|
|
#31
08-28-2005, 04:10 AM
|
|||
|
|||
Re: Missed it, again
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] India was part of the British Empire. The Eastern Bloc were puppet governments under the almost complete control of the Soviet Union. [/ QUOTE ] That's precisely the point ! Boundaries were not changed for Great Britain. The borders of the USSR metropolis were not moved forward. Expanding the borders is NOT necessary in an imperialist endeavor. Which is precisely the point that you missed when you wrote "If we are so imperialistic, why haven't we expanded our territory more?" If we were putting on cartons of milk every point in the 2+2 forums that you MISSED we'd run out of milk. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] You are clearly less intelligent than I had believed before. Mainly because Great Britian is PART of the United Kingdom. [/ QUOTE ] Great Britain IS the United Kingdom. You are clearly less intelligent than I had believed before. [/ QUOTE ] No, it's not. Great Britain is PART of the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland is NOT part of Great Britain. Wow, you have really set the mark high for making a fool of yourself. 
|
|
#32
08-28-2005, 04:12 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Missed it, again
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] India was part of the British Empire. The Eastern Bloc were puppet governments under the almost complete control of the Soviet Union. [/ QUOTE ] That's precisely the point ! Boundaries were not changed for Great Britain. The borders of the USSR metropolis were not moved forward. Expanding the borders is NOT necessary in an imperialist endeavor. Which is precisely the point that you missed when you wrote "If we are so imperialistic, why haven't we expanded our territory more?" If we were putting on cartons of milk every point in the 2+2 forums that you MISSED we'd run out of milk. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] You are clearly less intelligent than I had believed before. Mainly because Great Britian is PART of the United Kingdom. [/ QUOTE ] Great Britain IS the United Kingdom. You are clearly less intelligent than I had believed before. [/ QUOTE ] No, it's not. Great Britain is PART of the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland is NOT part of Great Britain. Wow, you have really set the mark high for making a fool of yourself. [/ QUOTE ] Yup, guess I have ... http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/home/scotland/britain.html [Edit] Spin this.
|
|
#33
08-28-2005, 04:16 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: Missed it, again
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] India was part of the British Empire. The Eastern Bloc were puppet governments under the almost complete control of the Soviet Union. [/ QUOTE ] That's precisely the point ! Boundaries were not changed for Great Britain. The borders of the USSR metropolis were not moved forward. Expanding the borders is NOT necessary in an imperialist endeavor. Which is precisely the point that you missed when you wrote "If we are so imperialistic, why haven't we expanded our territory more?" If we were putting on cartons of milk every point in the 2+2 forums that you MISSED we'd run out of milk. [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img] [/ QUOTE ] You are clearly less intelligent than I had believed before. Mainly because Great Britian is PART of the United Kingdom. [/ QUOTE ] Great Britain IS the United Kingdom. You are clearly less intelligent than I had believed before. [/ QUOTE ] No, it's not. Great Britain is PART of the United Kingdom. Northern Ireland is NOT part of Great Britain. Wow, you have really set the mark high for making a fool of yourself. [/ QUOTE ] Yup, guess I have ... http://www.geo.ed.ac.uk/home/scotland/britain.html [/ QUOTE ] Did you even read what you linked to? Here is a particularly entertaining nugget... England, Scotland and Wales together with the province of Northern Ireland, form the country officially known as "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" or simply the United Kingdom. Do you really want to keep digging yourelf into a deeper hole?
|
|
#35
08-28-2005, 04:23 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Re: The no-holes barred donut
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ] [ QUOTE ] Kosovo isn't a "state," but a UN protectorate within the state of Serbia and Montenegro. [/ QUOTE ] Normally you make pretty good posts. You back up your ideas with some semblence of competence. This is not one of those cases. I really expected more out of you. [/ QUOTE ] Alright. What part about Kosovo did you not understand? Because what was stated about Kosovo is a (very simple) fact. You wrote "Kosovo is a state" which is false. No biggie, as long as you don't make a fuss when people correct your mistakes. [/ QUOTE ] Ok, I will try to explain this in words you will understand. In my response to the OP I said this... Furthermore, the proof that we are imperialistic is amazingly clear when you look at the new states of Kosovo, Somalia, Hati, et al. Is the sarcasm clear? I should hope so, you should be used to it if you read much of what I write. Do you understand yet that my sarcasm was that the US had acquired new states (Kosovo, Somalia, and Haiti) bringing to total to 53. Do you understand that when I referred to Kosovo as a state I meant it in the sense that it was a US State in a sarcastic tone?
