NationStates Jolt Archive

Colombia, because the U.S. would use it's unbeatable air and sea power to stop a war of aggression by Chavez and the public will tolerate it without casualties, which only come when our troops have to be cops and crossing guards.

I don't see the US jumping in unless it looked like Columbia would lose. For this scenario I outlined the US would keep out of combat.

That's the whole point. We would stop Chavez from winning any war. The same with Israel. We'd have entered the war if they were losing.

I don't see a real war happening, but I don't see the U.S. or our allies allowing that to happen. Chavez has plenty of other enemies. Who does he have backing him? Cuba and Iran? You know China's not going to get involved in something that far away.

But leaving aside the situation, just between the powers you mentioned. Colombia could whip all those powers together. So could Brazil and Argentina. They are just talk and they are fighting for a leftist egotist.

I don't think the recent actions will escalate into armed conflict. However let's say it does and we have a good old fashioned regional conflict. Columbia and Brazil vs Venezuela and Ecuador. Perhaps Bolivia may try and back Venezuela with Argentina jumping in with Columbia and Brazil. In this scenario the US stays out of the combat phase and just provides Brazil and Columbia with logistics, intelligence and arms supplies.


So Side one is Venezuela, Ecuador and Bolivia. Side two is Columbia, Brazil and Argentina. Who comes out the victor?

Colombia, because the U.S. would use it's unbeatable air and sea power to stop a war of aggression by Chavez and the public will tolerate it without casualties, which only come when our troops have to be cops and crossing guards.

I don't see the US jumping in unless it looked like Columbia would lose. For this scenario I outlined the US would keep out of combat.

So could Brazil and Argentina. They are just talk and they are fighting for a leftist egotist.

And why the fuck is this our problem again? Indeed, why the fuck is it YOURS? Didn't Vietnam teach you anything about meddling?

Didn't Vietnam teach you anything about meddling?

No.

Our politicians are v-e-r-y slow leaners. If they had learned about meddling, we would not be in Iraq, would we? :(

Just curious, but Heikoku, where are you from, if you don't mind my asking?

And why the fuck is this our problem again? Indeed, why the fuck is it YOURS? Didn't Vietnam teach you anything about meddling?

Colombia is strong ally. Unlike the Europeans, we don't sell out our friends.

Vietnam was meddling?

You do mean trying to stop the communists from taking over South Vietnam and turning all of SE Asia into another communist killing field? For all the people that crow about the U.S. failure to stop communism in Vietnam, the only losers of the war were the Southeast Asians. A million South Vietnamese went into death camps after the war and millions of people in Cambodia died as a direct result of our leaving and the victory of communism. You ever think the protesters and media people who undermined the war ever have to think about that?

You see the difference between South Korea and North Korea? That would be difference between South Vietnam and North Vietnam if we had achieved the objectives there. You should remember that whenever someones crows about the communist victories in SE Asia.

No.

Our politicians are v-e-r-y slow leaners. If they had learned about meddling, we would not be in Iraq, would we? :(

I shouldn't have to live in a world in which all the good points are terrible ones.

Just curious, but Heikoku, where are you from, if you don't mind my asking?

Brazil. Y'know, the country HSH wants to use as fodder in HIS ideological wankfest.

God forbid leftist rebels win in Colombia and the CIA has to stop importing drugs to the USA...

I don't think the USA has the rational capacity for a 3rd war, though on an interesting note, if we had a military conflict with Venezuela, that proves many things said/predicted in Zeitgeist. Not that I think Zeitgeist is totally accurate, but it would be a troubling irony.

There's a big difference a war involving a lengthy ground involvement and war like Desert Storm that requires massive air and sea power, which is what would happen if Chavez invaded Colombia. We'd destroy the Venezuelan Air Force and destroy their Navy and bomb the shit our of their invasion force.

There's a big difference between that and a ground occupation where the casualties come from.

God forbid leftist rebels win in Colombia and the CIA has to stop importing drugs to the USA...

I don't think the USA has the rational capacity for a 3rd war, though on an interesting note, if we had a military conflict with Venezuela, that proves many things said/predicted in Zeitgeist. Not that I think Zeitgeist is totally accurate, but it would be a troubling irony.

Colombia is strong ally. Unlike the Europeans, we don't sell out our friends.

Vietnam was meddling?

You do mean trying to stop the communists from taking over South Vietnam and turning all of SE Asia into another communist killing field? For all the people that crow about the U.S. failure to stop communism in Vietnam, the only losers of the war were the Southeast Asians. A million South Vietnamese went into death camps after the war and millions of people in Cambodia died as a direct result of our leaving and the victory of communism. You ever think the protesters and media people who undermined the war ever have to think about that?

You see the difference between South Korea and North Korea? That would be difference between South Vietnam and North Vietnam if we had achieved the objectives there. You should remember what your celebrating whenever someones crows about the communist victories in SE Asia.

Justified or not - and that's the subject of another thread - it was meddling, whether the intent was well or ill.

A million South Vietnamese went into death camps after the war

Compared to the 2 to 5 million Vietnamese people dead in the fucking war, that number seems pretty slim. I thought you were supposed to be the good guys?

Brazil. Y'know, the country HSH wants to use as fodder in HIS ideological wankfest.

That explains your strong feelings regarding U.S. meddling. I don't blame you, given that we supported the dictatorship there - a fact which no amount of apologizing can undo, but must be done anyway. I had nothing to do with it (I was born the year it ended, 1985) but I still feel sorry for it.

Compared to the 2 to 5 million Vietnamese people dead in the fucking war, that number seems pretty slim. I thought you were supposed to be the good guys?

The latter figure includes the French-Indochina War. Either way, though, that's a lot of dead people. :(

That explains your strong feelings regarding U.S. meddling. I don't blame you, given that we supported the dictatorship there - a fact which no amount of apologizing can undo, but must be done anyway. I had nothing to do with it (I was born the year it ended, 1985) but I still feel sorry for it.

You have every right to feel sorry for it, but it's not your fault (well, not in THIS incarnation anyways, and I can't tell what you were in the other one, but unless you were LBJ...).

However, yes, Brazil would have been a much better place had the US not supported the coup.

You have every right to feel sorry for it, but it's not your fault (well, not in THIS incarnation anyways, and I can't tell what you were in the other one, but unless you were LBJ...).

However, yes, Brazil would have been a much better place had the US not supported the coup.

I hope Brazil never experiences another military dictatorship. Hell, I wish that no country ever suffered one.

I hope Brazil never experiences another military dictatorship. Hell, I wish that no country ever suffered one.

So do I, which is why we must keep neocons from setting their tentacles here by any means necessary.

I don't think the Brazilian people would stand for it.

They wouldn't. But just because they wouldn't stand for it doesn't mean it wouldn't succeed. After all, few Burmese stand for their country's military dictatorship.

I don't think the Brazilian people would stand for it.

Our youth didn't, back then. I myself was born in 1981, so it's not like I saw much of it. However, the fact remains that our youth didn't stand for it... Not that it helped, the dystopia lasted 20 years anyways.

Why can't we just trade with Latin America, invest there, and do cultural exchanges, instead of being so belligerent? Instead of trying to boss them around or impose our views on them, we should just stick to friendly trade and diplomacy, and butt out of their internal affairs.

I hope Brazil never experiences another military dictatorship. Hell, I wish that no country ever suffered one.

