|
| Thread: would like to know more about other countrys! please help!! |  This thread is pages long: 1 2 3 4 · «PREV / NEXT» |
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
posted August 02, 2005 01:49 AM |
|
|
Quote:
about 1 % percent of the English Population have
Norweigian ancestors this is proven by BBC
True but as I mentioned, Britain's population is a mis-mash of virtually the whole of europe, with other continents thrown in so this could apply for a number of countries, not just Norway.
Quote:
A scandinavian country or colony introduced christianity into England
I meant Converting by War nearly all of the inhabitants
Of England into being Christians
even I now about the Roman Legazy in England
but i dont now anything how many were christians
in england before the Scandinavian invasions
The conversion of England began by the romans, continued through various missions culminating with the conversion of most of the Kent region for example in the 6th century. The archbishops of Cantebury date to this period. The Celtic church survived in Wales and Ireland and these had some sucess in converting Scotland. I'd say the notion that the Vikings converted the English is rather incorrect as the process began earlier in England, and many historians think that the Viking conversions owed somewhat to the English.
Quote:
when you are telling me about Shetland
the Island is occupied as i am telling you now
my country burrowed money from Scotland
but my country didnt manage to pay the money back to the
scotish King so My Country made a Tempoary deal
with Scotland that Shetland was Ownned by the
Scotish King Until Norway Pay The sum of Money back
Which was Burrowed from The Scotts and Norway has tried
pay the money back to the scotts and return the ownership over The Island
Many times since 1905 but they Refuce to have anything
with it So this a fact and you must accept it
the money problem deal was designed by Norway
and it was just as i stated here and the deal was accepted by the Scottish King so yes the people of scotland and England has broken the deal and Refuse to give The Island and surronding sea Areas back to Norway
dont tell me that my country who designed the shetland deal gave shetland to the scotts they just gave the scotts tempoary control of the Island until money was payed back to the Scotts not permanent as you stated
dont you agree with me that this is occupation of norweigian land.
I'm afraid I will have to disagree with you frankly. By 1905 the islands had been Scotish/British for 400 odd years, no token or realistic amount of money could undo that just because the Norwegians suddenly decided they were unhappy with the original deal. Interesting point to note is that no-one seriously considers this a territorial dispute between the two countries. Like I said, taking this seriously is like expecting France to accept British rule because one of her monarchs ceded control of the throne to Henry V's son and his descendants. If there wasn't oil in the area I doubt anyone would care that much. This is less about land and money and more about precious oil.
Governments are not pawn shops, they operate on the basis of might and posession. Six hundred years of continual occupation is more than many countries can claim for core parts of their territory, for example Calais and Britanny in France. Therefore I count that as legitimate ownership.
Quote:
I dont Know much about the Normans but
norman means coming from north in a away
and I accept that you Know more about the
Normans then I do
Sure they were of Norse descent, but by 1066 they were not Scandanavian in culture, language or military style. They'd branched off from Norse culture in the same way Australians are not British.
Quote:
and now about The England Plan to invade
in 1800 belive me in my country in 1800
it was many military posts over the intire country
to Stop a Possibly Invasion by The English Royal Navy
even in the city which I lived My first Four Years
it was Big army Divison To stop a possibly
invasion by the English Royal Navy.
Assuming for a moment the British would bother to divert their land forces from the other two places I mentioned (very unlikely given there was little to no point in invading Norway in 1809 but...) they could have brought a force many times this size to bear. I presume this would be in concert with Swedish operations. Navy support would of course add to this.
Quote:
and Thrust me when you say it wasnt worth the Hassle Frankly
Belive me Norway is worth Many Hundred Thrillions
in Natrual Resources it was therefore it was made a plan
to invade Norway by England by using the Royal Navy
A source for that claim would be welcome. You're thinking too long term frankly. England in 1809 was tied down trying to support Austria on the continent and destroy napoleon's fleet. Hence the attacks by land forces at Walarchen and Spain, and the naval bombardment of Denmark. Attacking Norway, where there was little naval forces and no French force I know of would have achieved nothing in the scheme of the wars.
Quote:
I am only Trying To Inform You and Others about your
Gowerment The Gowerment of England About the facts
that they in fact have stolen Billons of Tons of Oil
around The Occupied Island of Shetland from us Norweigians You english are supposed to buy oil
from Norway not steal oil from Norweigians that is bad Moral
dont you agree with that
If I thought we "stole" the shetlands, or had no right to them I'd think we stole the oil. Since I don't I disagree with your analysis.
