NationStates Jolt Archive

Such as Imperialist Britain (oh the memorrys) or modern day Imperial America? :) :confused:

For the British Empire the best animal would be the Giant Tortoise- establishes itself slowly but surely, and just when you think its dead it gets up and starts moving again. The american "empire" is best represented by the three eyed fish out of the Simpsons- its a mistake, looks stupid, didn't last very long and has no use what so ever.

The Eagle, actually.

For the British Empire the best animal would be the Giant Tortoise- establishes itself slowly but surely, and just when you think its dead it gets up and starts moving again. The american "empire" is best represented by the three eyed fish out of the Simpsons- its a mistake, looks stupid, didn't last very long and has no use what so ever.


:p :p :p brilliant Merrington with your permission i would like to copy this and put it in myt signiature under your name :)

mold, starts small, unnoticable, and simply grows until someone or something stops it

The lion.

EDIT - Specifically the male lion. The lionesses and junior members of the pack do all of the hunting and feed the alpha-lion, while he sits there and looks regal and pretends to have some degree of importance.

The bloodsucker

The bloodsucker

what a leach?

what a leach?
That's the one. I forgot the English name. :(

That's the one. I forgot the English name. :(

your telling me in America they call the leach ( a standard term for the last 2 centuries) ..a bloodsucker?..well LP il be damned..its liek calling a dog a "barking meat eater" and teaching that that is its name in schools!.. :p

your telling me in America they call the leach ( a standard term for the last 2 centuries) ..a bloodsucker?..well LP il be damned..its liek calling a dog a "barking meat eater" and teaching that that is its name in schools!.. :p
I don't know if they call it a bloodsucker in America. I DO know that I call it "bloedzuiger" in my native language, which is Dutch. bloed = blood. zuiger = sucker

The salmon.

I don't know why I said that.. I like Salmon. MmMmMmMmMmm

Such as Imperialist Britain (oh the memorrys) or modern day Imperial America? :) :confused:

If America was Imperialist, I'd let you know.

As it stands, the US has not siezed any territory since the Hawaii was annexed in 1900, and the Spanish American War, (Guam, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Samoa) both over 100 years ago.

Army ants. *nod*

If America was Imperialist, I'd let you know.

As it stands, the US has not siezed any territory since the Hawaii was annexed in 1900, and the Spanish American War, (Guam, the Philippines, Puerto Rico, and Samoa) both over 100 years ago.

true America is not Imperialist in the traditional sense no....but it is behaving like an Imperial country, throwing its weight around, practically including patriotism into the cariculum..etc there is a book out at the moment called "the second red white and blue" by a very funny man called David Balkan, it compares the British Empire and otrher old world super powers to Modern day America...its quite a funny read :)

true America is not Imperialist in the traditional sense no....but it is behaving like an Imperial country, throwing its weight around, practically including patriotism into the cariculum..etc there is a book out at the moment called "the second red white and blue" by a very funny man called David Balkan, it compares the British Empire and otrher old world super powers to Modern day America...its quite a funny read :)

a) If the UN lived up to what it SHOULD be, the US wouldn't have to be the world's policeman.

b) Patriotism in the curriculum? What the heck does that have to do with being Imperialist? First, *every* nation teaches history from it's own persepective. Second, even saying the Pledge of Allegience is optional... no one is forcing kids into anything.

c) That's all well and fine, but it's hardly the end of the story. IMHO, that's like taking Rowan Atkinson and saying he wholly represents British culture. (So... sod off, Baldrick!) :)

A lion. This one in fact:

http://www.glanceback.co.uk/BRITISH%20LION.jpg

And America isnt a world policeman. It acts to further its own interests - nothing more.

Lion, eagle, hawk, and wolf all come to mind.

And America isnt a world policeman. It acts to further its own interests - nothing more.

