JMS Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/world/europe/28queen.html?_r=3&ref=world Left Out of D-Day Events, Queen Elizabeth Is Fuming By JOHN F. BURNS Published: May 27, 2009 LONDON — Queen Elizabeth is not amused. 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. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/28/world/europe/28queen.html?_r=3&ref=world Didn't we launch our attack from England? Another boneheaded move by the Admin, though I doubt Obama planned the ceremonies. However, he should have a broad enough understanding of history to let someone know to invite her. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 Another boneheaded move by the Admin, though I doubt Obama planned the ceremonies. However, he should have a broad enough understanding of history to let someone know to invite her. This looks entirely like a screw up, possibly deliberate, between Downing Street and Buckingham Palace. I don't see how Obama and his staff have anything to do with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 This looks entirely like a screw up, possibly deliberate, between Downing Street and Buckingham Palace. I don't see how Obama and his staff have anything to do with this.Like I said, I doubt the admin or Obama had anything to do with the initial invite list, but someone should have then noticed that the head of state for where we launched our attack wasn't included and remedied the situation. We have had enough snafu's with our closest ally in the first 100 days that the admin should be on the lookout for any slights, be they perceived or real. We cannot afford to alienate them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 Like I said, I doubt the admin or Obama had anything to do with the initial invite list, but someone should have then noticed that the head of state for where we launched our attack wasn't included and remedied the situation. We have had enough snafu's with our closest ally in the first 100 days that the admin should be on the lookout for any slights, be they perceived or real. We cannot afford to alienate them. If we did we might be interfering in a turf war between Downing Street and Buckingham Palace. Downing Street is far more important to us than Buckingham Palace. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Duckus Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 This thread is going to be funnier than the thread started about 2 months ago claiming that Obama was not even going to attend this event supposedly. I believe it was 20 pages of "what a complete screw-up", "he hates America", "does not understand history", "socialist", blah blah blah until everyone realized that the reports were complete bull****. In that thread a poster even became OUTRAGED that Obama had missed the celebration...only to be informed that it had not even happened yet......that was my personal favorite. Now we are going to be outraged about an event that I assume had nothing to do with Obama or his administration besides for the fact that he will attend. Even more funny is the suggestion that we should get in the middle of a fight between the Prime Minister and Queen of England. Yea…that’s a good move.Good times, good times. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stophovr6 Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 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. Just so there's no confusion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PokerPacker Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 This thread is going to be funnier than the thread started about 2 months ago claiming that Obama was not even going to attend this event supposedly. I believe it was 20 pages of "what a complete screw-up", "he hates America", "does not understand history", "socialist", blah blah blah until everyone realized that the reports were complete bull****. In that thread a poster even became OUTRAGED that Obama had missed the celebration...only to be informed that it had not even happened yet......that was my personal favorite. Now we are going to be outraged about an event that I assume had nothing to do with Obama or his administration besides for the fact that he will attend. Even more funny is the suggestion that we should get in the middle of a fight between the Prime Minister and Queen of England. Yea…that’s a good move.Good times, good times. :munchout: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nonniey Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 I think this is on Browns shoulders. The guy is an idiot who is not long for 10 Downing street. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corcaigh Posted May 28, 2009 Share Posted May 28, 2009 The guy is an idiot who is not long for 10 Downing street. How much should we blame Obama for ignoring this problem? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.