Defending the west's borders (at their borders) is one thing, but taking their defence as an agressor to the heart of another nation for purposes of regime change is entirely another. And in the case of the continent of African and Arab nations, this is never going to work.
Just witness the turmoil again in Iraq.

11 Sep 2012

Have to admire his cajones too ... takes some big ones to head into battle ..

From the safety of an Apache gunship armed with stand-off weaponry against opposition who's weapons of choice are mainly AK-47s, IEDs and suicide bombers? How big do your balls have to be to engage in completely asymmetric warfare like that, d'you reckon?
As for 'filthy 3rd world cowards', the statement reveals a very great deal about your attitudes. They are not ones I would be all that quick to reveal in polite company were I to hold them.

12 Sep 2012

I do not support the Taliban (and unlike the UK and USA would not have supported them with arms and supplies during thier war with Russia) I would fight against them if asked, but I do not believe they are 3rd world cowards, it may be wrong in our eyes but it takes a lot of guts to be a suicide bomber, it takes a lot of guts to convert old russian mines into roadside bombs, it takes a lot of guts to attack a British Army patrol with only RPG-7s and AK47s.
We fight them because we believe the supressive way they treat women and others in areas they rule is wrong and because they actively take part in the supply of hard drugs but they believe otherwise and are defending thier way of life and thier home soil.
But they are not just armed with home made rifles, AK47's and RPG7's, they took an awfull lot of sophisticated equipment off the Russians during that war and were supplied with Stinger anti aircraft weapons by the USA at that time, they may not have the quantities, sophistication and training of European forces but they have been fighting for nearly 20 years now against some of the most powerfull nations on earth, do NOT underestimate them.

12 Sep 2012

Quote by MidsCouple24
We fight them because we believe the supressive way they treat women and others in areas they rule is wrong and because they actively take part in the supply of hard drugs but they believe otherwise and are defending thier way of life and thier home soil.

An official reason.
"Now, as we approach our 10th year of combat in Afghanistan, there are those who are understandably asking tough questions about our mission there. But we must never lose sight of what’s at stake. As we speak, al Qaeda continues to plot against us, and its leadership remains anchored in the border regions of Afghanistan and Pakistan. We will disrupt, dismantle and defeat al Qaeda, while preventing Afghanistan from again serving as a base for terrorists."
I reckon it's oil.

12 Sep 2012

Just thought I'd drop in re the original topic.
I likes having a Royal Family (prefer it to a president any day) I think the Queen is awesome, I like the quirkyness of her other half, my 7yr old who was then 6 and her expression when she visited Buckingham Palace was an absolute picture and I think for the most part the Royals are excellent ambassadors for the UK...and whats more and as a tax payer I don't mind some of what I pay going towards their upkeep.
Could somebody pass the above paragraph on please, I'll expect to be a Dame Toots in the Christmas Honours list and of course i'll expect my letter from the reigning Monarch for when I reach 100
Toots
Dame Toot
Dame Toots the Centenarian
Dame Toots the Centenarian & still swinging (well, you could still lift up me fold (well folds since replaced with wrinkles)
Bring it on!

12 Sep 2012

Why is it always Monarchy OR Presidency. They aren't the same at all. Our monarchy has 0 power in law. They may be able to bribe, yes BRIBE, people with silly little medals and letters after their name (personally I worked for mine - BEng) to get something they want, but that's it. OK they employ people - but taking our castles back and opening them PROPERLY to the public, and running the grouse estates as profitable concerns, would employ loads of people too. It's not like these things would disappear.
A president is just another politician but they have actual power. They can do things in law. We have enough trouble with the current batch of theiving gits, we don't want/need any more.
Why not get rid of the monarchy and not have a president?

12 Sep 2012

Quote by Toots
As a tax payer I don't mind some of what I pay going towards their upkeep

I quite agree, I mean it's not as if I could do more for the country for 52p a year.

13 Sep 2012

Quote by flower411
Why is it always Monarchy OR Presidency. They aren't the same at all. Our monarchy has 0 power in law. They may be able to bribe, yes BRIBE, people with silly little medals and letters after their name (personally I worked for mine - BEng) to get something they want, but that's it. OK they employ people - but taking our castles back and opening them PROPERLY to the public, and running the grouse estates as profitable concerns, would employ loads of people too. It's not like these things would disappear.
A president is just another politician but they have actual power. They can do things in law. We have enough trouble with the current batch of theiving gits, we don't want/need any more.
Why not get rid of the monarchy and not have a president?

Must admit I`ve never understood the idea that getting rid of the monarchy immediately means we have to have a president .....it just isn`t a natural progression to me !!
I rather like the idea of having a figurehead without power but i`m not really happy about the huge wealth these people (the royal family) possess.
As ambassadors, figureheads and tourist attractions they cannot in all honesty be faulted but the enourmous wealth they control is unjustified .
I suppose we could swap them and have the Pope as our figuredhead backed by the Catholic Church, but the problem would be that last time I looked at the figures (albeit some time ago) they were the richest organisation in the world and a registered charity!
The thing is I am sure the President of the USA costs a fortune, as would the leader of China and Russia and most other heads of state, I don't know but doubt our bill for the Royals is much higher than other Countries pay for whoever they have, and in many of those Countries thier heads of state do not generate anything like the same kind of tourist revenue that ours do.

13 Sep 2012

Or even go along the Somalian route and not have a head of State or national Government at all....

13 Sep 2012

About my post ... I didnt mean to offend anyone but typed what I felt at the time after having served up close to know what im talking about. I dont particularly agree with the reasons why we are still their these days but why we entered in both 1991 and after 9/11 seems to be forgotten with some responses to my post.
I dont usually rant at all, but one of the things I have to defend is when I read things that completely ignore the work I and our forces have/are doing to keep all as safe in bed every night as is possible. Someone has to do the dirty work to ensure that happens.
I could have been clearer in my meaning of "3rd world" and "cowards", although it would still be a 3rd world country without any war going on.
When I said "cowards" i simply meant by blowing innocents up, shooting from mosques, using women and children as cover etc etc
But moving on ... I think its fantastic that someone with the position and comforts Harry has at his beckon is man enough to serve .. and also the Queen for sending her grandchild to carry out his duty;.
My attitude has its moments but I am man enough to either explain them and if wrong amend any, I realise that type doesnt always convey the nature of things too.
But hey ... it'd be boring if everyone were the same surely.
Have a good weekend everyone and stay safe
J smile