as you well know the UK is nation quickly going downhill. with spiralling debt in relation to its GDP, loss of its places in the world stage, are its chickens coming home to roost? Britain was a country that only became wealthy from from stealing from its colonies, even when the vile empire was collapsing, thank God, they did all they could to hold on to lands that didint belong to them .( my grandfather was arrested and tortured by the british in the 60s. his crime, asking for equality and freedom from the oppression from the brits) when the empire was over, they were almost bankrupt. they were saved by income from the north sea oil and gas. which 90% belongs to Scotland. now that the scots want independece, the brits will go broke and now are want to steal oil from Las malvinas, which they claim is theres even if its 3,000 miles away and on Argentinas continental shelf. I as an american am glad we are distancing ourselves. please dont mention the wars. we both went in to fight terror and with shared interests. the brits didnt go in as a vassal state, though some say so.Europe should learn to go back to work on monday mornings like the rest of the world. The days of swindling the colonies and the US is over. UK and France should give up its UN security council seats to Brazil and India so that there is some equitable distribution of power in the world. what do you think?
Answer :
THE TRUTH IS ALWAYS BITTER AND AS WE KNOW, HISTORY IS WRITTEN BY THE WINNERS.
THE WINNERS DURING THE COLONIAL ERA WERE MANY OF TODAYS DEVELOPED NATIONS INCLUDING UK AND OTHER EUROPIAN NATIONS.
THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION WAS MOSTLY FINANCED BY THE EXPLOITATION OF COLONIES IN ASIA.
READ: http://ashishthakare.blogspot.com/2005/1…
FOR BRITISH CONTRIBUTIONS IN INDIA.
THE QUESTION SHOULD BE: WHY DID THE BRITISH GO TO INDIA?
TO HELP THE POOR INDIANS?
OR
TO MAKE PROFIT?
EDUCATION, RAILWAYS ETC WERE BYPRODUCTS AND NOT INTENDED TO HELP INDIA...
EDUCATION: TO RAISE A ENGLISH SPEAKING INDIAN GENERATION FOR ADMINISTRATIVE WORKS UNDER THE BRITISH OR CIVIL SERVANTS.
RAILWAYS: TO TRANSPORT GOOD EFFECTIVELY OUT OF INDIA.
TO CALL THEM "POSITIVE EFFECTS" IS BASELESS.
BEFORE THE COLONIAL ERA INDIA WAS ONE OF THE MAJOR ECONOMIES IN THE WORLD.
INDIA AND CHINA ACOUNTED FOR ABOUT 50% OF WORLDS GDP!
(REMEMBER: COLUMBUS FOUND AMERICA IN SEARCH OF INDIA! MOTIVATED BY ITS RICHES... HENCE THE NATIVES WERE CALLED INDIANS!)
WHEN THE BRITISH LEFT INDIA POVERTY WAS OVER 50%..NOW ITS DOWN BY ROUND 25%...
FURTHER THE FAMINES DURING BRITISH RULE, MASSACRE OF JALIAN WALA BAGH ETC... (JUST GOGGLE!)
DURING THE COLONIAL ERA OVER 40 MILLION INDIANS LOST THEIR LIVES... AS MANY AS DURING WW2...
THE CRIMES OF COLONIAL EXPLOITATION IS A DARK TRUTH IN HISTROY THAT WE SHOULD ACCEPT AND NOT IGNORE OR DENY.
INDIA WOULDNT NEED ALL THOSE "AID" FROM ENGLAND OR OTHER NATIONS IF THE BRITISH WERE TO GIVE BACK THE RICHES THE STOLE IN INDIA DURING THE COLONIAL ERA... MAYBE START WITH THE KOHI-NOOR DIAMOND ON THE QUEENS CROWN!?!
IN CHINA THEY ALMOST MADE THE NATION OPIUM ADDICTED!
IN AFRICA THEY TOOK NATIVES AS SLAVES TO BRAZIL ETC!