Quote:
England is not a Sovreign Nation Because of its
Membership in EU thats my opinon
You'll forgive me if I disagree.
Word of advice by the way, the country is the United Kingdom, not England. England is not a seperate political entitity in terms of global politics, military and so on. England is therefore not the country responsible for the Shetlands, England is not a seperate part of the EU, England does not have a seperate government either.
Quote:
But when you English person State that England is the Most succesful Former Empire in the World that is not true if You Compare it To the other Former Empires
Rather depends on how you define sucess. Britain was a global superpower for at least 100 years (mid 1800s to WW2), Russia only really for 50 years, WW2 - 1990s. I define most sucessful as being able to dominate world affairs (or a section thereof in ancient times) for a period, and in my opinion Britain holds a longer period.
Quote:
Between 1941-1945 Russia freed The Northern Parts of Norway And Cased out the Nazi germans from our country they freed about 33% of our country
when the Germans Surrendered The Russian gave The Control of northern Norway back to the Norweigains preceisely after The Nazi Germans Surrendered in 1945
The Russians lost close too 200 000 soldiers when they freed 33% of Norway The Russians they were the only country that actively tried to free our country from The Nazi Germans
Whilst actively trying to Subjugate your finish neighbours during the period too. Not only this I rather think you do the British a diservice since they tried to help and assist you how they could during that period.
Quote:
Island was Founded and Namned By Norway
True but there's some evidence to suggest it was discovered by the Irish.
Quote:
Greenland Was Founded and Discovered and namned by Norway
Iceland was rather independent at the time, and the guy who discovered Greenland was Icelandic (albeit via Norwegian parents), so this might be stretching the point a little.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
REIMA_RIPLEY_M
Tavern Dweller
|
posted October 13, 2005 09:59 PM |
|
|
I have Changed my 2 Posts to be more Accurate
[quote-myself
Greenland Was Founded and Discovered and namned by Norway End of my Fact
-------------------------------------------------------
(quote) a English
Iceland was rather independent at the time, and the guy who discovered Greenland was Icelandic (albeit via Norwegian parents), so this might be stretching the point a little.
End of by English (quote)
-------------------------------------------------------
Start of the Correct Fact
Iceland was not at all Indepentent in that period it was
A part of Norway
But Iceland Had Their own Local Democratic
instustition Of Local Leaders
Acceptet and Founded by Norway.
Nr 2
Quote:
myself
Island was Founded and Namned By Norway
END
(quote) By a English
True but there's some evidence to suggest it was discovered by the Irish.
(quote) End
I Have added something to my posts on page 2
so i agree there is a possibility
|
|
Jebus
Promising
Supreme Hero
TheJester akaJeebs akaJebfoo
|
|
posted October 14, 2005 12:08 AM |
|
|
Quote:
Japan has a pretty boring culture, we have samurai and ninjitsu
WHA?? this seems like an oxi-moron to me!!
man growing up in Canada, I've always dreamed of learning those 2 martial arts (unless they are of the same school) and you had them bread into you?!
what do we have?
distaste in amercicans
hockey (sweet sweet hockey)
beaver tails.
sub zero temps 8 months outta the year!
I think I'd trade in most of that for martial arts!!
____________
"You went over my helmet??"
|
|
Lord_Crusader
Promising
Supreme Hero
UHU!! supreme!
|
|
posted October 14, 2005 01:02 AM |
|
|
MEXICO
The United Mexican States or Mexico is a country located in North America, bordered by the United States to the north, and Belize and Guatemala to the southeast. It is the northernmost and westernmost country in Latin America and the most populous Spanish-speaking country in the world.
Major cities
The following is a list of the biggest Metropolitan Areas of Mexico in order of population:
Mexico City (22.0 million)
Guadalajara, Jalisco (4.7 million)
Monterrey, Nuevo León (3.6 million)
Puebla, Puebla (2.6 million)
Tijuana, Baja California (1.5 million)
León, Guanajuato (1.2 million)
Toluca, México (1.2 million)
Ciudad Juárez, Chihuahua (1.1 million)
Torreón, Coahuila (1.1 million)
The total mexico's popullation is around 120 millions
Geography of Mexico
Situated in the southwestern part of mainland North America and roughly triangular in shape, Mexico stretches more than 3000 km from northwest to southeast. Its width is varied, from more than 2000 km in the north and less than 220 km at the Isthmus of Tehuantepec in the south.
