NationStates Jolt Archive

Who is better?

At:
War (in history and present day)
Civilisation
Invention
Infastructure
Governing
Culture
International relations
Anything Else.

I'd choose Britain.
I choose America. America spends at least 10x on military. We have Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, etc. In Britain there's a show called "Watching Paint Dry". They show gloss, semi-gloss, satin, etc. in real time. At the end of the show they vote out their least favorite.

Go go meaningless arguments!!

lolz...

and Mars FTW, screw those damn dirty apes

Who is better?

At:
War (in history and present day)
Civilisation
Invention
Infastructure
Governing
Culture
International relations
Anything Else.

I'd choose Britain.

What do you mean by America? Are you discussing the two continents, or just the USA?

America. Britain sure as hell had a hell of a time invading America.
Go go hypothetical war scenarios by armchair generals!!

Go go meaningless arguments!!

America as in the people who live in the USA but use the name of the continent.

Oh God, why?

Who said it was hypothetical?
I wasn't (directly) referring to your statement, I'm just anticipating page after page of 'experts' telling us in excruciating detail why army x wouldn't be able to invade country y.

I say...pie.

Debate.

Who for example would be better at invading a country then setting it to rights?

Britain brought us NS, so they win per default.

Debate.

Who for example would be better at invading a country then setting it to rights?

America. Britain sure as hell had a hell of a time invading America.

I choose America. America spends at least 10x on military. We have Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, etc. In Britain there's a show called "Watching Paint Dry". They show gloss, semi-gloss, satin, etc. in real time. At the end of the show they vote out their least favorite.

Never heard of that show and I watch a lot of TV.

Oh, and don't mention Edison, lest we get into the whole lightbulb thing again...

And remind me, when has an American Invasion improved a Country.
For Britain: Canada; India; South Africa etc

America. Britain sure as hell had a hell of a time invading America.

Except...the one time they did "invade" us...the war of 1812...they won.



Well, except for the colonization, but there was no "USA" then.

Go go hypothetical war scenarios by armchair generals!!

Who said it was hypothetical?

Britain has become a nanny state and is full of complete idiots

including myself, i should of left when i had the chance xD

CHINA!
<insert reasons why here>

Never heard of that show and I watch a lot of TV.

Oh, and don't mention Edison, lest we get into the whole lightbulb thing again...

And remind me, when has an American Invasion improved a Country.
For Britain: Canada; India; South Africa etc
Britain never invaded Canada, and India's still a hellhole. That leaves South Africa, and we have South Korea.

Who is better?

At:
War (in history and present day)


Hard to say since England has been around longer and thusly fought more wars, a something to point out on this though is...
The Two times that England has fought America it has been either a loss for England or a draw (American Revolution, War of 1812)


Edit:
Who is better?

At: Anything Else.

For Anything Else, I will choose Dentistry/Dental Hygiene...
America Wins :D ;)

apes ftw

Has to be Great Britain.

Meh, Cthulhu favors America for his messing with the minds of mortal men, so America clearly wins. :rolleyes:

Or we could come up with any other equally trivial reason in this international pissing contest.

lol nationalism*Crazy techno music*

America,for me. No question.

Tried Britain and like my home much better.

Britain never invaded Canada, and India's still a hellhole. That leaves South Africa, and we have South Korea.


Lets correct your historical ignorance here...

Britian used to control Canada, so arguablly that counts for them (just like the US does) because British rule helped a nation. India is not a hellhole, its actually a nation with a rapidly developing economy.

South Korea we didnt invade. We devided Korea in two and have military presence there. They have done everything else on their own.

Otherwise, we have destroyed:

Latin America
Argentina
Philipenes (who are now recorvering)

I think God has commanded you to say this, therefore you are wrong.
There is no other countries, this is all my imagination, you are all puppets to conspire against me.
This is true because God hates me and hates you.
So i'll go with other.

Meh, Cthulhu favors America for his messing with the minds of mortal men, so America clearly wins. :rolleyes:

Or we could come up with any other equally trivial reason in this international pissing contest.



Our flag has more red.

Go go meaningless arguments!!

Go go Gadget lawsuit!

Who is better?

At:
War (in history and present day)
Civilisation
Invention
Infastructure
Governing
Culture
International relations
Anything Else.

I'd choose Britain.

The United States. We spell civilization the correct way;)

Here comes the "They weren't British, they were Canadian" argument.... ;)

Which fails miserably because there weren't any Canadians then, at least not in the national sense.

Lets correct your historical ignorance here...

Britian used to control Canada, so arguablly that counts for them (just like the US does) because British rule helped a nation. India is not a hellhole, its actually a nation with a rapidly developing economy.

South Korea we didnt invade. We devided Korea in two and have military presence there. They have done everything else on their own.

Otherwise, we have destroyed:

Latin America
Argentina
Philipenes (who are now recorvering)

The Philippenes was already in terrible condition. Our brief 50 year reign didn't make things any better, of course, but I'd say the Spanish take equal, if not greater responsibility for their problems.

And the only parts of Latin America that we truly destroyed are the Caribbean, Central America, and to a lesser extent Mexico. To say the region's problems are entirely our fault is inaccurate.

Except...the one time they did "invade" us...the war of 1812...they won.



Well, except for the colonization, but there was no "USA" then.

Here comes the "They weren't British, they were Canadian" argument.... ;)

Lets correct your historical ignorance here...

Britian used to control Canada, so arguablly that counts for them (just like the US does) because British rule helped a nation. India is not a hellhole, its actually a nation with a rapidly developing economy.

South Korea we didnt invade. We devided Korea in two and have military presence there. They have done everything else on their own.

Otherwise, we have destroyed:

Latin America
Argentina
Philipenes (who are now recorvering)
What about in the Korean War when we helped defend it from North Korea?
The Mexican War is Mexico's fault, and Cuba is Castro's fault. I don't think we've ever had a war with Argentina. The Philippines are Japan's fault.
India is a hellhole, they rank 137'th in income per capita, at $720 as of 2005, just above Senegal and Mongolia. Also, I'm counting Puerto Rico for the U.S.
Also, the War of 1812 was a tie, had Britain won, we would've been a colony again.

America, as we have YET to screw over a colony in the way Britain did America. But at the current rate, I'd give it another ten or twenty years before we do,.

What about in the Korean War when we helped defend it from North Korea?

Defending allies is different fro what you were talking about. You were talking about a country benefiting from a US invasion. We were asked.

The Mexican War is Mexico's fault,

Thats actually incorrect, and your lack of historical knowledge is startling. It is widely accepted in the academic community tha our reasons for the Mexican America War were largely fabricated in an effort to gain support to expand our borders. Manifest Destiny and all that.

and Cuba is Castro's fault.

Wrong, its the result of stubborn US anti-communist policy.

I don't think we've ever had a war with Argentina.

Well, we helped with a coup and set up a brutal dictator who imprisoned and tortured his people for no reason.

The Philippines are Japan's fault.

The brutal dictatorship we had in place before WWII that ran the Philippines for us has nothing to do with Japan.

India is a hellhole, they rank 137'th in income per capita, at $720 as of 2005, just above Senegal and Mongolia.

Doesnt change the fact that their economy is one of the fastest growing the in the world. Look it up now. Not 2005.

Also, I'm counting Puerto Rico for the U.S.

Ah, more instances of US Imperialism where the people more or less resent us.

Also, the War of 1812 was a tie, had Britain won, we would've been a colony again.

No, it wasnt a fucking tie. Learn your history child. Britian did not invade us with the intention of making us a colony again, so your reasoning is bullocks. They attacked us because we werent taking sides in their spat with France, and then we ended up signing a treaty with France, so they started intercepting our ships on their way to France, and we declared war. And we lost. We were beaten to a bloody pulp. It was disasterous and we were humiliated, not to mention our capital captured and burnt down. The only reason a treaty was signed that didnt screw us hard was because the British had to go deal with Napoleaon in Europe, ie, they had bigger fish to fry. We won ONE major battle in Lousianna, and that was AFTER the treaty had been signed, just someone forgot to tell General Jackson.

We lost that war. Saying otherwise is historical ignorance of the highest caliber.

Except...the one time they did "invade" us...the war of 1812...they won.

Um...no the British didn't win 1812. Their invasion was actually unsuccessful despite burning down D.C. They did not accomplish what they set out to do.

Um...no the British didn't win 1812. Their invasion was actually unsuccessful despite burning down D.C. They did not accomplish what they set out to do.



They set out to keep us from siding with France. In that they succeeded, as they blockaded our ports and kicked our ass.


They also repusled our attempt to take Canada. They only reason they didnt get any territorial gains from the Treary of Ghent was because of the Battle New Orleans and they wanted to get the hell out because of escalating tension with Russia and public disgruntlement over taxes at home.

EDIT: Unless Im missing something. My historical background is medieval and classical europe. And Ill be glad to have this discussion with you Corny as your not an R-tard.

Defending allies is different fro what you were talking about. You were talking about a country benefiting from a US invasion. We were asked.



Thats actually incorrect, and your lack of historical knowledge is startling. It is widely accepted in the academic community tha our reasons for the Mexican America War were largely fabricated in an effort to gain support to expand our borders. Manifest Destiny and all that.



Wrong, its the result of stubborn US anti-communist policy.



Well, we helped with a coup and set up a brutal dictator who imprisoned and tortured his people for no reason.



The brutal dictatorship we had in place before WWII that ran the Philippines for us has nothing to do with Japan.



Doesnt change the fact that their economy is one of the fastest growing the in the world. Look it up now. Not 2005.



Ah, more instances of US Imperialism where the people more or less resent us.



No, it wasnt a fucking tie. Learn your history child. Britian did not invade us with the intention of making us a colony again, so your reasoning is bullocks. We lost. We were beaten to a bloody pulp. It was disasterous and we were humiliated, not to mention our capital captured and burnt down. The only reason a treaty was signed that didnt screw us hard was because the British had to go deal with Napoleaon in Europe, ie, they had bigger fish to fry. We won ONE major battle in Lousianna, and that was AFTER the treaty had been signed, just someone forgot to tell General Jackson.

We lost that war. Saying otherwise is historical ignorance of the highest caliber.

The War of 1812 was not a defeat because it confirmed our independence in the eyes of the British. We may have lost the majority of the battles, but we won the political fight, and seeing as war is nothing more than the continuation of politics to a violent level. We also did in fact manage to stop British impressment, so we won on that level as well. And in case you were unaware (which you seem to be), we burned Canada's capital, so it all evens out. We may have stopped short of annexing Canada, but we stopped impressement, all the while miraculously maintaining our territorial integrity. To call it a loss is historical ignorance, Knights of Labor.

Most people in fact do not resent US presence in Puerto Rico, otherwise they would've voted away their territorial status.

And you seem to be ignorant of Philippene history, so I'll enlighten you. The Philippenes was never under a dictator while in American possession. It was under the control of a government best classified as an aristocratic "democracy", with the landowning elite holding most of the power, but a dictatorship it was not.

EDIT: And please tell me KoL, was the Vietnam War an American loss? I'm curious as to your opinion? Oh, and please tell me why.

No, it wasnt a fucking tie. Learn your history child.

Why don't you? The War of 1812 was indeed a "fucking tie". Most historians agree that it was a tie and evidence backs that it was a tie. Go learn your history child.

Britian did not invade us with the intention of making us a colony again, so your reasoning is bullocks. They attacked us because we werent taking sides in their spat with France, and then we ended up signing a treaty with France, so they started intercepting our ships on their way to France, and we declared war.

Unless you can present the name of the treaty....I'm calling you out. Bonapart stopped seizing our ships at sea knowing full well that Britain will follow suit but that their decision would be to late.

And we lost. We were beaten to a bloody pulp. It was disasterous and we were humiliated, not to mention our capital captured and burnt down. The only reason a treaty was signed that didnt screw us hard was because the British had to go deal with Napoleaon in Europe, ie, they had bigger fish to fry. We won ONE major battle in Lousianna, and that was AFTER the treaty had been signed, just someone forgot to tell General Jackson.

