NationStates Jolt Archive

I wonder how many of the former colonies of the UK have become failed states, as compared to foreign colonies of other countries.

Here is a list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Colonial_Territories_by_country#Great_Britain_.2F_England

Ideally I'm looking for input from people who are familiar with one country or another.

The French lost Vietnam. 'Nuff said. XD

I wonder how many of the former colonies of the UK have become failed states, as compared to foreign colonies of other countries.

Here is a list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Colonial_Territories_by_country#Great_Britain_.2F_England

Ideally I'm looking for input from people who are familiar with one country or another.

Well, Somalia for one - used to be Somaliland, and is know a festering pit of corruption and cycles of violence.

Zimbabwe - Mugabe, need I say more?

Well... there was a few former English colonies which aren't failed states and they are Canada, New Zealand, Australia...

Wait, the British owned ALL of those places? Good lord! ...shows what you can do with a well-developed navy.

Wait, the British owned ALL of those places? Good lord! ...shows what you can do with a well-developed navy.
Looks like the French did pretty well too (although they lost a few to us).

Well, Somalia for one - used to be Somaliland, and is know a festering pit of corruption and cycles of violence.
But there's a bit of Somalia calling itself Somaliland that's actually been doing fairly well. Unfortunately for Somaliland's government, the rest of the world refuses to recognise it as a separate State from war-torn Somalia.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Somaliland

Wait, the British owned ALL of those places? Good lord! ...shows what you can do with a well-developed navy.
The British Empire covered a quarter of the land, and a third of the population of the world at one point. As the old saying goes "The sun never sets on the British Empire".

The British Empire played its part in creating the world we live in today, but we're often all too eagar to blame current problems on our ancestors rather than face our own responsibilities. The gap between rich and poor has massively increased since the end of Empire, and life expectancy in many places is actually decreasing.

Many of these failed states had bad foundations to begin with, this is undeniable; but we have continued to pile on bad structures on top of these foundations to create some of the terrible situations we see today.

The British Empire, like all successful hegemonic entities, was greatly concerned with the long-term maintenance of its rule, and crucially, the maintenance of the necessary conditions. It had already been one of the handful dominant international powers for centuries when it consolidated its position as the world's greatest power over the course of the 19th century. One of the secrets of its success was a culture of colonial administration and civil service tradition which dictated that wherever possible you did not fully exploit a resource, but acted as a caretaker, leaving something for your successor to manage.

At the most basic level, this meant introducing one's own currency, then pursuing a policy of mild taxation of the native population, rather than simply sacking a city and plundering its wealth. Military force was to be used rarely, to deal only with strategic threats, but when it was used, it was to be used brutally. This maximised shock value and ensured the prospect of repression did not become mundane. The Honourable East India Company was the embodiment of this approach, viewing its business interests from Afghanistan to China, and India in particular, as an ongoing business enterprise rather than an asset. Handing over administration of a city to one's successors, with the city functioning and its wealth intact, was every colonial administrator's goal and a source of considerable pride.

Corruption was of course endemic, as it must be in every imperial enterprise. But there was a gentleman's understanding that to maximise the return, the corruption should run in restrained fashion for centuries, rather than be a one-off act of robbery.

In contrast, once this management culture departed, post-independence governments were quickly overwhelmed by individuals unaccustomed to exercising financial restraint, and fell victim to one-off robberies, the pitiful proceeds ending up in offshore accounts and destroying any possibility of generating further revenue.

Europe owes its success to a slow controlled bleeding of the world. The newly-freed world killed itself instantly and may never recover.

oh looking at all those countries made me feel proud do you know at one point are empires colonies had colonies!

back to the subject

considering how large are empire was its a wonder the list of failed states is so short look at the list of failed states that were once made up the soviet union and you will see. I think are rather short list has something to do with the liberal policy’s that the empire had I think this really was the key to success of our empire especially when you look at the old colonial superpower Spain which didn’t follow are successful policy of liberalism within the empire

oh looking at all those countries made me feel proud do you know at one point are empires colonies had colonies!
So, were those your grand-colonies?
Ooh, look at our ickle colony, all grown up and oppressing other nations of its own.

Considering that England was a colony of France at one time, I think they've done rather well.

So, were those your grand-colonies?
Ooh, look at our ickle colony, all grown up and oppressing other nations of its own.

