AllUrHiveRblong2usBy Your Powers Combined...Join Date: 2002-12-20Member: 11244Members
<!--QuoteBegin--Bo Selecta+Mar 11 2003, 08:40 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Bo Selecta @ Mar 11 2003, 08:40 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> ?? the dutch oppressed most of Africa ?? What on earth are you talking about? We only had 1 colony in Africa, blame the French and British! .. <i>Indonesia</i> is where we did the oppressing <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> you tell me who to blame?!?! BAH!
I am AllUrHive! I say what I want and never need facts to back myself up!
I'd just like to point out that nothing is "set" in stone economically wise in the US, unlike much of Europe.
Do you honestly think that the millions of immigrants are coming over for the fun of it?
There is some validity to the American Dream.
There is a saying in America, it goes like this:
"50% of the rich are born with it, the other 50% get lucky..."
So, that's right, come to America and you could be amoung the most powerful too! <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
But seriously, it's almost a fact that economic stagnation in America is non-existant, allowing anyone to become the next Bill Gates, John D. Rockefellar.
AllUrHiveRblong2usBy Your Powers Combined...Join Date: 2002-12-20Member: 11244Members
edited March 2003
<!--QuoteBegin--Forlorn+Mar 11 2003, 09:54 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Mar 11 2003, 09:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> But seriously, it's almost a fact that economic stagnation in America is non-existant, allowing anyone to become the next Bill Gates, John D. Rockefellar. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> That is, assuming that Microsoft doesn't put out a hit on them for being an upstart corporation with superior software first.
<!--QuoteBegin--AllUrHiveRBelong2Us+Mar 12 2003, 02:59 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (AllUrHiveRBelong2Us @ Mar 12 2003, 02:59 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--Forlorn+Mar 11 2003, 09:54 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Mar 11 2003, 09:54 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> But seriously, it's almost a fact that economic stagnation in America is non-existant, allowing anyone to become the next Bill Gates, John D. Rockefellar. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> That is, assuming that Microsoft doesn't put out a hit on them for being an upstart corporation with superior software first. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Remember, it's 50% luck dude.
And, chances are if they can get around Microsoft and get a good foothold, then Microsoft will not be able to bump them out without being broken up by the United States Supreme Court.
Monopolies have been common with every new industry, but they always fall.
AllUrHiveRblong2usBy Your Powers Combined...Join Date: 2002-12-20Member: 11244Members
<!--QuoteBegin--Forlorn+Mar 11 2003, 10:17 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Mar 11 2003, 10:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And, chances are if they can get around Microsoft and get a good foothold, then Microsoft will not be able to bump them out without being broken up by the United States Supreme Court. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I agree totally, it's not as if Gov. officials can be bought or anything.
<!--QuoteBegin--AllUrHiveRBelong2Us+Mar 12 2003, 03:21 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (AllUrHiveRBelong2Us @ Mar 12 2003, 03:21 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <!--QuoteBegin--Forlorn+Mar 11 2003, 10:17 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Forlorn @ Mar 11 2003, 10:17 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> And, chances are if they can get around Microsoft and get a good foothold, then Microsoft will not be able to bump them out without being broken up by the United States Supreme Court. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I agree totally, it's not as if Gov. officials can be bought or anything.
O SNAP! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> This isn't 1890.
....
Get with the times.
Do you realize that America has much more to gain by breaking up Microsoft and allowing a TON of competition to fight for it than to let a big **** company wax fat?
Do you also realize that something like paying off an official would not go unnoticed, esp. a supreme court judge who is supposed to uphold the highest standards of law?
And, politicians don't go into higher politics(like the Supreme Court) just to be courrupted. It takes YEARS on end to get there, not to mention a certain degree of luck. If a person was aiming to be a Justice, they wouldn't be aiming for money. Far more powerful things to do than hoard money. You do realize that, don't you?
Man, not that I am trying to attack you here, but honestly, you are just some angry teenage kid who hates the world(or most of it), aren't you?
Cage- Dude, hit puberty before debating, please. You'll at least be old enough for others to even THINK you might have some kind of backing. You're just spouting irrelevant lies in an attempt to sound superior. Its not working. Try debating the issue instead of the terminology. New and Old europe is a social political term talking about the new culture of Europe vs the old culture of Europe. Right now there is a split. And Donald Rumsfeld uses the term. Jeez.
MonsE- You're so right, yet again. And my basement is a continent too! This topic is SOOO much better with Nem asleep. Its a cakewalk!
Oh, and as for the Dutch: they only had 1 colony- South Africa. What a great place that turned out to be. Apartheid, a small white dutch minority ruling over a vast black majority. You guys are guiltless.
AllUrHiveRblong2usBy Your Powers Combined...Join Date: 2002-12-20Member: 11244Members
edited March 2003
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Do you realize that America has much more to gain by breaking up Microsoft and allowing a TON of competition to fight for it than to let a big **** company wax fat?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> You just don't get it. True, the system would benefit by allowing competition, but the powers-that-be wouldn't. They would have no more large corporations to give them money, and guess who appoints the upholders-of-the-law? The said powers do, of course! The whole system is corrupt. From the head of it, to the lowest level.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And, politicians don't go into higher politics(like the Supreme Court) just to be courrupted. It takes YEARS on end to get there, not to mention a certain degree of luck. If a person was aiming to be a Justice, they wouldn't be aiming for money. Far more powerful things to do than hoard money. You do realize that, don't you?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I doubt anyone goes into anything just to be corrupted, but it happens, and when it does, the rest of the US has to deal with it. And even if they weren't corrupt, there's always someone inteh chain of comand that is.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Man, not that I am trying to attack you here, but honestly, you are just some angry teenage kid who hates the world(or most of it), aren't you? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Does that matter? Does that make my opinions any less valid? HELL NO. You'll not hear me deny that I am an angsty teenager disallusioned with the system, but you'll also not hear me care about motive. Not just mine, ANYONE'S. Motive doesn't matter, facts do.
I could imagine that very few countries in Europe actually want a war on this continent. Its more of risk for us Europians than to you Americans. USA probably wouldn't want some Europe country fighting in South-America or in Canada <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
And I think USA is not in control of Europe. You are just trying to(oh boy, I hear the flames comin')
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I am AllUrHive! I say what I want and never need facts to back myself up! <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> Hehe, you're a riot dude.