Mexico is bordered by the United States to the north, and Belize and Guatemala to the southeast. Mexico is about one-fourth the size of the United States. Baja California in the west is an 1,250-km peninsula and forms the Gulf of California. In the east are the Gulf of Mexico and the Bay of Campeche, which is formed by Mexico's other peninsula, the Yucatán. The center of Mexico is a great, high plateau, open to the north, with mountain chains on the east and west and with ocean-front lowlands lying outside of them.
Economy
According to the World Bank, Mexico is the 12th nation in the world in regards to GDP and the highest per capita income in that region; and is firmly established as an upper middle-income country. Since the economic debacle of 1994-1995 the country has made an impressive recovery, building a diversified economy and improving infrastructure. According to the director for Colombia and Mexico of the World Bank, the population below the poverty level has decreased from 24.2% to 17.6% in the general population and from 42% to 27.9% in rural areas [1].
Mexico has a free-market economy with a mixture of modern and outmoded industry and agriculture, increasingly dominated by the private sector. The number of state-owned enterprises in Mexico has fallen from more than 1,000 in 1982 to fewer than 200 in 1999. The administration of President Ernesto Zedillo (1994–2000) continued a policy of privatizing and expanding competition in sea ports, railroads, telecommunications, electricity, natural gas distribution, and airports which was initiated by his predecessors Miguel de la Madrid and Carlos Salinas.
A strong export sector helped to cushion the economy's decline in 1995 and led the recovery in 1996–1999. Private consumption became the leading driver of growth, accompanied by increased employment and higher wages. Mexico still needs to overcome many structural problems as it strives to modernize its economy and raise living standards. Income distribution is very unequal, with the top 20% of income earners accounting for 55% of income.
Following 6.9% growth in 2000, real GDP fell 0.3% in 2001, with the US slowdown the principal cause. Positive developments in 2001 included a drop in inflation to 6.5%, a sharp fall in interest rates, and a strong peso that appreciated 5% against the US dollar. Trade with the US and Canada has tripled since NAFTA was implemented in 1994.
Mexico has opened its markets to free trade as no other country in the world, having lifted its trade barriers with more than 40 countries in 12 Free Trade Agreements, including Japan and the European Union. However more than 85% of the trade is still done with the United States. Government authorities expect that by putting more than 90% of trade under free trade agreements with different countries Mexico will lessen its dependence on the US. The government is seeking to sign an additional agreement with Mercosur.
Religion
Mexico is predominantly Roman Catholic (about 89% of the population), with 6% adhering to various Protestant faiths (mostly Pentecostal), and the remaining 5% of the population adhering to other religions or professing no religion. Some of the country's Catholics (notably those of indigenous background) syncretize Catholicism with various elements of Aztec or Mayan religions.
The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormonism) enjoys a growing presence in the major border cities of northeastern Mexico with over 1,000,000 members nationwide. Judaism has been practiced in Mexico for centuries, and there are estimated to be 100,000 Jews in Mexico today. Islam is mainly practiced by members of the Arab, Turkish, and other expatriate communities; Mexico's indigenous Muslims number only a few thousand or less, although recent years have seen some growth of Islam in Chiapas.
Education
Mexico has made impressive improvements in education in the last two decades. In 2004, literacy rate was at 92%, and youth literacy rate (ages 15-24) was 96%. Primary and secondary education (9 years) is free and mandatory. Even though different bilingual education programs have existed since the 1960s for the indigenous communities, after a constitution reform in the late 1990s, this programs have had a new thrust, and free text books are produced in more than a dozen indigenous languages.
Mexico was the first country to establish, in the 1970s a system of "distance-learning" satellite secondary education, aimed for the little towns and rural communities. In 2005 this system included 30,000 connected schools, 3 million students and 300,000 teachers, who use televised lectures and education science programs, pre-recorded and transmited through "EduSat", via satellite. Schools that use this system are known as telesecundarias in Mexico. The Mexican "distant-learning" secondary education is also transmitted to some Central American countries and to Colombia, and it is used in some southern states of the United States as a method of bilingual education.
____________
Dig Out Your Soul
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted October 14, 2005 01:59 AM |
|
|
Quote:
(quote) a English
Iceland was rather independent at the time, and the guy who discovered Greenland was Icelandic (albeit via Norwegian parents), so this might be stretching the point a little.