I don't think the Brazilian people would stand for it.

Burma is not as important of a nation as Brazil is.

Define "important." And importance is irrelevant, a military dictatorship that wants to retain power can do so, regardless of how widely it's hated.

Would be a great idea theoretically. However when some want to nationalize certain sectors and throw foreign companies out that leads to issues of trade and investment.

True, but that's no excuse but to meddle in their affairs or be belligerent. A cool head can and should prevail.

You do mean trying to stop the communists from taking over South Vietnam and turning all of SE Asia into another communist killing field?

That worked really wel-

oh wait, china.

That's only what, ALL of Asia?

Our youth didn't, back then. I myself was born in 1981, so it's not like I saw much of it. However, the fact remains that our youth didn't stand for it... Not that it helped, the dystopia lasted 20 years anyways.


The youth on their own typically cannot stop a dictatorship takeover. I believe now it would be a larger show of force by the populace in general. Could be wrong though.

They wouldn't. But just because they wouldn't stand for it doesn't mean it wouldn't succeed. After all, few Burmese stand for their country's military dictatorship.

Burma is not as important of a nation as Brazil is.

Why can't we just trade with Latin America, invest there, and do cultural exchanges, instead of being so belligerent? Instead of trying to boss them around or impose our views on them, we should just stick to friendly trade and diplomacy, and butt out of their internal affairs.

Would be a great idea theoretically. However when some want to nationalize certain sectors and throw foreign companies out that leads to issues of trade and investment.

snip.. .

Do you see any possibility of Brazil doing a bit of saber rattling over Venezuela's move with Ecuador?

Brazil and Argentina won't be involved over that conflict, if it happens. You can bet on it.

Maybe politically, but they aren't moving one soldier. Too many treaties over that zone for that.

Regarding Bolivia, if both Peru and Brazil are neutral states, as you can bet they will be, Bolivia won't be able to move their forces to help Venezuela, even if they truly want that.

So, it would go down to Ecuador and Venezuela against Colombia, or well, Ecuador, Venezuela and the FARC against Colombia.

Colombia is strong ally. Unlike the Europeans, we don't sell out our friends.Hahaha! Saddam and the Taliban disagree. :D

Lula's Brazil and Kirschner's Argentina, with leftist presidents, would most likely stay neutral if ever a conflict would arise. Bachelet's Chile would probably stay neutral too. Chavez's allies would probably be Correa's Ecuador, possibly with some support from Ortega's Nicaragua (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colombia-Nicaragua_relations), Morales' Bolivia, and possibly Vazquez' Uruguay or Castro's Cuba. The only countries I see supporting Colombia may be the US and Calderon's Mexico, probably also Garcia's Peru (if Bolivia will not enter), and possibly Guatemala.

Note that I do not want another war, not do I encourage it or want these countries to be involved. Just hypothesizing about possibilities.

Lula's Brazil and Kirschner's Argentina, with leftist presidents, would most likely stay neutral if ever a conflict would arise. Bachelet's Chile would probably stay neutral too.

I entirely agree.

Chavez's allies would probably be Correa's Ecuador, possibly with some support from Ortega's Nicaragua (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Colombia-Nicaragua_relations), Morales' Bolivia, and possibly Vazquez' Uruguay or Castro's Cuba. The only countries I see supporting Colombia may be the US and Calderon's Mexico, probably also Garcia's Peru (if Bolivia will not enter), and possibly Guatemala.

Nicaragua perhaps, Although I can't see how they can send true support, because the naval forces of Nicaragua are in a ghastly state.

If Brazil and Peru are neutral, Morales couldn't move a single soldier towards the zone of conflict.

Same with Uruguay. Plus, Uruguay would follow the diplomatic lines of both Argentina and Brazil, to avoid further conflict.

Mexico would be too far away and unrelated to mess with the conflict. Peru would maintain its neutrality as long as Ecuador doesn't get messy or greedy, but as long ecuatorian activities doesn't involve the south frontier, they would remain as spectators.

Hahaha! Saddam and the Taliban disagree. :D

Neither of these were even remotely American allies. In the case of Saddam, the US government used Hussein and Khomeini against each other, providing arms and money to both sides.

And just plain out, we never supported the Taliban, a movement that sprang up well after we withdrew out interests from Afghanistan. Further, if they had, at any point, been associated with the US, they were the one's who would have betrayed the US, by harboring Al-Qaeda after they attacked the US.

Go suck on your polemics somewhere where reality doesn't matter.

Neither of these were even remotely American allies. In the case of Saddam, the US government used Hussein and Khomeini against each other, providing arms and money to both sides. Note that "allies" was not the term used by Eric. "Friends" was. However, Saddam was indeed an ally, and at least a "friend", judging from visits by smiling US officials.
And just plain out, we never supported the Taliban, a movement that sprang up well after we withdrew out interests from Afghanistan. Further, if they had, at any point, been associated with the US, they were the one's who would have betrayed the US, by harboring Al-Qaeda after they attacked the US.Depends on your definition of "we". Eric was generalizing Europeans, so the comment I made generalized as well, pointing out two regimes that were embraced by Americans (though not necessarily the federal government). As to withdrawing interests, that's only valid if you consider "killing Russians" as the only vested interest the US had in Afghanistan. "Oil" or better "constructing oil pipelines" was and remains a vital US interest in Central Asia, particularly in Afghanistan. Hence why Bush was all cozy with the Taliban back when he was still govenor of Texas.
Go suck on your polemics somewhere where reality doesn't matter.:D

--snip--
Very good observations right there. It's likely that Brazil, Argentina, Chile and/or Peru would force/encourage the former constituents of Gran Colombia to the negotiating table in the event of conflict. Other countries' support may not be military, it may be diplomatic or moral, especially for weaker nations such as Nicaragua who can't afford to be involved in an international military conflict. As for Mexico, I can remember one event in which Chavez insulted/criticized Mexico's Fox (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4437024.stm) that damaged Mexican-Venezuelan relations (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/4438876.stm). But that was three years ago...

*goes back to making his final paper*

Wouldn't it be nice for The Europeans to carve up S.America. Britain, France and The Netherlands could all have their Guyanas and the Brazil could go Back to Portugal, Peru and Ecuador to Spain, Uruguay and Argentina to Britain, Chile to France, Bolivia to Italy, Paraguay to Austria and Venezuela and Colombia to Britain.

Wouldn't it be nice for The Europeans to carve up S.America. Britain, France and The Netherlands could all have their Guyanas and the Brazil could go Back to Portugal, Peru and Ecuador to Spain, Uruguay and Argentina to Britain, Chile to France, Bolivia to Italy, Paraguay to Austria and Venezuela and Colombia to Britain.

I would also love to have a british slave. Specially if it can display a Norfolk accent. I would use him to massage my feet and serve me tea.

I would also love to have a british slave. Specially if it can display a Norfolk accent. I would use him to massage my feet and serve me tea.

We call them servants dearie. The British Empire outlawed Slavery in the 1830s.

And sorry but I don't Have a Norfolk Accent.

But remember, Colonialisation means fewer nations and fewer possible wars.

We call them servants dearie. The British Empire outlawed Slavery in the 1830s.

And sorry but I don't Have a Norfolk Accent.

But remember, Colonialisation means fewer nations and fewer possible wars.

OH, and we are called independent nations, dearie. In the case of Venezuela, since 1810, 1811, or 1821, whenever you prefer. In any case, before you outlawed slavery.

