Posted on 08/26/2014 3:51:25 AM PDT by Fenhalls555
British diplomats in Washington are apologizing for Twitter posts that made light of the 200th anniversary of their troops torching the White House in the War of 1812.
The apologies were prompted after the British Embassy posted a picture Sunday of Patrick Davis, deputy British ambassador to the United States, with a caption saying he was participating in "the anniversary of burning of the White House with a BBQ.”
The picture was followed by another, about an hour later, that showed a White House replica atop a sheet cake, flanked by sparklers. The caption said: “Commemorating the 200th anniversary of burning the White House. Only sparklers this time!”
Within hours of the tweets, the embassy received several angry Twitter responses and eventually backed off. "Apologies for earlier Tweet. We meant to mark an event in history & celebrate our strong friendship today," the embassy wrote.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
In Hell, the police are German, the chefs are British, and the trains are run by the French.
That much-overworked witticism has long been out of date in all three categories.
OK, I have calmed down a bit, due to lovely weather, soccer results going the way I wanted them to, and going to see Zulu (50th anniversary remastered edition) at the cinema (which is why I haven’t replied for nearly a day).
Firstly, my ‘Nam remark is not rude or shameful or any of the frankly OTT nonsense you have called it. It is not offensive to state a fact. It WOULD have been offensive and shameful if I had ridiculed those who served, or the 58,000 loss of men and women in the war. There is a difference between that (attacking/ridiculing those who fought) and just saying a country lost a war.
America lost the Vietnam war. That’s a fact. Just as the British lost the Revolutionary War. Or Germany lost two world wars. Or Argentina lost the Falklands War. Its simply fact. A statement of fact. And to try and suggest simply stating said fact is somehow offensive to veterans is utterly ridiculous.
Secondly, I only mentioned my ‘goddamn credentials’ when YOU criticised my alleged lack of knowledge. I mentioned my MA in order to tell you that I am actually academically trained in the history we are discussing. With all due respect, YOU opened that particular door and yet you criticise me for stepping forward into it.
Thirdly, I was angry because I have never been and never will be anti-American and would never, ever, ridicule those who served the United States of America. In fact, I would be the first to shake their hand. And buy them a pint. So I will never react gently to anyone accusing me of ridiculing military men and women. I served in the military myself (albeit p/t) and will not allow anyone I see or hear to ridicule the military. I find such a charge as repugnant as accusing me of anti-Semitism or racism.
I am sorry if you misread the reference as such, it was nothing but a repost to another member cheekily and in good humour winding this Limey up about losing the Revolution. In fact, the actual poster took no offence(!) and preceded to wind me up about Dunkirk, which I took in the good spirit intended.
Fourth, I have no problem with the British losing the 1776-83 war. In case you didn’t know, I am a relation of one Alexander Hamilton. And I’d have been a ‘rebel’ in 1776.
They were right in 1776 to fight, they fought only for the rights they deserved and which were being denied them. No, I would have fought at my relation’s side back then, no doubt.
And as a Scotsman, we fought on both sides. The Scots and Ulster Scots (again I have Ulster Scots blood) were in fact the backbone of the victorious American forces. A fact of which I am immensely proud. And can bore people to death with, lol. The tradition of Scottish freedom, from Calgacus through Wallace and Bruce, stood true in 1776 and again prevailed.
As one astute English writer put it: ‘This is not an American revolution, but a Scotch Presbyterian revolution’.
The war was one created by British arrogance and stupidity, and need never have been fought, a tragedy, a war which many forget was deeply unpopular at home, where many, from public to politicians and press, had great sympathy for the ‘rebels’ cause.
As to the armies, I don’t believe the British were defeated by supermen, but I also know that they weren’t defeated by rag-wearing farmers with no shoes and armed with pointed sticks. I hate the romantic history (which I have seen many Americans post here and elsewhere) that has the British defeated by almost pathetic human specimens, where the American armies are so downtrodden and hopeless its almost self-parodic.
That itself is almost an insult to and obscures what the Americans did in seven years to beat the British, how they brilliantly turned things around and built armies and militias capable to winning a war nobody thought they could. THAT is the real history, not some pseudo-romantic ‘The Patriot’ type tosh, with Mel Gibson running about.
As to the book, no I have not read it. It wasn’t part of my academic list as a student, and I couldn’t tell you if it was part of the list for students over here, although I studied the era fairly heavily, as Imperial History was the main basis of my later BA years and also my MA, I didn’t specialise in British America history of the period. I specialised in British military history of the 20th C (MA) and previously specialised in British colonies in India and the Far East (BA). Esp. the Scottish influences on both.
Neither did I read it for fun back then nor have I read it as a layman/lecturer since. I HAVE seen the book in bibliographies, but simply haven’t read it. Thank you for the recommendation. Now after all this, lol, I WILL most definitely read it.
I occasionally have done/ do ‘bank’ lecturing, only ever on Ayrshire or Scottish history. To mature students at a local college. The basic stuff: Roman Scotland, early Scottish kingdoms, Wallace, Bruce, the Wars of Independence, 1715 and 1745, the Union with England. Its what we call ‘pin money’: a few weeks, once a week. A few extra quid that pays a bill or petrol. And I haven’t done it since 2011. Although I am slated to do a course in Jan-May 2015.