End of by English (quote)
The name is privatehudson or PH, not "a english" please. I may be English, but that's not the point. I ask kindly for you to do this as I do not like being referred to like this as it's impersonal.
Quote:
Iceland was not at all Indepentent in that period it was
A part of Norway
Not according to Wikipedia amongst other sources. Iceland had her own general assembly, formed it's own republic and retained defacto independence until 1262 when she became a Crown Colony of Norway. The fact that she only became formalised as a colony 300 years later and retained a different culture for part of this time implies to me as I said that they were rather independent.
"Not at all independent" is a contradiction of the fact that they had their own government which you admit yourself. To the Icelandic people the man was Icelandic, to the Norwegians he was Norwegian, so it's merely a case of who's bias you listen to as usual.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
Russ
Promising
Supreme Hero
blah, blah, blah
|
|
posted October 14, 2005 07:57 PM |
|
|
Ok, that post will be a long one.
Russia as a country began to exist around 800-900 AD. This was the year when prince Rurik established Rurik dinasty in Novgorod which was Russia's capital until about 1100 A.D. Novgorod was a big and rich city located in the intersection of the major trade routes. It was also a part of Ganza (a mostly-German trade union between the city states.) Later on Novgorod was also known for having the most democratic system ever known to man - direct democracy up until mid-1500s when Ivan the Terrible sieged and captured Novgorod, which was followed by a demonstration of why his nickname was Terrible. For people who don't know what direct democracy is - it is when citizens make every important decision by the majority vote instead of electing others to make the decisions for them. This system was also used in ancient Greek cities, but unlike Novgorod, Greeks has slaves and that kind of downgraded their "democracy".
After Novgorod the capital of Russia moved to Kiev. However, Russia didn't remain a single country for long. Shortly after it was devided between 30 or so warlords, called "princes", each of which ruled over his land. At about that time Russian peasants started to lose their freedom to the nobles.
That is when Mongols decided to show up (around 1250). Although Russia could easily defeat them if the princes united against the mongols, most of them did not unite because they were too selfish and all but the southern ones didn't quite understand the mongol threat.
3 of the southern princes united, but their army was defeated. Then mongols moved north, conquering the cities one by one, killing, pillaging and taking slaves. Soon all of Russia except for Novgorod was under the mongol rule. Novgorod was very rich and had the strongest army, so mongols decided to leave it alone after receiving a HUGE bribe from Novgorod.
At about the same time the mostly-German crusaders decided to attack Novgorod (Germans seem to like doing it from time to time). In 1240 Alexander Nevsky defeated them. Come to think of it - he was a pretty cool guy - he managed to keep both germans and the mongol hordes away from the city!
So, the dark age began in Russia - for almost 300 years it was under the mongol rule.
In 1380 Dmitri Donskoy, the prince of Moscow defeated Khan Mamai - this was the first Russian victory over the mongols, however, Russian army at that time was too weak to win the war, so Russia remained under the mongol rule. This battle is famous for another reason - in the beginning of the battle the best Russian warrior (Peresvet) fought the best Mongol warrior (Chelubei) in front of the 2 armies. The Russian warrior killed the mongol, and even though the mongol's spear went through his chest, he rode his horse back behind the Russian flanks looking cool and unharmed and died where the Mongols and most of the Russians couldn't see it. So, some say this heroic act may have decided the battle.
So, then there were another 100 years of Mongols, then there was Ivan the Terrible who despite having the well-deserved nickname also managed to united Russia under Moscow's rule. He also captured the Mongol capital (Kazan') and kicked out whatever mongols were left.
Another few 100 years of quite eventful times, wars with Poland, Latvia, etc, but nothing really significant.
Finally, Peter the First (aka Peter the Great) came to power. He was the one who modernized the obsolete Russian army, reclaimed the northern and southern Russian lands, which opened Russia to the the North sea and the Mediterranean sea and in only a few years he built the excellent navy and St. Petersburg city (he wasn't a particularly shy guy naming a city after himself, as you can see). How did he do it? Well, he had his ways. For example, when the old-style army of 25,000 men revolted, not only he defeated them with his 2000 men army, he also captured 20,000 of them only to behead every one of them a few days later for treason. He also beheaded his son for conspiring against him. And when his wife cheated on him with the other man he put him on a stake, on which he died 2 days later (how dumb do you have to be to screw this guy's wife in the 1-st place?). His brand new navy was able to defeat the Swedish navy (which was considered the best at the time).