Back to the discussion about European foreign politics and policies towards the USA and how they differ from country to country in Europe, I just wanted to bring this up: Aren't we really **** off with the direction fundamenalist/extremist islam has taken with their "Allah is the one true God" so lets **** slap all those heathens with various single man weapons platforms of varying degrees of destruction because we once ruled the world with various great civilizations (Babylonians, Syrians, etc.)? Why the heck are particular european countries taking aim at the USA for trying to stop this?
Old europe or new europe, hmm, doesn't that bring into question the validity of collective psyche of various groups, such as states, provinces, countries, and continents? Can the actions by governments 10s or 100s or even 1000s of years ago affect the decisions made today by governments? It seems to be the case in the Middle East, why would Europe be the exception? I think some fundamental questions that this discussion is based on are not being considered.
<!--QuoteBegin--CanadianWolverine+Mar 12 2003, 08:00 AM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (CanadianWolverine @ Mar 12 2003, 08:00 AM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Back to the discussion about European foreign politics and policies towards the USA and how they differ from country to country in Europe, I just wanted to bring this up: Aren't we really **** off with the direction fundamenalist/extremist islam has taken with their "Allah is the one true God" so lets **** slap all those heathens with various single man weapons platforms of varying degrees of destruction because we once ruled the world with various great civilizations (Babylonians, Syrians, etc.)? Why the heck are particular european countries taking aim at the USA for trying to stop this? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Maybe they don't like it because Saddam isn't a raving mad muslim fanatic. He's just your old fashioned paranoic megalomanic despot with an unhealthy love for Big Guns. That he is muslim is a side note. I question the motive for attacking Iraq. What validates causing potentially hundreds of thousands of civilians losing their lives to get one man? Give CIA the green ticket to start popping heads off other countries leaders. They had a knack for it in the old days. Perhaps they still can drag out some old spook that can teach them that art again.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Old europe or new europe, hmm, doesn't that bring into question the validity of collective psyche of various groups, such as states, provinces, countries, and continents? Can the actions by governments 10s or 100s or even 1000s of years ago affect the decisions made today by governments? It seems to be the case in the Middle East, why would Europe be the exception? I think some fundamental questions that this discussion is based on are not being considered.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You'd be surprised to hear how deep roots in history some of our most basic assumptions have. But as for the current climate in Europe: "New Europe" is a valid term, it is trying to gather together a union of states. And for those yankees who insists that Europe isn't a continent <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Encyclop?dia Britannica+2002--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Encyclop?dia Britannica @ 2002)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->second smallest of the world's continents (after Australia), composed of the westward-projecting peninsulas of Eurasia and occupying nearly one-fifteenth of the world's total land area. It is bordered on the north by the Arctic Ocean, on the west by the Atlantic Ocean, and on the south (west to east) by the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea, the Kuma-Manych Depression, and the Caspian Sea. The continent's eastern boundary (north to south) runs along the eastern Ural Mountains and the Zhem River. Europe's islands and archipelagoes include Novaya Zemlya, Iceland, the British Isles, Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Crete, Malta, and Cyprus. Its major peninsulas include the Scandinavian, Iberian, Italian, Balkan, and Jutland. Indented by numerous bays, fjords, and seas, continental Europe's highly irregular coastline is about 24,000 miles (38,000 km) long. Area 4,000,000 square miles (10,400,000 square km). Pop. (1991 est.) 718,500,000.
From Infoplease.com: <i>Continent, largest unit of landmasses on the earth. The continents include Eurasia (conventionally regarded as two continents, Europe and Asia), Africa, North America, South America, Australia, and Antarctica.</i>
Calling Europe a continent is (here it comes) just a way for people to feel superior over their neighbors, the Asians. From a geographical standpoint, it's not a continent. You might as well have Brazil call itself a continent. Or Florida. Or Queensland. Oh well, I'm not going to convince euros of this anymore than I can convince them to stop using 500 different languages. Which (sort of getting back on topic) the same reason the EU is ultimately doomed to failure as a political entitity: european countries traditionally ally themselves together for convenience, but those alliances only last as long as the next shady deal or knife in the back; they inherently do not want to share, help their friends, ease other country's burdens, or anything else unless there's a payout. It's not like the US invented capitalism, backroom politics and gunboat diplomacy after all. Everything we know we learned from the masters. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Before the flames start, stop and examine the last 2500 years of european history and see if that's not a predeominant trend. The EU may live on for years as a trade pact, but getting europe to become the next US? No chance.
<!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> I am sorry to disappoint you my dear Monsieur <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> <a href='http://corporate.britannica.com/business_britannica.html' target='_blank'>Britannica HQ</a> Britannica.com Britannica Centre 310 South Michigan Avenue Chicago, Il 60604 Phone: (312) 347-7000 <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> It is an american operation and has been for some years <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Calling Europe a continent is (here it comes) just a way for people to feel superior over their neighbors, the Asians. From a geographical standpoint, it's not a continent. You might as well have Brazil call itself a continent. Or Florida. Or Queensland. Oh well, I'm not going to convince euros of this anymore than I can convince them to stop using 500 different languages. Which (sort of getting back on topic) the same reason the EU is ultimately doomed to failure as a political entitity: european countries traditionally ally themselves together for convenience, but those alliances only last as long as the next shady deal or knife in the back; they inherently do not want to share, help their friends, ease other country's burdens, or anything else unless there's a payout. It's not like the US invented capitalism, backroom politics and gunboat diplomacy after all. Everything we know we learned from the masters. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Right now we have two authoritative sources saying different. Untill you drag a geologist in here by the scruff and make him or here fess up, Ill refer to my part of the world as Continental <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> And yes, it gives us all a small tear to the eye *sniff* when US uses the tricks of the old world. They grow up so fast. See, diplomatic coercicon, how cute. They look sooo much like their parents. <!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Before the flames start, stop and examine the last 2500 years of european history and see if that's not a predeominant trend. The EU may live on for years as a trade pact, but getting europe to become the next US? No chance.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> The last 2500 years of history saw most of the northamerican continent as a tribal society in a stoneage, behind most of the rest of the african and eurasian countries. That didnt exactly point towards it being the place for a new world empire did it? Making predictions based on history is risky at best. Remember the roman empire. Pax romanum for many hundreds of years. USA is merely what, some 200 years old as a sovereign state? It's not yet at it's Empire Mid Life Crisis.