Ahw, isn't it cute. It looks just like its mother, doesn't it? :p

what's your definition of a failed state?

Considering that England was a colony of France at one time, I think they've done rather well.

No, it was run by Normandy, with England and Normandy later being joined in one Kingdom by Aqutaine. The Norman part then fell to France, seperating the remaining parts into England and Aquataine. Aquataine later fell to France and Engladn remained outside. Unless Normandy is considered intrinsically a part of England, then it cannot be said that England was French.

It could be argued that as England was ruled by a place that later became France upon seperation from England, that it is therefore French. That is pushing it however.

what's your definition of a failed state?


This one works http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failed_state

So to recap, former British colonies that have become failed states are limited to:

Sierra Leone, Somalia, Zimbabwe, the Sudan?

Why don’t we [England] just reinstate the Empire, instead of all this Commonwealth nonsense? While we're at it, we can quit the EU!

The Mercantile System of England was never meant to benefit its colonial outposts. That things worked out as well as they did for so many English colonies is a small miracle and mostly unintended. As many English colonial disasters there have been (Palestine and most of Africa come to mind), they have faired much better than the colonies of other European powers. Try finding a Spanish or French colony that smells like roses or a Belgian one for that matter. I think that the British did get more involved in the development of their colonies or at least held onto them long enough to do so.

An example is India, the unintentional colony. Everyone and their dog were setting up trading outposts on the coasts of India, as a means to get at the China’s resources. England was the last to really get established in there and all the best spots were taken. To make up for a bad situation they started exploring what India itself had to offer. India still might have carried on its business of not being made over as a colony, but the royals started butting heads with the small English port, which they considered no more than a fiefdom, and sacked it. The English came back with a fury and it was all over for the ruling powers of India. India went through a lot of suffering under English rule, but today are doing quite well, unlike Nepal their neighbour. The biggest screw up in India was the incompetent artificial partitioning of the border with Pakistan that continues to be a source of conflict in the region.

The Mercantile System does pretty much the same things that corporations are doing to the Third World today. Now though instead of having an official government presence, they just back the puppet they want, who will let them pillage the resources worse than the Mercantile System might have allowed for. By eliminating the responsibility of the corporation’s government directly, they eliminate direct protest against brutal regimes that the corporation’s government supports indirectly. Where in the past empires did develop the infrastructure of their colonies, corporations backing dictators have no need to do so.

The Bruce

Why don’t we [England] just reinstate the Empire, instead of all this Commonwealth nonsense? While we're at it, we can quit the EU!
And while we're at it why don't Germany just reinstate the third reich?

(I use this example because it gives an image of what it means to "reinstate" an empire)

So to recap, former British colonies that have become failed states are limited to:

Sierra Leone, Somalia, Zimbabwe, the Sudan?

Uganda, Zambia, Malawai, Ghana &c. anything in africa pretty much.

Afganistan.... Pakistan.... I'm sure I can think of more if I put my mind to it.

Oh, and of course Canada and the Republic of Ireland.

Uganda, Zambia, Malawai, Ghana &c. anything in africa pretty much.

Afganistan.... Pakistan.... I'm sure I can think of more if I put my mind to it.

Oh, and of course Canada and the Republic of Ireland.
We're(RoI) no longer failed by any definition and neither is Canada

We're(RoI) no longer failed by any definition and neither is Canada

So at some point they were?

(BTW, the last sentence in the previous post was smiley free flippancy).

So at some point they were?

Nope. Things were bad during the 80's, but they never could be called a failed state.

So at some point they were?

(BTW, the last sentence in the previous post was smiley free flippancy).
economicly we where failing and I think Ian Paisley at the time commented on "the failed Irish Republic". Glad you where being flippant though. :)


(edit: tis why I said by any defintion)

Uganda, Zambia, Malawai, Ghana &c. anything in africa pretty much.

Afganistan.... Pakistan.... I'm sure I can think of more if I put my mind to it.

Oh, and of course Canada and the Republic of Ireland.


Equating afghanistan and pakistan with sudan or sierra leone doesnt really work.

Equating afghanistan and pakistan with sudan or sierra leone doesnt really work.

Both the Islamabad and the Kabul governments are unable to enforce their wills in large parts of their respective countries. Which was the definition of failed state was it not?