WHAT SORT OF HELP OR DEVELOPMENT ARE WE TALKING ABOUT?
Answer :
Can you name any country ,ethnic group ,tribe or social group that didn't exploit others at some time in their history : that didn't fight and kill for land and other resources?
You say you are an American ( with Scottish or Irish ancestry by the sounds of it ) --how on earth can you have such a blind spot about the history of the USA?
Answer :
The British Empire was built to provide a source of raw materials and labour and a captive market for manufactured goods. The peoples were subjects and expected to obey the British Governors. So yes, Britain did get wealthy on the spoils of Empire.
Answer :
Basically yes.
Some institutions we have today were built on a "dark" history, for example Barclay's our highly respected High St Bank owes its existence to slavery, others have similar skeletons in the cupboard.
Answer :
No, the UK was built on science invention and innovation. here are a few examples.
British inventions and Discoveries:
First Hydroelectric power. George Armstrong later Lord Armstrong.(1810-1900).
The first programmable computer British was invented in Manchester university, This computer still works and is actually faster than the PC/laptop you are now using.1948 The first computer with a stored programme and memory- nicknamed 'baby'- was developed at Manchester University,UK
Anemometer - Robert Hooke British inventor
Blood Circulation, discovery of:William Harvey Folkestone, England, UK 1578. physician at St. Bartholomew's Hospital
Disc Brakes - Frederick William Lanchester British inventor
Cordite - Sir James Dewar, Sir Frederick Abel
Electromagnet - William Sturgeon, British Scientist
Fax Machine - Alexander Bain British Inventor
Holography - Dennis Gábor British Inventor
Optical Computer Bristol University UK Sept 2009
Internal Combustion Engine - Samuel Brown, British Engineer and Inventor
Geostationary satellite feasibility was another British first, A C Clarke who died recently
Jet Engine British (Whittle)
Radio (Underlying Principles) - James Clerk Maxwell Very famous British scientist
Thermos - Sir James Dewar, British inventor
Evolution theory Darwin British
Vacuum Cleaner - Hubert Cecil Booth, British Inventor (Not Hoover)
Body scanner British
The Internet BRITISH,(Tim Berners -Lee)
Radar British WW2
Train first train self propelled British (Stephenson)
Steam Engine British 3 British
Inventors: Thomas Savery, Thomas Newcomen, James Watt
Steam Turbine : British inventor Charles Parsons
First crude steam engine .Thomas Savery British 1650-1715
First atmospheric steam engine: Thomas Newcomen (1663-1729)
1803 John Dalton's atomic theory was the forerunner of all modern medicine. Manchester UK
1805 The first gas street lighting illuminated part of Chapel Street in Salford, along with the Philips and Lee factory.Manchester UK
1880 The first mechanically powered submarine was launched to the designs of eccentric Hulme curate, the Reverend George Garrett.Manchester UK
George Stephenson Rocket Steam Engone
Robert Stephenson , First Box Girder Bridge
Propelling pencil . Sampson Mordan.UK associate of Michael Faraday
Scramjet semi orbital jet engine British
First Powered flight. John Stringfellow Attercliffe, Sheffield, England
Cat Eyes British Percy Shaw
Float Glass and self cleaning glass, Pilkington UK
First successful two-stroke engine was invented by Sir Dougald Clerk.British
Periodic Table British
British chemist, John Newlands
The "Seismometer"British James Forbes
Englishmen, Sir Henry Bessemer (1813-1898) invented the first process for mass-producing steel
Spinning Jenny - James Hargreaves
Modern Seismograph
John Milne was the English seismologist and geologist who invented the first modern seismograph and promoted the building of seismological stations. In 1880, Sir James Alfred Ewing, Thomas Gray and John Milne, all British scientists working in Japan, began to study earthquakes. They founded the Seismological Society of Japan and the society funded the invention of seismographs. Milne invented the horizontal pendulum seismograph in 1880.