In fact, USA might be assisting in smithing a new unified europe, begun with the Marshall aid after WW2. now it's massive cultural and economical influence, which no matter how much the bitter french are fighting it, is slowly but surely overcoming all resistance. Note how I now try to make high muckity muck debate on international politics in my second language, english. I have only up to high school education in this language, but massive cultural influence have made me savvy enough to use it like it was second nature. I believe that a unified europe will be the result. English language and american culture will be the great equalizer of europe. But unified europe will not be like USA, why should we want to emulate? We want to make something better. That's just natural. Cultural differences will always remain, but it might not necessarily mean cultural animosity. And remember: it's the callousness of the politicians (who still play princes fighting over turf) rather than the citizen that hinders european unison at the moment.
Now we just need the french to understand that Charlemagne is DEAD! And this isn't the age of colonialism any longer!
edit: notice how I slyly got us back to the topic?
Yes Miez, our brief moment of US diversity led to the Civil War. Europe's diversity has led to uncountable thousands of wars. Ask the balkan war refugees how they feel about european diversity and tolerance, at this very moment.
On to Immo's points:
Damn! Oh well, maybe the Britanica people are all anglophliles? Heh. From a geological standpoint, no objective scientist is going to define Europe as a continent. If europeans want to call their half of a big landmass a continent, fine, go ahead. I am now declaring my neighborhood a continent based on that logic. I hereby live on the continent of Monsinia!
There are some problems with your next analogy though. The natives of north america were wiped out by european invaders and their decendents. They never did evolve out of the stoneage, and were basically operating at cromagnon level. The natives did not evolve into being a superpower, they were erased and replaced. There IS however several thousands years of well-documented evidence that the europeans have never, ever previously managed to hold together alliances or political agreements without ending up in a continent torched under war and invasion. The new 'isolationist and somewhat friendly to itself' europe accounts for about the last 30 years (and I'm letting it slide that during most of that 30 years, the EU was toothless and without many members, and had soviet army on its borders ready to pounce). That's 1% of the last 3000 years of turmoil, hatred, warfare, and the rest. Statisically meaningless.
As for the french... gah. Baby steps... get them out of their (very recently former) african colonies to start. The Ivory Coast called, they want their self-government back.
<!--QuoteBegin--MonsieurEvil+Mar 12 2003, 05:08 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Mar 12 2003, 05:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Damn! Oh well, maybe the Britanica people are all anglophliles? Heh. From a geological standpoint, no objective scientist is going to define Europe as a continent. If europeans want to call their half of a big landmass a continent, fine, go ahead. I am now declaring my neighborhood a continent based on that logic. I hereby live on the continent on Monsinia! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Long live the glorious continent of Monsinia. Where you can fall on your face and your body will strecth across the entire continent. May it never be haunted by microscopic quakes or miniature continental plate drifts (like the flowerbed starting to drift slowly towars the neighbour's continental shelf in his gold fish pond, creating a miniature hotspot the size of a teacup resulting in a thimble sized New Monsinia)
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There are some problems with your next analogy though. The natives of north america were wiped out by european invaders and their decendents. They never did evolve out of the stoneage, and were basically operating at cromagnon level. The natives did not evolve into being a superpower, they were erased and replaced. There IS however several thousands years of well-documented evidence that the europeans have never, ever previously managed to hold together alliances or political agreements without ending up in a continent torched under war and invasion. The new 'isolationist and somewhat friendly to itself' europe accounts for about the last 30 years. That's 1% of the last 3000 years of turmoil, hatred, warfare, and the rest. Statisically meaningless.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> Ok, I guess if we replaced all europeans with, say, nepalese it would become a great unified nation <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> But seriously, all this mess was started by the romans. It's all their fault! But our "history" is sort of like ROTW's. There's been so many wars between princes and dukes and whatnots in the middle east, India, far east etc. that no one can count them. That has not hindered a nation like India to emerge, or China (which is larger today than it has ever been). Your argument is slightly fatter than mine, but still awfully meager I think to dismiss a stable unification of europe on historical facts. Past does not future make. 30 years of wary mellowness beats anything we've seen hitherto. I think it's progress.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As for the french... gah. Baby steps... get them out of their (very recently former) african colonies to start. The Ivory Coast called, they want their self-government back.
Heh ok. First, no more colonies! No, you can't even keep a small itsy one that no one is going to miss anyway. Let go. Big boy.
And then we will teach them that Nuclear Weapons Testing is bad m'kay. And in 200 years we will very softly whisper to them that Charlemagne _IS_ in fact dead!
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Long live the glorious continent of Monsinia<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I my first decree is to make Immocolata my Secretary of State, and Fam Minister of Ponce.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ok, I guess if we replaced all europeans with, say, nepalese it would become a great unified nation But seriously, all this mess was started by the romans. It's all their fault! But our "history" is sort of like ROTW's. There's been so many wars between princes and dukes and whatnots in the middle east, India, far east etc. that no one can count them. That has not hindered a nation like India to emerge, or China (which is larger today than it has ever been). Your argument is slightly fatter than mine, but still awfully meager I think to dismiss a stable unification of europe on historical facts. <b>Past does not future make. 30 years of wary mellowness beats anything we've seen hitherto. I think it's progress</b>. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Point very well taken. Although your sample countries do share internally common languages, laws, and societal rules, unlike europe. I might also point out both of these countries were 'internally unified' by the sword a thousand years ago, and have continued on basically unchanged and relatively peaceful until the brief interruptions of becoming european colonies. But still an excellent point you make.
Friggin' france. Why do we keep talking about former colonies? They still have them. RIGHT NOW! Go to Guadeloupe, Guiana, Martinique, Réunion. Plus anytime someone blows their nose in west africa the foreign legion shows up to make sure french business interests are protected.
Don't even get me started on the nuke tests. Or how about french commandos sinking the rainbow warrior greenpeace ship? I hate hippies as much as the next guy, but come on, sinking a civilian boat and drowning a man in his cabin so that people will stop heckling you?
If you are complaining so much about colonies... why don't you yanks give America back to it's original owners? It feels like you somehow ignore the fact that you ARE Europeans in a way. If you hold the citizens of the Netherlands responsible for what the Dutch have done in the past (which you won't hear me deny), then you'll have to hold everyone in a America that has dutch blood in him/her responsible too. (And that's a lot of people...) And what made the Western World great? Take one long guess... <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> (And no the answer is not 'America' if that's what your patriotism tells you.)