News to us. What pressing interests did the US have that made us go into Jugoslavia? How about Haiti? Grenada? Lebanon?

a) If the UN lived up to what it SHOULD be, the US wouldn't have to be the world's policeman.

b) Patriotism in the curriculum? What the heck does that have to do with being Imperialist? First, *every* nation teaches history from it's own persepective. Second, even saying the Pledge of Allegience is optional... no one is forcing kids into anything.

c) That's all well and fine, but it's hardly the end of the story. IMHO, that's like taking Rowan Atkinson and saying he wholly represents British culture. (So... sod off, Baldrick!) :)

Considering the US are the most influental members of the UN perhaps a few talsk with other world leaders wouldnt be so bad...you know..before just charging in and insulting all other UN member nations

Every nation does teach history from its own perspective i agree..but none so more than america or so it would seem ;) , or possibly good old russia (now i am going what filters through the atlantic here you must understand)

what the bloody hell does IMHO mean? :)

This is not an atack on you or America, being an Imperialist i didnt really acknowledge that Americans* are not to keen on America being reffered to as Imperialist.

News to us. What pressing interests did the US have that made us go into Jugoslavia?
Yugoslavia is close to the EU and Russia, so its stability is important to America.

How about Haiti? Grenada?
Both of these are geographically close to America, so America wants to ensure that they remain stable.

Lebanon?
It's in the Middle East, which is where the US's oil comes from.

News to us. What pressing interests did the US have that made us go into Jugoslavia? How about Haiti? Grenada? Lebanon?

Every nation works only for it's own interests. It's not a bad thing.

Considering the US are the most influental members of the UN perhaps a few talsk with other world leaders wouldnt be so bad...you know..before just charging in and insulting all other UN member antions

I'm not insulting any UN member countries. I'm insulting the UN organization.

The one that has totally failed in it's mission to keep the world peaceful because it doesn't back it's own resolutions. Not in Jugoslavia, not in Iraq, not in North Korea (since the end of the war), not in Rwanda. Not in Columbia. Not in Somalia. Not in Sudan. Not in East Timor. Not in Sierra Leone. Et cetera.

Every nation does teach history from its own perspective i agree..but none so more than america or so it would seem ;) , or possibly good old russia (now i am going what filters through the atlantic here you must understand)

Er... the US is the size of Europe, with 300 million people, and has Hollywood. Of course it's going to be more prevelant than say, Belizian nationalism. :D

what the bloody hell does IMHO mean? :)

IMHO = In My Humble Opinion.

This is not an atack on you or America, being an Imperialist i didnt really acknowledge that Americans* are not to keen on America being reffered to as Imperialist.

Not taken as such. Just trying to deflate a sterotype which is as distastful as British dental care.

I'm not insulting any UN member countries. I'm insulting the UN organization.

The one that has totally failed in it's mission to keep the world peaceful because it doesn't back it's own resolutions. Not in Jugoslavia, not in Iraq, not in North Korea (since the end of the war), not in Rwanda. Not in Columbia. Not in Somalia. Not in Sudan. Not in East Timor. Not in Sierra Leone. Et cetera.
You realise that the UN isnt some mighty country-commanding god of geopolitics and that it is in fact just a group of nations which together decide to do things, m'yes? And that the US vetos most of its resolutions even one in the 80s about taking action against terrorism?

Not taken as such. Just trying to deflate a sterotype which is as distastful as British dental care.

Probably on the NHS but im on private and as such receive good dental care :D ..and the nurses are nicer too :D

back to stereotypeing..Personnaly i do not for one moment beleive that all U.S Citisens are trigger happy, Macheovelian, self inflated, Obnoxiouse,loud,rude,arogant and posstivly detestfull as par the stereotype..each person is an individual and should be treated as such.....

Yugoslavia is close to the EU and Russia, so its stability is important to America.


Both of these are geographically close to America, so America wants to ensure that they remain stable.


It's in the Middle East, which is where the US's oil comes from.

Geography? Then why didn't the EU handle it alone?? That's like pointing to a car and saying that it kills people. Yes, it does. But it's ancillary.

