Spare

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had wondered about the big picture of H (and M) trashing his family and the long term prospect of the BRF. Here's an article that touches on that:

https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3784176-the-trouble-with-harry-and-meghan/

Assigning them responsibility for UK national security is a bit much, don't you think? They're well on their way to becoming C-list celebrities. Who really cares abut any of this drivel, beyond the mild entertainment offered by salacious petty gossip.

+1 In fact Britain might be more secure as a true democracy, rather than bowing and curtsying to a bunch of mediocre inbred German descendants.

+2 Referring to Charles's figurehead-only-role as military head is ridiculous.

Which is more ridiculous, having Trump as Commander-in-Chief or Biden?

Neither. Y'all are being ridiculous. We have a head of state. The UK has a head of state. These are important, respected roles.

You don't seem the grasp the fundamental difference between the two. The British monarch doesn't make any military decisions; that role has been officially remanded to the Prime Minister and Defence Office. He is kept informed but has no real authority beyond approving military appointments at a certain rank.

Yes, we have combined some roles whereas other countries have separated them. Different countries do things differently. But not wrong, just because they don't do it the way we do.

I don't think the PPs were criticizing the way defense roles have been institutionalized in the UK, far from it. Who wants that kind of power in the hands of any unelected person? The point is that assigning any national security significance to H&M's critique of the royal family is nutty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The account of the altercation, frankly, paints Harry in a light that's too precious to sympathize with. I mean William's not much better but at least his vices are easy to understand.

But Harry? The broken necklace? the broken dog bowl? (what's it made of, crystal? what type of dog bowl breaks when a man falls on top of it?) The shards cutting his delicate skin? The therapist on speed dial?

It's all a bit much.

It’s insane. It doesn’t hold water with how fights happen.

William is a bully. That much is clear.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The account of the altercation, frankly, paints Harry in a light that's too precious to sympathize with. I mean William's not much better but at least his vices are easy to understand.

But Harry? The broken necklace? the broken dog bowl? (what's it made of, crystal? what type of dog bowl breaks when a man falls on top of it?) The shards cutting his delicate skin? The therapist on speed dial?

It's all a bit much.

It’s insane. It doesn’t hold water with how fights happen.

William is a bully. That much is clear.

So was this knock-down-drag-out fight the fight about Meghan bullying the staff and Harry not wanting to hear about it? That fight?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If H wanted a family, why not embrace M's? Oh wait, she's on the outs (or paying them). How is this different?

As far as leaks, M was leaking so much she couldn't hold water. But no one else can leak? GMAF

These two deserve what they get.

it may be a long time coming, but eventually, her mom will die and they'll find out how alone they've made themselves.

They won't be together at that point.

Hoping for it, aren't you?

For the sake of their kids, no. But I find their craven money grabs gross, and can't see how that makes for a good foundation for any relationship.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If H wanted a family, why not embrace M's? Oh wait, she's on the outs (or paying them). How is this different?

As far as leaks, M was leaking so much she couldn't hold water. But no one else can leak? GMAF

These two deserve what they get.

it may be a long time coming, but eventually, her mom will die and they'll find out how alone they've made themselves.

And they’ll be thankfully that much more sane for it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had wondered about the big picture of H (and M) trashing his family and the long term prospect of the BRF. Here's an article that touches on that:

https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3784176-the-trouble-with-harry-and-meghan/

Assigning them responsibility for UK national security is a bit much, don't you think? They're well on their way to becoming C-list celebrities. Who really cares abut any of this drivel, beyond the mild entertainment offered by salacious petty gossip.

+1 In fact Britain might be more secure as a true democracy, rather than bowing and curtsying to a bunch of mediocre inbred German descendants.

+2 Referring to Charles's figurehead-only-role as military head is ridiculous.

Which is more ridiculous, having Trump as Commander-in-Chief or Biden?

Neither. Y'all are being ridiculous. We have a head of state. The UK has a head of state. These are important, respected roles.

You don't seem the grasp the fundamental difference between the two. The British monarch doesn't make any military decisions; that role has been officially remanded to the Prime Minister and Defence Office. He is kept informed but has no real authority beyond approving military appointments at a certain rank.

+1 The King has his role due to the accident of his birth. While is fundamentally unmeritocratic and undemocratic in this new millennia. Kind of backwards if you will.

Having continuity rather than a new head of state every 4 or 8 years is not a worse way of doing things. Stability in these unstable times is important.

I will take less stability any day rather than a system where I'm required to bow to someone simply because of who his mother was. Particularly when they're not the most stellar of people (I'm not a fan of King Charles, his mother seemed good.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The account of the altercation, frankly, paints Harry in a light that's too precious to sympathize with. I mean William's not much better but at least his vices are easy to understand.

But Harry? The broken necklace? the broken dog bowl? (what's it made of, crystal? what type of dog bowl breaks when a man falls on top of it?) The shards cutting his delicate skin? The therapist on speed dial?

It's all a bit much.

It’s insane. It doesn’t hold water with how fights happen.