As the old saying goes "The sun never sets on the British Empire".

and as the retort to that goes "That's because God would'nt trust the British in the dark" :p

Uganda, Zambia, Malawai, Ghana &c. anything in africa pretty much.

Afganistan.... Pakistan.... I'm sure I can think of more if I put my mind to it.

Oh, and of course Canada and the Republic of Ireland.


Africa, of course, is a largely failed continent. It might be more instructive to compare the former British Colonies to their non-Empire neighbours to get a handle on how well they are doing in relative terms.

As to Afghanistan, it was hardly ever a part of the British Empire. Ohh, they tried in those three Anglo-Afghan wars. But by and large they failed beyond brief periods where they were garrisoned in Kabul and perhaps another city or two. It was only ever viewed as a pawn in The Great Game between the UK and Russia, not so much as a part of the Empire.

Pakistan? That is also a borderline call as it represents an autonomous splitting off of a ethnic group from the larger Indian subcontinent after the end of British rule. It's status as a "failed state" is also very debateable.

So at some point they were?

I think 'failed' and Ireland probably fits better when it was a colonial holding, rather than after. Not to say that life in 1950's Ireland was more fun than a barrel of monkeys, but the same can be said for the UK.

Both the Islamabad and the Kabul governments are unable to enforce their wills in large parts of their respective countries. Which was the definition of failed state was it not?


That being the case you will then have to retract many of your African examples. They may be failed in most measures that matter to the citizens, but Uganda, Zambia, Malawai, Ghana, etc DO have strong central governments.

economicly we where failing and I think Ian Paisley at the time commented on "the failed Irish Republic".

The Reverend Ian Paisley:
http://www.nndb.com/people/766/000085511/paisley.jpg

A pinch of salt:
http://www.foodsubs.com/Photos/pretzelsalt.jpg

Uganda, Zambia, Malawai, Ghana &c. anything in africa pretty much.

Afganistan.... Pakistan.... I'm sure I can think of more if I put my mind to it.

Oh, and of course Canada and the Republic of Ireland.

You forgot the United States of America. *grins impishly and runs*

The Reverend Ian Paisley:
http://www.nndb.com/people/766/000085511/paisley.jpg

A pinch of salt:
http://www.foodsubs.com/Photos/pretzelsalt.jpg


"Crazy" Ian Paisley was featured in Jon Ronson's wonderful book "Them: Adventures with Extremists"

That being the case you will then have to retract many of your African examples. They may be failed in most measures that matter to the citizens, but Uganda, Zambia, Malawai, Ghana, etc DO have strong central governments.

Uganda has lost control of the north of the country, malaqi is swamped by refugees &c.

Deutsch-Ostafrika, Deutsch-Südwestafrika, Kamerun and Togo are doing reasonably well...;)

Uganda has lost control of the north of the country, malaqi is swamped by refugees &c.


If having a refugee problem equates to "failed state", then what are we to make of the current Washington rhetoric regarding millions of illegal immigrants?

:p ;)

I wonder how many of the former colonies of the UK have become failed states, as compared to foreign colonies of other countries.

Here is a list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Colonial_Territories_by_country#Great_Britain_.2F_England

Ideally I'm looking for input from people who are familiar with one country or another.

Are we including America in the list of failed states?

As a percentage, I think ex-British colonies do pretty well.

bloody colonials

"Crazy" Ian Paisley was featured in Jon Ronson's wonderful book "Them: Adventures with Extremists"

Marvellous book. I do like the David Icke and Tottenham Ayatollah sections...

Somalia is comparatively stable nowadays, though I still wouldn't want to live there...

http://rru.worldbank.org/Documents/publicpolicyjournal/280-nenova-harford.pdf

Jack Straw mentions that the rise is state failure is directly related to end of the Cold War. He says that the tie (aid packages) between Western states and pro-western developing countries unraveled as the protecting these states from USSR influence was no longer necessary (and vice versa - except that the USSR ceased to exist).

I thought it was quite an interesting analysis.

http://www.eri.bham.ac.uk/events/jstraw060902.pdf

Somalia is comparatively stable nowadays, though I still wouldn't want to live there...

http://rru.worldbank.org/Documents/publicpolicyjournal/280-nenova-harford.pdf

Surely that's because it doesn't have a government, no?

Why don’t we [England] just reinstate the Empire, instead of all this Commonwealth nonsense? While we're at it, we can quit the EU!