Sir Isaac Newton ( British ) was the inventor of the Universal Law of Gravity
Michael Faraday (British 1791 - 1867) invented both the electrical generator and the electric motor,
John Logie Baird (1888 - 1946) is immortalised for his invention of Television (1926) but also worked on early developments in radar and fibre optics (1924/5).
Steady State, theory of the Universe.Sir Fred Hoyle 1915 - 2001
Hovercraft British Sir Christopher Cockerell (1910 - 1999) - 1959
Linear induction motor - Eric Laithwite (British 1921-1997) - early 1960s
Pedal cycle ....Kirkpatrick MacMillan- British -invented the pedal cycle 1839
Penicillin--Alexander Fleming - 1928
Holography 1947...Dennis Gabon -- British
Torpedo http://www.weymouthdiving.co.uk/torpedoe…
DNA Profiling.Prof Sir Alec Jeffreys,The inventor of DNA finger printing was named as the Great Briton of 2006 at a ceremony at London's Guildhall.
Tar Macadam Road surface ,was invented 200 years ago by a Scot named John Loudon McAdam
Harrier Jump Jet. British
1919 Lord Ernest Rutherford discovered how to split the atom at Manchester University UK .
2009......James Dyson has launched a bladeless fan
2009 Cancer Genome Sequence break-through British scientists Dec 2009
The above is not a complete list by any means and represents a fraction of British inventions
~~~~edit~~~America was a colony too and is now rich, the poverty of the Indian subcontinent is the fault of Indian subcontinentals, their corruption and lack of science and invention. That is why they flood into the UK
Answer :
Iv no idea which country you come from, you are too scared to say, Ill just say this to you and anyone else who denigrates the uk for its past empire. THE ENGLISH RULED the world! - never before in the history of the human race has there been such a successful country. You have the audacity to cite things which have nothing to do with whatever tin pot country you come from. I suggest that you look to your country and see what it can to give to the world, its a fact that if anything at all it wouldn't amount to 1,000,000,000,000 of what the British have given . I think you are just a jealous no mark with no national identity and no way of ever being part or belonging to anything worth more than 50cents..
Answer :
The Industrial Revolution was paid for by the rape of India!
Advanced capitalist nations need to constantly expand their markets in order for their economy's to continue to grow. This is as true now as it was 200 years ago.
Britain is no longer a superpower because of the loss of their empire. We are no longer able to dominate other country's in the same way as we used to. That is why we latched onto the so called 'War on Terror' that was led by the USA n the hope of being thrown a few crumbs by the US.
USA, Russia and China are the big players at the moment and it looks like China will be the biggest economy in the world soon.
The Falklands/Malvinas have reserves of oil that are difficult to access, given the level of technology that exists at the moment, but the UK sees t as a long term investment. If there was no oil there we wouldn't be interested...much like Iraq and other areas in the Middle East.
I wouldn't be so smug mate. The USA, since WWII, have embarked upon their own imperialist adventures. It is a consequence of this, along wth their slavish support of Israel, that caused 9/11 and other terrorist attacks. Their foreign policy's have resulted in some of the worst examples `of death and destruction the world has seen, and their policy of immiseration in non-compliant nations is truly appalling!
Answer :
Why do you single out Britain every Nation in the world from Mesopotamia to the present is built on conquest bar none , Even neutral Sweden has a bloody history of conquest and was built on other nations wealth , There are not innocents here to judge others look at any nation in the world and you will find they plundered somebody in their history, Britain was just far better at it than all the others, all motives to judge the British are based on jealousy that they did not have the balls and courage to conquer as much. To conquer half the world from a Island 500 miles by a hundred is something else and that was the British, three quarters of the world speaks English and every true English man should hold his head up in pride for with conquest we bought education and civilisation built vast monuments and roads systems railroads trade even to Timbuktu, And America has not reason for pride having destroyed the native American Indians for its own pure greed breaking every treaty it signed , its word it not worth the paper is was written on , so do not try to shame Britain it never in its history went back on its word.
Answer :
I think that you are an ill informed, clearly poorly educated moron.