William is a bully. That much is clear.

So was this knock-down-drag-out fight the fight about Meghan bullying the staff and Harry not wanting to hear about it? That fight?

I am definitely having trouble sorting out the various bullying accusations for sure, so have simply decided they all suck. But that those who have monetized it suck a little more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For very long time Harry was one of the most popular royal family members. I think the public was really happy for him when he found Meghan. Clearly, however there were signs that not all was well even before the wedding. And William tried to warn him, and Harry has been upset with him ever since.

What do you all think were William's objections and reasoning for trying to warn him? I'm sure it was the alleged staff bullying, but there has to be more.

That Harry and Meghan were getting popular, too popular.

They were having very positive articles about them until Australia. Then it was obvious there how much more popular Meghan was. the heir couldn't take it, and the leaks started about how difficult Meghan was etc..

[Anonymous]

I see no one is taking on Harry’s complaint that his father and brother leaked negative stories about Meghan to the press. How is that defensible?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If H wanted a family, why not embrace M's? Oh wait, she's on the outs (or paying them). How is this different?

As far as leaks, M was leaking so much she couldn't hold water. But no one else can leak? GMAF

These two deserve what they get.

Well it does seem he might be close to her mom?

Who walked out on Megan as a child and seemed to be absent from a big part of her life. Who also appears to be where Megan got the whole grifting lifestyle she embraces. Doria is being paid to be family at this point and if the money train stops, so will she.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The account of the altercation, frankly, paints Harry in a light that's too precious to sympathize with. I mean William's not much better but at least his vices are easy to understand.

But Harry? The broken necklace? the broken dog bowl? (what's it made of, crystal? what type of dog bowl breaks when a man falls on top of it?) The shards cutting his delicate skin? The therapist on speed dial?

It's all a bit much.

It’s insane. It doesn’t hold water with how fights happen.

William is a bully. That much is clear.

So was this knock-down-drag-out fight the fight about Meghan bullying the staff and Harry not wanting to hear about it? That fight?

I am definitely having trouble sorting out the various bullying accusations for sure, so have simply decided they all suck. But that those who have monetized it suck a little more.

Who got bullied out of England? Who got fed to the tabloids? And finally, who got pushed down the floor?

I fail to see exactly who is bullying Will, the heir to the throne and his English rose... But you see what you want to see.
I applaud HM for getting at least some $$$ out of this...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I had wondered about the big picture of H (and M) trashing his family and the long term prospect of the BRF. Here's an article that touches on that:

https://thehill.com/opinion/national-security/3784176-the-trouble-with-harry-and-meghan/

Assigning them responsibility for UK national security is a bit much, don't you think? They're well on their way to becoming C-list celebrities. Who really cares abut any of this drivel, beyond the mild entertainment offered by salacious petty gossip.

+1 In fact Britain might be more secure as a true democracy, rather than bowing and curtsying to a bunch of mediocre inbred German descendants.

+2 Referring to Charles's figurehead-only-role as military head is ridiculous.

Which is more ridiculous, having Trump as Commander-in-Chief or Biden?

Neither. Y'all are being ridiculous. We have a head of state. The UK has a head of state. These are important, respected roles.

You don't seem the grasp the fundamental difference between the two. The British monarch doesn't make any military decisions; that role has been officially remanded to the Prime Minister and Defence Office. He is kept informed but has no real authority beyond approving military appointments at a certain rank.

+1 The King has his role due to the accident of his birth. While is fundamentally unmeritocratic and undemocratic in this new millennia. Kind of backwards if you will.

Having continuity rather than a new head of state every 4 or 8 years is not a worse way of doing things. Stability in these unstable times is important.

I will take less stability any day rather than a system where I'm required to bow to someone simply because of who his mother was. Particularly when they're not the most stellar of people (I'm not a fan of King Charles, his mother seemed good.)

Interestingly, the criticism of Charles that I've heard from Brits is that he's too outspoken, too political, unlike Elizabeth

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If H wanted a family, why not embrace M's? Oh wait, she's on the outs (or paying them). How is this different?

As far as leaks, M was leaking so much she couldn't hold water. But no one else can leak? GMAF

These two deserve what they get.

Well it does seem he might be close to her mom?

Who walked out on Megan as a child and seemed to be absent from a big part of her life. Who also appears to be where Megan got the whole grifting lifestyle she embraces. Doria is being paid to be family at this point and if the money train stops, so will she.

Maybe she will write the tell all book next. Hope she's furiously taking notes now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see no one is taking on Harry’s complaint that his father and brother leaked negative stories about Meghan to the press. How is that defensible?

They swallowed all the tabloids stories about M and H hook and sinker... I am curious who will "win" the court of public opinion 20 years from now. My hunch is it will not be William.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I see no one is taking on Harry’s complaint that his father and brother leaked negative stories about Meghan to the press. How is that defensible?

It's certainly not how my family works but it seems to be the modus operandi of all of them, not just "his father and brother". Him and his wife did it too.