Lastly, thank you for your respect for British dead in the US. In fact, your remark has got my thinking about searching for American graves here in Scotland. I would love to find some military graves here and equally pay my respects.
All the best.
Not the bit about British cooking. It’s still foul. Foul. Even in London. Not Ireland though. Weird.
On the contrary, it’s as good as any in the world if you know where to look.
Hi! I read your post and, if you don’t mind, I’ll respond tomorrow. It’s getting a little late where you are and I’ve been working all day and am a little tired and need to start diner. Have a good night!
[. . .what actually won America victory were well trained armies and militias, with good equipment, and led by very good officers and senior commanders.]
I did a little research. The Creek (Indian) War of 1813-1814 brought southern militias to full strength. The fighting, mostly in Alabama and along the Gulf Coast, seasoned the militiamen and officers to wartime military operations, most importantly armed combat.
Where I think I disagree with you is that freepers get most of their knowledge of the history of the Revolution from a Mel Gibson movie. To be honest, I’ve never seen a Mel Gibson movie in which he was the helmer (to use Variety slang). I think we all know he tends to get a little hot under the collar whether in his private or cinematic life. People take short cuts on FR because space is limited and everyone is going from one thread to another in order to find interesting stories. I would say the real experts on FR history are our Civil War commenters which is out of your bailiwick. They really know their stuff.
In talking to my husband who studies the Founding Fathers and the war (Revolution not 1812), he does feel that our army went through many years of struggle before they got their act together - surely the Long Island/NYC campaign is an example. I once lived in Murray Hill (which has not been completely flattened) and would walk towards the East River that separates NYC from Brooklyn and try to imagine the British across the way. If you get hold of “Private Yankee Doodle” (ridiculously expensive now - try ABE Books or a battlefield that sells books online) - he was a part of that embarrassing campaign. His Bilko-esque performance is part of the book’s many charms. And, yes, I’m afraid he did, on occasion, go barefoot. The book is edited by George Scheer who also wrote “Rebels and Redcoats,” an excellent scholarly and readable history. He was a friend of ours in the last few years of his life and he was a wonderful man who was mentored by Douglas Southall Freeman - all three of us had tried to stage “Private Yankee Doodle” (George’s title, I believe, not Martin’s) with the help of composer Jay Ungar but it never came off.
One thing that concerns me and you can tell me - do British students studying this war for an advanced degree read books by American authors? Do they visit the northeastern parts of the USA and walk the battlefields? It worries me that a primary source like Joseph Martin’s is somehow lost in the English sauce.
Hope you enjoyed the remastered edition of “Zulu.” It’s a lulu!
You can’t go to cheap restaurants in England and expect to get a decent meal - same here. London restaurants are some of the best in the world but I’d avoid cheap chains. Treat yourself to a guidebook and you’ll eat like a king.
I own over 50 English cookbooks. I’m actually building a collection; the history of English food is fascinating and appetizing - going back to Roman times. (I’m not crazy about ancient Roman cooking - but medieval is pretty good.)
But I can go to a number of ME countries, Singapore, and many Central European countries and for not very much I can eat like a king.
This is the problem with England, you have to be rich to eat well. That’s not true elsewhere in Europe, here, or in Asia.
You don’t have to be rich to eat well - you just shouldn’t eat in cheap, bad restaurants. Plenty of middle-class restaurants in London and pubs serving good food. When all else fails, we end up at Pizza Express for a very decent pizza and a glass of wine. Good Chinese restaurants in Chinatown in London and the best Indian restaurants - expensive and inexpensive.
Also, English food when prepared well is wonderful. Lancashire Hot Pot, Cottage Pie, Shepherd’s Pie, Bubble and Sqeak, Summer Pudding, Biscuit cake, Christmas cake, mince pies (much tinier than ours), roasts, Yorkshire pudding, Branston Pickle and Cheddar, Stilton cheese, digestive biscuits, potted shrimp, the list goes on and on. I make it all in my home.
1—I didn’t mean freepers per se, I meant Americans in general. I know that Freepers and RightNationers have a higher level generally of knowledge.
2—I’d like to think I stand comparison with anyone here on certain eras of history, and overall. Military history, British military history, 20th C military history, British history, British Imperial History. I’d like to think I am numero uno for example when it comes to Scottish history, also Ulster Scots and Scots-Ulster Scots-American-Canadian history. I have a good to vg knowledge of the American Civil War, but as you said, I will defer to those who are truly encyclopedic on the subject.
3—Yes, British and Irish students will read American works, if they are important primary and secondary works. As I said, I just didn’t happen to study that text as part of my specialisation, as I didn’t specialise in American history. That’s not to say students then and now didnt.
4—Yes, Zulu on the big screen is amazing, even without the remastered sound and picture, both of which were so clear. I have now via the GFT Glasgow, managed to see several classic epics, war films and classic films that I am too young to have seen in their 50s to 70s heyday. Even a Bond classic or two. And older films from the 20’s and 30’s, such as Dr Caligari, Nosferatu, Metropolis, M.........
Stop woman, you’re making me hungry.
50 English cookbooks in my collection - the newest one being the classic “Good Things in England” which was published in 1932. I think they were still on the Imperial system, thank God, for this American.
Just saw Metropolis. What a film. Brigette Helm knocked me out. Have you seen the Pabst movies with Louise Brooks? She was unforgettable.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.