Nations vs Countries! (3 Viewers)

Osman

Koul Khara!
Aug 30, 2002
61,493
#65
I havent read the article i just googled it and linked it. I am not defending the Empire, i am trying to even the blame between all the european nations rather than blaming current gen british citizens and forgeting all the french, italians, germans, portugese etc.etc.etc. that did exactly the same thing, sometimes worse and some didnt bother to try and improve where they conquered.
1.You should KNOW what you link, it pretty much seemed like you used that link as an advocateur of Brittish emperialism and that you agree with it by doing so (otherwise why did you link it?), when its filled with such sickening revisionism, and exudes the very definition of bigoted and narrow-minded tripe. Let me quote one of the gems: Any nation which has wealth has a duty to conquer countries less wealthy than it, another gem: Where native religions were opposed to even simple moral behaviour, they would introduce Christianity in order to right the wrongs of paganism and allow these peoples to flower.. And so on and on.

2. I did not say the rest were any different, in fact worse as in they were more rudimentary emperialists (they were more ravage and pillage short term, while Brits were "sophisticated" in their pillaging), not as advanced ruling wise. But Brittish Emperialism was BAD BAD BAD, any way you put it, no mitigating sugarcoating BS like leaving behind "prosperous" foundations cant never excuse and will NEVER excuse centuries long of sheer emperialistic tyranny.
 

Ford Prefect

Senior Member
May 28, 2009
10,557
#66
1.You should KNOW what you link, it pretty much seemed like you used that link as an advocateur of Brittish emperialism and that you agree with it by doing so (otherwise why did you link it?), when its filled with such sickening revisionism, and exudes the very definition of bigoted and narrow-minded tripe. Let me quote one of the gems: Any nation which has wealth has a duty to conquer countries less wealthy than it, another gem: Where native religions were opposed to even simple moral behaviour, they would introduce Christianity in order to right the wrongs of paganism and allow these peoples to flower.. And so on and on.

2. I did not say the rest were any different, in fact worse as in they were more rudimentary emperialists (they were more ravage and pillage short term, while Brits were "sophisticated" in their pillaging), not as advanced ruling wise. But Brittish Emperialism was BAD BAD BAD, any way you put it, no mitigating sugarcoating BS like leaving behind "prosperous" foundations cant never excuse and will NEVER excuse centuries long of sheer emperialistic tyranny.
If you know anything about me and my views, you would i would be repulsed by that. I didnt read it because im feeling so ill atm i just cant be bothered.
 
OP

abejaa

Senior Member
Sep 25, 2006
1,665
  • Thread Starter
  • Thread Starter #72
    YOu guys are a bit off topic :)!
    what do you think, should countries make Nations or the other way around?

    I think nations should make countries!
     

    Bozi

    The Bozman
    Administrator
    Oct 18, 2005
    22,747
    #74
    Do nations make countries or Countries make nations! i'd like to know your opinion!
    all in know is that coco-pops make the milk go chocolaty

    what about the nation of islam
    X was a martyr

    @jasper-so while we are at it will we declare all Scandinavians fuckers because the Vikings raped and pillaged? if you are going to carry a grudge for every single terrible atrocity commited over the years you are gonna have a fucking long list of enemies, including some of your fellow Irishmen who acted in their "struggle for freedom" in such a horrendous way would cross the street to spit on them.
    generally the Irish and Scots have the same ideals,at both ends of teh spectrum and religious divide,it would be a great shame to cast a whole nation on the acts of a few savages
     

    IrishZebra

    Western Imperialist
    Jun 18, 2006
    23,327
    #75
    I'll repeat

    A country is a geographic territory

    A nation is a group with shared ethnic cultural and social experiences/traits

    A NATION-STATE is a defined geographic area over which a government holds sovereignty i.e. a monopoly on the use of force, has a permanent population and egages in external relations.
     

    Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 3)