If we are going to return to those ancient times, then we can be colonies, and I want my slave. The loss of the Norfolk accent is not a problem, you can learn to have it through enough lash treatment.

Yeah, all those "Independence Wars", I wonder what they were fighting for back then. But of course, ignorance is bliss.

Just remember that due to high levels of inmigration and low rates of birth in the european countries, you are the ones that are being colonized now. this time, violence is not even used.

This is coming from both an european, and a latinoamerican. Enjoy.

OH, and we are called independent nations, dearie. In the case of Venezuela, since 1810, 1811, or 1821, whenever you prefer. In any case, before you outlawed slavery.

If we are going to return to those ancient times, then we can be colonies, and I want my slave. The loss of the Norfolk accent is not a problem, you can learn to have it through enough lash treatment.

Yeah, all those "Independence Wars", I wonder what they were fighting for back then. But of course, ignorance is bliss.

Just remember that due to high levels of inmigration and low rates of birth in the european countries, you are the ones that are being colonized now. this time, violence is not even used.

This is coming from both an european, and a latinoamerican. Enjoy.

Slavery is wrong. And If you think I, A Subject of the Soverign Nation of Great Britain will ever Submit to a Person as My Lord and Master then You've got another thing Coming Buster.

Independence Wars show A Colony Isn't Being ruled Properly.

(Play Land of Hope And Glory)

We Shall Never Be Colonised. The British People are Too Proud Of Their Great Nation To Ever Surrender To the Will Of Foreign Nations.

If You think Violence isn't used Then You've never been at a Port when The Ilegals are Found.

This Is Coming From An Anglo-Indian With some German Thrown in For Good Measure.

Slavery is wrong. And If you think I, A Subject of the Soverign Nation of Great Britain will ever Submit to a Person as My Lord and Master then You've got another thing Coming Buster.

Colonization is wrong. And If you think I, A Subject to Two Independent and Democratic Countries will ever Submit to another Country as MY Lord and Master then You've got another thing Coming Buster.

Independence Wars show A Colony Isn't Being ruled Properly.

Independence Wars show A Inept Colonial Potence.
(Play lots and lots of anthems)

We Shall Never Be Colonised. The British People are Too Proud Of Their Great Nation To Ever Surrender To the Will Of Foreign Nations.

Wow, but after Hastings, your ass were handed to those french-vikings of Normandy, right? And you surrendered, right?


This Is Coming From An Anglo-Indian Race Supremacist With some Nazi Thrown in For Good Measure.

Fixed.

Colonization is wrong. And If you think I, A Subject to Two Independent and Democratic Countries will ever Submit to another Country as MY Lord and Master then You've got another thing Coming Buster.



Independence Wars show A Inept Colonial Potence.
(Play lots and lots of anthems)



Wow, but after Hastings, your ass were handed to those french-vikings of Normandy, right? And you surrendered, right?




Fixed.


Which Nation is Yours? Are You Civilised?

Therefore A different Colonial Government Should Be Installed.

The British Didn't Exist in 1066.
We Didn't Surrender, We were Suppressed.
The British Came About in The 1700s.

And That Last Quote Is Grade-A B*llS**t Slander (or Libel).

Race Is Unimportant (Anglo-Indian Means Of Mixed Blood(and Proud of It!) Therefore I Would Be Dumb To Even Think Of Being Racist) to Me, Though It Clearly Is To You. (Nazi in Hiding).

My German Forebears Left Germany Before World War One. (Quick History Lesson: Thats Before The Nazis.) They Left To escape an Oppressive Miltaristic Regime.

Which Nation is Yours? Are You Civilised?

Venezuela and Spain. Hard to choose one over the other. Dual citizenship is a blessing.

Therefore A different Colonial Government Should Be Installed.

A Different Goverment. Why it as to Be Colonial as Well?

The British Didn't Exist in 1066.
We Didn't Surrender, We were Suppressed.
The British Came About in The 1700s.

England Did, Although.

And That Last Quote Is Grade-A B*llS**t Slander (or Libel).

Race Is Unimportant (Anglo-Indian Means Of Mixed Blood(and Proud of It!) Therefore I Would Be Dumb To Even Think Of Being Racist) to Me, Though It Clearly Is To You. (Nazi in Hiding).

My German Forebears Left Germany Before World War One. (Quick History Lesson: Thats Before The Nazis.) They Left To escape an Oppressive Miltaristic Regime.

You seem, however, you propose the supremacy of european or "westerners" over the rest of the globe, giving them the banner of the "Bearers of Progress And Civilization". I imagine that label the rest of the world as uncivilized. Thus, your remark is racist. Do Not Hide Under False Curtains, At Least Take Pride On Your Own Advise. Being a Supremacist, you are also a Nazi, by ideology, if not by race.

Do Not Put a Mask. You Risk Looking Like An Arlequine.

Venezuela and Spain. Hard to choose one over the other. Dual citizenship is a blessing.



A Different Goverment. Why it as to Be Colonial as Well?



England Did, Although.



You seem, however, you propose the supremacy of european or "westerners" over the rest of the globe, giving them the banner of the "Bearers of Progress And Civilization". I imagine that label the rest of the world as uncivilized. Thus, your remark is racist. Do Not Hide Under False Curtains, At Least Take Pride On Your Own Advise. Being a Supremacist, you are also a Nazi, by ideology, if not by race.

Do Not Put a Mask. You Risk Looking Like An Arlequine.

So you're related to both the Colony and the Ruler. Ok.

Colonial allows there to be fewer nations (a good thing) and it allows trade to fuction easier.

England Is Only Part of Britain, in the Same way as Gibraltar is.

I believe in Colonialisation as it helps keep nations functioning. I'm not a racist. Which bit of that don't you get. I believe in advanced nations helping weaker ones. If India were a brilliant country with no Problems and Britain were a failing Jungle tribeland I would gladly be ruled by India.(It ain't gonna happen but still)

I'm Really not Racist. I want Civilisation. That's all.

I'm Not racist and your absurd and impudent comment makes me want to reach for a gun.

Colonial allows there to be fewer nations (a good thing) and it allows trade to fuction easier.

Colonial system allows a culture to impose over other, reduce diversification and self determination. (Bad things)

I believe in Colonialisation as it helps keep nations functioning. I'm not a racist. Which bit of that don't you get. I believe in advanced nations helping weaker ones. If India were a brilliant country with no Problems and Britain were a failing Jungle tribeland I would gladly be ruled by India.(It ain't gonna happen but still)

If you believe somewhat a citizen of a country is better than another, you are a supremacist pretty close to a racist. There are no "superiors" in the real world, pal. The "help" you are speaking about is opression.

I'm Not racist and your absurd and impudent comment makes me want to reach for a gun.

Your comments make me feel sick. However, I do not believe in indoctrination by violence, as you do.

Colonial system allows a culture to impose over other, reduce diversification and self determination. (Bad things)



If you believe somewhat a citizen of a country is better than another, you are a supremacist pretty close to a racist. There are no "superiors" in the real world, pal. The "help" you are speaking about is opression.



Your comments make me feel sick. However, I do not believe in indoctrination by violence, as you do.

So How come the Maoris aren't all completely Suppressed.

I believe living standards are better in some countries. Then the better (in terms of living standards) countries help the worse off countries.

So it's better to leave cannibals alone to kill than set up a colonial government and impose standards?