|
|
#37
08-28-2005, 06:42 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Keed digging yourself into a deeper hole
[ QUOTE ]
"Imperialism- 1. The policy of extending a nation's authority by territorial acquisition or by the establishment of economic and political hegemony over other nations. 2. The system, policies, or practices of such a government." [/ QUOTE ] Well, nice to see you have yer cliff notes handy! Thanks for the ...lesson. Now explain to me what part do you not understand from those words, because the definition fits the United States like a glove. Here, have a sandwich while you gather yer thoughts. [ QUOTE ] Boundries for Great Britain WERE changed. [/ QUOTE ] And when was the last time that the "boundries" [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] for Great Britain were changed, squire? Enlighten us. If you can spare a light bulb without the room going dark, that is. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [ QUOTE ] Great Britain is PART of the United Kingdom. [/ QUOTE ] Yep, that's what happens when you get your education from internet websites and second-hand information from a schoolmate who is worse than you! Read once more the text, with me, slowly : Great Britain is the term used for the island containing the contiguous nations of England, Scotland and Wales. England, Scotland and Wales together with the province of Northern Ireland, form the country officially known as "The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland" or simply the United Kingdom. The above was quoted verbatim from the link provided link by Roybert, whose text you obviously did not understand! [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Got it now, squire? Great Britain is shorthand for that part of the UK that does not include N. Ireland. It has come to mean, though, the country whose prime minister is Tony Blair and whose seat of government is in London. In other words, the meaning of the words "United Kingdom" and "Great Britain" has become totally, but totally, interchangeable, totally the same. (I can provide you with texts of speeches of British PMs which demonstrate this most clearly. You up for some reading assignment?.. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]) Quick quiz for ya, Brighton boy: "Britain" is to "British" as "United Kingdom" is to "-------" ? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] Now, to get back on track, my little derailed train, you [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] : The question was about imperialists and your denial that the United States is an imperialistic power. You wrote, blithely, that it can't be because "if we were so imperialistic, why haven't we expanded our territory more?" (Yes, that's actually how you put it - it reads quite badly now, doesn't it, squire? [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img]) The answer you were given was that an imperialist power does NOT need to expand its geographical boundaries. It merely needs to "establish economic and/or political hegemony over other nations" -- yes, that's from your own definition, hole digger! Check out the top of this post. [img]/images/graemlins/grin.gif[/img] You were given the examples of Great Britain (aka the UK) and the USSR. (As an aside to History-challenged folks here, squire, I am telling you now that attacking India, when it was still a British colony, was NOT the same as attacking Dover. Mull this over a while, will you?) [ QUOTE ] You are clearly less intelligent than I <font color="#666666"> had believed before.</font> [/ QUOTE ] Cryptic message but I deciphered it. No shame in that, mind you.
|
|
#38
08-28-2005, 06:57 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Post srcipt
It is not techinally accurate that the United States has not been "expanding its territories", as has been ignorantly claimed on these pages.
Aside from the fact that the hisotry of the United States is a history of a continuous expansion from the thirteen colonies to the modern colossus that virtually straddles the planet, we have the relatively recent, formal cases of Alaska, 1867 (statehood 1959) Hawaii, 1896, (ditto) Puerto Rico, 1898 Guam, 1898 Virgin Islands, 1917 Samoa, 1945 (1967) But I will not hold the likes of Alaska against you, jaxmike. It might warm your heart too much... [img]/images/graemlins/cool.gif[/img]
|
|
#40
08-28-2005, 07:26 AM
|
|||
|
|||
|
Try harder
[ QUOTE ]
India was PART of the United Kingdom. [/ QUOTE ] Time, once again, for an extra curriculum lesson in terminology and modern History, aimed especially for any moron who hapens to fall among the bright stars of this forum. Jaxmike, if you see anyone like that, grab 'im for me, will ya? [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] 1. The borders of the United Kingdom had nothing to do with Indian territory, ever. The borders of the United Kingdom were those that included the territories of England, Scotland, Wales and Ireland (before Eire). 2. Sometimes, half-educated persons confuse nation with empire. For example, the UK was a nation that was part of (the metropolis of) the British Empire. Two different things... 2. The status of a territory ruled over (directly or indirectly) by another country varies. There are suzerainties , territories , colonies, crown dependencies, dominions , etc. Yes, it can get confusing. 3. The British crown dependencies of Guernsey, Jersey, and the Isle of Man are part of neither the UK nor the European Union, yet they are administered by British officials and fly also the Union Jack, besides their own flags. (Confusing, huh?) 4. There were colonies once upon a time (no more of that ugly, non-PC term!) such as India, Australia, Cyprus, Rhodesia, South Afica, etc. (Here's a useful li'l linky.) 5. The United States occupies Iraq (and that's official!) but Iraq is not part of the United States. (Yet, if someone attacks Iraq right now from the outside, the United States will likely consider it as a attack on America.) In sum, saying that India was once part of the British Empire is correct. Saying that it was part of the United Kingdom shows carelessness, if not ignorance. Let's start paying more attention, shall we ? [ QUOTE ] I must assert that the Easter Bloc might as well as been part of the Soviet Union. It was under that much control. [/ QUOTE ] Assert whatever you like -- that's your privilege. ("Might as well as been" ?? Are you talking like a pirate now? [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img] And I will not mention the bunny in relation to the "Easter bloc". [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]) Merely asserting something does not make it true, though. And what you wrote is a small pile of crap. (E.g. Romania was not on the same terms with the USSR as was DDR at all ! And Yugoslavia was even worse. The Eastern Bloc was solely under the influence of the USSR but the USSR did NOT expand its territories there - with the exception of Eastern Poland, right after WWII. There are more of 'em nuances, but I'll leave 'em for next year.) Hey, you can do better ... [img]/images/graemlins/smirk.gif[/img]
|
 |
|
|
Linear Mode
