New Royal Baby

Gamers can also use this forum to chat about any game related subject, news, rumours etc.

Moderator: maddog986

User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Neilster
ORIGINAL: Hertston
ORIGINAL: Neilster

BTW, my Scottish mates want them to bugger off. They'd also like a proper, independent country like everyone else, please, and English people who bang on about their poxy pretend parliament tend to get punched repeatedly in the head [;)]

The above represents the situation advocates of Scottish independence like to pretend exists. The reality is that every time they have a poll a greater number of English people think Scotland should be independent than Scottish people do! Informing Scots of this usually produces looks of bafflement and prolonged silences that are most entertaining, as the implications sink in. [;)]
But I mentioned it because it's the situation that actually exists among my Scottish mates. [;)]

Cheers, Neilster
warspite1

I think you missed the point mate. I'm sure your Scottish mates think as they say - and fair play that's their choice. But the point - and its a serious one - is be careful what you wish for.

It is hard, if not impossible, to see how the generous healthcare and education benefits Scotland receive at present - much better than we in England receive - will be able to continue once the English are not around to pay for it.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
Neilster
Posts: 3010
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:52 pm
Location: Devonport, Tasmania, Australia

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by Neilster »

I think you missed the point mate. I'm sure your Scottish mates think as they say - and fair play that's their choice. But the point - and its a serious one - is be careful what you wish for.

It is hard, if not impossible, to see how the generous healthcare and education benefits Scotland receive at present - much better than we in England receive - will be able to continue once the English are not around to pay for it.

There's no point for me to miss. I live in a properly independent country where we run all our affairs. I don't care about the economics of your Greater British Co-Prosperity Sphere [:)]

Cheers, Neilster
Cheers, Neilster
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Neilster
I think you missed the point mate. I'm sure your Scottish mates think as they say - and fair play that's their choice. But the point - and its a serious one - is be careful what you wish for.

It is hard, if not impossible, to see how the generous healthcare and education benefits Scotland receive at present - much better than we in England receive - will be able to continue once the English are not around to pay for it.

I live in a properly independent country where we run all our affairs. I don't care about the economics of your Greater British Co-Prosperity Sphere [:)]

Cheers, Neilster
warspite1

I won't bother answering that one. There's only one way this will end up and I have too much respect for Australia, and the Aussies generally, to head there.


Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: Neilster

There's no point for me to miss. I live in a properly independent country where we run all our affairs. I don't care about the economics of your Greater British Co-Prosperity Sphere [:)]

Cheers, Neilster

Taking GB out of this equation, there's still a lesson to be learned, for those willing to hear it Neilster. One need look no further than Canada to see a provincial separatist movement rear its head occasionally-threatening not only itself, but the rest of the national stability. Could the Quebecois maintain their very high standard of living as an independent country without the largess of the rest of Canada? Doubtful.

We could delve into the politics of 'protectorates' or 'territories' of the US deriving some benefit without 'paying into' the system what they yield too. Puerto Rico and Guam would be good places to start.

Lastly, I can't believe that there has been no talk *ever* about one of the original six federated colonies taking their marbles and going home, pointing the dirty finger at the others that "don't pull their weight".

It's the nature of the beast, mate. We get 'splitters' that want to separate North Colorado from South Colorado, North California from South California, Texas (and most other states) from the Union, etc. every flipping year. They're just brushed off as blowing off steam. They're disaffected in general and blinded about the self-serving impracticality of developing their own system of governance.

It's got nothing to do with being properly democratically run. It's about letting the fringe elements blow off their steam, but understand fully the costs of their frustrated secessional goals. Usually cooler heads prevail.

Image
User avatar
Neilster
Posts: 3010
Joined: Mon Oct 27, 2003 1:52 pm
Location: Devonport, Tasmania, Australia

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by Neilster »

Taking GB out of this equation, there's still a lesson to be learned, for those willing to hear it Neilster.

Cool. Then they should learn it or whatever. I'm familiar with the concept. There's a long running secessionist movement in Western Australia but here it's based on economically powerful states or areas wanting to go it alone.

This doesn't have anything to do with me though. I was just reporting what my Scottish friends think.

Cheers, Neilster
Cheers, Neilster
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by Chickenboy »

Aye. I've got some Scottish friends too that have talked about this movement over the years. They pretty typically realize that such an effort, if realized, will be disastrous to their economy. Of course, they're pretty level-headed. Mostly, they derive 'mileage' from sticking it in the eye of the English, but they hope it doesn't go further than that. Kind of like the Quebecois.
Image
User avatar
Yogi the Great
Posts: 1949
Joined: Tue Apr 10, 2007 1:28 pm
Location: Wisconsin

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by Yogi the Great »

Sounds like a new movie and game could come out of this.

Braveheart 2 [;)]
Hooked Since AH Gettysburg
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Chickenboy

Aye. I've got some Scottish friends too that have talked about this movement over the years. They pretty typically realize that such an effort, if realized, will be disastrous to their economy. Of course, they're pretty level-headed. Mostly, they derive 'mileage' from sticking it in the eye of the English, but they hope it doesn't go further than that. Kind of like the Quebecois.
warspite1

Deleted.
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Zorch
Posts: 7087
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:21 pm

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by Zorch »

What incredible foresight my friend and his wife had!

Their son is named George, and was born on July 22 (some 20 years ago).
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Zorch

What incredible foresight my friend and his wife had!

Their son is named George, and was born on July 22 (some 20 years ago).
warspite1

Right, so basically, the Royal couple just copied your friend. They should have a word - that's not cricket [:-]
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Zorch
Posts: 7087
Joined: Sun Mar 07, 2010 4:21 pm

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by Zorch »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Zorch

What incredible foresight my friend and his wife had!