Minister of Ponce? LOL. Sure, what do I pimp? Got any good birds in this here banana republic? But your first presidential duty will be to learn to spell your minister of Ponce's name correctly. Im-ma-co-la-ta. (don't get me started on americans always getting the name of foreigners spelled wrong <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Point very well taken. Although your sample countries do share internally common languages, laws, and societal rules, unlike europe. I might also point out both of these countries were 'internally unified' by the sword a thousand years ago, and have continued on basically unchanged and relatively peaceful until the brief interruptions of becoming european colonies. But still an excellent point you make. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do not forget that notions of nationalism are quite new. Before your average empire ran all sorts of misfits together, like the roman empire. In medieval times the culture of people didnt matter as much as them paying tithe to the church or tax to their sovereign. People at each other's throats for cultural or ideological reasons is one of mankinds newest inventions. People fought mostly over classic stuff as Turf, Gold and Powah! 300 years ago, Yougoslavia having broken up into mini states would have made the peons a shrug and carry on plowing their fields and preparing for the next self-appointed king to declare his rule by decree of the pope. Or something. So blame it on the kings (and in recent times the politicians).
<!--QuoteBegin--Orcrist+Mar 12 2003, 06:46 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Orcrist @ Mar 12 2003, 06:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If you are complaining so much about colonies... why don't you yanks give America back to it's original owners? It feels like you somehow ignore the fact that you ARE Europeans in a way. If you hold the citizens of the Netherlands responsible for what the Dutch have done in the past (which you won't hear me deny), then you'll have to hold everyone in a America that has dutch blood in him/her responsible too. (And that's a lot of people...) And what made the Western World great? Take one long guess... <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> (And no the answer is not 'America' if that's what your patriotism tells you.) <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I think calling americans for europeans today is a bit - no it's a lot misleading. Remember the population is made up by all sorts of europeans like irish, swedish, english, french, germans, italians. And don't forget the many descendants of slaves from Africa. And if I am not mistaken, there's a minority of asians with chinese as the largest, and there's a great number of "hispanics" which only have one thing in common: the spanish language. And then there's the minority of actual "proto americans", the indians.
Giving back is not going to happen. Perhaps compensation for atrocities committed, but you can't mean you want 250+ mio people to abandon a continent for things their great-great-great parents did?
<!--QuoteBegin--MonsieurEvil+Mar 12 2003, 05:08 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Mar 12 2003, 05:08 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> Damn! Oh well, maybe the Britanica people are all anglophliles? Heh. From a geological standpoint, no objective scientist is going to define Europe as a continent. If europeans want to call their half of a big landmass a continent, fine, go ahead. I am now declaring my neighborhood a continent based on that logic. I hereby live on the continent of Monsinia! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Sorry, Mistah evil.
Europe _IS_ closer to a continent in the geological sense than you want itl. Only part of Europe that is technically not european indeed Italy up to the Alps. That bit is african. Italy is but a knob on Afriac <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> But Stretching from spain to the urals, that is a unit referred to as the "baltic shield". Ural is the where the baltic shield folds under the asian thingy (or the other way). The baltic shield it self is made up of 4 bits of different continent squashed together - but it is not just a chip off the contemporaryh Asian continent, or the african for that matter.
SpoogeThunderbolt missile in your cheeriosJoin Date: 2002-01-25Member: 67Members
edited March 2003
<!--QuoteBegin--Orcrist+Mar 12 2003, 12:46 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Orcrist @ Mar 12 2003, 12:46 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> If you are complaining so much about colonies... why don't you yanks give America back to it's original owners? It feels like you somehow ignore the fact that you ARE Europeans in a way. If you hold the citizens of the Netherlands responsible for what the Dutch have done in the past (which you won't hear me deny), then you'll have to hold everyone in a America that has dutch blood in him/her responsible too. (And that's a lot of people...) And what made the Western World great? Take one long guess... <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->? (And no the answer is not 'America' if that's what your patriotism tells you.) <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd--> There's a point in there somewhere, but after reading it 3 times I just can't determine what it might be.
I'll go back an try again.
EDIT: BTW, I have Friesian blood in me. Some of you might know what that means <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
I thinkin orc's point as that he admits europeans were the colonialists, after he points out that even the US was a colony, and colonialism is what made europe great, annnd...ehhh... I'm lost. Run that by me again?
Immo is correct in saying that while the US is made up mostly of former european immigrants, the percentage number is rapidly shrinking. We go through big ebbs and flows of immigration - right now, we're in our south american and sub-continental (indian/pakistani) phases. BY the end of my lifetime, the US will still have a majority european-descended population, but the other asian, south american, and african descendents will combine to outnumber them. According to the census at least. It gets the racists and eurocentrics pretty worked up.
As for Imm<b>a</b>colata (sorry), I dunno if you can go that route though. I mean, if that's the case then shifting plates is what defines a continent, and that means that the western half of the US is a separate continent, as is california. We need a real geologist in here to settle all this, darnit. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
As for compensation, I believe the american indian paid back the world in full for the loss of their lands by giving millions of people an early grave every year due to tobacco-related cancer deaths, for the last 400 years. So we're even.
<!--QuoteBegin--Immacolata+Mar 12 2003, 01:18 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Immacolata @ Mar 12 2003, 01:18 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> I think calling americans for europeans today is a bit - no it's a lot misleading. Remember the population is made up by all sorts of europeans like irish, swedish, english, french, germans, italians. And don't forget the many descendants of slaves from Africa. And if I am not mistaken, there's a minority of asians with chinese as the largest, and there's a great number of "hispanics" which only have one thing in common: the spanish language. And then there's the minority of actual "proto americans", the indians.
Giving back is not going to happen. Perhaps compensation for atrocities committed, but you can't mean you want 250+ mio people to abandon a continent for things their great-great-great parents did? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> I think I rushed that post too much... I know America has races from all over the world. But I was talking about the european-americans. Sorry if that wasn't clear. I'm not insinuating that there are hardly any african-american or asian-american's there, I just typed it in a hurry... Most European country's are very mixed too (especially The Netherlands.) And for the record I have no problem with that <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
About the giving America back part, of course I don't think that that would ever happen. It was to reinforce my point that America is not innocent when talking about colonialism.
The main point was to shed a different light on the blaming the Europe of today on 'dark side' of colonialism while not mentioning America and the very reason of its existence.
<!--QuoteBegin--MonsieurEvil+Mar 12 2003, 08:15 PM--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (MonsieurEvil @ Mar 12 2003, 08:15 PM)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin--> As for Imm<b>a</b>colata (sorry), I dunno if you can go that route though. I mean, if that's the case then shifting plates is what defines a continent, and that means that the western half of the US is a separate continent, as is california. We need a real geologist in here to settle all this, darnit. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd--> Way ahead of you, american foreigner. I got the "baltic shield" info cleared by my in-house geologist <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> Advantages to living in a student's part of town. He didn't hesitate to say (parts) of Europe is a continent. But truer scientist style took all sorts of conditional reservations such as italy being african, europe being made up of 4 former continents having a mad million year tryst and sigh. But I managed to make him say "Yes" to "Is europe a continent?<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--><!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->".
