world war 2
Sort:
i see the topic has gone from world war 2 to flaws of the United States. what a change in subject!
Mad_dog_96 wrote: calvinhobbesliker wrote: england and wales are not countries; they are states/provinces/territories of the nation of the unutes kingdom of great britian and northern ireland
No, they are countries and have certain devolved powers like raising their own taxes. The United Kingdom of Great Britian and Northern Ireland is just a Union of these countries.
Oh and the US and Britian didn't really win the war, most of the fighting was done on the Eastern front between the USSR and the Nazis, Stalin done more to beat the Nazis than Roosevelt and Churchill put together. But never let the facts get in the way of a good story eh?
http://geography.about.com/od/politicalgeography/a/englandnot.htm look at this. england is not a country
Feb 24, 2008
0
#104
calvinhobbesliker wrote: i see the topic has gone from world war 2 to flaws of the United States. what a change in subject!
I don't see these supposed flaws as being anything other than the general way that powerful states behave. Britain behaved in much the same way when it was the world superpower and still gets a lot of negative comments because of that.
Sharukin wrote: calvinhobbesliker wrote: i see the topic has gone from world war 2 to flaws of the United States. what a change in subject!
I don't see these supposed flaws as being anything other than the general way that powerful states behave. Britain behaved in much the same way when it was the world superpower and still gets a lot of negative comments because of that.
Yes, but that doesn't make it right.
Singapore was invaded and occupied by the Japanese Imperialist army during WW ll. It was renamed "Shyonan-To"!( the "Showa" Southern Island) Incidentally, I think, I am the only chess.com member who had the priviledge of singing 4 different National Anthems at his country's National Day celebration! The British "God Save the King" , the Japanese "Kimi Gayo", the Malysian "Negara-Ku, and Singapore's own " Majulah Singapura" during his life-time!
Feb 25, 2008
0
#107
ajachi wrote: Sharukin wrote: calvinhobbesliker wrote: i see the topic has gone from world war 2 to flaws of the United States. what a change in subject!
I don't see these supposed flaws as being anything other than the general way that powerful states behave. Britain behaved in much the same way when it was the world superpower and still gets a lot of negative comments because of that.
Yes, but that doesn't make it right.
and squawking about it on an internet forum won't change it. Right and wrong are subjective concepts in any case, your concept of right and wrong probably does not match mine or any other person's.
the navy officers sang the american national anthem "The Star Spangled Banner" on the battleship NEVADA even though it was being torpedoed by the japs and they finished the song and then started shooting the planes
Singa wrote: Singapore was invaded and occupied by the Japanese Imperialist army during WW ll. It was renamed "Shyonan-To"!( the "Showa" Southern Island) Incidentally, I think, I am the only chess.com member who had the priviledge of singing 4 different National Anthems at his country's National Day celebration! The British "God Save the King" , the Japanese "Kimi Gayo", the Malysian "Negara-Ku, and Singapore's own " Majulah Singapura" during his life-time!
aren't there any other chess.com members from singapore? also, i found out that the united states wants to defent the freedom of people everywhere
calvinhobbesliker wrote: also, i found out that the united states wants to defent the freedom of people everywhere
I think your young age shows your naivety when it comes to world politics, especially American foreign affairs politics.
But at least he is interested. Let's not discourage people from learning
Sharukin wrote: calvinhobbesliker wrote: i see the topic has gone from world war 2 to flaws of the United States. what a change in subject!
I don't see these supposed flaws as being anything other than the general way that powerful states behave. Britain behaved in much the same way when it was the world superpower and still gets a lot of negative comments because of that.
Thats it in a nutshell, empires be they territorial as in the British or Roman or modern day economic empires such as the USA exsist because they are able to exercise their power for the good of their native people and leaders and not to spread good cheer and will through the world. Thats what they do! So its a question of who would you prefer! As for the question about an american empire well I guess there was one in a territorial sense too as lets see, they picked up a few places around the world although the missed out on Africa didn't they. Places such as Guam, Porto Rico, Phillapines and Samoa. No luck with Cuba as we know thats why I'm afraid successive US governments are so up-tight about the island.
^Just because the U.S does something in our best interest, does not mean it doesn't help others out as well. To say the U.S. does not help out in the world is extremely naive. Name one country whose actions aren't primarily for the best interest of its people. That is the duty of a country.
On another note, what makes you think that it is our responsibility to take care of the entire world? Is that what you want?
If I misinterpreted your posts, then I apologize.
I know this is getting a little political, but sometimes I just can't help myself.
i'm glad not everyone is attacking me
Good on you Calvin! keep on in there, keep asking those questions but watch out for the quick and easy, dare I say it, Holywood driven perspectives of history. For instance a film that really got under my skin was 'The Patriot' with Mel Gibson talk about a load of tosh.
we promised to give the phillipines independence in 1946, and wwe did. unlike the british who did not have any desire to keep its promise of india's independence
Feb 26, 2008
0
#117
calvinhobbesliker wrote: we promised to give the phillipines independence in 1946, and wwe did. unlike the british who did not have any desire to keep its promise of india's independence
To be honest I think by the end of the war Britain was too knackered to care whether India was British or not. The politicians were the ones who didn't want to keep a promise.
Sharukin wrote: calvinhobbesliker wrote: we promised to give the phillipines independence in 1946, and wwe did. unlike the british who did not have any desire to keep its promise of india's independence
To be honest I think by the end of the war Britain was too knackered to care whether India was British or not. The politicians were the ones who didn't want to keep a promise.
That's probably true. Churchill repeatedly adamantly refused to keep the promise, and it took the election of a Labour government to give in to our claims.
It was the same with Ireland after the first world war, the war took a lot out of England and they really didn't want the hassle of fighting to keep their colonial interests. I wonder if the world wars never happened would Britain still have it's Empire?
Mad_dog_96 wrote: It was the same with Ireland after the first world war, the war took a lot out of England and they really didn't want the hassle of fighting to keep their colonial interests. I wonder if the world wars never happened would Britain still have it's Empire?
doesn't northern ireland still belong to the UK?
Who staged 9/11, an Islamist terrorist cell, most likely Al-Qaeda. Still, I don't see the relevence to Iraq here at all.
I didn't say Venezuela and America weren't trading, I said America has suddenly became worried about Venezuela's government because it wants to divert money from big corporations to their own people.
If countries stopped trading with Ireland then I think they'd find new partners of become self-sufficent. It won't happen though because Ireland is a neutral country and tends not to galavant around the world invading countries, setting up puppet governments and destroying the atmosphere like America does. :)