posted
(the following [formerly] contain[ed] expletives)
when i was in 4th grade, my class started learning about foreign affairs. Social Studies (pfft) is the class that first teaches kids that theres more to the world than the one city you live in.
- the first conflict we talked about in class was the invasion (don't remember by who) of a British owned island off the eastern coast of South America. The response was a quick retribution by the British to bring the island (some 2 square kilometers) back under their control. The invading country said that it was taken from the illegally (or something) and because it was less than 2 miles off the cost of their country they had legal right to it. As it was not in international waters... etc .. etc
- in my childish ignorance. i asked the teacher - why is it so important to the British to have a [poor quality] island more than 2000 miles away from their country thats only big enough to hold 40 sheep and a barn?- i also asked - Would it really be a big deal if England just, out of good will, gave back the island?
:the teacher replied harshly, but not surprisingly:- England owned it. They're a sovereign nation. They can't just give away parts of their country because another country feels like it.
---- ----- ------- ---- - ---- -------- - since 4th grade (9 years ago) i just accepted the teachers words at face value and as fact. just agreed.
but wait.
i'm old enough to think for myself. i don't have to be indoctrinated by the stupid sub-par military-political theory that "1st world countries" impose on the rest of the world just to get away with the exact same crimes that they themselves are committing. nope.
truth is. In that scenario. england is a [jerk]. to start [stuff] with another country just BECAUSE is stupid. no one said anything about giving away mainland England. No one even said anything about taking away the countries England sent colonies to and just, sort of, took over. :cough:India. :cough:South Africa.
its a [frustrat]ing piece of [garbage] island no one cares about. ----- ---- -- -
politics or no politics. its just bad human judgment. if i owned a playground in Missouri and the neighborhood that it's in approached me and asked if they can have the rights to it SIMPLY BECAUSE its next to their houses. and I'm not gaining any sort of economic stability from it. not charging for admission. just telling people "HEY I OWN A PLAYGROUND!"
id give that [stuff] up. ----
i don't know of any political leaders in the world that are just decent with their policies "just because".
everyone is out for something. makes me sick
[Bracketed changes made by me. Please refrain from the profanity (and perhaps you'd be well-served to revisit the user agreement). You never get a second chance to make a first impression, but you do get a chance to make a second impression. --PJ]
quote:Would it really be a big deal if England just, out of good will, gave back the island?
As I understand it, the Falklanders were citizens of the UK and wanted to remain so. The British government had an obligation to them. It should also be noted that the Falklands are self-governing, so I doubt Britain can simply give them away.
quote:Would it really be a big deal if England just, out of good will, gave back the island?
As I understand it, the Falklanders were citizens of the UK and wanted to remain so. The British government had an obligation to them. It should also be noted that the Falklands are self-governing, so I doubt Britain can simply give them away.
--j_k
See the sudentenland crisis.
edit: mind that this doesn't really have anything to do with the OP or really the Falklands in anyway. My point here was that land has been given away before, even when the giver didn't actually have it to give.
Posts: 1621 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Carrie: I keep being disappointed in threads - first I don't get to speak Latin, now I don't get to discuss cake and/or death.
posted
I liked that complaint generator. For fun, I used it to generate something that I e-mailed to our editorial page coordinator, with the comment that now we know the source of some of our letters to the editor.
Posts: 2034 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm confused/surprised that nobody is actually having a discussion here, and instead just berating him.
Posts: 655 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
aww. well i don't mind a little ridicule now and then.
no no Starsnuffer, some did try to gotta a discussion going.
the reason for my post was because i just finished Shadow of the Hegemon (for the 14th time) and in the end, the thing that i got out of it (everytime i read it, its something different) is that political leaders today are in it for themselves.
oh WOW big discovery right? NO ONE knew that.
well. if everyone knows it why don't we all revolt?
well whatever. the thing is. In the end, i liked the way Peter detached himself from the stereotypical world dominator and actually tried to be a humanitarian in its full definition.
thought that was neat.
also made me mad that we don't live in a world like that. or if we do.. very scarcely do we find decent leaders anywhere.
p.s. i went back to edit my first post for swearwords(i copy pasted it directly from another forum i wrote it on) and realized it was already edited. thanks PJ =) i wont to it again
p.p.s. glad people got the eddie izzard comment. makes me all warm and fuzzy inside
Posts: 10 | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
I've always been interested in the dialectical usage of ironical and ironic. Where are you from, and how old are you, if you don't mind me asking? Ironical tends to be more archaic.
Posts: 2705 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Carrie: I keep being disappointed in threads - first I don't get to speak Latin, now I don't get to discuss cake and/or death.
Seriously, people, stop disappointing me!
Hey Carrie, cake or death?
~Jane~
Dea - no, cake! Cake, please!
Posts: 3932 | Registered: Sep 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
Like coups. Coups are much cleaner than bloody revolution. Just say "I'm in charge" "Alrighty then, would you like me to show you around the white house?"
Posts: 2705 | Registered: Sep 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by JonHecht: I've always been interested in the dialectical usage of ironical and ironic. Where are you from, and how old are you, if you don't mind me asking? Ironical tends to be more archaic.
Whereas I have only heard it used in Serenity, so I thought it was a reference to that. I didn't know that it's a real word. Posts: 369 | Registered: Apr 2007
| IP: Logged |
in TRUE communism. why wouldn't it be ok for a country to give away small parts if its for the good of the people? (think of global communism)
Posts: 10 | Registered: Nov 2007
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yeah but who? The Islanders? the British? the Argentinians? Other people? What if there are different groups within those loose groups of people who will benefit differently. How do you know who will benefit most? What if the Islanders want to stay with Britain but you- as the government- think that Argentina would benefit from the reverse.
The world isn't divided into 'the government' and 'the people'.
Posts: 8473 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Noemon: The Vanguard of the Proletariat is out of cake, but will gladly award steven a slice of pie.
Hey! Who elected you the Vanguard of the Proletariat?
Oh, our whole clique is the Vanguard of the Proletariat. I'm just the head of the Committee for the Equitable Redistribution of Territory and Desserts.
::awards Shigosei a nice lemon torte::
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[No No]](graemlins/nono.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Blushing]](graemlins/blushing.gif)
![[Razz]](tongue.gif)
![[Mad]](mad.gif)
Quit stealing my baked goods!