I am sure ther are those who disagrees with him. That is, people qualified to have an opinion on it unlike us nublets <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->The main point was to shed a different light on the blaming the Europe of today on 'dark side' of colonialism while not mentioning America and the very reason of its existence. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ahhh. Good point! I should have explained the colonialism issue better: we revolted and threw the europeans (british) out 228 years ago though, and were really not a unified colony for very long. Most european colonies were under the boot of your continent (heh heh) for hundreds of years though, all the way up into the 80's in many cases of Africa, but certainly into the late 40's for most others. That's 300 to 400 years of not having self-rule; it's no surprise that most former colony's governments are, to this day, cesspools. All they ever learned of rule came from the barrel of a gun.
But you are right, there are exceptions, like the US, or Australia, or Canada. Hmmm... seems like if they were UK colonies they ended up ok though...
Oops, forgot about India/Pakistan/Bangladesh. Britain **** that one up completely. Nevermind <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> .
Awww god, this thread is just growing and growing. I'm too tired to write another dissertation today, but will come back to haunt MonsEs little butt tomorrow <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
Jammer there is no new and old Europe I'm from Europe and I've never ever heard this before.
Thats like going into Africa and renaming a river wich is called for thousands of years something by the native people and renaming the river to "John's river" cause he "discovered it".
and MonsieurEvil calling Europe - Europe is NOT like saying Brazil is a continent because Europe is NOT a country
Very well. The middle east is now a continent. It sticks out into the water like europe, and is not a country. Boom, continent. What else you got?
As for your analogy about europe... where do you think Jammer picked up the habit? The whole world was 'discovered' and renamed by europeans. According to europe, at least...
MonSe you foo, even if you have your own continent, that doesn't mean its a country you can have your own politicians etc. <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
Ontopic: Why US has states? Thats the reason why Europe hasn't united yet. In large area there NEEDS to be smaller areas that control themselves. So I think even if Europe would unite in to one big country, we would keep smaller states and every country would slowly start melting in to others.
The biggest problem is, why for example would Finland(fairly succesful and "rich" country) want to share its resources with poorer European countries? US never had this problem, because it was one and whole from the beginning.
And btw, laughing at Europe because we can't unite is stupid as long as there are three separate countries of Canada, USA and Mehico(notice the k3wl spelling). OMG! WHY CAN'T THOSE THREE COUNTRIES UNITE! R00fle!!1 N00bs! Are u stp1d or wh4t!!??!!!111oneone <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Edit: Fortunately we always have Winrisk to solve these unpleasant area problems <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Ehhhhhhhh, ok? Let me try to figure all this out...
I have no idea what the first sentence means.
Are you saying you want europe to be one big country in the second paragraph? I don't understand it.
In the third paragraph - I think that's why you came up with the EU. And of course the US has a problem with distributing wealth between the states. We have a finite budget and a lot of state senators, governors, and representatives all crowding around for their slice of the pie. To think otherwise is to not understand the US congress...
I have no idea what anything in the last paragraph means.
Whatever country you're from, I suggest not telling us, so as not to embarrass other european boardmembers, as they are rolling their eyes at you right now and cursing through clenched teeth about how you're undermining all their arguments.
Comments
What on earth are you talking about? We only had 1 colony in Africa, blame the French and British!
..
<i>Indonesia</i> is where we did the oppressing <!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--> <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
you tell me who to blame?!?! BAH!
I am AllUrHive! I say what I want and never need facts to back myself up!
Do you honestly think that the millions of immigrants are coming over for the fun of it?
There is some validity to the American Dream.
There is a saying in America, it goes like this:
"50% of the rich are born with it, the other 50% get lucky..."
So, that's right, come to America and you could be amoung the most powerful too! <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
But seriously, it's almost a fact that economic stagnation in America is non-existant, allowing anyone to become the next Bill Gates, John D. Rockefellar.
That is, assuming that Microsoft doesn't put out a hit on them for being an upstart corporation with superior software first.
That is, assuming that Microsoft doesn't put out a hit on them for being an upstart corporation with superior software first. <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Remember, it's 50% luck dude.
And, chances are if they can get around Microsoft and get a good foothold, then Microsoft will not be able to bump them out without being broken up by the United States Supreme Court.
Monopolies have been common with every new industry, but they always fall.
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree totally, it's not as if Gov. officials can be bought or anything.
O SNAP!
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I agree totally, it's not as if Gov. officials can be bought or anything.
O SNAP! <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
This isn't 1890.
....
Get with the times.
Do you realize that America has much more to gain by breaking up Microsoft and allowing a TON of competition to fight for it than to let a big **** company wax fat?
Do you also realize that something like paying off an official would not go unnoticed, esp. a supreme court judge who is supposed to uphold the highest standards of law?
And, politicians don't go into higher politics(like the Supreme Court) just to be courrupted. It takes YEARS on end to get there, not to mention a certain degree of luck. If a person was aiming to be a Justice, they wouldn't be aiming for money. Far more powerful things to do than hoard money. You do realize that, don't you?
Man, not that I am trying to attack you here, but honestly, you are just some angry teenage kid who hates the world(or most of it), aren't you?
MonsE- You're so right, yet again. And my basement is a continent too! This topic is SOOO much better with Nem asleep. Its a cakewalk!
Oh, and as for the Dutch: they only had 1 colony- South Africa. What a great place that turned out to be. Apartheid, a small white dutch minority ruling over a vast black majority. You guys are guiltless.
You just don't get it. True, the system would benefit by allowing competition, but the powers-that-be wouldn't. They would have no more large corporations to give them money, and guess who appoints the upholders-of-the-law? The said powers do, of course! The whole system is corrupt. From the head of it, to the lowest level.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->And, politicians don't go into higher politics(like the Supreme Court) just to be courrupted. It takes YEARS on end to get there, not to mention a certain degree of luck. If a person was aiming to be a Justice, they wouldn't be aiming for money. Far more powerful things to do than hoard money. You do realize that, don't you?<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I doubt anyone goes into anything just to be corrupted, but it happens, and when it does, the rest of the US has to deal with it. And even if they weren't corrupt, there's always someone inteh chain of comand that is.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Man, not that I am trying to attack you here, but honestly, you are just some angry teenage kid who hates the world(or most of it), aren't you? <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Does that matter? Does that make my opinions any less valid? HELL NO. You'll not hear me deny that I am an angsty teenager disallusioned with the system, but you'll also not hear me care about motive. Not just mine, ANYONE'S. Motive doesn't matter, facts do.