Any link to accurate historical reporting has been washed away with a stream of incorrect supposition and based upon the usual populace drivel that passes for knowledge in the US.
As for getting back to work, as a member of the most clinically obese nation in the world, I suggest you move out of the glass house before you throw any more stones.
Brit baiting is the preserve of rayhere, another dipshit from over the pond.
Answer :
The US is built on the blood and sweat of African slaves and land stolen from the native Indians.
Justify that one.
Am not interested in your pathetic anti-UK rant. I have no idea why your "grandfather was arrested and tortured" but it wouldn't simply be because he was "asking" for equality and freedom". If his method of "asking" involved bombs or killing people (IRA by any chance???) he deserved what he got.
The Falklands have always belonged to the UK no debate at all. The Argentines only want them now because of the oil. Well last time they tried to (brutally) invade they got their arses handed to then. They will get the same again.
"UK and France should give up its UN security council seats to Brazil and India so that there is some equitable distribution of power in the world. what do you think?"
Haha! Umm . . . no. We don't "give up" our power. Weaker countries have to WORK to get recognition not expect strong countries to hand it to them. Why are you failures always desperate for a handout?
Weak countries get their arses kicked. As do weak people. Fact of life.
If you are a "Plastic Paddy" (ie ignorant American with an Irish grandparent) you should know that 99% of REAL Irish people consider you to be utterly ridiculous and want nothing to do with you.
By the way, dear, your question has been reported for being nothing more than a bigotted racist rant (and a poorly informed, badly written one at that). Have a nice day now won't you?
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Which of the ideas set forth in the Fourteen Points was adopted in the Treaty of Versailles?
(A) Free trade
(B) Freedom of the seas
(C) Reduction of Armaments
(D) Return of a democratic Russia
(E) League of Nations
Best answer full stars
Answer :
B. The overall principle that guided Wilson's Fourteen Points was the idea that war was bad and should be avoided. The main ways to avoid it, in Wilson's opinion, were:
Principle of self-determination. Ethnic groups should rule themselves, not be ruled by other ethnic groups.
Freedom of the seas. Countries should be able to trade freely with one another, even in time of war.
Open diplomacy. No secret treaties.
Collective security -- through the League of Nations. If one country attacks another, all countries should gang up on the attacking country.
This last is why the US didn't ratify. We didn't want to be dragged into war if, say, Italy attacked Austria (get in wars we don't care about).
(B) Freedom of the seas
(C) Reduction of Armaments
(D) Return of a democratic Russia
(E) League of Nations
Best answer full stars
Answer :
B. The overall principle that guided Wilson's Fourteen Points was the idea that war was bad and should be avoided. The main ways to avoid it, in Wilson's opinion, were:
Principle of self-determination. Ethnic groups should rule themselves, not be ruled by other ethnic groups.
Freedom of the seas. Countries should be able to trade freely with one another, even in time of war.
Open diplomacy. No secret treaties.
Collective security -- through the League of Nations. If one country attacks another, all countries should gang up on the attacking country.
This last is why the US didn't ratify. We didn't want to be dragged into war if, say, Italy attacked Austria (get in wars we don't care about).
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Can anybody help me answer this question please? It's school related.?
This is the question:
American foreign policy leading up to involvement in the First World War was greatly influenced by our definitions of the rights of neutrals and our assertions of “freedom of the seas.” American foreign policy leading up to involvement in the First World War was greatly influenced by our definitions of the rights of neutrals and our assertions of “freedom of the seas.” At what point do you feel that Germany was justified in considering the United States an enemy and acting on that perception accordingly?
This supposed to be an essay, but i'm stuck!! I have no idea what to put or how to begin!! Any ideas????? please help me!! :)
Answer :
this is the main question:
"At what point do you feel that Germany was justified in considering the United States an enemy and acting on that perception accordingly?"
do you understand that? It's basically asking you to input your thoughts about Germany losing to the Americans in the World War. If I recall correctly, the Americans joined the "good side" to defeat the Nazis and the invading Japanese
Start brainstorming.