What about the rest of the UK? Let's see how England liked it if the UK was referred to as Scotland or....Wales all the time, eh.

Oh, and Basildon District counts as a failed state too, I think. Apart from the bits on the north side of the A127.

What about the rest of the UK? Let's see how England liked it if the UK was referred to as Scotland or....Wales all the time, eh.

Oh, and Basildon District counts as a failed state too, I think. Apart from the bits on the north side of the A127.Basildon district council has a monopoly on the legitimate use of force? Remind me never to go there. :eek:

So wait, does that mean the coucil goes round and duffs up the Police force every now and again? o_O

Whatever you may say about Britain, I think my country and many other countries owe a lot of their success to England. I applaud in particular their common law system (vs a civil law system), which for some mysterious reason seems to cut down on corruption, thereby giving a boost to the economy and the rule of law.

The Reverend Ian Paisley:

A pinch of salt:
I know, I was thinking since one crazy person said it another person on the internet might be crazy enough to believe it.

I wonder how many of the former colonies of the UK have become failed states, as compared to foreign colonies of other countries.

Here is a list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Colonial_Territories_by_country#Great_Britain_.2F_England

Ideally I'm looking for input from people who are familiar with one country or another.
Most of those countries are tiny and Britain had far more than any other nation has had in history. I would hardly call America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, Etc. "failed states".

Spain's former colonies are also doing fairly well. Sure, they've had their troubles, social and economic, but overall they've kept reasonable government and integrity, hardly the state of social unraveling that defines a failed state. Brazil, a former Portuguese colony, can't be said to be a failed state either.

I think the only failed state in the continent is Haiti.

Many AFrican states are "failed" because they were never meant to suceed. The colonial powers consciously carved the continent up in a way that showed no respect for linguistic or cultural groupings ... it was all part and parcel of the divide and conquer approach. It made for strong colonies but weak independent nations.

Marvellous book. I do like the David Icke and Tottenham Ayatollah sections...


Google video has one of the segments of his BBC documentary, the one about Bohemian Grove and Alex Jones, its really extremely great. Look up "jon Ronson" on google video.

The bit in the Icke section where the wacko is listing the different kinds of reptillians had me fall on the floor laughing... the "interdimensional sasquatch."

Many AFrican states are "failed" because they were never meant to suceed. The colonial powers consciously carved the continent up in a way that showed no respect for linguistic or cultural groupings ... it was all part and parcel of the divide and conquer approach. It made for strong colonies but weak independent nations.
South Africa is a 1st world nation. Zimbabwe and Cote D'Ivoire were pretty prosperous before their own governments screwed them up. Most of Africa would be ok were it not for the Africans, their incompetent governments and their silly wars.

South Africa is a 1st world nation. Zimbabwe and Cote D'Ivoire were pretty prosperous before their own governments screwed them up. Most of Africa would be ok were it not for the Africans, their incompetent governments and their silly wars.

As I said, some of them made good colonies, but lousy countries.

The "incompetent governments and silly wars" are quite often a result of the way the continent was carved up, in a way that does not respect cultural and linguistic groupings. It leaves people with a common culture and language divided between several countries, and often at the mercy of larger linguistic and cultural groups within a given country.

As I said, some of them made good colonies, but lousy countries.

The "incompetent governments and silly wars" are quite often a result of the way the continent was carved up, in a way that does not respect cultural and linguistic groupings. It leaves people with a common culture and language divided between several countries, and often at the mercy of larger linguistic and cultural groups within a given country.

See also the Saarland in the 30's.

The brits started to the USA we have done realy well =-)

Most of those countries are tiny and Britain had far more than any other nation has had in history. I would hardly call America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, Etc. "failed states".

There is a difference between those colonies (like Australia, NZ, Canada, US, but not India) where they displaced the indigenous people and so were largely governing British citizens who had moved there as settlers and those colonies (like Africa) where they were actually governing indigenous people.

They were also generally colonized at different stages of the colonial project.

Another key point - most of the colonies in Africa were taken to spread Christianity (supposedly) rather than for economic value.

See Nigeria, which is poor, but just about 100% of the population is Christian. Which stops them getting condoms and such, which is sad.

I sort of whished that we'd never have bothered, but whatever.

I wonder how many of the former colonies of the UK have become failed states, as compared to foreign colonies of other countries.