As for Grenada or Haiti, the US has lived with a hostile Cuba for 50 years. Why do you have a problem with the idea that the US *does do things* that are not solely in it's interests? Same as the French in Ivory Coast... they don't HAVE to be there. But they are.

Oil? Pfha. Why invade, DISRUPT the oil supply, and raise the price (disrupting the economy with higher prices) while spending over $80 BILLION?

The war in Iraq had several factors. To pin it all on oil is just punditry. That argument went back to Gulf War 1, when the peace at any price crowd would have left Kuwait to Hussein. (And established the kind of appeasement that allowed Hitler to rise to power).

Probably on the NHS but im on private and as such receive good dental care :D ..and the nurses are nicer too :D

back to stereotypeing..Personnaly i do not for one moment beleive that all U.S Citisens are trigger happy, Macheovelian, self inflated, Obnoxiouse,loud,rude,arogant and posstivly detestfull as par the stereotype..each person is an individual and should be treated as such.....

So: they're like the rest of the planet, they just have a higher standard of living and happen to be living in the hyperpower. Thanks. :)

The human.

You realise that the UN isnt some mighty country-commanding god of geopolitics and that it is in fact just a group of nations which together decide to do things, m'yes? And that the US vetos most of its resolutions even one in the 80s about taking action against terrorism?

Yep.

Do you mean the one in 1975 that condemned Israeli attacks on Lebanese civilians in response to attacks on Israel? :rolleyes:

http://www.ifamericansknew.org/us_ints/p-neff-veto.html

The war in Iraq had several factors. To pin it all on oil is just punditry. That argument went back to Gulf War 1, when the peace at any price crowd would have left Kuwait to Hussein. (And established the kind of appeasement that allowed Hitler to rise to power).

speaking on behalf of fellow British people who are now considered to eccentric to stand for parliment..General "storming" norman should have kept going on to Bagdad...damn Hippies back in blighty! thats the problem there!

Also the reason America does "do things" is because its system allows it..we have to put up with the village council lot debating for hour on hour while the generals want to get the job over and doen..same with any country...blame france, we do ;)

So: they're like the rest of the planet, they just have a higher standard of living and happen to be living in the hyperpower. Thanks. :)

you are saying you have a higher standard of living than me? :rolleyes: :p

you realise you do nothing to calm the stereotype help by america...

speaking on behalf of fellow British people who are now considered to eccentric to stand for parliment..General "storming" norman should have kept going on to Bagdad...damn Hippies back in blighty! thats the problem there!

Also the reason America does "do things" is because its system allows it..we have to put up with the village council lot debating for hour on hour while the generals want to get the job over and doen..same with any country...blame france, we do ;)

It would have spared us a lot of the problems from 1991 to now, but I'm not sure the internatial coalition would have stood for it, espeically the Arab members.

Thus why when it comes to large groups why representative government works better than straight democracy.

you are saying you have a higher standard of living than me? :rolleyes: :p

you realise you do nothing to calm the stereotype help by america...

Nope. Just than most of the rest of the world. (First world vs. the rest)

Er? Not sure what you mean here.

Nope. Just than most of the rest of the world. (First world vs. the rest)

Er? Not sure what you mean here.

i can agree with that..i know that here in britain many people experiance pleasant little lives on the same accordance to those of the U.S. although american citisens do reveive all the good gadjets and tech before europe :( which is why i import :D

well it just could be to me that you are being a little well..ofencive (and i use the term loosly) in what is basically a simple one sided discussion between you and i..who through the most part agreeing and comming to the same conclusion...in that America is indeed a large power and yet you must not forget that elsewhare in the world people can live in the same levels of comfort as in america..obviousely not the whole world but in some parts.

i can agree with that..i know that here in britain many people experiance pleasant little lives on the same accordance to those of the U.S. although american citisens do reveive all the good gadjets and tech before europe :( which is why i import :D

well it just could be to me that you are being a little well..ofencive (and i use the term loosly) in what is basically a simple one sided discussion between you and i..who through the most part agreeing and comming to the same conclusion...in that America is indeed a large power and yet you must not forget that elsewhare in the world people can live in the same levels of comfort as in america..obviousely not the whole world but in some parts.