Their son is named George, and was born on July 22 (some 20 years ago).
warspite1

Right, so basically, the Royal couple just copied your friend. They should have a word - that's not cricket [:-]

Ironically, George's nickname has always been "King".
User avatar
PunkReaper
Posts: 1003
Joined: Wed Aug 23, 2006 6:27 pm
Location: England

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by PunkReaper »

British press on royal birth

Image

Image
Attachments
image.jpg
image.jpg (132.66 KiB) Viewed 430 times
image.jpg
image.jpg (70.87 KiB) Viewed 431 times
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by warspite1 »

You always know you've won an argument when the opposition resort to lies and untruths.

- Private Eye is a satirical magazine - its headline, which is actually quite funny, is more about the fact that the news occupied the papers and news programs for days rather than any anti-royalist sentiment.

The Daily Mail front page was of course completely made up. The royals do not live off the state - they work damn hard for this country and bring in millions.

How the birth was really reported

Image

Image

Image
Attachments
MailOnline008.jpg
MailOnline008.jpg (36.92 KiB) Viewed 430 times
483716616x9940x529.jpg
483716616x9940x529.jpg (96.97 KiB) Viewed 430 times
RoyalBaby..sPhotos.jpg
RoyalBaby..sPhotos.jpg (143.14 KiB) Viewed 430 times
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
User avatar
catwhoorg
Posts: 686
Joined: Thu Sep 27, 2012 3:47 pm
Location: Uk expat lving near Atlanta

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by catwhoorg »

Was actually back over that side of the pond, I thought the coverage of the event was pitched pretty much at the right level.

Newspapers went a bit more crazy than the TV.

Congrats to the Royal couple.

I didn't have interweb access, but I did call Louis as a middle name to my family. (after Louis Mountbatten obviously)
Image
User avatar
Toby42
Posts: 1630
Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2003 11:34 pm
Location: Central Florida

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by Toby42 »

ORIGINAL: catwhoorg

Was actually back over that side of the pond, I thought the coverage of the event was pitched pretty much at the right level.

Newspapers went a bit more crazy than the TV.

Congrats to the Royal couple.

I didn't have interweb access, but I did call Louis as a middle name to my family. (after Louis Mountbatten obviously)

Before the name was announced, I told my wife that Alexander would be a good first name. Missed it by thaaat much [:)]
Tony
User avatar
Chickenboy
Posts: 24648
Joined: Fri Jun 28, 2002 11:30 pm
Location: San Antonio, TX

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by Chickenboy »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

You always know you've won an argument when the opposition resort to lies and untruths.

- Private Eye is a satirical magazine - its headline, which is actually quite funny, is more about the fact that the news occupied the papers and news programs for days rather than any anti-royalist sentiment.

The Daily Mail front page was of course completely made up. The royals do not live off the state - they work damn hard for this country and bring in millions.

How the birth was really reported

Image

Image

Image


Aye. According to the Sydney Herald (lower right), they have the entire heirarchy of the royal family tree on the page with the comment that "they will all go to PNG" below. Are the royals going to Port Moresby for vacation or getaway? Seems a bit distant for a little fun in the sun, idnit?
Image
User avatar
Curtis Lemay
Posts: 15411
Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2004 3:12 pm
Location: Houston, TX

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by Curtis Lemay »

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

I was secretly hoping for:

Tarquin Fin-Tim-Lin-Bin-Whin-Bim-Lim-Bus-Stop-F'tang-F'tang-Olé-Biscuitbarrel.

Oh well. Maybe next time.
warspite1

Yeah it was very close to happening too. There were lots of heated arguments between the Royal Family members overheard on Tuesday evening by the nursing staff. However, try as she might, The Queen just could not get William and Kate to go along with it..... so they got their way with plain old George.

Well, now they have a second chance. Let's hope that common sense prevails this time.
My TOAW web site:

Bob Cross's TOAW Site
User avatar
warspite1
Posts: 42130
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 1:06 pm
Location: England

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by warspite1 »

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

ORIGINAL: warspite1

ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay

I was secretly hoping for:

Tarquin Fin-Tim-Lin-Bin-Whin-Bim-Lim-Bus-Stop-F'tang-F'tang-Olé-Biscuitbarrel.

Oh well. Maybe next time.
warspite1

Yeah it was very close to happening too. There were lots of heated arguments between the Royal Family members overheard on Tuesday evening by the nursing staff. However, try as she might, The Queen just could not get William and Kate to go along with it..... so they got their way with plain old George.

Well, now they have a second chance. Let's hope that common sense prevails this time.
warspite1

'Fraid not. They have eschewed Tarquin Fin-Tim etc etc for plain old Charlotte. It seems common sense has no place in the Royal Household...[&:]

[:D]

But in all seriousness - congratulations to the Royal Couple, Prince George and of course little Princess Charlotte



Image

Image
Attachments
royal-baby..revealed.jpg
royal-baby..revealed.jpg (62.26 KiB) Viewed 430 times
Portal_clo..3289614b.jpg
Portal_clo..3289614b.jpg (78.95 KiB) Viewed 430 times
Now Maitland, now's your time!

Duke of Wellington to 1st Guards Brigade - Waterloo 18 June 1815
Aurelian
Posts: 4090
Joined: Mon Feb 26, 2007 2:08 pm

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by Aurelian »

Her Royal Highness Princess Charlotte Elizabeth Diana of Cambridge.

4th in line to the throne.
Building a new PC.
gradenko2k
Posts: 930
Joined: Mon Dec 27, 2010 6:08 am

RE: New Royal Baby

Post by gradenko2k »

-10 opinion towards Prince George. She'll be starting a Plot soon, too.
Post Reply

Return to “General Discussion”