I believe in Civilisation.

I meant your absurd and incorrect judgements of me make me want to shoot something. Going around calling people a Nazi without reason and causing offence will one day get you a lot of trouble. And No one will sympathise with you.

The only winners would be the US and FARC.

The only winners would be the US and FARC.

I know of other people who would win.:p
Winners (http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=puka5XaVIyI)

Aelosia, que vas a hacer? Vas a huir y ir a Espana? No vas a quedarse alli en medio de una guerra....? O que?

Do you see any possibility of Brazil doing a bit of saber rattling over Venezuela's move with Ecuador?

Only if everyone else fails to read the Brazilian Constitutional amendment that prevents first strike in wars.

Wouldn't it be nice for The Europeans to carve up S.America. Britain, France and The Netherlands could all have their Guyanas and the Brazil could go Back to Portugal, Peru and Ecuador to Spain, Uruguay and Argentina to Britain, Chile to France, Bolivia to Italy, Paraguay to Austria and Venezuela and Colombia to Britain.

It would be also nice for us Brazilians to get all that gold from the colonization back from England. With interest. Which would be enough to leave your nation penniless.

Now will you quit the flamebaiting or should I raise the possibility of having the Queen sell her organs for our benefit?

Aelosia, que vas a hacer? Vas a huir y ir a Espana? No vas a quedarse alli en medio de una guerra....? O que?

When the ugly thing started, I decided to stay.

Now it is getting uglier, but I will stay anyway. Unless someone expels me, or I start to be "requested" for interrogation, I will stay here.

It has something to do with "patriotism", that is not the same thing as "nationalism". I love this country. Dearly. Even being citizen to a second one, this is where my mother rocked my cradle, and this is where I got my accent from, where I did attend to High School, and where I did know my friends and acquietances.

Patriotism makes you stay in your country even facing the possibility of becoming a war victim, (in the sense of having your enviroment destroyed, not becoming a casualty). Nationalism makes you scream how good and better is your country than anyone's else on Internet Forums. Also, patriotism is the kind of affection that makes you despise your goverment instead of nodding to each of their decisions. Nationalism, sometimes, has exactly the opposite effect.

There's a big difference a war involving a lengthy ground involvement and war like Desert Storm that requires massive air and sea power, which is what would happen if Chavez invaded Colombia. We'd destroy the Venezuelan Air Force and destroy their Navy and bomb the shit our of their invasion force.

There's a big difference between that and a ground occupation where the casualties come from.
RAWRRAWRRAWR

I meant your absurd and incorrect judgements of me make me want to shoot something. Going around calling people a Nazi without reason and causing offence will one day get you a lot of trouble. And No one will sympathise with you.I sympathize with her, especially since she hasn't gone around calling you a Nazi. :)

When the ugly thing started, I decided to stay.

Now it is getting uglier, but I will stay anyway. Unless someone expels me, or I start to be "requested" for interrogation, I will stay here.

It has something to do with "patriotism", that is not the same thing as "nationalism". I love this country. Dearly. Even being citizen to a second one, this is where my mother rocked my cradle, and this is where I got my accent from, where I did attend to High School, and where I did know my friends and acquietances.

Patriotism makes you stay in your country even facing the possibility of becoming a war victim, (in the sense of having your enviroment destroyed, not becoming a casualty). Nationalism makes you scream how good and better is your country than anyone's else on Internet Forums. Also, patriotism is the kind of affection that makes you despise your goverment instead of nodding to each of their decisions. Nationalism, sometimes, has exactly the opposite effect.

Ironic. Just months ago a Bulgarian (in a different forum) said that:

'The Beauty of Nationalism can't be same with the destructive force the Patriotism can expel. I am always in the side of the Nationalist, rather than with the Patriots. And you, IWM, is a good old friend [ideolically] of me'

Haha! The thinking of a Spanish and a Bulgars really like the sky and earth!

Well, I'm not flame-baiting, I just post this here because the ironical part.

And before you ask, I am a good [under-age] citizen of Indonesia, Nationalist-Socialists-Islamists is my ideology.
AND I WILL NOT SUBJECT TO THE CAPITALIST SYSTEM, THE ARM OF THE OPRESSOR NEO-CONS! (But that belong in other threads)

And what I think about this 'possible/future war' that it came from the Rightist hunts (oppressing) the Leftists, and of course the Venezuela (which is Left, if I'm not mistaken) a little uneasy about it. And the Colombia make a graveful mistake by militarily-ilegally crossing border. Which, of course, make Venezuela get the chance. And this would prove good to the Iranians that the attention of the Americans will shift to their south (A more possible danger) and the Iran's nuclear can be continued without the arrogance of the American Media and Government putting pressure on them.

Hopefully...

Ironic. Just months ago a Bulgarian (in a different forum) said that:

'The Beauty of Nationalism can't be same with the destructive force the Patriotism can expel. I am always in the side of the Nationalist, rather than with the Patriots. And you, IWM, is a good old friend [ideolically] of me'

Haha! The thinking of a Spanish and a Bulgars really like the sky and earth!

Well, I'm not flame-baiting, I just post this here because the ironical part.

A translation issue, it seems. The same idea is expressed by both arguments.


And what I think about this 'possible/future war' that it came from the Rightist hunts (oppressing) the Leftists, and of course the Venezuela (which is Left, if I'm not mistaken) a little uneasy about it. And the Colombia make a graveful mistake by militarily-ilegally crossing border. Which, of course, make Venezuela get the chance. And this would prove good to the Iranians that the attention of the Americans will shift to their south (A more possible danger) and the Iran's nuclear can be continued without the arrogance of the American Media and Government putting pressure on them.

Hopefully...

Send a telegram to Andaras, he has been looking for someone like you for some time.

England Is Only Part of Britain, in the Same way as Gibraltar is.
Actually, being the pedant that I am, Gibraltar is a British Overseas Territory and not an constituent country of the United Kingdom like England is.

A translation issue, it seems. The same idea is expressed by both arguments.

{ANSWER} Yeah, maybe it is. I maybe has an issue with my memory. It was posted years ago. I'll quote it here (in English, the original was, so there must be no problem with translation, rather with my memory)



Send a telegram to Andaras, he has been looking for someone like you for some time.

What?

Edit: Can't find his post. Maybe has been cleaned. However there was an argument there (I am IWM) about Chauvinism, Nationalism, and Patriotism but I don't know linking to other forums are violating rules or not.

Send a telegram to Andaras, he has been looking for someone like you for some time.

Although the Islamist religious bit he might not like, since "religion is the opiate of the masses," after all

I am lolled when I discover that some Nazi remark was used just some posts above...

And I am a little surprised when no one has insult me by calling me 'Islamo-Fascist'

By the basis: My ideology is Nationalists-Socialists-Islamists (Nearly same as Ir. Soekarno's NASAKOM; albeit I am more moderate (not a communist))

If we scramble it a little, it would become:

Islamists National-Socialists....

With other name:
Islamists Nazi


Hahahahaha!!!

(JOKE; NO HARD FEELINGS MEANT)

I am lolled when I discover that some Nazi remark was used just some posts above...

And I am a little surprised when no one has insult me by calling me 'Islamo-Fascist'

By the basis: My ideology is Nationalists-Socialists-Islamists (Nearly same as Ir. Soekarno's NASAKOM; albeit I am more moderate (not a communist))

If we scramble it a little, it would become:

Islamists National-Socialists....