Here is a list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Colonial_Territories_by_country#Great_Britain_.2F_England

Ideally I'm looking for input from people who are familiar with one country or another.
"The Wikimedia Foundation servers are currently experiencing technical difficulties." :p

Well... there was a few former English colonies which aren't failed states and they are Canada, New Zealand, Australia...
I just knew someone would use this opportunity to slam America again. Thank you. Had you not, I would have been disappointed. :p

"The Wikimedia Foundation servers are currently experiencing technical difficulties." :p


Well *I* donate money to them so dont blame me ;)

This one works http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Failed_state
"The Wikimedia Foundation servers are currently experiencing technical difficulties." Aahahahahaha! :p

You forgot the United States of America. *grins impishly and runs*
Very funny. Ha. Ha. Ha.

I wonder how many of the former colonies of the UK have become failed states, as compared to foreign colonies of other countries.

Here is a list:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Colonial_Territories_by_country#Great_Britain_.2F_England

Ideally I'm looking for input from people who are familiar with one country or another.

GAHH!! Wikipedia is broken!

If having a refugee problem equates to "failed state", then what are we to make of the current Washington rhetoric regarding millions of illegal immigrants?

:p ;)
What are we to make of it? Mexico is a "failed state." :p

Are we including America in the list of failed states?
Only if you're exceeingly stupid.

Only if you're exceeingly stupid.

Then I'm stupid. America is failing. and Bush isn't helping either.

"The Wikimedia Foundation servers are currently experiencing technical difficulties." Aahahahahaha! :p


*I* donate money so dont blame me ;)

Then I'm stupid. America is failing. and Bush isn't helping either.
By whose definition, oh statistically challened one?

*I* donate money so dont blame me ;)
Doesn't look like it worked. :)

Wiki's working fine for me.

Wiki's working fine for me.

Same here.

Then I'm stupid. America is failing. and Bush isn't helping either.

Despite all of the bullshit of Bush America is still the best place to be. I understand you just have to look at an American supermarket to show our success. Our freedoms are still the best as well.

Mexico to the south is a failed state. Must be why their people are constantly trying to get to America.

Then I'm stupid. America is failing. and Bush isn't helping either.

America is slipping ... I don't know if that means they are failing. Yet.

So to recap, former British colonies that have become failed states are limited to:

Sierra Leone, Somalia, Zimbabwe, the Sudan?

Somalia wasn't a British colony. Only the northern section - the self-proclaimed, fully functioning, but unrecognised Republic of Somaliland - was British.

The rest of Somalia - the anarchistic bit - was an Italian colony.

The two sections were joined together at independence in order to form what is currently the internationally recognised (in theory) nation of Somalia.

Which just goes to prove that ethnic homogeneity isn't necessarily the solution to Africa's problems.

Sudan was technically a UK-Egyptian co-dominion, rather than a British colony. But I'll concede that the 'UK' part had more power and input than the Egyptian bit.

Somalia wasn't a British colony. Only the northern section - the self-proclaimed, fully functioning, but unrecognised Republic of Somaliland - was British.

The rest of Somalia - the anarchistic bit - was an Italian colony.

The two sections were joined together at independence in order to form what is currently the internationally recognised (in theory) nation of Somalia.

Which just goes to prove that ethnic homogeneity isn't necessarily the solution to Africa's problems.

Sudan was technically a UK-Egyptian co-dominion, rather than a British colony. But I'll concede that the 'UK' part had more power and input than the Egyptian bit.

Fantastic, just the sort of info I was looking for, thanks.

Well... there was a few former English colonies which aren't failed states and they are Canada, New Zealand, Australia...
Can't forget the mighty Singapore.

The 13 States should fess up and admit that they want back in.;)

Well, basically that whole list ( Minus America, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, India, and a few others to name ) relied on the Empire/Kingdom/England it self. Without that Mega Economy ( for it's time since it did control almost every aspect and 2/3 of the World's Top Ports ) they are...well worthless. Infact, one may say it is the fault of the English as to why the world is poorer today. Mostly because they gave such a saturated nipple for most of these now nations to suck on...giving them ( most of them ) no chance or not really opting them to make their own local economy. Infact, just left them with...nothing.

So yea those are my 2 cents...

Why don’t we [England] just reinstate the Empire, instead of all this Commonwealth nonsense? While we're at it, we can quit the EU!
Woo! And reinstate the Roman Empire! Just do away with thew EU all together! And the Third Reich...and The Russian Empire. And Axum!Somalia wasn't a British colony. Only the northern section - the self-proclaimed, fully functioning, but unrecognised Republic of Somaliland - was British.