WOW!!! Just Wow. Where to start. Ok, I'll grant you the capital burning down was not a highlight but face the fucking facts. They were turned back at Baltimore (rumor has it that it was a twister) and they lost the Battle of Fort McHenry. They were suffering losses on the Great Lakes and in upstate New York towards the end of the war. Beaten to a bloody pulp? Bull fucking shit mate.

We lost that war. Saying otherwise is historical ignorance of the highest caliber.

Go learn your history mate. Its obvious you haven't learn much about the War of 1812.

We lost that war. Saying otherwise is historical ignorance of the highest caliber.

No, we didn't lose... It was a tie, not because of anything we did, but because of a change in circumstances in Europe. If they hadn't felt it necessary to pull their forces away, they would have won the war and forced really unfavorable terms upon us.

Admittedly saying it was a tie is a bit of an exaggeration, but they didn't really win either.

They set out to keep us from siding with France. In that they succeeded, as they blockaded our ports and kicked our ass.

They kicked our ass? From where I'm standing, no they didn't.

They also repusled our attempt to take Canada.

And they failed in their invasion of upstate New York as well as Louisiana. What's your point?

They only reason they didnt get any territorial gains from the Treary of Ghent was because of the Battle New Orleans and they wanted to get the hell out because of escalating tension with Russia and public disgruntlement over taxes at home.

Um...The Treaty of Ghent was signed BEFORE the Battle of New Orleans.

EDIT: Unless Im missing something. My historical background is medieval and classical europe. And Ill be glad to have this discussion with you Corny as your not an R-tard.

I'm more than willing to discuss it but you do need to settle down and realize that the War of 1812 was a tie and both sides (short of the nationalists) knows this.

Edit: For the discussion, it is going to have to wait awhile for I have a night class and attending my fiance's synchronize swimming show tonight.

Well weren't the British also fighting the French each time they had a war with the US?

Um...no the British didn't win 1812. Their invasion was actually unsuccessful despite burning down D.C. They did not accomplish what they set out to do.

lol, im in your capitalz, burning down your white housez

Yes, but the United States survived, and seeing as Britain was the largest power in the world at that time, that's the best we could've hoped for.

Well with the British diverting most of there military strength against the French does make the survival a bit less impressive.
In 1812 weren't they mainly fighting the French and had most of there forces fighting the French?

Although I like the US i like the UK better..

Well weren't the British also fighting the French each time they had a war with the US?

Yes, but the United States survived, and seeing as Britain was the largest power in the world at that time, that's the best we could've hoped for.

The United States. We spell civilization the correct way
Erm, English came first, then you guys used the language and started changing spelling and pronounciation.

Well with the British diverting most of there military strength against the French does make the survival a bit less impressive.
In 1812 weren't they mainly fighting the French and had most of there forces fighting the French?


Yep, most troops fought in Europe... and to compare, Denmark fought Britain in this war and we survied too, although getting quite a beating :p

Well with the British diverting most of there military strength against the French does make the survival a bit less impressive.
In 1812 weren't they mainly fighting the French and had most of there forces fighting the French?

Yes, less impressive. But hey, we weren't destroyed.

I choose America. America spends at least 10x on military. We have Ben Franklin, Thomas Edison, etc. In Britain there's a show called "Watching Paint Dry". They show gloss, semi-gloss, satin, etc. in real time. At the end of the show they vote out their least favorite.

The show that was set up to mock how idiotic reality TV shows like Big Brother are? That is indeed one of our finer points.

Overall it's a hard comparison, because the US has only been around a few centuries while the UK has a shedload of history behind it, hence has had more time for culture, inventions, dominating the world and so on.

I don't understand why there is a widely held opinion that the war of 1812 was a draw or even worse that the US won. Given that the all the British ever wanted was the status quo to be preserved while they dealt with Bonaparte surely a treaty that does nothing but specifically preserve the status quo ante bellum confirms that they won? What more can you expect them to do before you allow them that? The two key British war aims in the war of 1812 were to beat Bonaparte and keep Canada, both of which they did.

The Americans on the other hand failed to accomplish any of their pre war aims.
Repealing orders in council? - happened before war broke out.
Stopping impressment? - made moot by the defeat of Napoleon.
Taking Canada? - Nope.
Stopping the British inciting the Native Americans? - it's a bit tenuous that they ever were - trading for firearms is fairly standard.
Avoiding destruction by the British? - it's not the most ambitious goal when starting a war of aggression, and anyway they seemed to be managing it quite well before they found it necessary to declare war.

All you're left with are fairly nebulous ideas about prominence on the world stage and lessons learned.

Baseball, Enough said

Cricket. We win everything after this consideration.:)

Yeah, I'm sure.

I would seriously rather poke my eyes out than watch a live baseball match...
...and don't get me started on AMERICAN football :rolleyes:

Baseball, Enough said

Yeah, I'm sure.

You don't know history.

No you don't know history!

Ireland lays down some pwnage. If only we could move Bosto their...
:mp5:
:sniper:
any comments mesage my nation.

Ireland lays down some pwnage. If only we could move Bosto their...
:mp5:
:sniper:
any comments mesage my nation.

And I think Ireland is better than both countries :p BTW

EDIT: And please tell me KoL, was the Vietnam War an American loss? I'm curious as to your opinion? Oh, and please tell me why.

Militarially, we technically won because we inflicted many many more casualties on them than they did on us.

In practicality we lost. Our goals were not achieved as South Vietnam fell to North Vietnam.

I would seriously rather poke my eyes out than watch a live baseball match...
...and don't get me started on AMERICAN football :rolleyes:

Bloody true.

Cricket. We win everything after this consideration.

Um, more like, you lose everything after this consideration. Isn't cricket the "sport" that people use to mock the British ;)

Although, I hold us Americans responsible for baseball, something another insipid "sport". The score is now tied.

Militarially, we technically won because we inflicted many many more casualties on them than they did on us.

In practicality we lost. Our goals were not achieved as South Vietnam fell to North Vietnam.

If casualty figures directly determined the military outcome of a war, the Soviet Union lost to Nazi Germany in the second world war, which, if memory serves, is not consistent with historical truth. The "military" success of any conflict is determined by if one does, or does not, accomplish the objectives for which conflict is initiated; simply outkilling the Vietcong and Vietminh was not the objective of the USA in Vietnam, hence, "militarily", you lost.

Um, more like, you lose everything after this consideration. Isn't cricket the "sport" that people use to mock the British ;)

Although, I hold us Americans responsible for baseball, something another insipid "sport". The score is now tied.

No. Cricket is the sport that the entirety of the commonwealth plays with a passion, and that 1 billion Indians adore to a degree American sports fans genuinely do not understand.

All other arguments aside I think that as of right now both nations have their strong points.

Culture: as we in the U.S. are comprised of many cultures we have yet to achieve a singular overlying culture so Brittan wins

History: Both nations have equally rich histories which have been intertwined for the last 400 years. This is a tie between Mother Brittan and her offspring America.

War: Although both countries have a proud military history, as of “right now” the runaway bloated military budget of the United States makes us the final say in today’s military matters, especially in the air where we will maintain supremacy for at least the next 30 years. However I would like to remind my fellow Americans who taught us how to fight give the Brits some credit.

Food: Not going to touch this one.

Government: We are run differently so it’s really not an issue of policy as it is ideology, personally I like the stability that comes with the bloated clogged government we have, but for people who like things to change faster than they do here then you might like Brittan.

Except...the one time they did "invade" us...the war of 1812...they won.


Ehh, not so much, no. It was a funny situation becuase it involved the French too, thus making it a sort of three way war.(Although it was solely the British attacking America) The US wanted to remain nutreal but Britain kept taking US soldiers. The US invasion of British held Canada did fail and they did burn down the old Whitehouse but the US also won lots of battles.(Lets not foeget New Orleans, a battle won, after the war ended!) And they didn't gain US territory.

More of a tie. Both sides accomplished goals.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/War_of_1812
______________
On a different note. Why do people start these threads?

America wins for fish and chips with malt vinegar.

Russia.

Although I like the US i like the UK better..

Are you nervous about this.... maybe hesitant to tell us....

I would seriously rather poke my eyes out than watch a live baseball match...
...and don't get me started on AMERICAN football :rolleyes:

As boring as those are, they PAIL in comparison (of awfullness) next to soccer and cricket.

Who is better?

At:
War (in history and present day)
Civilisation
Invention
Infastructure
Governing
Culture
International relations
Anything Else.

I'd choose Britain.

Hmm, I'll go topic by topic. EDIT: Given the title of this thread, I've focused on the UK and US. Russia and China both have rich histories, but to figure out which of the four is "better" would not only make my head explode, but take waaaayyyy too long.
War-I'd go with US, merely on batting average. We aren't all that inventive in terms of strategy, but you know what, we win more often than not.

Civilization- Britain has a distinct and successful civilization and for a time empire, and while the US doesn't really have as clearly defined civilization, it is arguably more influential, and has the potential to be more so in the future. But this is not the future, so I'll go England.

Invention- England (off the top of my head) lots of advances in early science, especially math and physics (newton, etc.) first to really use steam power effectively, other inventions that I can't think of right now. US airplanes, telephone, electricity, internet, the US tax code, etc. Gotta give it to US.

Infrastructure- The US infrastructure is decaying and needs an extensive overhaul. I don't know peanuts about the UK infrastructure. I'll give it to UK.

Governing-Theoretically the US is better in my opinion. In practice I'd say it's about a push.

Culture-See civilization. Except that the British don't get benefit of time, so US wins.

Int. Relations- US=Sucks UK=Sucks harder. I'll push it.

Anything else- what else? push
Score: England=2 US=3

America wins for fish and chips with malt vinegar.

Brilliant. :p

Really though, this is one of the sillier threads I've seen. America is not a homogenous enough population to define in any meaningful way, and even if it were, comparison to the UK or other countries in a categorical rather than a more specific way is doubly meaningless.

Although I noticed a few people selling the U.S. Army and *especially* the Navy way short, concerning 1812 - both performed well after the disastrous beginning. The Navy, mostly small ships, outperformed even optimistic expectations, and the Army about broke even. Of course, military losses aren't the question when asking who "won," but a little more respect is deserved either way.

Who said it was hypothetical?

We all saw that South Park episode, the Brits are still sore about us breaking away from the empire.

Who is better?

At:
War (in history and present day)
Civilisation
Invention
Infastructure
Governing
Culture
International relations
Anything Else.

War: I'd have to say it would be a draw between Great Britain and Russia with a slight nod to the British. You don't control a quarter of the world's surface and population through peaceful means. The British Empire (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Empire)

Civilization: Great Britain, thanks to them English become the dominant language. Use to be French.

Invention: China for the most part.

Govening: United States of America

Culture: British followed by the Americans.

International relations: None/all

Anything Else: Yeah, off the top of my head is Denmark which has the most happiest people. China for the most populous, USA for the largest GDP in the world and Nepal/China for having the highest mountain on Earth. Feel free to add anything else.

Edit: I see I forgot Infastructure. I'd have to go with Germany on that one. American roads are terrible. Make sure you have a vehicle with good shocks, your going to need them.

War (in history and present day) : America spends the most, but Planet of the Apes wins this one.
Civilisation: China
Invention: Toss up between America and China. The latter DID invent gunpowder. America DID invent the airplane and the lightbulb, and who-knows-what-else.
Infastructure: America. Specifically, our wonderful highways.
Governing: Great Britain.
Culture: Great Britain.
International relations: Switzerland.
Anything Else.: Screw Nationalism.

Cricket. We win everything after this consideration.:)

except cricket :p

Who is better?

At:
War (in history and present day)
Civilisation
Invention
Infastructure
Governing
Culture
International relations
Anything Else.

I'd choose Britain.

similarities
USA is a scion of Britain. Nowadays Britain is on the path of becoming the 51st state of the USA.
USA is ruled alternatively by two parties, who still don't differ very much when it comes to economy. Britain is ruled alternatively by two parties, who still don't differ very much when it comes to economy.
USA invaded and is invading countries around the globe. Same goes for Britain.

differencies
Brits speak English. Usians think they speak English.
Britain has steak-and-kidney pie and fish and chips. USA has McDonald's.
Usians think they have the real Bud. Brits travel to Czech Republic and drink the real Budweiser.
Britain has Queen Elizabeth II. USA has George Bush II.

