Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 25, 2017 17:44:05 GMT
Historical people who have been threaded unfairly by history
So which people do you think history have been unfair on ?
I think Mary I sure she sent 283 protestants to their death. But she wasn`t as bloodthirsty as people think and she was no more violent than other monarchs of her time. I mean her fahter Henry VIII sent more than 50.000 people to the gallows. Mary I was not a great ruler but she was capable and not as bad as history tells us. Also she did pave way for much of Elisabeth I achievments. The nickname "Bloody Mary" was conined by the protestant supporters of her sister Elisabeth I. And it stuck and it wrongly created the perceptuion that she was an evil and bloody woman. But the fact is that she was really no worse than any other of the Tudor Monarchs and other European monarchs of that time. I know its hard for people to accept this its hard to accept that what people have thougth for almost 500 years is wrong.
She was not a great monarch far from it. The point is that she was far from as bad as people think and she was not a bloody evil woman. Frankly both her father and sister are far more deserving of the name bloody than Mary I.
And no i wait to see how long it takes for somebody to call me an idiot for stating a fact
|
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Jul 26, 2017 3:17:22 GMT
I think people were much too harsh on Bruce Ismay for getting into a boat. Other way, the man was going to lose. If he hadn't gotten on, he would have drowned in the freezing waters of the Atlantic, that awful night in April 1912.
|
|
|
|
Post by telegonus on Jul 26, 2017 7:15:23 GMT
Neville Chamberlain: a good man, and a brave one. He made the horrible mistake of taking Hitler at his word. It ruined his career and it killed him. There have been attempts to "resurrect" Chamberlain. A.J.P. Taylor wrote a fine tribute, admitting the man's shortcomings as a politician (frickin' obvious, hey!), admiring his virtues, such as courage. Chamberlain tried, and he tried hard, to bring "peace to our time". He failed. In this he was not alone.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jul 27, 2017 23:33:02 GMT
Herbert Hoover. He does bear his share of responsibility for his naive if not poor reaction to the Great Depression but in some circles, you'd think he deliberately let it worsen out of spite.
|
|
|
|
Post by telegonus on Jul 28, 2017 6:08:14 GMT
Herbert Hoover. He does bear his share of responsibility for his naive if not poor reaction to the Great Depression but in some circles, you'd think he deliberately let it worsen out of spite. Yes, though in Hoover's case I think that he had a basic difficult to like personality that made him an easy target. He was a decent man, and highly intelligent, and charitable, and yet he had no charm, even in his writings. |
|
|
|
Post by bravomailer on Jul 28, 2017 18:35:14 GMT
Neville Chamberlain: a good man, and a brave one. He made the horrible mistake of taking Hitler at his word. It ruined his career and it killed him. There have been attempts to "resurrect" Chamberlain. A.J.P. Taylor wrote a fine tribute, admitting the man's shortcomings as a politician (frickin' obvious, hey!), admiring his virtues, such as courage. Chamberlain tried, and he tried hard, to bring "peace to our time". He failed. In this he was not alone. Chamberlain did not take Hitler at his word. Chamberlain was trying to buy time to build up the British military for what he knew to be an inevitable war with the Third Reich. The only way to buy time was to accept the German takeover of Czechoslovakia. British preparations for war continued even after Chamberlain came to terms with Hitler. It obviously didn't work as the British and French were overwhelmed even after two years of preparation. Furthermore, the agreement alarmed Stalin who thought the western powers were content to see Nazi Germany expand, as long as it did so in an easterly direction. This led Stalin to form the Molotov-Ribbentrop Pact. |
|
|
|
Post by MCDemuth on Jul 29, 2017 5:06:48 GMT
I think people were much too harsh on Bruce Ismay for getting into a boat. Other way, the man was going to lose. If he hadn't gotten on, he would have drowned in the freezing waters of the Atlantic, that awful night in April 1912. I agree. Bruce Ismay was NOT the only man to get into a boat, as they were launched... As it should have been expected... The lifeboats had to be launched quickly... They could not wait forever for women and children to decide to come to the boat deck and board the lifeboats... If the lifeboats all waited to be launched until they were filled to capacity with women and children, Most of the lifeboats would never have been launched, and fewer women and children would have been saved than actually were... Some officers strictly loaded the lifeboats, based on women and children only. Many of these boats that launched early on, were not full, and had many empty seats. Why? Because there were no more women and children standing there waiting to board the lifeboats... Others officers did let men board the lifeboats, when there were no more women and children standing there waiting to board the lifeboats... If the historical records are true... 1.) Bruce Ismay did NOT dress up as a woman to board a lifeboat... 2.) There were no more women and children standing there waiting to board the lifeboat... 3.) There were no men standing there, who wanted to board the lifeboat... 4.) The lifeboat could no longer wait to be launched, and there was still at least one empty seat... Bruce Ismay did nothing wrong at all by boarding the lifeboat. There was no reason why he should allow himself to die, when no one else could be saved. |
|
|
|
Post by koskiewicz on Jul 29, 2017 22:18:15 GMT
...do you mean "threaded like a needle?"
|
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Aug 2, 2017 1:49:34 GMT
I think people were much too harsh on Bruce Ismay for getting into a boat. Other way, the man was going to lose. If he hadn't gotten on, he would have drowned in the freezing waters of the Atlantic, that awful night in April 1912. yeah I laugh at that scene in Titanic when he gets death stared by the officer for getting on a lifeboat lol like damn looks could kill he'd be dead now. |
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Aug 2, 2017 3:05:13 GMT
I think people were much too harsh on Bruce Ismay for getting into a boat. Other way, the man was going to lose. If he hadn't gotten on, he would have drowned in the freezing waters of the Atlantic, that awful night in April 1912. yeah I laugh at that scene in Titanic when he gets death stared by the officer for getting on a lifeboat lol like damn looks could kill he'd be dead now. I think you're thinking of ANTR. In James Cameron's movie, he just gets on, like its entitlement to get off. |
|
|
|
Post by hi224 on Aug 2, 2017 5:47:23 GMT
yeah I laugh at that scene in Titanic when he gets death stared by the officer for getting on a lifeboat lol like damn looks could kill he'd be dead now. I think you're thinking of ANTR. In James Cameron's movie, he just gets on, like its entitlement to get off. no am referring to this scene www.youtube.com/watch?v=NfDZO9QAiEM |
|
|
|
Post by clusium on Aug 2, 2017 15:15:48 GMT
|
|