With other name:
Islamists Nazi


Hahahahaha!!!

(JOKE; NO HARD FEELINGS MEANT)

Do you believe that muslisms, specially Indonesian muslisms, are superior to any other humans and deserve to rule by that base over others?

I sympathize with her, especially since she hasn't gone around calling you a Nazi. :)

Post 43.

If that's not calling me a Nazi then what is ?

It would be also nice for us Brazilians to get all that gold from the colonization back from England. With interest. Which would be enough to leave your nation penniless.

Excuse me dearie but Brazil was never A British Colony.

Go after the Portuguese.

Although we did help end your slave trade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery#Brazil

Post 43.

If that's not calling me a Nazi then what is ?
Calling you a Race-supremacist with some Nazi thrown in for good measure *nod*

Missed that one. Ah, well. Then again, the shoe fits. You've been tossing some outrageous stuff out, and while overuse of the N-word cheapens it, she didn't call you a full-blooded Nazi, but merely someone with National Socialistic tendencies, and you do fit the profile.

Calling you a Race-supremacist with some Nazi thrown in for good measure *nod*

Missed that one. Ah, well. Then again, the shoe fits. You've been tossing some outrageous stuff out, and while overuse of the N-word cheapens it, she didn't call you a full-blooded Nazi, but merely someone with National Socialistic tendencies, and you do fit the profile.

You are still cute, you know?

You are still cute, you know?:D

I'd be doing this even if you hadn't voted for me :p

You missed it, fair enough.

Excuse Me?

My Views are My Views. Whilst People don't agree with them I think Comparing me to a Murderous regime which killed millions across Europe and North Africa.

How am I a National Socialist?

I'm an Imperialist Equalist.No, your views are Imperialist Equalist with a bit of Murderous regime which killed millions across Europe and North Africa tossed in for good measure.

You can have your views, just don't expect people not to voice their disagreement.

Calling you a Race-supremacist with some Nazi thrown in for good measure *nod*

Missed that one. Ah, well. Then again, the shoe fits. You've been tossing some outrageous stuff out, and while overuse of the N-word cheapens it, she didn't call you a full-blooded Nazi, but merely someone with National Socialistic tendencies, and you do fit the profile.

You missed it, fair enough.

Excuse Me?

My Views are My Views. Whilst People don't agree with them I think Comparing me to a Murderous regime which killed millions across Europe and North Africa.

How am I a National Socialist? And she whole heartedly insulted me!

I'm an Imperialist Equalist.

Aelosia: Thank God that wasn't directed at me!!!!!!!!!!

You missed it, fair enough.

Excuse Me?

My Views are My Views. Whilst People don't agree with them I think Comparing me to a Murderous regime which killed millions across Europe and North Africa.

How am I a National Socialist? And she whole heartedly insulted me!

I'm an Imperialist Equalist.

Aelosia: Thank God that wasn't directed at me!!!!!!!!!!

Well, the nazis. A political movement that dared to advocate in the 20th Century the practices and beliefs used by the same colonial powers you are defending in previous centuries.

"Thin Red Line", "Tasmans", "Black Legend", "Belgium in Congo", "Slavery", "Indian Reservations". I think those concepts aren't really that apart from Nazism. The problem is that the nazis tried to apply it when it was already outdated for the rest of the world. Same as you, trying to defense a model already outdated.

Sorry, you aren't a National Socialist. You are an Imperial Equalist. That means you are, in fact, a primitive Nazi. Eventually, you will evolve to the 20th century and become a Nazi. You are right, I was wrong, I put you way after your time, and gave you an advancement you do not deserve.

What was exactly the thing that wasn't directed at you?

Trust me, If you research the Empire, You'll appreciate why I take the idea of me as a Murder supporter as Higly Offensive.

Whilst I am not naieve enough to believe that all share my views, I expect the common Courtesy of not Comparing people to Nazis whenever Colonialism comes up. That is just wrong.

I compare colonialism to genocide.

I relate nazis to genocide.

Indirectly, I relate colonialism to nazism.

Again, have your views, you can have it if you want. That doesn't eliminate the fact that you are indeed a primeval nazi, and that I can voice that view too.

No, your views are Imperialist Equalist with a bit of Murderous regime which killed millions across Europe and North Africa tossed in for good measure.

You can have your views, just don't expect people not to voice their disagreement.

Trust me, If you research the Empire, You'll appreciate why I take the idea of me as a Murder supporter as Higly Offensive.

Whilst I am not naieve enough to believe that all share my views, I expect the common Courtesy of not Comparing people to Nazis whenever Colonialism comes up. That is just wrong.

Trust me, If you research the Empire, You'll appreciate why I take the idea of me as a Murder supporter as Higly Offensive.I have. Maybe it's because I don't believe Niall Ferguson, but then again, he is a crackpot.
Whilst I am not naieve enough to believe that all share my views, I expect the common Courtesy of not Comparing people to Nazis whenever Colonialism comes up. That is just wrong.Colonialism is very strongly linked to Nazism. Both have similar, racist roots.

Trust me, If you research the Empire, You'll appreciate why I take the idea of me as a Murder supporter as Higly Offensive.


Erm.... have you researched the Empire?

Because if you talk to people who used to be subjects of it - you'll get a rather different viewpoint than from someone from Britain itself.

Maybe it's because I don't believe Niall Ferguson, but then again, he is a crackpot.

Thank Christ. I thought I was the only one. You, sir, have risen highly in my opinion today.
*tips hat*

Thank Christ. I thought I was the only one. You, sir, have risen highly in my opinion today.
*tips hat*TBC keeps mentioning as though he was a God. Unfortunately, I know remember the name.

I compare colonialism to genocide.

I relate nazis to genocide.

Indirectly, I relate colonialism to nazism.

Again, have your views, you can have it if you want. That doesn't eliminate the fact that you are indeed a primeval nazi, and that I can voice that view too.

I compare Colonialism to the Advance of Civilisation.

I do not relate Colonialism to Genocide. That's a horrific efect of War and Evil.

I could never be A Nazi. Nazis support the Murder of Jews and others to achieve a Utopian Race.

I believe in advancing Civilisation to Improve the lives of all and then using all the united societies to advance Civilisation at a much faster pace.

If you find it hard to distinguish between The Nazis and The Empires then I suggest you research the two using unbiased source (yes these can be found).

The Thing I'll let you work out.

I compare Colonialism to the Advance of Civilisation.

I do not relate Colonialism to Genocide. That's a horrific efect of War and Evil.

I could never be A Nazi. Nazis support the Murder of Jews and others to achieve a Utopian Race.

I believe in advancing Civilisation to Improve the lives of all and then using all the united societies to advance Civilisation at a much faster pace.

If you find it hard to distinguish between The Nazis and The Empires then I suggest you research the two using unbiased source (yes these can be found).

The Thing I'll let you work out.

Check and research how your Empire treated the Tasmans, and then we can talk about the Empire and Genocide.

Even the nazis had more dignity.

The thing I'll let you work out.