Ayep.

Exactly. By the same token that Europe must not forget that it can't just live in isolationism and let the rest of the world go to hell in a handbasket. One may hate war, but must realize that sometimes there is no other solution.

Ayep.

Exactly. By the same token that Europe must not forget that it can't just live in isolationism and let the rest of the world go to hell in a handbasket. One may hate war, but must realize that sometimes there is no other solution.

entirely understandable

Geography? Then why didn't the EU handle it alone?? That's like pointing to a car and saying that it kills people. Yes, it does. But it's ancillary.
Do you have any idea about history, politics or indeed anything at all? You do appreciate that nations going over into the Russian sphere of influence is bad, m'yes? Or perhaps you dont...

As for Grenada or Haiti, the US has lived with a hostile Cuba for 50 years. Why do you have a problem with the idea that the US *does do things* that are not solely in it's interests? Same as the French in Ivory Coast... they don't HAVE to be there. But they are.
The US hasnt "lived with" Cuba. You've tried to invade them on at least one occassion and assasinate Castro more times than I care to mention. Needless to say, America doesnt want any more communist nations springing up on its doorstep, and only refuses to invade Cuba because it would piss off Russia.



Oil? Pfha. Why invade, DISRUPT the oil supply, and raise the price (disrupting the economy with higher prices) while spending over $80 BILLION?

The war in Iraq had several factors. To pin it all on oil is just punditry. That argument went back to Gulf War 1, when the peace at any price crowd would have left Kuwait to Hussein. (And established the kind of appeasement that allowed Hitler to rise to power).
I mentioned Iraq anywhere in my post...?

Not taken as such. Just trying to deflate a sterotype which is as distastful as British dental care.



Ewwww x.x

Maybe a virus, multiplying and consuming...

A shark. Looking big and bad...eating other countries...thought of as the biggest, scariest sea creature but really harmless as long as you don't agitate it. Which can be fairly easy.

Considering that there was effectively world piece from 1815 to 1914 (the age of imperialism) I'd say the dove :)

The Lancet Fluke. If I remember correctly from a Discover article a while (4-6 years, in fact) back, this particular parasite travels through a wide number of hosts, getting them to act out some part of its life cycle.
Oh yeah, and it also forces ants to commit suicide (by climbing to the top of grass and being eaten by cows).

Oh you little piece of...! *calls attorney* "Mr. Wreit? Yes, I need to sue someone for a copyright violation..."

the cuckoo. It takes other birds' homes and fills it with its' own

I think either the Frigatebird:

Frigate Bird (http://www.rit.edu/~rhrsbi/GalapagosPages/Frigatebirds.html)
(Read the whole thing)

Or the Bald Eagle:

-National animal of both America and Nazi Germany (go figure)
-It has the habit of letting an Osprey catch a fish, swooping down on it, scaring it, making it drop the fish, then catches the fish in mid-air and flies off with it.
-Also known to prey on young livestock, such as baby sheep, etc.

A bird is good because it symbolizes many Americans' self-righteousness, and because the Americans love their warplanes.

How is America Imperialistic? When was the last time we killed 400,000 Chinese civillians for no reason other than expanision (Japs, Rape of Nanking)? Other annexed a near-by country (Hitler, was it Czechosolvakia)? Or attacked another near-by country (Saddam, Kuwait)?

When was the last time we invaded Poland or Russia (Hitler, Blitzkrieg)? Or the Phillipines (Jap, S. Pacific expansion)? Or killed 33 million people (Hitler, WWII)? Or shot our allies' soldiers in the back of the heads (Stalin, I forget)? When was the last time we bombed cities in England (Hitler, Battle of Britain)? Or attacked a country who was supposed to be our friend by destroying a lot their navy and killing 2,400 of their men (Japs, Pearl Harbor)?