Many uneventful years have passed...
Catherine the Great comes to power after her husband "accidentally died" after 6 months of marriage. Although she was 100% German, born and raised in Germany, she did a lot for Russia and really deserved her title. Unfortunately, her f*ggy son f**ed it all up, but that's another story.
In 1812 Russians kicked the French out and played a major role in defeating Napoleon. Suvorov actually had a very interesting way of fighting the French - he destroyed all provisions on their path. He even let them capture Moscow (which was burned before they got there, so French army got nothing when they got there). And finally - he defeated the starving and demoralized French army.
In 1860-s Russia has finally abolished slavery. Eemember I mentioned how peasants "started to lose their freedom"? Well, they ended up losing all of it and became a private property of their landowners who had the right to do anything with them.
Russia was on the rise and became #1 coutry in the world when it got pulled in WW1. In 1917 the Germans created a "lil diversion" (Lenin) which was designed to slightly destabilize Russia. This "lil diversion" caused a 4 year long civil war which ended in 75 year of communist dictatorship. That started another dark age for us. Many millions died because of the system, many died during WW2 when Germany attacked USSR (the Germans again! WTH is wrong with them?)
In 1970-s the communist system actually started to work more or less! Crime was low, living standards were increasing, Lenin, Stalin and WW2 were behind. Most of the people were happy. However, in 1983 a weakling called Gorbachev came to power. I don't think Russia has ever had a worse leader. Shops became empty, food was limited, so you could only buy a certain amout of meat/milk, etc in shops. His international policy was focused on bending over and taking it up the a**. This is perharps why a lot of westerners like him so much. (Note: when I say this I am not talking about him letting go of eastern europe - this should have been done, but not in such a moronic way he did it.)
In 1991 a drunken idiot (Eltsyn) gave a speech standing on top of the tank. This symbolized the fall of the Soviet Union. At that time the Drunken Idiot was extremely popular in Russia as well as the west. However, looking good standing on top of the tank is not enough to be a good leader. His years were marked by a LARGE SCALE CORRUPTION. UNIMAGINABLY LARGE scale corruption and anarchy. Everything that could be stolen got stolen. And I am talking trillions of dollars here. Khodorkovsky, Berezovsky, Gusinski and other "freedom lovers" (as they are called in the west) were the most successful at legally stealing the most. GDP dropped by 50% a year!!! Inflation was 1000% or more a year. Living standards were dropping extremely fast. While some people bacame extremely poor, another (i.e. the abovementioned "freedom lovers") got extremely rich. Schools, hospitals and universities stopped receiving funding. Old people stopped receiving government pension and were forced to live off the garbage dumpsters (and I am not joking here). People who won the WW2, who survived Stalin's regime, who worked hard their whole life now had to dig in the dumsters just to find a piece of rotten bread to eat. In only a few years Russians have realized that there isn't much in the future for them while the Drunken Idiot is in power. However, he got elected for the 2-nd time because the alternatives were even worse. But for some unknown reason he is still very popular in the west.
In 2000 Russia has finally got a leader who isn't a weakling, nor a moron. I personally have a lot of respect for the man. Same as most of other Russians. If you think that his election was "falsified" - go on the street and ask the Russians what they think about him, you'll find majority of them thinking the same as I do.
Ok, some of his decisions are bad. But every man makes mistakes. There are many good things that he did to compensate for that.
Now - I've heard a lot of talk about him limiting the freedom. In particular - taking TV channels from the abovementioned "freedom loving" Oligarkhs. Well, those TV channels were NEVER independent. Until Putin they showed only what the Oligarch wanted to show them. Now they show what the government wants to show them. Now - who do you trust more? A known thief whose only goal in life is to make as much money as he can, or the government (which at least in theory is supposed to be good for you)? I go with the government. Russia really needs some morale standards and some patriotic propaganda now. It isn't popular being Russian anymore in Russia. And most young kids want to become gangsters and criminals instead of making something of themselves. They really need some steering in the right direction.
What about "freedom-loving" Hodorkovsky and his "unfair" trial? Well, the trial may not have been fair, BUT he IS a thief. And a thief has to be in jail. No matter how big and known he is.
Same as USA - Enron's CEO is a thief? He has to go to jail, he isn't above justice.
|
|
angelito
Honorable
Undefeatable Hero
proud father of a princess
|
|
posted October 14, 2005 08:29 PM |
|
|
Very nice summary here Russ. I learned a lot by reading it. And yes, we (germans) didn´t had great ideas between 1900 and 1950. Hope we learned for the next 1000 years...