This is enough to say that Britain owns USA all the time.

better are those who DON'T throw their resources away on ways of beating each other over the head, but put the kind of world everyone has to live in, ahead of kissing the ass of little green pieces of paper.

and no, i don't mean fanatically worshipping some other kind of idiology eather.

i would put america and gb both well below the top 10 percentile, with america quite a bit lower of the two, though of course no where near the bottem either.

i don't know who i'd put at the top or the bottom, but i think u.s. at about the 40th percentile level and gb and maybe the 55th or 60th.

=^^=
.../\...

War (in history and present day)
The British managed to conquer a quarter of the world's surface for a time and the British Redcoat was the most feared infantry in the world.
Nowadays? The British are still formidable man for man, while the US has ALOT of Armour and airpower behind it, although this can be rather disasterous...
Have I mentioned that in 1800 25% of all British Troops were Irish? :p
And that 10% of the Civil War Union Army was Irish

UK 1 - 0 US

Civilisation

The British have to win, plain and simple. They did bring western civilisation to a large proportion of the world (Including the US). The United States...less so.

UK 1 - 0 US

Invention
Alright I have to be honest, Britain went through the industrial revolution and if you mean the UK, that includes Scotland and they invented most of ths stuff we use or used:
The steamship paddle wheel
The steam boat
The first iron-hulled steamship
The pedal bicycle
The speedometer
The modern lawnmower
Cotton-reel thread
The fountain pen
Colour photography
Hypnosis
Criminal fingerprinting
The ultrasound scanner
the cure for malaria
the use of surgical anaesthesia
Penicillin
There are more but I think the point has been made

UK 2 -0 US

Infastructure

Britain has less miles of moterway per person than any other developed nation but America's infanstructure is no better from what I hear so it's a personal opinion

UK 2 - 1 US

Governing

The same, America is run by two parties and Britain is essentially run by two Parties. However, The British Parliament has been going for nearly a thousand years and almost every successful parliamentary system in the world is based off it (Including the American Senate)

UK 3 - 1 US

Culture
Britain again has the more culture although this is debatable amongst the less desireable council estates. American Culture (Such as it is) isn't really all that different. But Britain has had more painters, more singers and more poets and authours in General.

Plus the smugness that Americans think they have the greatest nation in the world really gets my goat completly.

UK 4 - 1 US

International relations

Britain has struggled here in the past and now but America takes the cock-up biscuit with spectacular invasions of the Middle East that bitten her in the ass. Britain was there too but she is withdrawing her troops, something the US doesn't want to do

UK 5 - 1 US

Anything Else.

Only that this can't be judged accurately as Britain has over 2 thousand years of development behind her (As England) while modern America has only about 300. However, when one looks at the catagories above, I find that Britain is a clear winner between them.

except cricket :p

Very true, although I'm less than impressed with whatever the BCCI has named its latest Twenty20 Cashcow.

Ireland lays down some pwnage. If only we could move Bosto their...
If only we could tow Ireland across the Atlantic, to just a few miles off of either Boston or New York, and tell the Yanks that it's their problem from now on...

The British Parliament has been going for nearly a thousand years and almost every successful parliamentary system in the world is based off it (Including the American Senate)
I doubt that the Lionheart's England was nowhere near a constitutional monarchy, or that Guillaume the Conqueror brought parliament along with him back in 1066. I think we should wait till the XVII century for the English parliament (anyway this makes more than 300 years going, and that's quite some time).

By the way, almost every parliamentary system in the world - including the British Parliament, and excluding the norse-originated thing - is based on the Roman Senate (that's why there are Senates in many Republics - also another Roman concept), and also many parliaments are an almost direct offspring of the French Revolution.

America. Britain sure as hell had a hell of a time invading America.

Though we did rather better at invading the US than William Tate's attempt to invade us.

War (in history and present day)
The British managed to conquer a quarter of the world's surface for a time and the British Redcoat was the most feared infantry in the world.
Nowadays? The British are still formidable man for man, while the US has ALOT of Armour and airpower behind it, although this can be rather disasterous...
Have I mentioned that in 1800 25% of all British Troops were Irish? :p
And that 10% of the Civil War Union Army was Irish

UK 1 - 0 US

Civilisation

The British have to win, plain and simple. They did bring western civilisation to a large proportion of the world (Including the US). The United States...less so.

UK 1 - 0 US

Invention
Alright I have to be honest, Britain went through the industrial revolution and if you mean the UK, that includes Scotland and they invented most of ths stuff we use or used:
The steamship paddle wheel
The steam boat
The first iron-hulled steamship
The pedal bicycle
The speedometer
The modern lawnmower
Cotton-reel thread
The fountain pen
Colour photography
Hypnosis
Criminal fingerprinting
The ultrasound scanner
the cure for malaria
the use of surgical anaesthesia
Penicillin
There are more but I think the point has been made

UK 2 -0 US

Infastructure

Britain has less miles of moterway per person than any other developed nation but America's infanstructure is no better from what I hear so it's a personal opinion

UK 2 - 1 US

Governing

The same, America is run by two parties and Britain is essentially run by two Parties. However, The British Parliament has been going for nearly a thousand years and almost every successful parliamentary system in the world is based off it (Including the American Senate)

UK 3 - 1 US

Culture
Britain again has the more culture although this is debatable amongst the less desireable council estates. American Culture (Such as it is) isn't really all that different. But Britain has had more painters, more singers and more poets and authours in General.

Plus the smugness that Americans think they have the greatest nation in the world really gets my goat completly.

UK 4 - 1 US

International relations

Britain has struggled here in the past and now but America takes the cock-up biscuit with spectacular invasions of the Middle East that bitten her in the ass. Britain was there too but she is withdrawing her troops, something the US doesn't want to do

UK 5 - 1 US

Anything Else.

Only that this can't be judged accurately as Britain has over 2 thousand years of development behind her (As England) while modern America has only about 300. However, when one looks at the catagories above, I find that Britain is a clear winner between them.

Mate, you are a genius!

Debate.

Who for example would be better at invading a country then setting it to rights?

The Smurf Village, of course. Silly question.

lol, im in your capitalz, burning down your white housez

LOLz...we burned down the capital of Canada as well Andaras. Nice job of forgetting that.

I don't understand why there is a widely held opinion that the war of 1812 was a draw or even worse that the US won.

Maybe because the historical evidence points to it?

Given that the all the British ever wanted was the status quo to be preserved while they dealt with Bonaparte surely a treaty that does nothing but specifically preserve the status quo ante bellum confirms that they won?

The Brits were not out for Status Quo Ante Bellum in reality. If they were, the war would have ended much sooner.

What more can you expect them to do before you allow them that? The two key British war aims in the war of 1812 were to beat Bonaparte and keep Canada, both of which they did.

Ony half true. They wanted an indian state for the natives as well and um...they did not get that. Oh and while we are at it...we wanted the British to stop impressing and seizing our ships at sea. Guess what? We got that. We also got the British out of the Great Plains as well (a place they should not have been anyways).

The Americans on the other hand failed to accomplish any of their pre war aims.

We failed?

Repealing orders in council? - happened before war broke out.

That true but it arrived to late!

Stopping impressment? - made moot by the defeat of Napoleon.

Possibly but it was a violation of our soveriegnty.

Taking Canada? - Nope.

Basicly the only aim we did not accomplish!

Stopping the British inciting the Native Americans? - it's a bit tenuous that they ever were - trading for firearms is fairly standard.

The Jury is still out!

Avoiding destruction by the British? - it's not the most ambitious goal when starting a war of aggression, and anyway they seemed to be managing it quite well before they found it necessary to declare war.

Because of everything else you stated.

All you're left with are fairly nebulous ideas about prominence on the world stage and lessons learned.

And the British learned some lessons as well! Especially at sea.

Though we did rather better at invading the US than William Tate's attempt to invade us.

Um...yea! Last time I checked, Canada did not invade the United State! Britain did and to top it off, we did burn down York (present day Toronto) when it was the capital before Ottawa was. Thus why D.C. was burnded down. It was in response to York being burnt and before you say anything...canadian militia was not at the burning of D.C.

Um...yea! Last time I checked, Canada did not invade the United State! Britain did and to top it off, we did burn down York (present day Toronto) when it was the capital before Ottawa was. Thus why D.C. was burnded down. It was in response to York being burnt and before you say anything...canadian militia was not at the burning of D.C.

I am not Canadian

I am not Canadian

Doesn't matter. Both sets of invasions failed so it really does not matter.

War: USA
---------------------

The USA has directly fought the UK twice. The first was a win. (No, the French assictance was valuable but not as decisive as some think.) The second was a political win and a military draw.
(We didn't get Canada, but there wasn't any more British Navy impressing American sailors so meh.)

When we've fought as Allies, The USA has historically been stronger, although I'd suspect individual troop quality is about equal with a slight advantage to the UK.

Civilisation: USA
--------------------
I think we're still stronger on civil liberties overall but that may not last much longer

Invention: USA
--------------------
British scientists invented the digital computer and radar. American amateurs invented Television, Airplanes, Automobiles and scientists invented electric lights, telephones, nukes

Infastructure: USA
--------------------
By sheer volume

Governing: UK
--------------------
Not that it's necessarily that much better, but ours has fallen far from its origins.

Culture: UK
--------------------
2 Words: Monty Python

International relations: UK
--------------------
Prettymuch everybody hates us.

Cars: USA
--------------------
Ever had to work on a Jag? Oy vey!
(I know Ford owns them now. Wasn't always the case.)

Space: USA
--------------------
Number of Union Jacks on the Moon: 0
Number of Old Glories on the Moon: 8

I've also heard American food is way better, but I have no personal experience with British food to corroborate that.

differencies
Brits speak English. Usians think they speak English.


http://www.pbs.org/speak/ahead/change/ruining/

Languages change. To claim that British English is somehow more pure or correct is false. British English is no closer to the root language than American English.

Languages change. To claim that British English is somehow more pure or correct is false.
I'm sorry, I couldn't understand you.

Could you speak English? :p

I'm sorry, I couldn't understand you.

Could you speak English? :p

:p I could try Mandarin, if you'd prefer. Though my Mandarin has been known to make native speakers cringe.

I just really hate the "Americans don't speak English" tripe. It's nothing but nationalistic wanking. The version spoken in the U.K. is no closer to "original" English than the version spoken in the U.S.

:p

I just really hate the "Americans don't speak English" tripe. It's nothing but nationalistic wanking. The version spoken in the U.K. is no closer to "original" English than the version spoken in the U.S.

Except the American version probably bastardizes more Spanish words in its vocabulary ;)

Who is better?
War (in history and present day)- Military? USA definately, you can thank Labour for groing the gap.
Civilisation- I'll give this to the UK, their's is older and ours did stem from yours.
Invention- probably about even.
Infastructure- Hrm... well, with you guys using really old roads and such... even though healthcares in shambles... USA.
Governing- We both are having problems with this at the moment.
Culture- I like America's meltingpot thing.
International relations- Well Bush hasn't exactly helped this... Tie?
Anything Else.- America for Apple Pie.



So even though I'm obviously biased as an American, I have to go with the USA, with Britain not too far behind.

Except the American version probably bastardizes more Spanish words in its vocabulary ;)

Which brings up the second point: Defending the purity of any version of English is like defending the purity of a cribhouse whore.

There's more to that blantantly plagerized quote, but I can't remember what it is or who said it.

Given a choice between walking down a street in inner city Britain or along a lane in the American Countryside, I'd choose Britain everytime, it's safer.

And remind me, when has an American Invasion improved a Country.
For Britain: Canada; India; South Africa etc

Okay, get your facts straight

You invaded New France, not Canada, Lots of North American Indians would debate you improved THEIR continent. The French actually treated their Indian allies a lot better than you did yours

You committed genocide on the Boers! You rounded up the women and children into concentration camps which were later used as inspiration for the Third Reich's!