When was the last time he set up camps all over the country where where creamated our enemies (Hitler, concentration camps)? Or the last time we made POW's that we captured fight to the death in a large arena (Romans, gladitorial combat)? Or the last time we took over Europe and parts of Africa (Romans, for a long time)?


How many countries have we declared war on in the last 15 years? Two, one of which actually attacked us and international civillians and is now a much happier place than it was before (Afghanistan).

What animal best represents Imperialism

Norman. He's the animal that lives in my pants. The chicks call him Norman the Conqueror.

Do you have any idea about history, politics or indeed anything at all? You do appreciate that nations going over into the Russian sphere of influence is bad, m'yes? Or perhaps you dont...

With a BA and an MA in history, it'd say I've studied it a bit, yes. :rolleyes:
You're aware that Russia has historically had an agenda of "pan-Slavism", and mobilised in World War One because of Serbia? That Jugoslavia was a Communist nation and (mostly) in the Soviet orbit post WW2?

How would US involvment be necessary (let alone Imperialist?), when the EU nations were already involved?
By insinuation, you're stating that in this case, (and perhaps for Grenada, Panama, et al?) that world peace is in the US's best interest, and therefore you're *sanctioning* the US being the world's policeman???

My position is that the US has not been an Imperialist power in over 100 years.

The US hasnt "lived with" Cuba. You've tried to invade them on at least one occassion and assasinate Castro more times than I care to mention. Needless to say, America doesnt want any more communist nations springing up on its doorstep, and only refuses to invade Cuba because it would piss off Russia.

And we've had to live with them off our coast for 50 years as being hostile.
Nah. At least not in the past 30 years or so. It's too expensive in terms of public relations and cost. After the Carter Administration, it was determined that eventually Cuba will either fail economically (as it is now), or Castro will simply die. That's why there hasn't been any US interventions in there since the Ford years.
But that still fails the Imperialism test: the US had Cuba as a possession post the Spanish-American War. It was Independent after that, then had the Revolution. The US isn't seeking to reclaim Cuba, but it does want to oust Castro. Kind of the same way lots of people on this board would like to oust Bush, if they could. ;)

I mentioned Iraq anywhere in my post...?

You countered
"It's in the Middle East, which is where the US's oil comes from. " when I mentioned Lebanon.
My counter to that is that oil was NOT the reason (especially in the early 80s), as Lebanon has almost no oil at all. To simply say that garrisoning Lebanon brought stability to the Middle East is pretty simplistic, as the Syrians basically owned the place, Iran had just undergone the Revolution and was fighting with Iraq, Yemen was divided and Israel/Palestine was hot.
Further, the nay-sayers of American foreign policy keep bringing up oil, yet mysteriously every American intervention in the Middle East causes the price to go UP. (Cf: The Iranian Revolution, both Gulf War 1 & 2, and even the strike on Libya in 1986.) Further, in the decades since the US began working as a player in the Middle East (roughly 1940s), it has yet to actually claim any territory or oil for itself.

In an effort to get the thread back on topic I nominate the serpent, coiling itself around the world.
The leach is a bad choice because that's already a derrogatory term for doctors.

Army ants. *nod*
not at all! army ants have what i would value as one of the few extremely close to perfect societies in the world. the u.s. and the brittish empires are/were never near perfect.

When was the last time we invaded....the Phillipines (Jap, S. Pacific expansion)

as stated before the last time you invaded the phillipines was 1898...

"On June 12, 1898, General Emilio Aguinaldo declared the Philippines to be independent of Spain and thus formed the First Philippine Republic, in which he was the President. However, after the Spanish-American War the United States proceeded to lay claim to the Philippines and on February 4, 1899, the Filipino-American War began. The Americans established an occupation government in 1901."