-2 Teams, what are they?
-Why did the US join the British side?
-End Results: freedom, destruction and great depressiion in Germany after the war, etc.
Research
Research
Research
Are you in grade school? high school? If so, refer to your notes and textbook. They might help you too.
If not, the internet is there. Never use wikipedia. Look for legitimate sources. Government sites or historical sites are the best ones to visit and get info from.
American foreign policy leading up to involvement in the First World War was greatly influenced by our definitions of the rights of neutrals and our assertions of “freedom of the seas.” American foreign policy leading up to involvement in the First World War was greatly influenced by our definitions of the rights of neutrals and our assertions of “freedom of the seas.” At what point do you feel that Germany was justified in considering the United States an enemy and acting on that perception accordingly?
This supposed to be an essay, but i'm stuck!! I have no idea what to put or how to begin!! Any ideas????? please help me!! :)
Answer :
this is the main question:
"At what point do you feel that Germany was justified in considering the United States an enemy and acting on that perception accordingly?"
do you understand that? It's basically asking you to input your thoughts about Germany losing to the Americans in the World War. If I recall correctly, the Americans joined the "good side" to defeat the Nazis and the invading Japanese
Start brainstorming.
-2 Teams, what are they?
-Why did the US join the British side?
-End Results: freedom, destruction and great depressiion in Germany after the war, etc.
Research
Research
Research
Are you in grade school? high school? If so, refer to your notes and textbook. They might help you too.
If not, the internet is there. Never use wikipedia. Look for legitimate sources. Government sites or historical sites are the best ones to visit and get info from.
Friday, July 9, 2010
If u had to pick between freedom or love?
which would u pick?
like ur gf or watever is like, "if u luv me, u hav to do wat i say." u hav to let her control u, she has u on a leash she dominates the relationship, but for the sake of example u do luv her.
now u could leave and be totally free, like the sea itself impossible to be obtained or controlled by anyone. but u'll be alone.
i pick freedom. everytime.
Answer :
If i love them enough yes i would choose Love over Freedom(odd coming from me).Thats what i would do out of love, it's a sacrifice but also a test, "2 do what ever he saids"?, okay for love i will, but if he allows me to torture myself toss all my chances of happiness take all my freedom, and all the things that comes with, and notices all this pain I'm going threw for him and just allows me 2 hurt myself for his own sick satifaction.Then he doesn't love me, I'm kickin his A** to the CURVE! NO MAN that really loves a woman would acknowledge all this pain the woman he loves is going threw for him and just continue 2 let her suffer for himself, and no woman in their right mind should allow this, And i'm in my right mind, in that case i would pick freedom.
Y the thumbs down ? O.o
Answer :
Sadly, I would choose freedom at the expense of love. But it's really close because the prospect of a true, unconditional love is so appealing (to my Pisces venus :p).
Even if I really love them, I couldn't be with someone so controlling. We'd just end up resenting each other because I'd do everything in my power to defy them and prove that I'm the only one in control of me. It's like my personality screams "FIGHT IT!!" when confronted with options like that. :p
Answer :
Sadly, I would choose freedom at the expense of love. But it's really close because the prospect of a true, unconditional love is so appealing (to my Pisces venus :p).
Even if I really love them, I couldn't be with someone so controlling. We'd just end up resenting each other because I'd do everything in my power to defy them and prove that I'm the only one in control of me. It's like my personality screams "FIGHT IT!!" when confronted with options like that. :p
Answer :
It has to be freedom then. I can't loose my identity to someone else. When love is the way its suppose to be, when its fresh and filled with magic, mystery, excitement, when its passionate and honest, then love is a new life, it feels like a rebirth to me- there's nothing like it. I'm a new woman. But the relationship you described to me sounds like death, like a spiritual death. I don't want any part of someone who stifles who I am.