India I will give you as there was no India; there was only warring feudal kingdoms. Your illegal occupations and depredations, in the end, gave them a sense of self and you imposed a democracy which somehow has survived

What of Britain's Opium Wars? You invaded China because the Chinese would not accept British wool as payment for silks and porcelains

Oh, and as for America's invasions: have you ever heard of two countries, named Germany and Japan?

Let's check on both

No longer fascistic military dictatorships ruled by racial supremacists? Check!
No longer committed to military conquest? Check!
Possessing disturbing social qualities and strange perversions? oh, no.

Yeah, you're right. The US dropped the ball by letting Germans retain their love of transvestite cabarets and the Japanese their love of multi-tentacled monsters raping schoolgirls

Never mind Britains destruction of Scotland's native culture (what exists there now was made up in Victorian times based loosely on what once was there), the frank oppression of Wales. And what about Ireland?

No issues there?

The British allowed the famines to happen. Anyone who complained was transported (a prison sentence) to Australia

Hey, Britain was a major supporter of the Confederate States before Lincoln embarassed you into abandnoning the slavemasters!

Canada in WWII was used as a sacrifice several times, the most blatant was Dieppe. YOUR country sent my countries young men into what they knew was an untenable position. The Canadian troops were slaughtered!

Now, we are up to modern UK

Ever heard of a gentleman named Rowan Williams? Head of the CofE? Said that Britain should just get used to the idea of aspects of Sharia Law becoming part of the British legal system

Bow down and accept Dhimmi status men and ESPECIALLY women of Britain.

So you are greater?

You committed far more genocide than the Americans ever did, invaded sovereign nations far more, committed far more atrocities but I guess they are all wogs in your eyes and don't vcount as human beings!

I like the cribhouse whore analogy. A friend of mine from Italy once told me, English doesn't just borrow from other languages, it knocks them out in dark alleys then searches through their pockets looking for loose grammer.

I'm sorry, I couldn't understand you.

Could you speak English? :p

I have visited the UK on several occassion and I have had issues understanding the thick drawl and slang you call English

I have never had issues understanding Americans despite their accents

I like the cribhouse whore analogy. A friend of mine from Italy once told me, English doesn't just borrow from other languages, it knocks them out in dark alleys then searches through their pockets looking for loose grammer.

That's it! That's the rest of it!

You should have told us - we could have helped you understand by shouting louder.

OHH AND SPEAKING SLOWER!

I have visited the UK on several occassion and I have had issues understanding the thick drawl and slang you call English

I have never had issues understanding Americans despite their accents

You should have told us - we could have helped you understand by shouting louder.

OHH AND SPEAKING SLOWER!

And the hand signals

War: USA
Invention: USA
--------------------
British scientists invented the digital computer and radar. American amateurs invented Television, Airplanes, Automobiles and scientists invented electric lights, telephones, nukes


Actually, the Scots invented television and electricity and Germans invented the first cars...

...Although I will concede you built the first plane...

...even if it was an Italian's idea.

...oh and I never got around to thanking you for the nukes, cheers :p

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

And those invasions you mentioned where in the 1800's at best. A man cannot blame a country for the mistakes of the past. The people who invaded those countries are long dead.
As for the invasions of Germany and Japan, the advance into Germany was spearheaded by British Units.
As for Japan, America gave us the nuclear weapon and assured a new era of fear. To protect her fighting men, the US dropped WoMD on defenceless woman and children. Not once but twice!

And as for Dieppe, that was a monumental calamity that was only meant to be a test to see if that was possible. Those thousand Canadians who gave their lives saved tens of thousands of lives that would have been lost in the later amphibious assaults.

All the resentment you speak off has caused untold suffering in MY country for centuries.

And as for the suffering of native cultures, what about the Native Americans? Not once did the US keep a contract with them and even massacred them on many occasions without provocation.

Britain has her crimes, but America is not free of guilt either.

Invention: USA
Err, no.
British scientists invented the digital computer and radar.
And SONAR, medical anaesthesia as we know it today, analogue computers, civilian uses for nuclear power, train travel, the tank and oh so much more.
American amateurs invented Television
No, that was the UK.
Airplanes
True, and good job on this one.
Automobiles
No, that was the Germans.
scientists invented electric lights
No, that was the UK again, both with the Arc Light and a proper electric light, both by Humphry Davy, who was a pretty leet scientist, to be honest.
telephones
That was Antonio Meucci, an Italian, or Alexander Graham Bell, a Scot, depending on who you ask.
nukes
Were a massive collaborative effort. US scientists played their part, but then so did Germans, Hungarians and British scientists.

Remind me, which nation commited genocide against the natives to clear the plains using Railroads?

The Boer war was fought against guerillas, the colonial administration failed to deal with things properly out of desperation.

Thank you for accepting our role in India was beneficial.

The Opium wars led to Hong Kong being given to the British. Didn't hear them complaining about capitalism did you?

What's wrong with Cabaret? It's a laugh!

And Germany was so thankful for America's late arrival and leaving their country divided in Cold War misery. And Britain was in Both World Wars much Earlier than you. India, Singapore and Hong Kong suffered a lot more than Hawaii from the Japanese.

Wales still has it's national culture and it was never beaten by the English.
Ireland was attacked by the Puritans. Heard of them in American "History" (in the loosest sense of the word) lessons. (I'm not criticising the teachers, they do the best they can with apalling resources mostly). Scotland rules England. (look at Monarchs in 1603).

The Famines of Ireland were caused by a monocrop agriculture being affected by blight. Britain does not control nature and never has.

The Lincoln comment is blatant Yankee propaganda. Britain outlawed Slavery Empire wide in the 1830s. The Civil War in America wasn't for another 30 years. The British used their naval influence to attack Slavery ships and helped end the International Slave Trade in the Atlantic.

Canadian troops were no more sacrificed than any other troops lost in the War. Never forget that Canada was a Dominion and therefore had more Freedom than many other Parts of the Empire. And people rushed to join up in Both World Wars, despite the Trenches. They saw it as their Duty, a concept now sadly gone.

Are you a French Canadian by any Chance? You most Certainly sound it, spouting French nationalist ideas.

Now we're up to the presentish era.

The Queen of England is Head of the CofE, not the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Rowan Williams barley counts as sane, still that's the CofE for you! And Look at What the Archbishop of York replied. And don't forget, The CofE has little influence. The Methodists (Another British founded Denomination) and Catholics are nothing to do with the man.

America is new nation. Britain is an Old and Wise nation. We Only have more mistakes to our name because we have had longer to become a True Nation.

Don't Insult me by assuming I'm some BNP Racist.

My Ancestors were "Wogs" as you so impudently termed it. Your Sheer Ignorance of People Greatly Offends and Upsets Me.

My Ancestors knew more of life in the Worst of the Empire than you ever shall. They fought to defend it. That shows you what the Empire did. It United People of all Creeds and Races, into a Union that was Peaceful and Well Run for the Most part. That's why the Americans destroyed it, it was Better than their Union of semi-nations.

Had Britain run New Orleans when Catrina Hit, It would have suffered less than it did under the Americans.

Well said!

Okay, get your facts straight

You invaded New France, not Canada, Lots of North American Indians would debate you improved THEIR continent. The French actually treated their Indian allies a lot better than you did yours

You committed genocide on the Boers! You rounded up the women and children into concentration camps which were later used as inspiration for the Third Reich's!

India I will give you as there was no India; there was only warring feudal kingdoms. Your illegal occupations and depredations, in the end, gave them a sense of self and you imposed a democracy which somehow has survived

What of Britain's Opium Wars? You invaded China because the Chinese would not accept British wool as payment for silks and porcelains

Oh, and as for America's invasions: have you ever heard of two countries, named Germany and Japan?

Let's check on both

No longer fascistic military dictatorships ruled by racial supremacists? Check!
No longer committed to military conquest? Check!
Possessing disturbing social qualities and strange perversions? oh, no.

Yeah, you're right. The US dropped the ball by letting Germans retain their love of transvestite cabarets and the Japanese their love of multi-tentacled monsters raping schoolgirls

Never mind Britains destruction of Scotland's native culture (what exists there now was made up in Victorian times based loosely on what once was there), the frank oppression of Wales. And what about Ireland?

No issues there?

The British allowed the famines to happen. Anyone who complained was transported (a prison sentence) to Australia

Hey, Britain was a major supporter of the Confederate States before Lincoln embarassed you into abandnoning the slavemasters!

Canada in WWII was used as a sacrifice several times, the most blatant was Dieppe. YOUR country sent my countries (SIC) young men into what they knew was an untenable position. The Canadian troops were slaughtered!

Now, we are up to modern UK

Ever heard of a gentleman named Rowan Williams? Head of the CofE? Said that Britain should just get used to the idea of aspects of Sharia Law becoming part of the British legal system

Bow down and accept Dhimmi status men and ESPECIALLY women of Britain.

So you are greater?

You committed far more genocide than the Americans ever did, invaded sovereign nations far more, committed far more atrocities but I guess they are all wogs in your eyes and don't vcount as human beings!


Remind me, which nation commited genocide against the natives to clear the plains using Railroads?

The Boer war was fought against guerillas, the colonial administration failed to deal with things properly out of desperation.

Thank you for accepting our role in India was beneficial.

The Opium wars led to Hong Kong being given to the British. Didn't hear them complaining about capitalism did you?

What's wrong with Cabaret? It's a laugh!

And Germany was so thankful for America's late arrival and leaving their country divided in Cold War misery. And Britain was in Both World Wars much Earlier than you. India, Singapore and Hong Kong suffered a lot more than Hawaii from the Japanese.

Wales still has it's national culture and it was never beaten by the English.
Ireland was attacked by the Puritans. Heard of them in American "History" (in the loosest sense of the word) lessons. (I'm not criticising the teachers, they do the best they can with apalling resources mostly). Scotland rules England. (look at Monarchs in 1603).

The Famines of Ireland were caused by a monocrop agriculture being affected by blight. Britain does not control nature and never has.

The Lincoln comment is blatant Yankee propaganda. Britain outlawed Slavery Empire wide in the 1830s. The Civil War in America wasn't for another 30 years. The British used their naval influence to attack Slavery ships and helped end the International Slave Trade in the Atlantic.

Canadian troops were no more sacrificed than any other troops lost in the War. Never forget that Canada was a Dominion and therefore had more Freedom than many other Parts of the Empire. And people rushed to join up in Both World Wars, despite the Trenches. They saw it as their Duty, a concept now sadly gone.

Are you a French Canadian by any Chance? You most Certainly sound it, spouting French nationalist ideas.

Now we're up to the presentish era.

The Queen of England is Head of the CofE, not the Archbishop of Canterbury.
Rowan Williams barley counts as sane, still that's the CofE for you! And Look at What the Archbishop of York replied. And don't forget, The CofE has little influence. The Methodists (Another British founded Denomination) and Catholics are nothing to do with the man.

America is new nation. Britain is an Old and Wise nation. We Only have more mistakes to our name because we have had longer to become a True Nation.

Don't Insult me by assuming I'm some BNP Racist.

My Ancestors were "Wogs" as you so impudently termed it. Your Sheer Ignorance of People Greatly Offends and Upsets Me.

My Ancestors knew more of life in the Worst of the Empire than you ever shall. They fought to defend it. That shows you what the Empire did. It United People of all Creeds and Races, into a Union that was Peaceful and Well Run for the Most part. That's why the Americans destroyed it, it was Better than their Union of semi-nations.

Had Britain run New Orleans when Catrina Hit, It would have suffered less than it did under the Americans.

On The Electric Light:


No, that was the UK again, both with the Arc Light and a proper electric light, both by Humphry Davy, who was a pretty leet scientist, to be honest.



Wasn't that Joseph Swann with the lightbulb?

Don't forget the first Industrial application of Steam Power was done by James Watt. And we also exported our ideas on a scale never seen before or since. (not even with Coca-Cola!)