The rest of Somalia - the anarchistic bit - was an Italian colony.

The two sections were joined together at independence in order to form what is currently the internationally recognised (in theory) nation of Somalia.

Which just goes to prove that ethnic homogeneity isn't necessarily the solution to Africa's problems.

Sudan was technically a UK-Egyptian co-dominion, rather than a British colony. But I'll concede that the 'UK' part had more power and input than the Egyptian bit.
I always find it odd that the weaker, less stable colony before the unification turned out to be the stronger, more stable nation after they became free.

Infact, one may say it is the fault of the English as to why the world is poorer today.
The world is richer everywhere today than it has ever been.

The world is richer everywhere today than it has ever been.

Except for the parts that are poorer.

The world is richer everywhere today than it has ever been.

Thought you had me on your Ignore list :-P.

So...

Yemen and Oman are richer?

Sheeze...

Well, God Bless the English for that one I guess.

Same goes for most of the Middle East, don't worry you...the English get to split the guilt their with the French :-).

Why don’t we [England] just reinstate the Empire, instead of all this Commonwealth nonsense? While we're at it, we can quit the EU!

New Zealand would probibly be the easyest nationt to obsorb back into the empire.

so long as you had some sort of "imperial parliment" or something, at least. the nations that have since declared themselves republics would probibly be harder.

hehe.. odds are good NZ would outright implode without the monarchy, for all the noises various people [mostly MPs... hummm.. wonder why? ;) ] make about republicanisem.

interestingly, we just got/are about to get a new Governer General.. who is apparantly something of a monarchist.. which, combined wtih good governance skills, are basicly the requirements for the job.

i'm not sure how one would go about re-obsorbing nations into an empire again though. it could have been done just prior to world war 2 without too much difficulty. .. now? not so sure.

certianly, the EU is a menace.

The British Empire covered a quarter of the land, and a third of the population of the world at one point. As the old saying goes "The sun never sets on the British Empire".

I'm sorry but that saying was originally made about the spanish empire, the first world wide colonial empire.;)

Fantastic, just the sort of info I was looking for, thanks.
You should watch a British travel show that was on Aussie TV recently. It's called "Holidays in places that don't exist"

It's brilliant, and one of the places they went to was Somalia and Somaliland. The guy even got a Somalian passport - from a private businessman with three teeth and a red beard.

Anarchism in action...as I said, a marvellous show.

I believe that England pwned Ireland at one point in history... and I'm not sure if they're still there or not...

I believe that England pwned Ireland at one point in history... and I'm not sure if they're still there or not...

Well, at least you're honest in admitting your ignorance, which is more than can be said for some.

I believe that England pwned Ireland at one point in history... and I'm not sure if they're still there or not...

And I do believe that Ireland 'pwned' England at another point in history.

The Irish War of Independence wasn't called the War of Independence for no reason.

And I do believe that Ireland 'pwned' England at another point in history.

The Irish War of Independence wasn't called the War of Independence for no reason.

Although they do still "occupy" the North.

Are we including America in the list of failed states?

no

Elected government with teeth

Strong military

Strong economy

Economic freedom unrivaled (or nearly so) in the world; social freedoms extremely strong as well. (we can work where we want to, live where we want to, buy what we want to, drive what we want to, travel where we want to, say what we want to, write what we want to, listen to what we want to, worship how we want to, etc., with impunity... of course there are some practical limits -- buying crack, driving a tank on a race track, etc... but within the general framework of accepted acts, we can do whatever we want to.)

I believe that England pwned Ireland at one point in history... and I'm not sure if they're still there or not...

That was... random.

Although they do still "occupy" the North.

No. Just... no.

No. Just... no.

In addition to the quotation marks, I should have included a smily face. That was tongue in cheek.

In addition to the quotation marks, I should have included a smily face. That was tongue in cheek.


At any rate, what you meant is that armed terrorist peasant rabble occupy the south of ireland. :)

Mexico to the south is a failed state. Must be why their people are constantly trying to get to America.
No, it's not.

At any rate, what you meant is that armed terrorist peasant rabble occupy the south of ireland. :)

Now a very propserous armed terrorist peasant rabble. :)