Wot No Screaming About Cameron's Gaffe?

BBKing · 21-07-2010, 22:10

I do believe David Cameron insulted the memory of The Few today, by claiming that the UK was the 'junior partner' in fighting the Nazis in 1940. Perhaps he needs to attend one of Mr. Gove's Academies?

[serious point: It's probably a slip of the tongue and Gordon Brown would have been absolutely crucified if he'd said this, wouldn't he?]

Xaccers · 21-07-2010, 22:25

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cameron talking about the special relationship between the UK and the US

"I think it is important in life to speak as it is and the fact is that we are a very effective partner of the US but we are the junior partner," he said.

"We were the junior partner in 1940 when we were fighting the Nazis."

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we weren't the junior partner, ie the senior and controlling partner, wouldn't we have been able to get the US to send troops in the beginning rather than them having to be bombed by Japan to give us more than financial support?

**Damien** · 21-07-2010, 22:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKing

I do believe David Cameron insulted the memory of The Few today, by claiming that the UK was the 'junior partner' in fighting the Nazis in 1940. Perhaps he needs to attend one of Mr. Gove's Academies?

[serious point: It's probably a slip of the tongue and Gordon Brown would have been absolutely crucified if he'd said this, wouldn't he?]

Who cares? Yes If Brown did it he would be crucified but so will Cameron when he becomes unpopular.

Osem · 21-07-2010, 22:27

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKing

I do believe David Cameron insulted the memory of The Few today, by claiming that the UK was the 'junior partner' in fighting the Nazis in 1940. Perhaps he needs to attend one of Mr. Gove's Academies?

Why, are they going to specialise in how to avoid unintentional mistakes?

Quote:

Originally Posted by BBKing

[serious point: It's probably a slip of the tongue and Gordon Brown would have been absolutely crucified if he'd said this, wouldn't he?]

Yes Brown would have copped the flak and Cameron's going to cop some too but it won't be on the same scale because the electorate aren't yet fed up to the back teeth of him as they were with his predecessor. It'll be interesting to see if/how Cameron acknowledges his mistake.

Anyway it's being covered by plenty of the media so far as I can see, even that well known unofficial Tory mouthpiece is having a pop or is it all partisan tabloid lies?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...l-Harbour.html

Peter_ · 21-07-2010, 22:33

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osem

Why, are they going to specialise in how to avoid unintentional mistakes?

.

That was not an unintentional mistake it was an idiotic one made by another UK prime minister all to ready to kiss a US presidents butt.

TheDaddy · 21-07-2010, 22:38

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Correct me if I'm wrong, but if we weren't the junior partner, ie the senior and controlling partner, wouldn't we have been able to get the US to send troops in the beginning rather than them having to be bombed by Japan to give us more than financial support?

Point is we weren't the junior partner in 1940, we were the only partner. Imo it isn't a major gaffe though.

Osem · 21-07-2010, 22:43

Quote:

Originally Posted by Masque

That was not an unintentional mistake it was an idiotic one made by another UK prime minister all to ready to kiss a US presidents butt.

Idiotic maybe but intentional definitely not, hence the term 'gaffe'.

Mr Angry · 21-07-2010, 22:52

It's been a day for gaffes.

Earlier we heard Clegg make reference to the illegal invasion of Iraq.

Xaccers · 21-07-2010, 22:54

Quote:

Originally Posted by TheDaddy

Point is we weren't the junior partner in 1940, we were the only partner. Imo it isn't a major gaffe though.

Point is in 1940 the US were giving support but not being the senior partner, we couldn't convince them to get more involved.
The Destroyers for Bases agreement was in 1940 for instance.

Peter_ · 21-07-2010, 22:59

Quote:

Originally Posted by Osem

Idiotic maybe but intentional definitely not, hence the term 'gaffe'.

The Battle of Britain was fought during the summer and autumn of 1940 and the United States played no part in that whatsoever, and they only declared war on the AXIS powers after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour on the morning of December 7, 1941.

Up to this point in time we had been at war for over 2 years, I would call it idiotic and insulting to the men and women of this country and the commonwealth who were at war with Germany at that time.

As I said another UK prime minister who is all to easily able to fall in line with US policy and kiss butt.

Xaccers · 21-07-2010, 23:03

Quote:

Originally Posted by Masque

The Battle of Britain was fought during the summer and autumn of 1940 and the United States played no part in that whatsoever, and they only declared war on the AXIS powers after the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbour on the morning of December 7, 1941.

Up to this point in time we had been at war for over 2 years, I would call it idiotic and insulting to the men and women of this country and the commonwealth who were at war with Germany at that time.

As I said another UK prime minister who is all to easily able to fall in line with US policy and kiss butt.

Except he didn't say "during the battle of britain we were the junior partner to the US" but hey, why let facts get in the way right?

Peter_ · 21-07-2010, 23:05

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Point is in 1940 the US were giving support but not being the senior partner, we couldn't convince them to get more involved.
The Destroyers for Bases agreement was in 1940 for instance.

America was not a partner in any sense of the word as we stood alone in 1940 while the US supplied us with 50 old destroyers under lend lease which actually started in March 1941

---------- Post added at 23:05 ---------- Previous post was at 23:04 ----------

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xaccers

Except he didn't say "during the battle of britain we were the junior partner to the US" but hey, why let facts get in the way right?

You cannot be a junior member to the US in a war that they were not actually involved in and that actually is a fact.

Xaccers · 21-07-2010, 23:06

Quote:

Originally Posted by Masque

America was not a partner in any sense of the word as we stood alone in 1940 while the US supplied us with 50 old destroyers under lend lease which actually started in March 1941

The destroyers for bases took place in 1940, lend lease act was different and came in 1941.

Peter_ · 21-07-2010, 23:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Xaccers

The destroyers for bases took place in 1940, lend lease act was different and came in 1941.

Yes quite right my error.

But in 1940 were not a junior partner in the Second World War because we were the only partner.

Xaccers · 21-07-2010, 23:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by Masque

You cannot be a junior member to the US in a war that they were not actually involved in and that actually is a fact.

Again, he didn't say "we were a junior partner to the US in war" he said we were a junior partner to the US while we were at war.
It's like saying the mujahideen in Afghanistan in the 80's weren't partners of the US because the US wasn't at war with the Soviet Union.