In Britain there's a show called "Watching Paint Dry". They show gloss, semi-gloss, satin, etc. in real time. At the end of the show they vote out their least favorite.

I could choose to be offended by that statement.

Well said!

Thanks. I feel passionately about the Empire, without it half the World's People Wouldn't Exist.

And The "Wogs" Comment really hacked me off. Racism always does, especially when people are accused of being racist because of the biased view of the accuser.

We were actually a rather important part of your empire...

...and a massive pain the arse as well :p

Okay, get your facts straight

You invaded New France, not Canada, Lots of North American Indians would debate you improved THEIR continent. The French actually treated their Indian allies a lot better than you did yours

You committed genocide on the Boers! You rounded up the women and children into concentration camps which were later used as inspiration for the Third Reich's!

India I will give you as there was no India; there was only warring feudal kingdoms. Your illegal occupations and depredations, in the end, gave them a sense of self and you imposed a democracy which somehow has survived

What of Britain's Opium Wars? You invaded China because the Chinese would not accept British wool as payment for silks and porcelains

Oh, and as for America's invasions: have you ever heard of two countries, named Germany and Japan?

Let's check on both

No longer fascistic military dictatorships ruled by racial supremacists? Check!
No longer committed to military conquest? Check!
Possessing disturbing social qualities and strange perversions? oh, no.

Yeah, you're right. The US dropped the ball by letting Germans retain their love of transvestite cabarets and the Japanese their love of multi-tentacled monsters raping schoolgirls

Never mind Britains destruction of Scotland's native culture (what exists there now was made up in Victorian times based loosely on what once was there), the frank oppression of Wales. And what about Ireland?

No issues there?

The British allowed the famines to happen. Anyone who complained was transported (a prison sentence) to Australia

Hey, Britain was a major supporter of the Confederate States before Lincoln embarassed you into abandnoning the slavemasters!

Canada in WWII was used as a sacrifice several times, the most blatant was Dieppe. YOUR country sent my countries young men into what they knew was an untenable position. The Canadian troops were slaughtered!

Now, we are up to modern UK

Ever heard of a gentleman named Rowan Williams? Head of the CofE? Said that Britain should just get used to the idea of aspects of Sharia Law becoming part of the British legal system

Bow down and accept Dhimmi status men and ESPECIALLY women of Britain.

So you are greater?

You committed far more genocide than the Americans ever did, invaded sovereign nations far more, committed far more atrocities but I guess they are all wogs in your eyes and don't vcount as human beings!

Wait...A canadian who DOESN'T hate the U.S? I...I think I must be dead.

Ireland was Important until the 1920s. Then they ran. Oh, and sheltered Nazi supporters from Europe after the war.



True, you can thank de Valera for that. He was of the persuasion that if you where an Enemy of England, you were a friend of his, rather than any ideals. And you forget all the Rebellions prior to 1921. There were DOZENS!

America is new nation. Britain is an Old and Wise nation. We Only have more mistakes to our name because we have had longer to become a True Nation.

My Ancestors knew more of life in the Worst of the Empire than you ever shall. They fought to defend it. That shows you what the Empire did. It United People of all Creeds and Races, into a Union that was Peaceful and Well Run for the Most part. That's why the Americans destroyed it, it was Better than their Union of semi-nations.

Had Britain run New Orleans when Catrina Hit, It would have suffered less than it did under the Americans.

Ahhh, nationalism and bigotry, how we missed thee.

The Fish and Chips comment. Really not a Yankee invention!

French Chips and English fried fish.

Ireland was Important until the 1920s. Then they ran. Oh, and sheltered Nazi supporters from Europe after the war.

I remain confident that God shall save the World From America (it's called hope, albeit in vain).

I'm not a bigot.

My favourite was when they siezed a Dublin Tram at gun point then paid for their tickets!

It was their own countrymen don't forget. Wouldn't have got them far if they had've killed their own. And glad to know we did so much while in the Empire, especially in battle :p

I hate to burst Britain's supporters bubbles but the U.S. spends over 350 Billion on military while the U.K. spends only around 30 billion. China only spends 20 billion. Russia spends more than both but it is only around 100 billion at best. The British are a bunch of F*cking bastards that are stuck on there miserable little island for a reason. They tried to expand to far and they got what they diserved. They don't even uphold alliances.. In WW2 they attacked FRENCH ships going into toulon. FRENCH ships that would have willingly joined the Free French Forces. I have no respect for the British anymore.

:upyours::upyours::upyours:

True, you can thank de Valera for that. He was of the persuasion that if you where an Enemy of England, you were a friend of his, rather than any ideals. And you forget all the Rebellions prior to 1921. There were DOZENS!


My favourite was when they siezed a Dublin Tram at gun point then paid for their tickets!

As much as I hate to put myself in the middle of this nationalistic masturbation session, I thought I'd clear up some nonsense:

You invaded New France, not Canada... You committed genocide... You rounded up the women and children... Your illegal occupations... You invaded China
Unless Dukeburyshire is very old, I sincerly doubt s/he had anything to do with the Boer War, Boxer Rebellion, American War of Independence, etc.

Neither did any British person alive today. Kindly differentiate between a state and its citizens.

Britains destruction of Scotland's native culture
Scotland's Highland culture.

The vast majority of Scotland was Anglicised long before the Clearences. There was never a majority of Scots who spoke the Gaelic; it, and the playing of the pipes, wearing of plaid, etc., were always a Highland thing. (Not that this makes the Clearences any more acceptable.)

Heck, there wasn't even a proper conception of the Scottish people till sometime after 1745.

Ever heard of a gentleman named Rowan Williams? Head of the CofE? Said that Britain should just get used to the idea of aspects of Sharia Law becoming part of the British legal system

Bow down and accept Dhimmi status men and ESPECIALLY women of Britain.
Williams said nothing of the sort:

[Williams] stresses that "nobody in their right mind would want to see in this country the kind of inhumanity that's sometimes been associated with the practice of the law in some Islamic states; the extreme punishments, the attitudes to women as well".

(Source (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/7232661.stm))
I don't agree with Williams' suggestions, but misrepresenting his position will do nobody good.

So, as you say: "Get your facts straight!"

Don't mention Williams. He said something different in every Statement about it.
His position wasn't very clear at all, but he never advocated the degredation of women.

Don't mention Williams. He said something different in every Statement about it.

Before World War Two I would say England wins after WWII its America wins.
1. England would have fallen to the Germans or the Russians without Americas help. America
2. Also America would not have developed without influence from our British and German back rounds. England
3. England world’s most powerful military now America
4. England had the world largest navy now it’s America.
5. England "once" ruled over 1/3 of the earth’s surface now it’s only in charge of the British Isles America has 50 states.
6. New York Stock Exchange #1, London Stock Exchange #1 before WWII
7. New York City is the world's most important financial city in the 20th century, London 19th century
8. England was the world largest economy in the world now it’s America
9. America has more natural resource and a bigger population then England in the 19th England had more of both
10. America has the most millionaires England use to have the most millionaires
11. America is also now the world’s largest trading partner and England use to be the world’s largest trading partner
12. America has the world’s largest corporations in the world and the biggest numbers of company headquarters in the world are in the U.S.
13. America has the world’s largest G.N.P. and G.D.P.
14. More immigrants legal or illegal are trying to get in to the United States of America then any country on earth

Fuck that. Here's a better proposal: Britain AND America!

On The Electric Light:


Wasn't that Joseph Swann with the lightbulb?

Actually...it was Thomas Edison who invented the lightbulb.

Don't forget the first Industrial application of Steam Power was done by James Watt. And we also exported our ideas on a scale never seen before or since. (not even with Coca-Cola!)

That was why it was illegal to export technology.

Never heard of that show and I watch a lot of TV.

Oh, and don't mention Edison, lest we get into the whole lightbulb thing again...

And remind me, when has an American Invasion improved a Country.
For Britain: Canada; India; South Africa etc

Britain in North America led to the destruction of Native American tribes.

Let's take a look at this. Britain in South Africa led to Apartheid and brutal secret police which led to natives being denied their rights in favor of whites.

The British in India repressed their rights. They arrested and beat Gandhi and thousands of followers for touching salt. they banned the right to gather. In 1919, in the Amritsar Massacre, a British General and 50 troops systematically killed 380 Indian civilians in a matter of minutes for no reason. When Britain fought in WW1, they promised India freedom if Indians fought. They lied. Indian troops fought again in WW2. In both wars, British officials censored Indian letters home so that they couldn't complain or criticize the Empire. Those Indian troops who fought valiantly always never receive any credit either. Have you seen any images or stories of the bravery of Indians in WW2? No, only the RAF. Britain's wealth also only comes from its past exploitation of other nations. But Britain still can't keep India down. One little man kicked them out with no violence, and now India and china are set to be the next world leaders, not Europe.

Your opinion designates you as imperialistic, racist scum. Britain did not have a give-and-take relationship with the peoples it oppressed, just a take.

What does that mean are you saying that you want America and England to become one country I would be in favor of that The United States OF America, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, and the British isle getting back to gather to make one country? That would be grand the Chinese would never be able to compete and it would give us an edge over the European Union and Russia. We all speak English and think alike our culture is almost the same, something like that would be so cool.

Aren't Americans the scum of Europe?:confused:

We also have a common history from England together we would be unstoppable England’s pound, America’s economy, Canada’s natural resources, Australia’s land, and New Zealand trade. It would be a happy day for our countries both strategically and economically.

SCUM what do mean by that?:confused:

Fuck that. Here's a better proposal: Britain AND America!

Quoted for truth.

If you mean the tired poor huddled masses of Europe looking for a better life which they found then YA you would consider me that my descendents that left because they were tired of being told, you were born in the peasant class you will always be a peasant you will die a peasant and your children will also be peasants then YA. I have a right not to be poor because I was born poor.

AMERICA AND CANADA is our best choice :p

Who is better?

At:
War (in history and present day)
Civilisation
Invention
Infastructure
Governing
Culture
International relations
Anything Else.

I'd choose Britain.
War: Either the US or China, kinda undecided there.
Civilization: Ancient Rome:D
Invention: China or Ancient Rome
Infrastructure: Not sure
Governing:Not really sure, maybe the UK?
Culture: Ancient Rome or Japan.
International Relations: Switzerland, they haven't been at war in what, 2 centuries?
Anything Else: Ireland!

Actually...it was Thomas Edison who invented the lightbulb.
No, it wasn't. He invented the first commercially viable lightbulb. That's not the same thing.

Anything Else: Ireland!

:D :D

Eire Abu!!

No, it wasn't. He invented the first commercially viable lightbulb. That's not the same thing.

There was a huge row about this as they both had the same idea at the same time. Who got their patent in would decide who invented it.

and Joseph Swann put his patent in year before Edison

and Joseph Swann put his patent in year before Edison

And gave Permission for Edison to sell the lights in America while he retained the rights in Britain.

Thanks for That. We never got taught stuff like that at school

And this from the Wikipedia article on Edison:

Edison bought light bulb U.S. patent 181,613 of Henry Woodward that was issued August 29, 1876 and obtained an exclusive license to Woodward's Canadian patent. These patents covered a carbon filament in a rarefied gas bulb.

So if we go by this, Swann's patent was predated by Henry Woodward.

Thanks for That. We never got taught stuff like that at school

Canada at that time Being a Dominion of Britain

Britain in North America led to the destruction of Native American tribes.That was due to the British colonists, from whom some modern Americans are descended, NOT official British policy. In fact, the British government's insistence on protecting the natives from further expansion was -- although I gather modern American textbooks tend not to mention the fact -- an important factor in the growth of the pro-independence movement amongst those colonists.

Let's take a look at this. Britain in South Africa led to Apartheid and brutal secret police which led to natives being denied their rights in favor of whites.That was mainly down to the Afrikaners, the Dutch-descended colonists, once they were given a say in government of the whole area -- rather than just their former republics in the north -- a few years after the Boer War.