And I think USA is not in control of Europe. You are just trying to(oh boy, I hear the flames comin')
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
Motive doesn't matter, facts do.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
But earlier you noted...
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
I am AllUrHive! I say what I want and never need facts to back myself up!
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Hehe, you're a riot dude.
Back to the discussion about European foreign politics and policies towards the USA and how they differ from country to country in Europe, I just wanted to bring this up: Aren't we really **** off with the direction fundamenalist/extremist islam has taken with their "Allah is the one true God" so lets **** slap all those heathens with various single man weapons platforms of varying degrees of destruction because we once ruled the world with various great civilizations (Babylonians, Syrians, etc.)? Why the heck are particular european countries taking aim at the USA for trying to stop this?
Old europe or new europe, hmm, doesn't that bring into question the validity of collective psyche of various groups, such as states, provinces, countries, and continents? Can the actions by governments 10s or 100s or even 1000s of years ago affect the decisions made today by governments? It seems to be the case in the Middle East, why would Europe be the exception? I think some fundamental questions that this discussion is based on are not being considered.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Maybe they don't like it because Saddam isn't a raving mad muslim fanatic. He's just your old fashioned paranoic megalomanic despot with an unhealthy love for Big Guns. That he is muslim is a side note. I question the motive for attacking Iraq. What validates causing potentially hundreds of thousands of civilians losing their lives to get one man? Give CIA the green ticket to start popping heads off other countries leaders. They had a knack for it in the old days. Perhaps they still can drag out some old spook that can teach them that art again.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Old europe or new europe, hmm, doesn't that bring into question the validity of collective psyche of various groups, such as states, provinces, countries, and continents? Can the actions by governments 10s or 100s or even 1000s of years ago affect the decisions made today by governments? It seems to be the case in the Middle East, why would Europe be the exception? I think some fundamental questions that this discussion is based on are not being considered.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
You'd be surprised to hear how deep roots in history some of our most basic assumptions have. But as for the current climate in Europe: "New Europe" is a valid term, it is trying to gather together a union of states. And for those yankees who insists that Europe isn't a continent <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--Encyclop?dia Britannica+2002--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> (Encyclop?dia Britannica @ 2002)</td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->second smallest of the world's continents (after Australia), composed of the westward-projecting peninsulas of Eurasia and occupying nearly one-fifteenth of the world's total land area. It is bordered on the north by the Arctic Ocean, on the west by the Atlantic Ocean, and on the south (west to east) by the Mediterranean Sea, the Black Sea, the Kuma-Manych Depression, and the Caspian Sea. The continent's eastern boundary (north to south) runs along the eastern Ural Mountains and the Zhem River. Europe's islands and archipelagoes include Novaya Zemlya, Iceland, the British Isles, Corsica, Sardinia, Sicily, Crete, Malta, and Cyprus. Its major peninsulas include the Scandinavian, Iberian, Italian, Balkan, and Jutland. Indented by numerous bays, fjords, and seas, continental Europe's highly irregular coastline is about 24,000 miles (38,000 km) long. Area 4,000,000 square miles (10,400,000 square km). Pop. (1991 est.) 718,500,000.
Copyright ? 1994-2002 Encyclop?dia Britannica, Inc.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Nnuuuh! The ural mountain chain demarcates the end of europe and the start of Asia.
Mmm, HMMMM! No bias there!
<!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
From Infoplease.com:
<i>Continent, largest unit of landmasses on the earth. The continents include Eurasia (conventionally regarded as two continents, Europe and Asia), Africa, North America, South America, Australia, and Antarctica.</i>
Calling Europe a continent is (here it comes) just a way for people to feel superior over their neighbors, the Asians. From a geographical standpoint, it's not a continent. You might as well have Brazil call itself a continent. Or Florida. Or Queensland. Oh well, I'm not going to convince euros of this anymore than I can convince them to stop using 500 different languages. Which (sort of getting back on topic) the same reason the EU is ultimately doomed to failure as a political entitity: european countries traditionally ally themselves together for convenience, but those alliances only last as long as the next shady deal or knife in the back; they inherently do not want to share, help their friends, ease other country's burdens, or anything else unless there's a payout. It's not like the US invented capitalism, backroom politics and gunboat diplomacy after all. Everything we know we learned from the masters. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Before the flames start, stop and examine the last 2500 years of european history and see if that's not a predeominant trend. The EU may live on for years as a trade pact, but getting europe to become the next US? No chance.
Mmm, HMMMM! No bias there!
<!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
I am sorry to disappoint you my dear Monsieur
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->
<a href='http://corporate.britannica.com/business_britannica.html' target='_blank'>Britannica HQ</a>
Britannica.com
Britannica Centre
310 South Michigan Avenue
Chicago, Il 60604
Phone: (312) 347-7000
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It is an american operation and has been for some years <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Calling Europe a continent is (here it comes) just a way for people to feel superior over their neighbors, the Asians. From a geographical standpoint, it's not a continent. You might as well have Brazil call itself a continent. Or Florida. Or Queensland. Oh well, I'm not going to convince euros of this anymore than I can convince them to stop using 500 different languages. Which (sort of getting back on topic) the same reason the EU is ultimately doomed to failure as a political entitity: european countries traditionally ally themselves together for convenience, but those alliances only last as long as the next shady deal or knife in the back; they inherently do not want to share, help their friends, ease other country's burdens, or anything else unless there's a payout. It's not like the US invented capitalism, backroom politics and gunboat diplomacy after all. Everything we know we learned from the masters. <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Right now we have two authoritative sources saying different. Untill you drag a geologist in here by the scruff and make him or here fess up, Ill refer to my part of the world as Continental <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.natural-selection.org/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> And yes, it gives us all a small tear to the eye *sniff* when US uses the tricks of the old world. They grow up so fast. See, diplomatic coercicon, how cute. They look sooo much like their parents.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Before the flames start, stop and examine the last 2500 years of european history and see if that's not a predeominant trend. The EU may live on for years as a trade pact, but getting europe to become the next US? No chance.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
The last 2500 years of history saw most of the northamerican continent as a tribal society in a stoneage, behind most of the rest of the african and eurasian countries. That didnt exactly point towards it being the place for a new world empire did it? Making predictions based on history is risky at best. Remember the roman empire. Pax romanum for many hundreds of years. USA is merely what, some 200 years old as a sovereign state? It's not yet at it's Empire Mid Life Crisis.