____________
Better judged by 12 than carried by 6.
|
|
Russ
Promising
Supreme Hero
blah, blah, blah
|
|
posted October 14, 2005 09:15 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Very nice summary here Russ. I learned a lot by reading it. And yes, we (germans) didn´t had great ideas between 1900 and 1950. Hope we learned for the next 1000 years...
Haha, ty. About bad ideas and bad choices - everyone makes them. Especially under specific circumstances. But consider this: did YOU start WW2? Did YOU commit any war crimes? No. (Well, I hope you didn't  )So, why worry too much about it?
|
|
REIMA_RIPLEY_M
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted October 21, 2005 10:00 PM |
|
|
i add facts to did i do a diservice to united Kingdom
Quote:
Myself
---------------------------------------------------------
Between 1941-1945 Russia freed The Northern Parts of Norway And Cased out the Nazi germans from our country they freed about 33% of our country
when the Germans Surrendered The Russian gave The Control of northern Norway back to the Norweigains preceisely after The Nazi Germans Surrendered in 1945
The Russians lost close too 200 000 soldiers when they freed 33% of Norway The Russians they were the only country that actively tried to free our country from The Nazi Germans
end
---------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------
(quote) by a from the country with the Shell company
--------------------------------------------------------- Whilst actively trying to Subjugate your finish neighbours during the period too. Not only this I rather think you do the British a diservice since they tried to help and assist you how they could during that period End
-------------------------------------------------------
In my country Norway there is Shell Stations everywhere
those you call finnish
i dont understand why you call them finish
they were not from Finland
I view them as russians or slavians
slavian is a big European group of People
NOT ONLY RUSSIANS BUT UKRAINE Poland Finland Lituainia
Estonia Latvia Belarus And many more countries
+ the samer a group of People who lives in four Diffrent countries
someone also view them as having swedish ancestors
i dont think they have swedes as ancestors
since the swedes have only existed between 1000-1300 Years
but the swedes have namned 8-14 cities in russia
The swedes have a Extremely overestimated reputation of having a very historically big Influence in the old Days
This reputation is pure propaganda
but swedes are in truth a sub divison of either
Denmark or Norway
by scandinavian standards the swedes are new
Norway and Denmark are the old real scandinavian countries
Norway is the most scandinavian country because of
There was much Havoc and Destabilisation and wars
alongside Denmark so they are some kind of a
little less scandinavian then Norway.
one time Denmark asked desperately Norway to protect
The border of Denmark which Norway did sucessfuly
but Denmark
shortly after betrayded Norway because they did not
keep their promisses which they offerd Norway in Exchange
of Protection against powerful Invaders.
Their Betrayal of Their promises they gave to Norway were of a exstreme degree.
and now about Iceland
Iceland has had two uprising against
Norweigian absence in politics
both times the Icelandic rebels were Crushed
the Icelandic People are very very alike Norweigians
They were Orginally Norweigians
they have claimed more and more they are not Norweigians since Year 900+
they are bunch of violent sepratist
if they hadnt been so extremly anti Norweigian
they had still been a part of Norway
instead of a rule anti Norweigian
all ting - which is the name of their
Democratic Instutition founded by Norway
but it was meant to be Local democratic instutition
not a Indepented Democratic Instution
it was meant to respect Norway not to be anti Norway
but the Icelandic rebels did make a sucess
in their anti Norweigian movement
today Iceland is a Indepentedd country
Iceland has given the US the responsibilty
to Defend Iceland instead of Norway
so the United States is supporting
the Icelandic anti Norweigian Sepratist
United States is a Pro
Icelandic sepratist and anti Norweigian Country
Norway is supposed in my opinon too Defend
Iceland not the United States
The US have Been Pro Icelandic sepratist
too 280 000 Icelandic People
And the US Have by that Have chosen betrayal by being
Anti Norweigian To 4,7 Millon Norweigians
The US Have Made Norway A Angry Country
here is Two positive fact about Iceland
But they are ranked the least corrupt country in the world
And it is second best country to live in after Norway
And when about The Places in Scandinavia
The United Kingdom sucessfully protected against
the Nazi germans invaders During World War 2
I Have a list of them Here
Jan Mayen a Norweigian Volcanic Island with a population
of None at the time
today some scientist are there in periods
it is the only volcano in Norway.