The British in India repressed their rights. They arrested and beat Gandhi and thousands of followers for touching salt. they banned the right to gather. In 1919, in the Amritsar Massacre, a British General and 50 troops systematically killed 380 Indian civilians in a matter of minutes for no reason.
And just how widely acknowledged were the "rights" of most Indians, by their native rulers and by rulers of various Central Asian immigrant stocks, before British rule? The place wasn't exactly a shining beacon of human rights in those days, either...
Touching salt wasn't illegal, producing it outside of the government monopoly was... and government (including the Public Works department that built the country's railways and telegraph system, and did a lot to improve its irrigation system) had to be funded somehow.
Yes, General Dwyer over-reacted to what (as was subsequently proven) was a peaceful demonstration at Amritsar. He did not have orders to carry out a massacre, and in fact -- as you could find out quite easily, if you bothered to look -- he lost his job over it.

When Britain fought in WW1, they promised India freedom if Indians fought. They lied. Indian troops fought again in WW2. In both wars, British officials censored Indian letters home so that they couldn't complain or criticize the Empire. Those Indian troops who fought valiantly always never receive any credit either. Have you seen any images or stories of the bravery of Indians in WW2? No, only the RAF.
Legislation paving the way for eventual independence was introduced just a few years after WW1, once suitable-seeming plans had been drawn up: See references to the 'Dyarchy' system, whereby native politicians were gradually given responsibility for more and more matters at the provincial level. That process was designed to take several decades for the practical reasons that traning Indians to do all of the jobs concerned properly, and getting people in general accustomed enough to the idea of democratic elections for the concept to take hold, simply couldn't have been done much more quickly.
In both wars British officials censored the letters that British troops sent home, to remove any criticism of the leadership (as well as to preserve various strategic & tactical secrets), too, not just those of the Indian soldiers.
Indian soldiers did receive credit for their bravery, they were awarded appropriate medals just as British troops and other Imperial troops were. And yes, I have seen stories about the bravery of Indian soldiers, during the World Wars and at other times: A number of books about the Indian Army's actions while India was under British rule are in my local library (in a medium-sized town in southern England), filed alongside those about the British Army's actions during the same periods, and that was also the case in my local libraries back when I lived in London. If the RAF are the only Imperial forces whom you've ever seen given any credit for Britain's part in the Allied victory then you really can't have been looking very hard...

Britain's wealth also only comes from its past exploitation of other nations. But Britain still can't keep India down. One little man kicked them out with no violence, and now India and china are set to be the next world leaders, not Europe. Your opinion designates you as imperialistic, racist scum. Britain did not have a give-and-take relationship with the peoples it oppressed, just a take.

Britain's wealth comes mostly from invention (You should look up the terms 'Agricultural Revolution' and 'Industrial Revolution', and see where both of those processes started...), widespread trading activities under the protection -- when necessary -- of the Royal Navy, and the early development of London as a centre of sound financial enterprises that still has a legacy today. Having some of the colonies as secure sources of raw materials and markets for our manufactured goods helped, but Britain would have been an economic success even without the Empire as long as the other European powers hadn't established empires of their own and shut our traders out. In most colonies Britain gave at least as much back, in terms of good government and public works as well as imports, as it took out: There were a number of colonies and protectorates within the Empire, in parts of Africa and the Middle East and the Pacific, on which we definitely made an overall loss in most years.
Are you ignorant of the fact that a number of peoples actually asked to be taken under British rule, for protection against local rivals or other colonial powers whom they thought would otherwise take them over and be much worse? Are you ignorant of the fact that when the British administration in India announced plans to restore one large area that they'd been running on a "temporary" basis (for a few decades, by then) to the native state that theoretically owned it -- Hyderabad -- the people there actually carried out mass protests against that change?
Gandhi didn't "kick the British out" of India, because they were leaving anyway as it's fairly easy to see if you bother to look at neutral sources rather than just at ones with a conscious or subconscious anti-British bias, although he might have speeded the process up very slightly. Oh, and were you ignorant of his own statement that the British were the only imperial power whom he considered decent enough for non-violent protest against them to be worth trying?

And if British rule was as awful as you claim, why have most of the nations to which we eventually gave independence chosen to retain membership in the Commonwealth, governments modelled to varying extents on the Westminster system, and the use of the English language for communication between their different ethnic groups and (often) for national administration too?
And why hasn't independent India legalised or re-legalised certain formerly-traditional practices that the British suppressed there, such as Thuggee and Suttee?
Your stated opinions show you to be both biased and extremely ignorant.

*Cheers*

Nice to know Empire bashing isn't standard

More a way of pitting a Civilisationally superior nation against a Militarily Superior nation.

Or a nationalistic wanking contest of which, I'm proud to say, I have not got involved with.

St Edmund has become my hero. If his debate weren't so long, it would be my sig.

I swear this thread is just a flame war in sheeps clothing.

More a way of pitting a Civilisationally superior nation against a Militarily Superior nation.

Or a nationalistic wanking contest of which, I'm proud to say, I have not got involved with.

Indeed. But USA and UK are currently in a draw...

Corneliu 2


Now there's an idea for a contest!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You mean getting prince Brown and Bush to face each other and see who can get the most in a cup from standing a yard back?

Corneliu 2


Now there's an idea for a contest!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not exacly a new one, though. At least not in this forum...

Corneliu 2
Or a nationalistic wanking contest of which, I'm proud to say, I have not got involved with.

Now there's an idea for a contest!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Not exacly a new one, though. At least not in this forum...

It happens in nearly every thread it seems! Especially when subjects like war comes up.

It happens in nearly every thread it seems! Especially when subjects like war comes up.

Or politics, or guns, or social topics... ;)

What I find rather odd is that it usually turns into US vs rest of the world.

Hence this thread. (which I started and Timewarp messed with horrifically)

Condensing it to one all out match

Personally, I think these kinda threads are a bit like dick measuring contests.

It isn't quantity, it's quality :p

Which is why Britain should win.

Champagne anyone? (Another Brit invention, and the Brit versions are better than French according to experts)

All my imperialistic friends:

Since you are probably British and have been fed the Eurocentric history version that is also rampant in the American school systems. This means that you can't know any better, and I'll forgive you for your repeating pro-imperialism propaganda.

Look. If India liked British rule, why were they so eager to be free? And why would Britain need to invade and exploit- I mean, "trade with and improve"- other countries if they were such nice people. Why was Gandhi jailed nearly 10 times? Why were thousands arrested at the Salt March? Why are these "neutral" sources all Western? just think on it.

Oh, and people use English because the imperialists spread it around, so now different groups have a sadly built-in way to communicate.

Never heard of that show and I watch a lot of TV.

Oh, and don't mention Edison, lest we get into the whole lightbulb thing again...

And remind me, when has an American Invasion improved a Country.
For Britain: Canada; India; South Africa etc


When has Britian done anything great for another nation, I'm mean besides the US, The UK's pretty much raped the world, so have the French, but that be another story.

*Cheers*

Nice to know Empire bashing isn't standard

Yes, we can all blame every problem in the world on the yanks. It's nice having a scape goat isn't it?

All my imperialistic friends:

Since you are probably British and have been fed the Eurocentric history version that is also rampant in the American school systems. This means that you can't know any better, and I'll forgive you for your repeating pro-imperialism propaganda.

Look. If India liked British rule, why were they so eager to be free? And why would Britain need to invade and exploit- I mean, "trade with and improve"- other countries if they were such nice people. Why was Gandhi jailed nearly 10 times? Why were thousands arrested at the Salt March? Why are these "neutral" sources all Western? just think on it.

Oh, and people use English because the imperialists spread it around, so now different groups have a sadly built-in way to communicate.

I recommend the author(s) ~ Kazmati (Pakistani) Jeribo (Jamaican) and Singh (Indian) - all neutral historians, from countries the UK used to occupy.

Their books are good - helped a lot with my essays.

...Obvious Troll is Obvious...

RULE 1...Meh, enact order 181.

When has Britian done anything great for another nation, I'm mean besides the US, The UK's pretty much raped the world, so have the French, but that be another story.

In what sense? In a directly charitable sense? Of course not, no credible nation state acts in a charitable manner.

In an indirect sense? Britain has done as much for the world as any state beyond the abstraction that is "classical Greece".

All my imperialistic friends:

Since you are probably British and have been fed the Eurocentric history version that is also rampant in the American school systems. This means that you can't know any better, and I'll forgive you for your repeating pro-imperialism propaganda.

Look. If India liked British rule, why were they so eager to be free? And why would Britain need to invade and exploit- I mean, "trade with and improve"- other countries if they were such nice people. Why was Gandhi jailed nearly 10 times? Why were thousands arrested at the Salt March? Why are these "neutral" sources all Western? just think on it.

Oh, and people use English because the imperialists spread it around, so now different groups have a sadly built-in way to communicate.

I am from one of those nations that were invaded and exploited and I would walk across the whole United States to get to Britain.
It's your opinion, the statements about Propaganda are completely unnecessary.

All my imperialistic friends:

Since you are probably British and have been fed the Eurocentric history version that is also rampant in the American school systems. This means that you can't know any better, and I'll forgive you for your repeating pro-imperialism propaganda.

Look. If India liked British rule, why were they so eager to be free? And why would Britain need to invade and exploit- I mean, "trade with and improve"- other countries if they were such nice people. Why was Gandhi jailed nearly 10 times? Why were thousands arrested at the Salt March? Why are these "neutral" sources all Western? just think on it.

Oh, and people use English because the imperialists spread it around, so now different groups have a sadly built-in way to communicate.


Which sources? Official reports are rather more likely to be accurate than you would have us believe; policy requires the truth to be well founded.

Equally, I would suggest you read "Empire". I daresay you will not, and have not, read it, because it is "imperialist" propaganda to the likes of you, despite the contemporary historiographical trend towards post-colonial criticism that renders it noteworthy at all. Simply put, you cannot expect colonialism to occur than by military and economic aggressive expansion; equally, the desire for autonomy, and its manifestations, is a consistent trend throughout history. It is neither noteworthy, nor is it of any relevance to the discussion, since you seem to contend that those to whom you post are trenchant imperialists who believe empire to have arisen due to invitation.

Quite ridiculous, as ever, from another pseudo-intellectual left winger on NSG.

I don't know.
US have done some pretty neat stuff, so has the UK. Both have done horrific actions(e.g. UK, Boer war, US, Atomic bombs on two Japanese cities).

They're as bad as each other.
One thing i do know is the US have far more varying weather than the UK, far more interesting.

Look. If India liked British rule, why were they so eager to be free?
They didn't like it, but it probably was beneficial - see the current situation with Kosovo. They'll be regretting their decision when push comes to shove economically and they haven't got the power to do anything much.
And why would Britain need to invade and exploit- I mean, "trade with and improve"- other countries if they were such nice people.
We didn't actually need to, it was just extremely beneficial to us, and we spread around railways and such, and banned the more stupid colonial pasttimes such as Suttee, which you cannot honestly try to defend.

Oh and we British aren't actually particularly nice people, we've got a ruthless streak down beneath the 'how do you do?' and the charming accent ;)
Why was Gandhi jailed nearly 10 times? Why were thousands arrested at the Salt March?
Because they protested in an illegal manner.
Why are these "neutral" sources all Western?
Because every source has some degree of bias in it, and we see neutral sources as those more favourable to us, see this 'Liberal bias' business.
Oh, and people use English because the imperialists spread it around, so now different groups have a sadly built-in way to communicate.
English is an alright language, and it's good that people all over the world can communicate in it. There's nothing wrong with that whatsoever. Having language barriers all over the place is a complete pain in the arse, as anyone who's actually studied a few foreign languages will tell you, myself included.
When has Britian done anything great for another nation, I'm mean besides the US, The UK's pretty much raped the world, so have the French, but that be another story.
Rhodesia much?

All my imperialistic friends:

Since you are probably British and have been fed the Eurocentric history version that is also rampant in the American school systems. This means that you can't know any better, and I'll forgive you for your repeating pro-imperialism propaganda.