In fact, USA might be assisting in smithing a new unified europe, begun with the Marshall aid after WW2. now it's massive cultural and economical influence, which no matter how much the bitter french are fighting it, is slowly but surely overcoming all resistance. Note how I now try to make high muckity muck debate on international politics in my second language, english. I have only up to high school education in this language, but massive cultural influence have made me savvy enough to use it like it was second nature. I believe that a unified europe will be the result. English language and american culture will be the great equalizer of europe. But unified europe will not be like USA, why should we want to emulate? We want to make something better. That's just natural. Cultural differences will always remain, but it might not necessarily mean cultural animosity. And remember: it's the callousness of the politicians (who still play princes fighting over turf) rather than the citizen that hinders european unison at the moment.
Now we just need the french to understand that Charlemagne is DEAD! And this isn't the age of colonialism any longer!
edit: notice how I slyly got us back to the topic?
On to Immo's points:
Damn! Oh well, maybe the Britanica people are all anglophliles? Heh. From a geological standpoint, no objective scientist is going to define Europe as a continent. If europeans want to call their half of a big landmass a continent, fine, go ahead. I am now declaring my neighborhood a continent based on that logic. I hereby live on the continent of Monsinia!
There are some problems with your next analogy though. The natives of north america were wiped out by european invaders and their decendents. They never did evolve out of the stoneage, and were basically operating at cromagnon level. The natives did not evolve into being a superpower, they were erased and replaced. There IS however several thousands years of well-documented evidence that the europeans have never, ever previously managed to hold together alliances or political agreements without ending up in a continent torched under war and invasion. The new 'isolationist and somewhat friendly to itself' europe accounts for about the last 30 years (and I'm letting it slide that during most of that 30 years, the EU was toothless and without many members, and had soviet army on its borders ready to pounce). That's 1% of the last 3000 years of turmoil, hatred, warfare, and the rest. Statisically meaningless.
As for the french... gah. Baby steps... get them out of their (very recently former) african colonies to start. The Ivory Coast called, they want their self-government back.
<!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo-->
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Long live the glorious continent of Monsinia. Where you can fall on your face and your body will strecth across the entire continent. May it never be haunted by microscopic quakes or miniature continental plate drifts (like the flowerbed starting to drift slowly towars the neighbour's continental shelf in his gold fish pond, creating a miniature hotspot the size of a teacup resulting in a thimble sized New Monsinia)
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->There are some problems with your next analogy though. The natives of north america were wiped out by european invaders and their decendents. They never did evolve out of the stoneage, and were basically operating at cromagnon level. The natives did not evolve into being a superpower, they were erased and replaced. There IS however several thousands years of well-documented evidence that the europeans have never, ever previously managed to hold together alliances or political agreements without ending up in a continent torched under war and invasion. The new 'isolationist and somewhat friendly to itself' europe accounts for about the last 30 years. That's 1% of the last 3000 years of turmoil, hatred, warfare, and the rest. Statisically meaningless.<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Ok, I guess if we replaced all europeans with, say, nepalese it would become a great unified nation <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> But seriously, all this mess was started by the romans. It's all their fault! But our "history" is sort of like ROTW's. There's been so many wars between princes and dukes and whatnots in the middle east, India, far east etc. that no one can count them. That has not hindered a nation like India to emerge, or China (which is larger today than it has ever been). Your argument is slightly fatter than mine, but still awfully meager I think to dismiss a stable unification of europe on historical facts. Past does not future make. 30 years of wary mellowness beats anything we've seen hitherto. I think it's progress.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->As for the french... gah. Baby steps... get them out of their (very recently former) african colonies to start. The Ivory Coast called, they want their self-government back.
<!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--><!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Heh ok. First, no more colonies! No, you can't even keep a small itsy one that no one is going to miss anyway. Let go. Big boy.
And then we will teach them that Nuclear Weapons Testing is bad m'kay. And in 200 years we will very softly whisper to them that Charlemagne _IS_ in fact dead!
I my first decree is to make Immocolata my Secretary of State, and Fam Minister of Ponce.
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Ok, I guess if we replaced all europeans with, say, nepalese it would become a great unified nation But seriously, all this mess was started by the romans. It's all their fault! But our "history" is sort of like ROTW's. There's been so many wars between princes and dukes and whatnots in the middle east, India, far east etc. that no one can count them. That has not hindered a nation like India to emerge, or China (which is larger today than it has ever been). Your argument is slightly fatter than mine, but still awfully meager I think to dismiss a stable unification of europe on historical facts. <b>Past does not future make. 30 years of wary mellowness beats anything we've seen hitherto. I think it's progress</b>.
<!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Point very well taken. Although your sample countries do share internally common languages, laws, and societal rules, unlike europe. I might also point out both of these countries were 'internally unified' by the sword a thousand years ago, and have continued on basically unchanged and relatively peaceful until the brief interruptions of becoming european colonies. But still an excellent point you make.
Friggin' france. Why do we keep talking about former colonies? They still have them. RIGHT NOW! Go to Guadeloupe, Guiana, Martinique, Réunion. Plus anytime someone blows their nose in west africa the foreign legion shows up to make sure french business interests are protected.
Don't even get me started on the nuke tests. Or how about french commandos sinking the rainbow warrior greenpeace ship? I hate hippies as much as the next guy, but come on, sinking a civilian boat and drowning a man in his cabin so that people will stop heckling you?
<!--QuoteBegin--></span><table border='0' align='center' width='95%' cellpadding='3' cellspacing='1'><tr><td><b>QUOTE</b> </td></tr><tr><td id='QUOTE'><!--QuoteEBegin-->Point very well taken. Although your sample countries do share internally common languages, laws, and societal rules, unlike europe. I might also point out both of these countries were 'internally unified' by the sword a thousand years ago, and have continued on basically unchanged and relatively peaceful until the brief interruptions of becoming european colonies. But still an excellent point you make. <!--QuoteEnd--></td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'><!--QuoteEEnd-->
Do not forget that notions of nationalism are quite new. Before your average empire ran all sorts of misfits together, like the roman empire. In medieval times the culture of people didnt matter as much as them paying tithe to the church or tax to their sovereign. People at each other's throats for cultural or ideological reasons is one of mankinds newest inventions. People fought mostly over classic stuff as Turf, Gold and Powah! 300 years ago, Yougoslavia having broken up into mini states would have made the peons a shrug and carry on plowing their fields and preparing for the next self-appointed king to declare his rule by decree of the pope. Or something. So blame it on the kings (and in recent times the politicians).
