Left Out of D-Day Events, Queen Elizabeth Is Fuming

#1
OrangeEmpire

OrangeEmpire

The White Debonair
Joined
Nov 28, 2005
Messages
74,988
Likes
60
#1
The New York Times > Log In

Indeed, she is decidedly displeased, angry even, that she was not invited to join President Obama and France’s president, Nicolas Sarkozy, next week at commemorations of the 65th anniversary of the D-Day landings in Normandy, according to reports published in Britain’s mass-circulation tabloid newspapers on Wednesday. Pointedly, Buckingham Palace did not deny the reports.
The queen, who is 83, is the only living head of state who served in uniform during World War II. As Elizabeth Windsor, service number 230873, she volunteered as a subaltern in the Women’s Auxiliary Territorial Service, training as a driver and a mechanic. Eventually, she drove military trucks in support roles in England.
While serving, she met the supreme Allied commander for the D-Day landings, Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower, and developed a fondness for him, according to several biographies. This prompted Queen Elizabeth, who was crowned in June 1953, to say in later years that he was the American president with whom she felt most at ease.
But on June 6, when Mr. Obama and Mr. Sarkozy attend commemorations at the iconic locations associated with the American D-Day assault — Utah Beach, the town of Ste.-Mère-Église, where the first United States paratroopers landed, and the American war cemetery at Colleville-sur-Mer — the highest-ranking British representative will be Prime Minister Gordon Brown. His main role will be at ceremonies at the town of Arromanches, near the beaches where British troops landed.
How the queen came to be excluded has become entangled in a thicket of diplomatic missteps, or misunderstandings, depending on whether the account is given in London or Paris. The French have said officially that they regard the commemorations in the American sector of the landings as “primarily a Franco-American ceremony,” and that it was up to the British to decide who should represent Britain — in other words, that Mr. Brown was at fault for not seeking an invitation for the queen.
The French have also said the Brown government was slow to accept that the ceremonies merited more than a modest British involvement, since British policy had been to give full-scale government backing only to commemorations at decade-long intervals.
Click to expand...

Thoughts?
 
#7
#7
I wonder if Obama will remember to take the lens covers foff the binoculars.

It'll also be interesting to see if there is a little pile of rocks, strategically placed by an aide, he can solemnly arrange into a small cross.

Will he apologize for the massive carbon footprint generated by the Allied Invasion?

$1 says he'll find some way during his teleprompter-aided speech to blame George W. Bush for something
 
#8
#8
Weren't there sectors that were primarily Candian and British beaches? Let her go there.

The American sectors were the ones that took the most casualties anyway.
 
#10
#10
MG1968 said:
I wonder if Obama will remember to take the lens covers foff the binoculars.

It'll also be interesting to see if there is a little pile of rocks, strategically placed by an aide, he can solemnly arrange into a small cross.

Will he apologize for the massive carbon footprint generated by the Allied Invasion?

$1 says he'll find some way during his teleprompter-aided speech to blame George W. Bush for something
Click to expand...

Oh yeah, he will say D-day was the great crusade and not the war on terror like the previous administration.
 
#11
#11
rjd970 said:
Weren't there sectors that were primarily Candian and British beaches? Let her go there.

The American sectors were the ones that took the most casualties anyway.
Click to expand...

Why in the world wouldn't you have her at a D-Day ceremony?

:dunno:
 
#12
#12
She must want to download some pictures or music on that shiney new MP3 player. Figures she can score some free stuff from her boy.
 
#15
#15
She should just show up!
I don't think or imagine they would turn her away.

England and France have a history of showing up on each other's door step uninvited.
 
#16
#16
rjd970 said:
Weren't there sectors that were primarily Candian and British beaches? Let her go there.

The American sectors were the ones that took the most casualties anyway.
Click to expand...

In the running for dumbest post ever. How does the fact that the Germans were alert at Omaha make us more important in establishing the beachhead than were the British and Canadiens at Sword, Gold, anD Juno? Remember, we camee ashore basically unopposed at Utah. I can't get over how many people are so glad to ignore the contributions of our Allies in the 2 World Wars.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#17
#17
JTrainDavis said:
In the running for dumbest post ever. How does the fact that the Germans were alert at Omaha make us more important in establishing the beachhead than were the British and Canadiens at Sword, Gold, anD Juno? Remember, we camee ashore basically unopposed at Utah. I can't get over how many people are so glad to ignore the contributions of our Allies in the 2 World Wars.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

Russia won the war in Europe.

We, USA, England etc had mop up duty.
 
#20
#20
JTrainDavis said:
In the running for dumbest post ever. How does the fact that the Germans were alert at Omaha make us more important in establishing the beachhead than were the British and Canadiens at Sword, Gold, anD Juno? Remember, we camee ashore basically unopposed at Utah. I can't get over how many people are so glad to ignore the contributions of our Allies in the 2 World Wars.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
Click to expand...

And this is in the running for the most misguided post ever. Completely missed the point of what I was saying.

I simply meant there were other British sectors that she could visit for these ceremonies. She is, afterall, British. And I'm not ignoring anything. But the simple fact of the matter is without us there is no way the Western front gets opened, and I hardly think that the British army would have accomplished much anyway with Montgomery as there best general. All the allies contributed, sure, but is there any doubt that other than the soviets, we contributed more than anybody else to ultimate victory Europe?
 
#22
#22
rjd970 said:
And this is in the running for the most misguided post ever. Completely missed the point of what I was saying.

I simply meant there were other British sectors that she could visit for these ceremonies. She is, afterall, British. And I'm not ignoring anything. But the simple fact of the matter is without us there is no way the Western front gets opened, and I hardly think that the British army would have accomplished much anyway with Montgomery as there best general. All the allies contributed, sure, but is there any doubt that other than the soviets, we contributed more than anybody else to ultimate victory Europe?
Click to expand...
regardless how anyone slices it, our logistics capabilities made very clear to the Germans that there was no hope for long term victory.
 
#23
#23
BigPapaVol said:
regardless how anyone slices it, our logistics capabilities made very clear to the Germans that there was no hope for long term victory.
Click to expand...

And the magnitude of our manufacturing capabilities. We were spitting out Sherman's and Bomber's like we did with Chevy's and Ford's.....and we could maintain it for much longer than any of our enemies.

...not to take away from the individual and amazing heroism and accomplishments from our veterens, but I have always maintained that our industrial base is what really won victories in Europe and the Pacific. It simply just couldn't be overcome.
 
Last edited:
#24
#24
OrangeEmpire said:
Russia won the war in Europe.

We, USA, England etc had mop up duty.
Click to expand...

I was arguing with a friend of Russian descent a couple of years ago about their contribution. I will pose this question to you.

Do you think that without the US opening a western front with the British and others there could be any chance of Russian victory without devastation that would have set them back and weakened them to the point they would not have remained a super power after the second world war?

His argument to me was that the US was not needed and they would have eventually come out victorious and most of their infrastructure intact.
 
#25
#25
IMO the Germans had hit their high water mark in the east by the time the french front was opened.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top