Look. If India liked British rule, why were they so eager to be free? And why would Britain need to invade and exploit- I mean, "trade with and improve"- other countries if they were such nice people. Why was Gandhi jailed nearly 10 times? Why were thousands arrested at the Salt March? Why are these "neutral" sources all Western? just think on it.

Oh, and people use English because the imperialists spread it around, so now different groups have a sadly built-in way to communicate.


Not all India wished to be free.

May liked the staus quo, especially people of Eurasian descent, who were loathed after independence and victimised.

And remember, Ghandi was taught by the Imperial system.

And If English weren't spread around, we wouldn't have a world economy.

And If English weren't spread around, we wouldn't have a world economy.

Have anything to back up that statement?

Have anything to back up that statement?

He is both correct and incorrect. But for the British empire, it is unlikely an anglo-centric world economy would have developed; however, as dangerous as ventures into the counterfactual are, I would imagine a different European power would have acceded to the same position had Britain not done so.

I said "other" for England.

He is both correct and incorrect. But for the British empire, it is unlikely an anglo-centric world economy would have developed; however, as dangerous as ventures into the counterfactual are, I would imagine a different European power would have acceded to the same position had Britain not done so.

Which is exactly the point I was going for. They certainly weren't the only ones with widespread colonies.

If there had been no Empires think how bad the world would be...

If there had been no Empires think how bad the world would be...

Or how good, speculating wildly is rather pointless since there were empires, so we have no basis for what the world would be like if they hadn't existed.

All my imperialistic friends:

Since you are probably British and have been fed the Eurocentric history version that is also rampant in the American school systems. This means that you can't know any better, and I'll forgive you for your repeating pro-imperialism propaganda.

Look. If India liked British rule, why were they so eager to be free? And why would Britain need to invade and exploit- I mean, "trade with and improve"- other countries if they were such nice people. Why was Gandhi jailed nearly 10 times? Why were thousands arrested at the Salt March? Why are these "neutral" sources all Western? just think on it.

Oh, and people use English because the imperialists spread it around, so now different groups have a sadly built-in way to communicate.

And your country (I presume the USA) is NOT imperialistic?!

Pointless but fun.

Like making up tragic life stories for your mates on a long bus ride home from the trip to Bath (the city)

Or how good, speculating wildly is rather pointless since there were empires, so we have no basis for what the world would be like if they hadn't existed.

Medieval ages, quite possibly. Or, maybe today, although one could argue that imperialism is moving from territorial gains to that of trade and economic expansion.
In any case, the world that we live in today is still a violent one without empires.
Also before the break up of the British Empire there was certainly less poverty in Africa (less AIDs, no humanitarian crises in Sudan, Zimbabwe, Rhodesia etc etc) and no military standoff between Pakistan and India that could quite easily go nuclear if everything goes to pot in that area.

Edit- Yes! Britain is ahead in the poll! Get in!

Also before the break up of the British Empire there was certainly less poverty in Africa (less AIDs, no humanitarian crises in Sudan, Zimbabwe, Rhodesia etc etc) and no military standoff between Pakistan and India that could quite easily go nuclear if everything goes to pot in that area.

You're not seriously implying that these problems wouldn't exist if the British empire hadn't collapsed are you?

You're not seriously implying that these problems wouldn't exist if the British empire hadn't collapsed are you?

That we will never find out. But as far as I know, they did not exist while the empire existed- I could be wrong.

You're not seriously implying that these problems wouldn't exist if the British empire hadn't collapsed are you?

Where Rhodesia and, to a lesser extent, South Africa are concerned, they did rather well out of the collapse of empire; the general quality of life in both has declined significantly since the governments established after empire have been replaced.

Equally, the birth pangs of African democracy are undeniably perjorative, however, to maintain that they are worse than what would have arisen had Africa been left to its merry way in isolation is ludicrous.

That we will never find out. But as far as I know, they did not exist while the empire existed- I could be wrong.

Well since the empire really ceased to exist by the end of WWII the nukes is a moot point, and since AIDS wasn't discovered until the '80's you're just making baseless assumptions that you think will make your country look good.

Famine still existed.

And the colonies were still being let off into the 1960s and Rhodesia didn't leave until the fall of Ian Smith.

You're not seriously implying that these problems wouldn't exist if the British empire hadn't collapsed are you?
Let's look at Rhodesia :

Rich, functioning state, which provided food for the whole of Africa. Yes, run almost entirely by whites, but run very well.

And then Zimbabwe :

Utter clusterfuck, revered by the more stupid end of African dictators as some bastion of anti-Britishness, plagued by AIDS and hyperinflation, and between 2002 and 2006, the population dropped by 4 million.



Yeah, fine, extreme examples, but still noteworthy.

Well since the empire really ceased to exist by the end of WWII the nukes is a moot point, and since AIDS wasn't discovered until the '80's you're just making baseless assumptions that you think will make your country look good.

Thinking hypothetically. Say if the two world wars had never happened for (whatever reason e.g. no Franco-Prussian conflict in the 1870s), then the British Empire would have most likely have survived longer than it did, then the situations that I stated could POSSIBLY have been avoided or maybe not as bad as they are today. No Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe in that case, thus that nation would not be in its current state in my hypothetical scenario.

Off the point, I don't need to make my country look good, it does that by itself. For the most part, I will concede.

The empire really ceased to exist by the end of WWII
Not really, no.

Not really, no.

Ah, good point. As I understand the Empire is considered to have ended with the handover of Hong Kong.
Score another point for GB.

Bugger, we're level again in the poll. When does it close?

Ah, good point. As I understand the Empire is considered to have ended with the handover of Hong Kong.
Score another point for GB.
Again, not realy.

Hong Kong wasn't a proper EMPAHR type affair, and I'd personally say that the Empire really died out around the mid-1970s, when almost everywhere was granted independence.

Hong Kong was more just a piece of land that we kind of owned. The rest was more repressed, and more stripped of its resources. Hong Kong we spent a lot of money on, the African colonies not so much, although the work the British did there has definitely helped trade in those areas.

Again, not realy.

Hong Kong wasn't a proper EMPAHR type affair, and I'd personally say that the Empire really died out around the mid-1970s, when almost everywhere was granted independence.

Hong Kong was more just a piece of land that we kind of owned. The rest was more repressed, and more stripped of its resources. Hong Kong we spent a lot of money on, the African colonies not so much, although the work the British did there has definitely helped trade in those areas.


Fair point. Personally I view it as the last piece of fully foreign land that we gave back to its people (this could cause a stir).
Also in a book I read the age of the empire was given at near exactly 500 years old when HK was handed over- a nice round number!

We still Own the Falkland Islands, Cayman Islands, Bermuda, Gibraltar, Tristan da Cunha, Ascencion Island, St Helena, Pitcairn Island and other small places.

Therefore the Empire still clings to life.

And God willing it shall remain as such.

Does the Sun ever set on it? (if you include the Indian Ocean territories etc)

Even if the Sun does set on it, well, it has to sleep sometime!

We still Own the Falkland Islands, Cayman Islands, Bermuda, Gibraltar, Tristan da Cunha, Ascencion Island, St Helena, Pitcairn Island and other small places.

Therefore the Empire still clings to life.

We still Own the Falkland Islands, Cayman Islands, Bermuda, Gibraltar, Tristan da Cunha, Ascencion Island, St Helena, Pitcairn Island and other small places.

Therefore the Empire still clings to life.

It's on life-support.

Does the Sun ever set on it? (if you include the Indian Ocean territories etc)

It's on life-support.
It's a complete irrelevance. The only time since the '60s that the empire has mattered was in 1982.

I vote for Britain because...

At one point in time, Great Britain controlled one quarter of the Earth's population.

Thanks to it's horrific diet, USA can barely control it's bowel movements.

Does the blood ever dry?

That said, the USA is the only country in the world where a fat person can go in a cake shop openly!

Victoria Wood (source of such great Quotes)

If you were a very big person going into a cake shop in this country you'd have to say "er, a woman's collapsed two streets away and I er, think it's a diabetic coma. On the other hand it could be head injuries in which case I can eat it Myself"
:D

No, we blame that on Teenagers.

At least we didn't invent Disneyland.

(See Victoria Wood's comments on it)

No need for that stereotype.
Plenty of fat adults out there. I of course speak as a teenager.

I vote for Britain because...

At one point in time, Great Britain controlled one quarter of the Earth's population.

Thanks to it's horrific diet, USA can barely control it's bowel movements.

Horrific diet? I refer you to one of your own newspaper's quotes:

"Britain has overtaken the United States as a nation of fast food gluttons"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?view=BLOGDETAIL&grid=F11&blog=yourview&xml=/news/2008/01/02/view02c.xml

Fortunately, one quarter of the globe didn't entirely succumb to your culture of Saturday night binge drinking followed by fights and chips and a curry.Which is no doubt, as with everything else, blamed on "the foreigners", or more specifically the EU.

No, we blame that on Teenagers.

At least we didn't invent Disneyland.

(See Victoria Wood's comments on it)

I meant the binge drinking etc

Yeah, I suppose that lets us lot down alot. Sometimes I feel ashamed I'm in the same age group as those people.

Back to the topic at hand- another reason why we are better than the USA, Rugby! No doubt you know why!

No need for that stereotype.
Plenty of fat adults out there. I of course speak as a teenager.

I meant the binge drinking etc

I meant the binge drinking etc

You think England's bad, come to Ireland. It'll blow you away. Seriously

Great Britain is winning! :)

Great Brittan is small. Everything is small in England. The cars are too small, the bathrooms are way too small and the hamburgers are a joke. In fact, the only food in England that doesn't taste like crap are the tea, the fish and chips, and the Cadberry Chocolate.

Now in America, everything is big. In fact, everything is bigger than you need it to be which is awesome. And everything is cheap too. And you can go places faster because everybody drives big cars with a lot more horsepower and seats than they need. Plus, nobody worries about waste because their is no pollution in America and we have all the landfill space that we need.

Is this a joke?

Great Brittan is small. Everything is small in England. The cars are too small, the bathrooms are way too small and the hamburgers are a joke. In fact, the only food in England that doesn't taste like crap are the tea, the fish and chips, and the Cadberry Chocolate.

Now in America, everything is big. In fact, everything is bigger than you need it to be which is awesome. And everything is cheap too. And you can go places faster because everybody drives big cars with a lot more horsepower and seats than they need. Plus, nobody worries about waste because their is no pollution in America and we have all the landfill space that we need.

Isn't everything?

Funny man

Is this a joke?

Isn't everything?

Does the Sun ever set on it? (if you include the Indian Ocean territories etc)
Not quite: The gap between Pitcairn and the British Indian Ocean Territory is just narrow enough for this boast to remain true...

Let's face it, Brittania is way hotter than Lady Liberty ;)

Great Brittan is small.
Everything is small in England. The cars are too small, the bathrooms are way too small and the hamburgers are a joke. In fact, the only food in England that doesn't taste like crap are the tea, the fish and chips, and the Cadberry Chocolate.

Now in America, everything is big. In fact, everything is bigger than you need it to be which is awesome. And everything is cheap too. And you can go places faster because everybody drives big cars with a lot more horsepower and seats than they need. Plus, nobody worries about waste because their is no pollution in America and we have all the landfill space that we need.

American arrogance summed up pretty nicely. No pollution in America? Bollocks! Also on average both our maximum speed limits are roughly the same. Our minimum speed limit on average in built up areas is also similar to the USA's. The reason why we have smaller burgers over here is so we don't turn out like half of the US poulation, and the only burgers you might have had over here I'm guessing are McDonalds burgers. Fish n Chip shop burgers are actually quite huge, yet bot supersizedly disgusting.
Bathrooms (or toilets/bogs/khazis/lavatories/loos etc) too small? It isn't meant to be an issue over here. Cars are too small? Well we can't have cars that can't go around corners (ahem- unlike some American ones).
As for your last sentence of the first paragragh, you only single out England as the only country in the British Isles- we are the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, thus you exlude Scottish, Welsh and Irish food aswell. Have you not ever tried Aberdeen angus steak/burgers?
I rest my case.

I think that was sarcasm. :rolleyes:

You know, I had a recent epiphany...

