FabSwingers.com > Forums > The Lounge > If Guy had succeeded ..,
If Guy had succeeded ..,
Jump to: Newest in thread
 |
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
Well we wouldn't have a fecking huge bill to renovate the damn building.
So if anyone has any spare fireworks left over after tonight get in touch we can all meet up in London and ...................
 |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"In blowing up Parliament, what would Britain be like now?"
We'd probably be wondering who's the bloke on the bonfire and what's all these fizz bang flashy things going off all over the place.....  |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *rtemisia OP Woman
over a year ago
Norwich |
"Well we wouldn't have a fecking huge bill to renovate the damn building.
So if anyone has any spare fireworks left over after tonight get in touch we can all meet up in London and ...................
"
Off with her head!!! |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By *inaTitzTV/TS
over a year ago
Titz Towers, North Notts |
Honest, but boring answer, pretty much the same. There wasn't much support for Catholicism in 1605 and the likely result would have been a series of reprisals against Catholics and an even more restrictive Protestant regime taking the place of James I. Worst case, the civil war would have been brought forward a generation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"It would have a more recently built house of commons."
It wouldn't, the current building was built in 1800s (spot the geek who did the Parliament tour this year!!) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Honest, but boring answer, pretty much the same. There wasn't much support for Catholicism in 1605 and the likely result would have been a series of reprisals against Catholics and an even more restrictive Protestant regime taking the place of James I. Worst case, the civil war would have been brought forward a generation. "
That...and no bonfire night so a bit shit. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Honest, but boring answer, pretty much the same. There wasn't much support for Catholicism in 1605 and the likely result would have been a series of reprisals against Catholics and an even more restrictive Protestant regime taking the place of James I. Worst case, the civil war would have been brought forward a generation. "
Or the 'Glorious Revolution' would have been brought forward.
But we'd still have bonfires and fireworks, we'd just be celebrating its success
 
Mr ddc |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"In blowing up Parliament, what would Britain be like now?"
they would have probably made a new parliament building and had some memorial day for all the people who died in the explosion..
also probably some tradition which is similar to what will go down tonight.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Honest, but boring answer, pretty much the same. There wasn't much support for Catholicism in 1605 and the likely result would have been a series of reprisals against Catholics and an even more restrictive Protestant regime taking the place of James I. Worst case, the civil war would have been brought forward a generation. "
Hmm, not too sure about the Civil War bit as the one major reason for the commons to revolt was that Charles had married a Catholic & was reputedly planning to reintroduce Catholicism as the State Religion. Given that any replacement for James would have been even more anti Catholic & that Parliament (a new one) would have passed laws barring such a marriage then that wouldn't have been a problem.
I see a replacement Monarch working much more closely with a puritan Parliament & almost no Catholic presence in England, instead of a Civil War I suspect England & Scotland would have joined in with the other Protestant Nations of Europe in the Wars of Religion that rampaged across Europe in the C17th.
I suspect Ireland would have suffered even more as well. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"England & Scotland would have joined in with the other Protestant Nations of Europe in the Wars of Religion that rampaged across Europe in the C17th.
I suspect Ireland would have suffered even more as well."
The Thirty Years War? We didn't take part? Surely we'd have just been on the other side?
And I'm pretty sure Ireland couldn't have suffered much more than they did. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"England & Scotland would have joined in with the other Protestant Nations of Europe in the Wars of Religion that rampaged across Europe in the C17th.
I suspect Ireland would have suffered even more as well.
The Thirty Years War? We didn't take part? Surely we'd have just been on the other side?
And I'm pretty sure Ireland couldn't have suffered much more than they did."
Perhaps England & Scotland could have joined with the King of Sweden & actually defeated his Catholic enemies, Protestant armies at the gates of Rome?
Can you imagine the revenge of the puritans on Catholic Ireland should the plot have succeeded? Waterford & Wexford would have been mere footnotes 
If James had fallen, who was the heir? Was Charles born at that time? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Honest, but boring answer, pretty much the same. There wasn't much support for Catholicism in 1605 and the likely result would have been a series of reprisals against Catholics and an even more restrictive Protestant regime taking the place of James I. Worst case, the civil war would have been brought forward a generation.