I think calling americans for europeans today is a bit - no it's a lot misleading. Remember the population is made up by all sorts of europeans like irish, swedish, english, french, germans, italians. And don't forget the many descendants of slaves from Africa. And if I am not mistaken, there's a minority of asians with chinese as the largest, and there's a great number of "hispanics" which only have one thing in common: the spanish language. And then there's the minority of actual "proto americans", the indians.
Giving back is not going to happen. Perhaps compensation for atrocities committed, but you can't mean you want 250+ mio people to abandon a continent for things their great-great-great parents did?
<!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
Sorry, Mistah evil.
Europe _IS_ closer to a continent in the geological sense than you want itl. Only part of Europe that is technically not european indeed Italy up to the Alps. That bit is african. Italy is but a knob on Afriac <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> But Stretching from spain to the urals, that is a unit referred to as the "baltic shield". Ural is the where the baltic shield folds under the asian thingy (or the other way). The baltic shield it self is made up of 4 bits of different continent squashed together - but it is not just a chip off the contemporaryh Asian continent, or the african for that matter.
Check and mate?
There's a point in there somewhere, but after reading it 3 times I just can't determine what it might be.
I'll go back an try again.
EDIT: BTW, I have Friesian blood in me. Some of you might know what that means <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
Immo is correct in saying that while the US is made up mostly of former european immigrants, the percentage number is rapidly shrinking. We go through big ebbs and flows of immigration - right now, we're in our south american and sub-continental (indian/pakistani) phases. BY the end of my lifetime, the US will still have a majority european-descended population, but the other asian, south american, and african descendents will combine to outnumber them. According to the census at least. It gets the racists and eurocentrics pretty worked up.
As for Imm<b>a</b>colata (sorry), I dunno if you can go that route though. I mean, if that's the case then shifting plates is what defines a continent, and that means that the western half of the US is a separate continent, as is california. We need a real geologist in here to settle all this, darnit. <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
As for compensation, I believe the american indian paid back the world in full for the loss of their lands by giving millions of people an early grave every year due to tobacco-related cancer deaths, for the last 400 years. So we're even.
Giving back is not going to happen. Perhaps compensation for atrocities committed, but you can't mean you want 250+ mio people to abandon a continent for things their great-great-great parents did? <!--QuoteEnd--> </td></tr></table><span class='postcolor'> <!--QuoteEEnd-->
I think I rushed that post too much... I know America has races from all over the world. But I was talking about the european-americans. Sorry if that wasn't clear. I'm not insinuating that there are hardly any african-american or asian-american's there, I just typed it in a hurry... Most European country's are very mixed too (especially The Netherlands.) And for the record I have no problem with that <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
About the giving America back part, of course I don't think that that would ever happen. It was to reinforce my point that America is not innocent when talking about colonialism.
The main point was to shed a different light on the blaming the Europe of today on 'dark side' of colonialism while not mentioning America and the very reason of its existence.
Way ahead of you, american foreigner. I got the "baltic shield" info cleared by my in-house geologist <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo--> Advantages to living in a student's part of town. He didn't hesitate to say (parts) of Europe is a continent. But truer scientist style took all sorts of conditional reservations such as italy being african, europe being made up of 4 former continents having a mad million year tryst and sigh. But I managed to make him say "Yes" to "Is europe a continent?<!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo--><!--emo&???--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/confused.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='confused.gif'><!--endemo-->".
I am sure ther are those who disagrees with him. That is, people qualified to have an opinion on it unlike us nublets <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
Ahhh. Good point! I should have explained the colonialism issue better: we revolted and threw the europeans (british) out 228 years ago though, and were really not a unified colony for very long. Most european colonies were under the boot of your continent (heh heh) for hundreds of years though, all the way up into the 80's in many cases of Africa, but certainly into the late 40's for most others. That's 300 to 400 years of not having self-rule; it's no surprise that most former colony's governments are, to this day, cesspools. All they ever learned of rule came from the barrel of a gun.
But you are right, there are exceptions, like the US, or Australia, or Canada. Hmmm... seems like if they were UK colonies they ended up ok though...
Oops, forgot about India/Pakistan/Bangladesh. Britain **** that one up completely. Nevermind <!--emo&:p--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/tounge.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='tounge.gif'><!--endemo--> .
I'm too tired to write another dissertation today, but will come back to haunt MonsEs little butt tomorrow <!--emo&;)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/wink.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='wink.gif'><!--endemo-->
I'm from Europe and I've never ever heard this before.
Thats like going into Africa and renaming a river wich is called for thousands of years something by the native people and renaming the river to "John's river" cause he "discovered it".
and MonsieurEvil calling Europe - Europe is NOT like saying Brazil is a continent
because Europe is NOT a country
As for your analogy about europe... where do you think Jammer picked up the habit? The whole world was 'discovered' and renamed by europeans. According to europe, at least...
Ontopic:
Why US has states? Thats the reason why Europe hasn't united yet. In large area there NEEDS to be smaller areas that control themselves. So I think even if Europe would unite in to one big country, we would keep smaller states and every country would slowly start melting in to others.
The biggest problem is, why for example would Finland(fairly succesful and "rich" country) want to share its resources with poorer European countries? US never had this problem, because it was one and whole from the beginning.
And btw, laughing at Europe because we can't unite is stupid as long as there are three separate countries of Canada, USA and Mehico(notice the k3wl spelling). OMG! WHY CAN'T THOSE THREE COUNTRIES UNITE! R00fle!!1 N00bs! Are u stp1d or wh4t!!??!!!111oneone <!--emo&:D--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/biggrin.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='biggrin.gif'><!--endemo-->
Edit: Fortunately we always have Winrisk to solve these unpleasant area problems <!--emo&:)--><img src='http://www.unknownworlds.com/forums/html/emoticons/smile.gif' border='0' style='vertical-align:middle' alt='smile.gif'><!--endemo-->
I have no idea what the first sentence means.
Are you saying you want europe to be one big country in the second paragraph? I don't understand it.
In the third paragraph - I think that's why you came up with the EU. And of course the US has a problem with distributing wealth between the states. We have a finite budget and a lot of state senators, governors, and representatives all crowding around for their slice of the pie. To think otherwise is to not understand the US congress...
I have no idea what anything in the last paragraph means.
Whatever country you're from, I suggest not telling us, so as not to embarrass other european boardmembers, as they are rolling their eyes at you right now and cursing through clenched teeth about how you're undermining all their arguments.