1 Re: the twin-tailed blue-eyed blond -- if it weren't for the guns, I'd argue she was the Ark Royal.  You could fly planes off those decks...

2 Actually, the strange part of that picture is that her red jacket is British Army dress uniform. The Royal Navy has never used red uniforms.

3

I got curious and went back and found that third image again. All those are British shipgirls from the Chinese game that's competing with Kancolle.

And though most of you (probably all of you) know this, then just for completeness, "Si vis pacem, para bellum" is a Roman aphorism that means "If you seek peace, prepare for war." The 9x19 Parabellum pistol cartridge is named for this aphorism.

4  Mystery TwinTail is, allegedly HMS Dreadnaught, however, this seems dubious as that ship had no secondary turrets and.....was never fitted with flying off platforms.

5 Mystery TwinTail is, allegedly HMS Dreadnaught

Perhaps the smaller turrets symbolize HMS Dreadnought's wing turrets?   But clearly the "flying off platforms" are the ship's innovative turbines.

6 I toasted Hirohito's death when it finally came.

I toasted the first Elizabeth's death at an Outback dinner.

I couldn't stand either ceremony extolling the supposed virtue of these megalomaniac psychopaths; one willing to command every deluded Japanese man, woman and child to their deaths so he could save his own skin, the other an Honor-less wench who was willing to see her people conquered if only to rule as a puppet monarch for the Continent.

I will toast Elizabeth's death as well.

And I will raise a glass to our Founders who, Praise the Lord, broke the false religion and psychological yoke of self-styled God-Kings and Emperors.

7

I toasted the first Elizabeth's death at an Outback dinner.

Are you talking about the Queen Mother?

Because Elizabeth I died in 1603.

8

Are you talking about the Queen Mother?

Because Elizabeth I died in 1603.

Why yes, my good man.  And the same was true for her husband George - the Third. He died a couple of centuries ago, but in spite of their posh lifestyles, I'm outlasting all of these limey Royals. 

Bottom's up!

9

Whatever other faults the English monarchy has, 'God-kings' has not been an issue ever since the Glorious Revolution.

I guess you would take issue with Alexander Hamilton too.

10

Whatever other faults the English monarchy has, 'God-kings' has not been an issue ever since the Glorious Revolution.

False.

The issue of Divine Right was an overriding Royal crutch leading right up to the American Revolution, long after the "Glorious Revolution".

It was during this time that British Loyalists (Tories), Parliamentarians, Aristocracy, the Anglican Church, etc, condemned Americans in religious terms - and these pronouncements were perfectly in keeping with the over-arching philosophy of the time:

A) It is God's Will that the King rules.

B) The King delegates this Power to his Lords/Nobles/Aristocracy.

C) The Lords/Nobles/Aristocracy govern the King's "subjects" (a term derived from the latin "subiugare" which literally means "to place under the yoke").

This is not a philosophy of causality, but one of temporal and spiritual resolution.  "The way things are" or "God's Will" so to speak.

So it was perfectly normal for the Church of England (actually, anybody of official or high position to include bureaucrats and academics) to swear allegiance to the King (the religious icon and head of the Established Religion and Imperial Church) under God and with hand on the Good Book; to obey/support him in all things in accordance to that holy Oath, including the condemnation of heretics like George Washington.

Today, Americans swear a derived Oath of Allegiance to the Constitution, not to a King.  The Oath of Supremacy alone would outrage Americans if they were taught the heresies of the British Empire.

For the British in 1776 (and British Loyalists), the American rebels weren't just committing treason.

For the British, they were committing an act against God.

By the reckoning of both sides, the American Revolution was a religious war which sought (and succeeded) to turn the prevailing World Order upside-down.

A) It is God's Will that the King People rule.

B) The King People delegate this Power to the Nobles/Lords/Aristocracy Legislature/Judiciary/Government.

C) The Nobles/Lords/Aristocracy Legislature/Judiciary/Government submits Laws to the King President.

The Glorious Revolution had nothing to do with this awakening (jsut as Magna Carta had nothing to do with our Founding documents). 

It is one thing for a supposed God-King to be stripped of Power by men who seek themselves to be God-Kings, who then reinstate a separate system based on the same phony Divine Right to delude a subjugated "peasantry". 

But it is entirely another matter for an otherwise unremarkable and fallible man to hold in his hands the Divine Right of a King - only to relinquish it willingly.  That is a moment that can truly be called "Divine", for it broke the spell of any future God-King over the American People. 

That - and not the "Glorious Revolution".

11

I guess you would take issue with Alexander Hamilton too.

I have no problem with getting side-tracked and debating along with someone if they decide to go off on tangents, but given some blog-owner might not appreciate long-winded responses to loaded, but off-topic, jibes...let's get back on topic:

Elizabeth II, God bless her, has been Queen of England (and Scotland and Canada and Australia and Wales and not the United States) my whole life.

Yesterday the voters of the UK decided there should continue to be a UK for Elizabeth to be Queen of.

Steven, these are statements based on a false assumption.

You assume, if obliquely, that Elizabeth II would be pleased with the Brexit vote to leave the EU.

You are wrong.

Aside from the fact that the postwar British Crown is historically for European integration, this is more about the Queen Mother and her regnant daughter personally, rather than a prejudice of history going back before the hundred Year's War.  It's their personal history; specifically, their role in the pre-war and WW2 era where one faction favored allying with the United States (led by King Edward and his understudy, Winston Churchill) and the other faction which envisioned a European alliance (led by the Queen Mother and her understudy, Neville Chamberlain).

Long story short,  the Queen Mother, George, and their daughter have ever been supportive of integration on the continent in the interests of Her Majesty's Royal Court.  And when that plan failed spectacularly, instead of doing everything in their power to prevent disaster and at the knowing cost to their subjects, their one unerring concern was to exile Edward to protect their reign.

I don't care about the British People (We are not "cousins", and I am not enthusiastic about the Brexit result for differing reasons), but there is something wanton and unseemly about foreigners who sell out their own people - even when they're selling out to my country. 

For this, I abhor Elizabeth II, as surely as I abhor Hillary.

I will sake my abhorrence of both when they meet the Lord.

12 Enough, OK? This was just a cheesecake post, nothing more.