Virgo sun, Cancer moon, Pisces rising
Answer :
Freedom. I've been alone all of my life and I cannot stand seeing people not doing what they wanted to do because of love/partner. Compromise is so unappealing. I can only do SO MUCH for someone before I get exhausted and want things MY WAY! So freedom by choice or not by choice, is still freedom and not being tied down.
Answer :
"If you love me you have to do what I say."
That is Not love at all. That's pure insecurity and a need for control. Whoever says that needs to work on themself.
I choose freedom, I'm not gonna be some whipped *****.
Answer :
I could barely read the demands in your example because I was already thinking "I am so out of here" LOL!!!!
I couldn't love anyone who was like that, so yeah, freedom for sure!!!
I don't want to be alone though :(
Me: Sadge w a Leo Moon
Answer :
Honestly I cannot let anyone control me in a relationship so I would definitely pick Freedom. I want love more than anything but if I'm not happy I'd rather be alone, and have my freedom.
like ur gf or watever is like, "if u luv me, u hav to do wat i say." u hav to let her control u, she has u on a leash she dominates the relationship, but for the sake of example u do luv her.
now u could leave and be totally free, like the sea itself impossible to be obtained or controlled by anyone. but u'll be alone.
i pick freedom. everytime.
Answer :
If i love them enough yes i would choose Love over Freedom(odd coming from me).Thats what i would do out of love, it's a sacrifice but also a test, "2 do what ever he saids"?, okay for love i will, but if he allows me to torture myself toss all my chances of happiness take all my freedom, and all the things that comes with, and notices all this pain I'm going threw for him and just allows me 2 hurt myself for his own sick satifaction.Then he doesn't love me, I'm kickin his A** to the CURVE! NO MAN that really loves a woman would acknowledge all this pain the woman he loves is going threw for him and just continue 2 let her suffer for himself, and no woman in their right mind should allow this, And i'm in my right mind, in that case i would pick freedom.
Y the thumbs down ? O.o
Answer :
Sadly, I would choose freedom at the expense of love. But it's really close because the prospect of a true, unconditional love is so appealing (to my Pisces venus :p).
Even if I really love them, I couldn't be with someone so controlling. We'd just end up resenting each other because I'd do everything in my power to defy them and prove that I'm the only one in control of me. It's like my personality screams "FIGHT IT!!" when confronted with options like that. :p
Answer :
Sadly, I would choose freedom at the expense of love. But it's really close because the prospect of a true, unconditional love is so appealing (to my Pisces venus :p).
Even if I really love them, I couldn't be with someone so controlling. We'd just end up resenting each other because I'd do everything in my power to defy them and prove that I'm the only one in control of me. It's like my personality screams "FIGHT IT!!" when confronted with options like that. :p
Answer :
It has to be freedom then. I can't loose my identity to someone else. When love is the way its suppose to be, when its fresh and filled with magic, mystery, excitement, when its passionate and honest, then love is a new life, it feels like a rebirth to me- there's nothing like it. I'm a new woman. But the relationship you described to me sounds like death, like a spiritual death. I don't want any part of someone who stifles who I am.
Virgo sun, Cancer moon, Pisces rising
Answer :
Freedom. I've been alone all of my life and I cannot stand seeing people not doing what they wanted to do because of love/partner. Compromise is so unappealing. I can only do SO MUCH for someone before I get exhausted and want things MY WAY! So freedom by choice or not by choice, is still freedom and not being tied down.
Answer :
"If you love me you have to do what I say."
That is Not love at all. That's pure insecurity and a need for control. Whoever says that needs to work on themself.
I choose freedom, I'm not gonna be some whipped *****.
Answer :
I could barely read the demands in your example because I was already thinking "I am so out of here" LOL!!!!
I couldn't love anyone who was like that, so yeah, freedom for sure!!!
I don't want to be alone though :(
Me: Sadge w a Leo Moon
Answer :
Honestly I cannot let anyone control me in a relationship so I would definitely pick Freedom. I want love more than anything but if I'm not happy I'd rather be alone, and have my freedom.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)