I'm from a family only possible thanks to the Empire.Whoohoo. If it weren't for WWII, I wouldn't exist. I guess now I have to lobby for Holocaust and WWII appreciation week?
Colonialism is rooted in a desire to acquire new land and Improve Nations. Kindly explain how the Heck that's racist.It assumes that you are by default in a position to improve other nations.
Niall Ferguson? Oh yeah. I've read one of his books. I also have read the "Age of Empire" (author I can't remember) "Sixty Years A Queen", Various essays on the Empire and I have also conducted research into Post Colonial Nations, amongst other activities related to the best thing Britain ever did.Well, apparently Ferguson isn't the only crackpot out there. Arguing that colonialism is on the whole beneficial takes some serious ignorance. You weren't even able to tell how it was racist!

Erm.... have you researched the Empire?

Because if you talk to people who used to be subjects of it - you'll get a rather different viewpoint than from someone from Britain itself.


Since I was about 7.

I have. They're my relatives.

I'm from a family only possible thanks to the Empire.

Colonialism is rooted in a desire to acquire new land and Improve Nations. Kindly explain how the Heck that's racist.

Niall Ferguson? Oh yeah. I've read one of his books. I also have read the "Age of Empire" (author I can't remember) "Sixty Years A Queen", Various essays on the Empire and I have also conducted research into Post Colonial Nations, amongst other activities related to the best thing Britain ever did.

Aelosia, don't state your view as Fact.

Since I was about 7.
Children's books aren't exactly going to show the horrors of what colonialism does to a people.


I'm from a family only possible thanks to the Empire.
And? I'm from one that lived under the Empire - and was treated horrendously by it to boot.

Colonialism is rooted in a desire to acquire new power and Improve the home country.
Fixed for accuracy.

Kindly explain how the Heck that's racist.
I never said it was. Freudian slip perchance ;)

Niall Ferguson? Oh yeah. I've read one of his books. I also have read the "Age of Empire" (author I can't remember) "Sixty Years A Queen", Various essays on the Empire and I have also conducted research into Post Colonial Nations, amongst other activities related to the best thing Britain ever did.
Niall Ferguson ain't a historian. He's a media-whore. When you dilute points and omit them to fit more deftly with the smoothness of modern media - you lose credibility in academia.

The Empire sent the Convicts & Twisted settlers to Tasmania. The Convicts (& Twisted settlers) acted as their highly immoral consciences saw fit.

That said, It was a Monumental Cock-up.

Don't get that Comment.

Iwedtwafc.So the Empire is absolved of all guilt. :rolleyes:

The Empire sent the Convicts & Twisted settlers to Tasmania. The Convicts (& Twisted settlers) acted as their highly immoral consciences saw fit.

That said, It was a Monumental Cock-up.

Don't get that Comment.

Iwedtwafc.

Check the Black War, the Black Line.

You ethnically cleansed the Tasmans.

Your goverment did. Your lords. Not a bunch of bandits and convicts. You first hunted them and then left them in an island to die.

Whatever you say, you are going to find excuses for a nazist regime.

Keep your Nazi position, I hope you can live with yourself supporting and hating the same thing at the same time.

Check and research how your Empire treated the Tasmans, and then we can talk about the Empire and Genocide.

Even the nazis had more dignity.

The thing I'll let you work out.

The Empire sent the Convicts & Twisted settlers to Tasmania. The Convicts (& Twisted settlers) acted as their highly immoral consciences saw fit.

That said, It was a Monumental Cock-up.

Don't get that Comment.

Iwedtwafc.

No. But we Certainly did a lot of good.Prove it.

[QUOTE=Laerod;13500846]So the Empire is absolved of all guilt. QUOTE]

:rolleyes: Another random idea from a vague notion of a statement made.

No. But we Certainly did a lot of good.

Yup, after cleansing the Tasman culture and population through genocide, you introduced convicts to form a colony.

A lot of good.

Don't "Fix" Posts. It's Slanderous.Only if it appears that you actually said that. The "fixed" and the bolding, along with the little green arrow are enough to avoid it becoming slander.
Who said I was reading Children's books? I went through the atlas (Ours is a 1950s one) and then I reasearched a topic that interested me, starting with the Encyclopaedias and them widening my research.My old atlasses maintained Silesia, Pommerania, and East Prussia were merely under Polish and Soviet administration...
I'll take your word for that. I found "Sixty Years A Queen" the most useful source.A Louie Henri silent movie is your most useful source? Good grief...

Children's books aren't exactly going to show the horrors of what colonialism does to a people.

Niall Ferguson ain't a historian. He's a media-whore. When you dilute points and omit them to fit more deftly with the smoothness of modern media - you lose credibility in academia.

Don't "Fix" Posts. It's Slanderous.

Who said I was reading Children's books? I went through the atlas (Ours is a 1950s one) and then I reasearched a topic that interested me, starting with the Encyclopaedias and them widening my research.

I'll take your word for that. I found "Sixty Years A Queen" the most useful source.

[QUOTE=Laerod;13500846]So the Empire is absolved of all guilt. QUOTE]

:rolleyes: Another random idea from a vague notion of a statement made.

No. But we Certainly did a lot of good.

Check the Black War, the Black Line.

You ethnically cleansed the Tasmans.

Your goverment did. Your lords. Not a bunch of bandits and convicts. You first hunted them and then left them in an island to die.

Whatever you say, you are going to find excuses for a nazist regime.

Keep your Nazi position, I hope you can live with yourself supporting and hating the same thing at the same time.

Iwedtwafc.

I Am not a Nazi. Your Perception of What makes a Nazi is more altered than my perception of the World after coming on this forum.

Don't "Fix" Posts. It's Slanderous.
Libelous actually, but since I made it obvious to all that it was I who had changed the post and highlighted the changes, it's not applicable to your point of view/opinion anymore.

Who said I was reading Children's books? I went through the atlas (Ours is a 1950s one) and then I reasearched a topic that interested me, starting with the Encyclopaedias and them widening my research.
Well, you said since you were 7 years old, so I would imagine you looked at children's books when you were 7.

I'll take your word for that. I found "Sixty Years A Queen" the most useful source.
Fair enough. But researching the benefits of something doesn't hold water, if you don't take into account the negatives of it either. An informed opinion can only be so, if you understand both sides to the issue.

Prove it.

India. It wasn't a nation before the British.

Africa. The only reason there are countries is because of the Scramble for Africa and the Founding of Colonies.

Australia. It would not have any of it's cities.

Norfolk Island. It's whole poulation is there because of the British Government's policy.

Singapore, Hong Kong. Cities built up from very little to become major trading centers.

Amongst others.

And the Convicts were on Tasmania before the Natives were wiped out. They helped.

My old atlasses maintained Silesia, Pommerania, and East Prussia were merely under Polish and Soviet administration...
A Louie Henri silent movie is your most useful source? Good grief...

Mine showed the Empire and I looked it up and was fascinated.

I came across the atrocities, but I often found the results were actually better than before (Partition and the Boer War Excepted).

No. The Book is a Victorian book Published to Mark Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee. It reviewed each colony and was a sound base for research. (It wasn't that biased. Go figure.)

Who's Louie Henri? Is he French?

India. It wasn't a nation before the British.
It's not really a 'nation' now.

Africa. The only reason there are countries is because of the Scramble for Africa and the Founding of Colonies.
The only reason it's FUBAR now, is because of said Scramble. Are you forgetting the dark side to this Scramble too?

Australia. It would not have any of it's cities.
......

Norfolk Island. It's whole poulation is there because of the British Government's policy.
God man. No. Just.... no.

Singapore, Hong Kong. Cities built up from very little to become major trading centers.
Again, they were only built up to serve the home country of Britain. It's not like the Crown gave a shit about the people there or their welfare.