Hmm, not too sure about the Civil War bit as the one major reason for the commons to revolt was that Charles had married a Catholic & was reputedly planning to reintroduce Catholicism as the State Religion. Given that any replacement for James would have been even more anti Catholic & that Parliament (a new one) would have passed laws barring such a marriage then that wouldn't have been a problem.
I see a replacement Monarch working much more closely with a puritan Parliament & almost no Catholic presence in England, instead of a Civil War I suspect England & Scotland would have joined in with the other Protestant Nations of Europe in the Wars of Religion that rampaged across Europe in the C17th.
I suspect Ireland would have suffered even more as well."
Suffered worse than attempted genocide ? Blimey what would they have unleashed on them ? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"Honest, but boring answer, pretty much the same. There wasn't much support for Catholicism in 1605 and the likely result would have been a series of reprisals against Catholics and an even more restrictive Protestant regime taking the place of James I. Worst case, the civil war would have been brought forward a generation.
Hmm, not too sure about the Civil War bit as the one major reason for the commons to revolt was that Charles had married a Catholic & was reputedly planning to reintroduce Catholicism as the State Religion. Given that any replacement for James would have been even more anti Catholic & that Parliament (a new one) would have passed laws barring such a marriage then that wouldn't have been a problem.
I see a replacement Monarch working much more closely with a puritan Parliament & almost no Catholic presence in England, instead of a Civil War I suspect England & Scotland would have joined in with the other Protestant Nations of Europe in the Wars of Religion that rampaged across Europe in the C17th.
I suspect Ireland would have suffered even more as well.
Suffered worse than attempted genocide ? Blimey what would they have unleashed on them ? "
Annihilation? Can you imagine the clamour to join a war of annihilation amongst the English & Scots? Would have made the Balkan Wars look tame. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
If James had fallen, who was the heir? Was Charles born at that time?
Wasn't the plan to put his young, Catholic daughter on the throne as a puppet?
"
9-year old princess Elizabeth.
(Thanks Wiki  ) |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Honest, but boring answer, pretty much the same. There wasn't much support for Catholicism in 1605 and the likely result would have been a series of reprisals against Catholics and an even more restrictive Protestant regime taking the place of James I. Worst case, the civil war would have been brought forward a generation.
Hmm, not too sure about the Civil War bit as the one major reason for the commons to revolt was that Charles had married a Catholic & was reputedly planning to reintroduce Catholicism as the State Religion. Given that any replacement for James would have been even more anti Catholic & that Parliament (a new one) would have passed laws barring such a marriage then that wouldn't have been a problem.
I see a replacement Monarch working much more closely with a puritan Parliament & almost no Catholic presence in England, instead of a Civil War I suspect England & Scotland would have joined in with the other Protestant Nations of Europe in the Wars of Religion that rampaged across Europe in the C17th.
I suspect Ireland would have suffered even more as well.
Suffered worse than attempted genocide ? Blimey what would they have unleashed on them ?
Annihilation? Can you imagine the clamour to join a war of annihilation amongst the English & Scots? Would have made the Balkan Wars look tame."
I thought they had already tried annihilation. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
"
If James had fallen, who was the heir? Was Charles born at that time?
Wasn't the plan to put his young, Catholic daughter on the throne as a puppet?
9-year old princess Elizabeth.
(Thanks Wiki )"
I doubt that would have happened, Parliament would have had to ratify that I think & the ensuing anti Catholic Mania would have been strong enough to prevent it. Hmm, perhaps a Civil War would have happened in the aftermath of the bomb - Catholic Nobles install a puppet Monarch & the Commons rise up with the support of the Scottish covenanters to overthrow & execute every major Catholic in the countries. A hardline puritan Parliament is elected, passes laws barring Catholic succession & casts around for a suitably Protestant Monarch.. |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
|
By (user no longer on site)
over a year ago
|
"Couldn't be more screwed up than it is now lol complete bunch morons in the big house squabbling like children in school playing field "
Yeah because the UK is literally the worst place on earth right? |
Reply privately, Reply in forum +quote
or View forums list | |
» Add a new message to this topic
,,tbh I don't know 