In the classic Star Trek, The Federation was an obvious analog to the USA and the Klingon Empire was the USSR.

But nowadays... I'm thinking the Americans are the Klingons.

Consider that the US is the easiest country in the world to pick a fight with. We eat, sleep and breathe war and guns and violence. Naked breast on TV? No, much too obscene. Guy having his heart torn out through his chest? No problem! We can even schedule a commercial for a resturant immediately afterwards!

Kinda like that French Military History list where it talks about how we dealt with the Barbary Pirates. Everybody else: Pay to have them leave you alone. U.S. solution: Kick their asses. It's how we think. Why would an American even CONSIDER letting somebody pirate our stuff?

And gawd... have you see the U.S. miltary? How many freaking Supercarrirers do we NEED? NOBODY else has even one! And get this... We're still building new ones.

WTH for?

The answer: Because they're COOL AS HELL!

Yep. We're the Klingons now. Totally.

Kinda like that French Military History list where it talks about how we dealt with the Barbary Pirates. Everybody else: Pay to have them leave you alone. U.S. solution: Kick their asses.
Inaccurate. There had already been at least one British (or maybe combined British and Dutch?) expedition for that purpose at some date significantly before the American attack.

No, new Trek Klingon's are wusses, we're even more badass. :sniper::mp5: :sniper::D

Inaccurate. There had already been at least one British (or maybe combined British and Dutch?) expedition for that purpose at some date significantly before the American attack.

Really didn't do much good now did it if we had to put a stop to it. Hell we even sacked Tripoli.

You know, I had a recent epiphany...

In the classic Star Trek, The Federation was an obvious analog to the USA and the Klingon Empire was the USSR.

But nowadays... I'm thinking the Americans are the Klingons.



So who where the Romulans? Cause they had the Warbird, thus making them the coolest/lucky.

And America was Klingons? Bah, now we're the Borg. Negotiation is irrelevent. You will be assimilated. You WILL be a democratic society with a constitution we approve of. You will follow our morals, standards, and culture.

As an aside...this thread is still going on?

No, new Trek Klingon's are wusses, we're even more badass. :sniper::mp5: :sniper::D

That might not be such a good thing...

I'm worried that planet of the apes is third.

That might not be such a good thing...

It was a joke...

I'm worried that planet of the apes is third.

Yeah...Heeeey...Yeaah!

C'mon everyone, remember how amazing Russia is, I mean, it was a superpower until the eary 90's, and it has a pretty immense history - responsible for 85% of German soldiers deaths, all the wars - Napoleon, Barbarossa...Yeah...

And China, I don't realy know much about China, but it's has it's own version of Zen - Cha'an, and that's gotta mean something, right?

OK I take that back.

Bring on Planet of the Apes!!!!!!!!!!!

If Britain's a complete no hoper.

Really didn't do much good now did it if we had to put a stop to it. Hell we even sacked Tripoli.
It stopped them attacking us, which was all that we were trying to achieve, so good enough.

:D :D

Eire Abu!!

*sigh*

If only.

It stopped them attacking us, which was all that we were trying to achieve, so good enough.

And we pretty much put an end to it on our ships as well :D

American arrogance summed up pretty nicely. No pollution in America? Bollocks! Also on average both our maximum speed limits are roughly the same. Our minimum speed limit on average in built up areas is also similar to the USA's. The reason why we have smaller burgers over here is so we don't turn out like half of the US poulation, and the only burgers you might have had over here I'm guessing are McDonalds burgers. Fish n Chip shop burgers are actually quite huge, yet bot supersizedly disgusting.
Bathrooms (or toilets/bogs/khazis/lavatories/loos etc) too small? It isn't meant to be an issue over here. Cars are too small? Well we can't have cars that can't go around corners (ahem- unlike some American ones).
As for your last sentence of the first paragragh, you only single out England as the only country in the British Isles- we are the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, thus you exlude Scottish, Welsh and Irish food aswell. Have you not ever tried Aberdeen angus steak/burgers?
I rest my case.


The comment you were responding to was sarcasm. You did prove in responding however, that you did the same thing he was pretending to do. Happy you big ol' hypocrite?

American arrogance summed up pretty nicely. No pollution in America? Bollocks! Also on average both our maximum speed limits are roughly the same. Our minimum speed limit on average in built up areas is also similar to the USA's. The reason why we have smaller burgers over here is so we don't turn out like half of the US poulation, and the only burgers you might have had over here I'm guessing are McDonalds burgers. Fish n Chip shop burgers are actually quite huge, yet bot supersizedly disgusting.
Bathrooms (or toilets/bogs/khazis/lavatories/loos etc) too small? It isn't meant to be an issue over here. Cars are too small? Well we can't have cars that can't go around corners (ahem- unlike some American ones).
As for your last sentence of the first paragragh, you only single out England as the only country in the British Isles- we are the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, thus you exlude Scottish, Welsh and Irish food aswell. Have you not ever tried Aberdeen angus steak/burgers?
I rest my case.

Poppycock! Most of the toilets in the England are older than I am (21 years old). You've got ancient European funk from centuries ago in some of those loos.
Maybe your mini coopers and sexy morgan roadsters can go around corners, but try moving apartments sometime and see how many boxes you can fit in one of those squeaky little cars. And don't tell me that landrovers do a good job because their are a lot more of those in Georgia than in England.
And black Angus beef tastes too dark, like its been over-cooked. You want a really good burger, go to Texas and get a Longhorn or buffalo steak burger.:p

And by the way, I singled out the English on purpose, My last name is Welsh and I would never rag on my direct ancestors. Die you heathen invading English scum!

And by the way, I singled out the English on purpose, My last name is Welsh and I would never rag on my direct ancestors. Die you heathen invading English scum!

What about the Irish?

What about the Irish?

bunch of drunks if you ask me.

I try not to think about the Irish

bunch of drunks if you ask me.

I try not to think about the Irish

Cheers for that,

I'm glad to see the old attitudes haven't died out.

I wonder if the same people who joke about 'French military victories' are the same people who think the USA gained independence purely of its own accord and that the war of 1812 was a draw...

Anyway, my vote goes for the planet of the apes. Stupendous amounts of facial hair for all!

America, of course.

Case and point:

We have MC Hammer:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EMzoBkaFxh4

While Britain has Lady Sovereign:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I3ILUic7aN0


There is no comparison. America all the way.

Britain is awesome, probably the second best country in the world, but America owns.

Edit: Damn, I want to learn MC Hammer's dance so bad!

I wonder if the same people who joke about 'French military victories' are the same people who think the USA gained independence purely of its own accord and that the war of 1812 was a draw..

The War of 1812 was a draw.

http://www.weirdomatic.com/wp-content/pictures/doggiegen/cute_puppy_07.jpg

Cute.

http://www.smiliegenerator.de/s34/smilies-16459.png

:D

The War of 1812 was a draw.As far as I'm aware Great Britain achieved everything they wanted: they stopped the US trading with France, in an effort to bring about the end of the Napoleon's empire. In addition the US invasion of Canada was repulsed. Great Britain had no interest in retaking US territory as Great Britain was making similar amounts of money from trade with the US as before the American Revolution, plus they didn't have to pay to maintain a defensive army for a colony.

Of course the war can be seen of major benefit to the US, but it certainly wasn't a draw because of these benefits.

Lets correct your historical ignorance here...

Britian used to control Canada, so arguablly that counts for them (just like the US does) because British rule helped a nation. India is not a hellhole, its actually a nation with a rapidly developing economy.

South Korea we didnt invade. We devided Korea in two and have military presence there. They have done everything else on their own.

Otherwise, we have destroyed:

Latin America
Argentina
Philipenes (who are now recorvering)

You are correct

@someone else:

:@ we don't have bad hygeine or dentistry in the best country the UK!!

also the UK used to OWN nearly a 1/3 of the world - including the US

You are correct

@someone else:

:@ we don't have bad hygeine or dentistry in the best country the UK!!

also the UK used to OWN nearly a 1/3 of the world - including the US

UK only owned part of what is today the United States. :)

Lets correct your historical ignorance here...

Britian used to control Canada, so arguablly that counts for them (just like the US does) because British rule helped a nation. India is not a hellhole, its actually a nation with a rapidly developing economy.

South Korea we didnt invade. We devided Korea in two and have military presence there. They have done everything else on their own.

Otherwise, we have destroyed:

Latin America
Argentina
Philipenes (who are now recorvering)

You are correct

@someone else:

:@ we don't have bad hygeine or dentistry in the best country the UK!!

also the UK used to OWN nearly a 1/3 of the world - including the US

UK only owned part of what is today the United States. :)

Yeah I know but the majority was British - east, west was spanish and small part near the carrbiean was french. (Florida[spanish too] and new orleans)
The centre was 'injun' native land but the British controlled it.

UK only owned part of what is today the United States. :)Whereas China owns nearly of all what is today the United States. Yay corporate states.

k... I exagerate, but it wouldn't look so good a point if I didn't.

'Whereas today China has huge amounts of US treasury bonds and such'

As far as I'm aware Great Britain achieved everything they wanted: they stopped the US trading with France, in an effort to bring about the end of the Napoleon's empire. In addition the US invasion of Canada was repulsed. Great Britain had no interest in retaking US territory as Great Britain was making similar amounts of money from trade with the US as before the American Revolution, plus they didn't have to pay to maintain a defensive army for a colony.

Of course the war can be seen of major benefit to the US, but it certainly wasn't a draw because of these benefits.
The US also achieved everything it wanted to. Britain and France stopped attacking their ships, and they gained international recognition. The invasion of Canada was not repulsed, we burned Toronto. We lost at Washington DC, but we won at Baltimore, New York, the Great Lakes, and New Orleans. In addition to that, during the war, Britain wasn't trading with the U.S. so we replaced their textile factories with our own so we didn't have to trade with them much anyway after that.

Yeah I know but the majority was British - east, west was spanish and small part near the carrbiean was french. (Florida[spanish too] and new orleans)
The centre was 'injun' native land but the British controlled it.

The British only ever touched the Eastern Seaboard. The French owned the Center.

As far as I'm aware Great Britain achieved everything they wanted: they stopped the US trading with France in an effort to bring about the end of the Napoleon's empire.

Um...not quite true. We stopped trading with both sides. Not one of Jefferson's greatest moments.

In addition the US invasion of Canada was repulsed. Great Britain had no interest in retaking US territory as Great Britain was making similar amounts of money from trade with the US as before the American Revolution, plus they didn't have to pay to maintain a defensive army for a colony.

You may want to rethink some of that. Their invasion was also being in the process of repulsed as well. I mean, look at Fort McHenry, Baltimore, Plattsburg, Lake Erie.

Of course the war can be seen of major benefit to the US, but it certainly wasn't a draw because of these benefits.

Historical evidence proves you wrong and only a fucking nationalist would think that either side won this war.

The US also achieved everything it wanted to. Britain and France stopped attacking their ships, and they gained international recognition. The invasion of Canada was not repulsed, we burned Toronto. We lost at Washington DC, but we won at Baltimore, New York, the Great Lakes, and New Orleans. In addition to that, during the war, Britain wasn't trading with the U.S. so we replaced their textile factories with our own so we didn't have to trade with them much anyway after that.

Historical Footnote!

New Orleans took place after the peace treaty was signed.

I'm going to have to go with "pie".

I'm going to have to go with "pie".

Mmmm, pie.....

Mmmm, pie.....


"Throttlebottom"? Are you by any chance another fan of the Gershwins' musicals 'Of Thee I Sing' and 'Let Them Eat Cake', in which the USA had a Vice-President by that surname?

No, we blame that on Teenagers.

At least we didn't invent Disneyland.

(See Victoria Wood's comments on it)

What are you talking about, Disneyland is the happiest place on Earth. :rolleyes: You're just jealous.

Saddest thing is that America encourage colonial rebellion by not supporting colonialist nations.

Suez being a prime Example.

Vietnam?

Saddest thing is that America encourages/d colonial rebellion by not supporting colonialist nations.

Suez being a prime Example.