Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- British Empire

[ VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5, 6, 7 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 08:44:47 05/18/08 Sun
Author: Jack
Author Host/IP: phoebe.bcuc.ac.uk / 192.149.238.37
Subject: Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire?
In reply to: Latham 's message, "Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire?" on 15:04:45 05/17/08 Sat

so you say the soveriegn is greater then the people? i cannot agree. Those imperial days are over and its already been mentioned, but its due to our inability to adapt. Those individuals lived in a different time, and those individuals of the empires days had something to gain from the monarch, in world war 1 which was so devasting those who faught in the war didnt want anything like that to occur again for king or not. world war two got off to a relectant start, and the fact the royal family had the option of going to canada isnt right even though they stuck to their duty,but when was the last time a monarch had faught for their country like they used to? Sure Harry went to afghanistan, but he may never be monarch and how long was he there? Also during the world wars we faught for our own freedom the king was a symbol of the country, but im sure if Winston Churhill had been president, we would have been equally devoted to him and a republic as we were to the king and to Winston Churchill as prime minister.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- Latham, 13:54:47 05/24/08 Sat
- Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- Jack, 01:35:52 05/25/08 Sun
  - Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- Latham, 06:09:30 05/27/08 Tue
    - Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- Jack, 17:28:18 05/27/08 Tue
      - Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- Latham, 14:49:13 05/29/08 Thu
        Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- RMW Stanford, 15:26:56 05/29/08 Thu
        Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- Latham, 18:04:39 06/02/08 Mon
        Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- Jack, 06:31:55 06/03/08 Tue
        Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- RMW Stanford, 10:56:56 06/04/08 Wed
        Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- Latham, 17:56:34 06/12/08 Thu
        Re: is the break up of the UK a direct result of the loss of the British Empire? -- Jack, 08:18:28 05/30/08 Fri

[ VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
* Notice: Posting problems? [ Click here ]
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
Message subject (required):

Name (required):

Expression ^{(Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)}

E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:
>so you say the soveriegn is greater then the people? i >cannot agree. Those imperial days are over and its >already been mentioned, but its due to our inability >to adapt. Those individuals lived in a different time, >and those individuals of the empires days had >something to gain from the monarch, in world war 1 >which was so devasting those who faught in the war >didnt want anything like that to occur again for king >or not. world war two got off to a relectant start, >and the fact the royal family had the option of going >to canada isnt right even though they stuck to their >duty,but when was the last time a monarch had faught >for their country like they used to? Sure Harry went >to afghanistan, but he may never be monarch and how >long was he there? Also during the world wars we >faught for our own freedom the king was a symbol of >the country, but im sure if Winston Churhill had been >president, we would have been equally devoted to him >and a republic as we were to the king and to Winston >Churchill as prime minister.
Choose Message Icon: [ View Emoticons ]

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums^(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2008 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.