The Empire only served one thing: Britain. No one else. Unless you were living as part of the wealthy in Britain - the Empire either made life hell for you, or at best - ignored you.

It's not really a 'nation' now.


The only reason it's FUBAR now, is because of said Scramble. Are you forgetting the dark side to this Scramble too?


......


God man. No. Just.... no.


Again, they were only built up to serve the home country of Britain. It's not like the Crown gave a shit about the people there or their welfare.

The Empire only served one thing: Britain. No one else. Unless you were living as part of the wealthy in Britain - the Empire either made life hell for you, or at best - ignored you.

It's a Nation. What are you diputing re my comment?

FUBAR? And The Scramble had a Dark side no more than anything else.

The People on Norfolk Island are descended from Pitcairners.(still British.)

Then how come the Colonial admistration didn't shoot every Missionary Doctor and Teacher that tried to help the natives?

1950s immigration? Policy of fighting the Japanese in the East in WWII?

Life improved for the poor. They didn't even realise how bad their situation was until the Empire appeared.

.

The People on Norfolk Island are descended from Pitcairners.(still British.)
.

...keeping as they do the Royal traditions of inbreeding and rampant pederasty alive....

.
Life improved for the poor. They didn't even realise how bad their situation was until the Empire appeared.

...after which they referred to those days as the "golden years", while lamenting their lot as serfs in their own land. Wonderful.

It's a Nation. What are you diputing re my comment?
Meh. It's as much of a 'nation' as it ever was. 'State' maybe, but I know a lot of people from the sub-continent who firstly associate themselves with their regions, not their nationality.

FUBAR? And The Scramble had a Dark side no more than anything else.
Yeh, FUBAR. It's German. :p Well at least you admit the Scramble had a dark side. Now you're only justifying the negative aspects of it for the glory of the European powers.

The People on Norfolk Island are descended from Pitcairners.(still British.)
Whoop di do. The Empire was worth it because of Norfolk Island then.

Then how come the Colonial admistration didn't shoot every Missionary Doctor and Teacher that tried to help the natives?
Because Missionaries (mostly religious doctors and teachers) weren't part of the governmental policy - they were independent of state control.

1950s immigration? Empire was over by then.

Policy of fighting the Japanese in the East in WWII?
British wouldn't have gotten involved had the Japanese not picked on British interests. (Burma, Singapore, Malaysia etc)

Life improved for the poor. They didn't even realise how bad their situation was until the Empire appeared.
I don't agree with you.

Excuse me dearie but Brazil was never A British Colony.

Go after the Portuguese.

Although we did help end your slave trade.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_slavery#Brazil

The gold only passed through Portugal, it went to the British. However, the US, India and some of Africa could well force reparations from the British. The difference being that what I am saying isn't trolling.

I compare Colonialism to the Advance of Civilisation.

I do not relate Colonialism to Genocide. That's a horrific efect of War and Evil.

I could never be A Nazi. Nazis support the Murder of Jews and others to achieve a Utopian Race.

I believe in advancing Civilisation to Improve the lives of all and then using all the united societies to advance Civilisation at a much faster pace.

If you find it hard to distinguish between The Nazis and The Empires then I suggest you research the two using unbiased source (yes these can be found).

The Thing I'll let you work out.

Actually colonialism is capitalist exploitation at it's most basic, for every 10$ the colonialists put in they 100$ back, it was exploitation pure and simple. If it helped them then why didn't the colonialists educate the people? I'll tell you why, it's better to have an uneducated people to be your slaves than an educated one, for example at the time of independence the Congo had like 10 university graduates in the whole country, which meant of course that they had no choice but to allow the Belgians back in to run things again.

Also, remember the 10 million African slaves who perished to bring your industrialization, not to mention the millions used by the Americans to prop up their economies on the continent.

As to the topic of an interstate war in northern South America, I'd daresay that such an event will not happen. Colombian forces will not clash with Venezuelan or Ecuadoran, but that this will merely be remembered as yet another step down the road to heightened regional tensions and risks. Did Colombia handle the strikes properly? It would seem that it did not keep good form, as well as it could do, but it stuck within established international law.

Does Ecuador have a right to be pissed? Yes, yes it does. There are avenues through which this sort of thing can go, the UN, the OAS, various types of international arbitration and so forth.

Does Venezuela have anything to do with this? No, and Chavez's response has been highly inappropriate and disproportionate. Deploying a force with this sort of striking power is highly provocative, and ill advised.

Actually colonialism is capitalist exploitation at it's most basic, for every 10$ the colonialists put in they 100$ back, it was exploitation pure and simple. If it helped them then why didn't the colonialists educate the people? I'll tell you why, it's better to have an uneducated people to be your slaves than an educated one, for example at the time of independence the Congo had like 10 university graduates in the whole country, which meant of course that they had no choice but to allow the Belgians back in to run things again.

That's called Mercantilism, chief, and it's a far older structure than capitalism, rather, it's a form of statist corporatism.

Also, remember the 10 million African slaves who perished to bring your industrialization, not to mention the millions used by the Americans to prop up their economies on the continent.

The tragedy of imperialism in Africa was immense, yes, and the result so far has been even worse, exacerbated by the development of a significant number of Soviet client-states on the continent, where the leaders mismanaged the economy to a startling degree, but were maintained by weapons-chairty from Moscow. There's a reason the Kalashnikov is on the flag of Mozambique.

Just to let you know, if it was pure military, Venz and And Ecua could easily beat Columiba. Columbia also has some SERIOUS internal problems with rebels and alot of the population not like the current government. There army is also not as well built up as Venezuelas is.

It is also likely that forgen powers would stay out of it in the military sense. Maby arms and finacial supprot but very unlikely that there miliatry will get involved.

So i can only see Columbia losing alot out of this.

[QUOTE=Does Venezuela have anything to do with this? No, and Chavez's response has been highly inappropriate and disproportionate. Deploying a force with this sort of striking power is highly provocative, and ill advised.[/QUOTE]

Actually yes he does, Venezuela and Ecuador have a very very very close relationship. Sort of like the U.K and the U.S.

Now please dont tell me that if this happened to the U.K, the U.S would shut up.

India. It wasn't a nation before the British.

As Mises said, "The marvelous achievements of the British administration in India were overshadowed by the vain arrogance and stupid race pride of the white man."

Africa. The only reason there are countries is because of the Scramble for Africa and the Founding of Colonies.

Australia. It would not have any of it's cities.

Norfolk Island. It's whole poulation is there because of the British Government's policy.

Singapore, Hong Kong. Cities built up from very little to become major trading centers.

Amongst others.

And the Convicts were on Tasmania before the Natives were wiped out. They helped.

Mises offers possibly the most accurate description of colonialism ever given:

"It may be safely taken for granted that up to now the natives have learned only evil ways from the Europeans, and not good ones. This is not the fault of the natives, but rather of their European conquerors, who have taught them nothing but evil. They have brought arms and engines of destruction of all kinds to the colonies; they have sent out their worst and most brutal individuals as officials and officers; at the point of the sword they have set up a colonial rule that in its sanguinary cruelty rivals the despotic system of the Bolsheviks."

"No chapter of history is steeped further in blood than the history of colonialism. Blood was shed uselessly and senselessly. Flourishing lands were laid waste; whole peoples destroyed and exterminated. All this can in no way be extenuated or justified."

Do you believe that muslisms, specially Indonesian muslisms, are superior to any other humans and deserve to rule by that base over others?

Some times. I speak with truth.

Although the Islamist religious bit he might not like, since "religion is the opiate of the masses," after all

Haha. No one perfect.

I compare Colonialism to the Advance of Civilisation.

I do not relate Colonialism to Genocide. That's a horrific effect of War and Evil.

I could never be A Nazi. Nazis support the Murder of Jews and others to achieve a Utopian Race.

I believe in advancing Civilisation to Improve the lives of all and then using all the united societies to advance Civilisation at a much faster pace.

If you find it hard to distinguish between The Nazis and The Empires then I suggest you research the two using unbiased source (yes these can be found).

The Thing I'll let you work out.

I compare colonialism to nothing but lust of power.


I relate Colonialism to Genocide. After all to make a colony, you must make war with it's locales, at least using evil means.

I maybe an Nazi. But I'm not with the aryan supremacy. I am with the Islam's supremacy however. (some times.)

I believe in advancing Civilisation to make more types of evil acts and to make the road of the world-government to be easier.

This is my position.

India. It wasn't a nation before the British.Now show how this is better than the state before the British.
Africa. The only reason there are countries is because of the Scramble for Africa and the Founding of Colonies.You're alleging there were no countries before the scramble. This is false.
Australia. It would not have any of it's cities.Which are not really populated by the indigenous population, but by descendants of the British colonists. This means that the Aboriginees did not benefit from this.
Norfolk Island. It's whole poulation is there because of the British Government's policy.Now show how this is a good thing.
Singapore, Hong Kong. Cities built up from very little to become major trading centers.Singapore? Hardly. Singapore straddles the straits of Malaysia. It's pretty silly to believe it wouldn't have become a major trading center without the British.
Amongst others.Some where it was beneficial, some totally irrelevant, some where it was decidedly not. Overall, more harm than good was done.
Mine showed the Empire and I looked it up and was fascinated.

I came across the atrocities, but I often found the results were actually better than before (Partition and the Boer War Excepted).What? Never heard of the genocides that still go on today because the current borders in Africa aren't along ethnic lines at all?
No. The Book is a Victorian book Published to Mark Queen Victoria's Diamond Jubilee. It reviewed each colony and was a sound base for research. (It wasn't that biased. Go figure.)Now that's just utter bullshit. To believe that a book to honor Miss "Let's ravage the savage as long as we make him Christian" can actually be considered an unbiased source...
Who's Louie Henri? Is he French?You have internet. I suggest checking Wikipedia when names appear that you haven't heard before.

As we are more off topic than a gardner discussing Space travel's affect on fish stocks, I'll attempt to bring us back.

I could go on defending the Empire, but it seems that some people would rather die than admit it was not the worst thing ever bar the Nazis (though some wouldn't even include that distinction).

If Brazil were to attack Argentina, Would the British get involved for revenge for the Falklands War.

Hmmmm. You came expecting 'Zulu' but ended up with 'Zulu dawn', I suspect.

As we are more off topic than a gardner discussing Space travel's affect on fish stocks, I'll attempt to bring us back.

I could go on defending the Empire, but it seems that some people would rather die than admit it was not the worst thing ever bar the Nazis (though some wouldn't even include that distinction).

If Brazil were to attack Argentina, Would the British get involved for revenge for the Falklands War.

Let's make one thing clear, a lot of us like the British, they're fun people, but what we don't like is your belief that the British Empire was pure as driven snow and your blatant refusal to accept any counterpoint no matter how much of an idiot it makes you look like. Duke, in anything not involving the Empire I find you are a reasonable intelligent individual, but you always blow it when this comes up.
Anyway, beyond humanitarian aid and protection of our own specific interests, I.E. US Nationals, embassies, that sort of thing, we really should take a hands off approach on this one, it's too close to home if (or when depending on your views) we fuck up.

I'm an imperialist.

Of Course I'm going to go mad whenever it's mentioned (see eco-nuts on wind farms)

As we are more off topic than a gardner discussing Space travel's affect on fish stocks, I'll attempt to bring us back.

I could go on defending the Empire, but it seems that some people would rather die than admit it was not the worst thing ever bar the Nazis (though some wouldn't even include that distinction).Nah, if someone were holding a gun to my head and I could save my life by stating that the British Empire and the other colonial empires were really flowers and sunshine as opposed to oppression and the cause of most modern problems, I might actually do it.

But it would have been nice if you'd made some serious arguments in favor of your position as opposed to pulling a drama queen when people berate you for historical revisionism.
If Brazil were to attack Argentina, Would the British get involved for revenge for the Falklands War.Doubt it.
I'm an imperialist.

Of Course I'm going to go mad whenever it's mentioned (see eco-nuts on wind farms)So you admit that you're a loony? What would be the normal equivalent to imperialist as environmentalist would be to eco-nut?

Even being citizen to a second one...oh.

So what is your other citizenship? [/Curioso]

I'm an imperialist.

Colour me surprised.


Of Course I'm going to go mad whenever it's mentioned (see eco-nuts on wind farms)

Only because you can't defend your points without letting your emotions involved.

If Brazil were to attack Argentina, Would the British get involved for revenge for the Falklands War.
Why would Brazil attack Argentina? And what benefit/justification would the UK use for attacking another democracy?

Colour me surprised.



Only because you can't defend your points without letting your emotions involved.


Why would Brazil attack Argentina? And what benefit/justification would the UK use for attacking another democracy?

The UK attack somebody!? Never! The Imperial British Nation would never attack anyone! The nerve of anyone to say that an Imperial Nation that forcibly invaded everywhere at one point just for their personal gain!

As we are more off topic than a gardner discussing Space travel's affect on fish stocks, I'll attempt to bring us back.

I could go on defending the Empire, but it seems that some people would rather die than admit it was not the worst thing ever bar the Nazis (though some wouldn't even include that distinction).

If Brazil were to attack Argentina, Would the British get involved for revenge for the Falklands War.


Not really we whipped the Argentines in 1982 leading to the fall of the military government there, since then , although relations have been cool, neither country has any wish to fight over a bunch of sheep*, and even during the 90's theres been military co-operation between Britain and Argentina during joint UN missions of various sorts

El-Presidente Boris

*PS except the welsh :D

oh.

So what is your other citizenship? [/Curioso]

Venezuelan/Spanish

Venezuelan/Spanish

Do you actually have citizenship for both, or are you simply entitled to the second citizenship (but haven't applied)?

(I'm just wondering what Venezuala's policy is towards dual-citizenship.)

Do you actually have citizenship for both, or are you simply entitled to the second citizenship (but haven't applied)?

(I'm just wondering what Venezuala's policy is towards dual-citizenship.)

Actual citizenship for both. I have just voted in the spanish elections, for instance.

Current constitution of Venezuela allows any citizen to have a dual citizenship if able and willing, without losing the venezuelan one.

Actual citizenship for both. I have just voted in the spanish elections, for instance.

Current constitution of Venezuela allows any citizen to have a dual citizenship if able and willing, without losing the venezuelan one.

Ah cool. That must be handy. Thanks for the info.

Actual citizenship for both. I have just voted in the spanish elections, for instance.

Current constitution of Venezuela allows any citizen to have a dual citizenship if able and willing, without losing the venezuelan one.Grr... Germany has nothing like that...