These Scandinavian areas were also protected by the
United Kingdom from the germans during World War 2
Svalbard is the biggest Island in Norway
Faroe Islands occuied by Denmark founded by Norway
Greenland occupied by Denmark Founded by Norway
Shetland Occupied by United Kingdom still
Orkney Islands occupied by United Kingdom still
United Kingdom did of course Help Norway in some
incidents and Geograpical Areas as the the North Sea
United Kingdom liberated the North Sea by controling it
and by using the Royal Navy to Destroy the German Fleet
United Kingdom did much
So the help was good To us Norweigians.
But United kingdom Didnt Liberate Norway
Russia Liberated Norway
But United Kingdom gave the Second Biggest
contribution to Defeat Nazi germany
I think United Kingdom lost about 2.5 Million
Civilians and Soldiers during World War 2
Russia gave the largest Contribution to Defeat Nazi Germany when nazi Germany invaded Russia
Russia Had a army of 1,5 millon Soldiers
Russia lost about 10 million sodiers during world war 2
and about between 7 - 15 million cilvians
When the Second world war over in 1945
Russia Had 11 million soldiers left still alive and ready
for warfare and Combat
that is the largest army that have ever existed.
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted October 21, 2005 10:18 PM |
|
|
Quote:
(quote) by a from the country with the Shell company
Say what?
If you're not going to have the decency to address me properly as I asked I see no point in continuing the discussion frankly.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
REIMA_RIPLEY_M
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted October 21, 2005 10:43 PM |
|
|
That is okay but as i said i promised in a way on page 2 to not offend you
This I gave some information about connections about
our Countries instead of PH or Private Hudson
to identify you as the writer of the quote
I Thaught you would react diffrently
I simply Prensented to Others that are not From
Norway and England
A bit of Rivalery In the Oil Industri between our Two countries
I did stopped presenting you as a English many weeks ago
(quote) PH
If you're not going to have the decency to address me properly as I asked I see no point in continuing the discussion frankly.
End of (quote)
I addressed you with Information about a Oil company
Not everyone in Heroes Community Have Knowledge
about a simle thing as the company Shell and its large Global Size
I addresed you by giving a little information
instead of Your Username
|
|
Lich_King
Honorable
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted October 22, 2005 02:02 PM |
|
|
Quote:
slavian is a big European group of People
NOT ONLY RUSSIANS BUT UKRAINE Poland Finland Lituainia
Estonia Latvia Belarus And many more countries
+ the samer a group of People who lives in four Diffrent countries
LITHUANIANS AND LATVIANS ARE NOT SLAVIC PEOPLE ! They are Baltic people. At the middleages, there were 3 kingdoms of Balts - The lithuanians, latvians and prussians, however prussians got all vanquished by the crusaders and their country ruined.
And if I'm correct, Estonians are fino-ugrians, not slavs at all.
____________
|
|
vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
|
posted October 22, 2005 02:27 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Quote:
slavian is a big European group of People
NOT ONLY RUSSIANS BUT UKRAINE Poland Finland Lituainia
Estonia Latvia Belarus And many more countries
+ the samer a group of People who lives in four Diffrent countries
LITHUANIANS AND LATVIANS ARE NOT SLAVIC PEOPLE ! They are Baltic people. At the middleages, there were 3 kingdoms of Balts - The lithuanians, latvians and prussians, however prussians got all vanquished by the crusaders and their country ruined.
And if I'm correct, Estonians are fino-ugrians, not slavs at all.
When you type it in bold and caps lock, it seems as if it was something bad... 
Just for the record, Slavic countries in Europe are: Russia, Ukraine, Belarus, Poland, Czech Republic, Slovakia, Slovenia, Croatia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Serbia and Montenegro, Macedonia and Bulgaria.
____________
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted October 22, 2005 06:14 PM |
|
|
Try telling that to Croatian nationalists Vlad...
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
vlaad
Admirable
Legendary Hero
ghost of the past
|
posted October 22, 2005 07:38 PM |
|
|
Quote:
Try telling that to Croatian nationalists Vlad...
What do you mean?
____________
|
|
privatehudson
Responsible
Legendary Hero
The Ultimate Badass
|
|
posted October 22, 2005 08:11 PM |
|
|
I know one on Myspace who will swear blind to the fact that Croatians are no more Slavic than I am Martian.
And like 90% of all of those who are the most vocal about being a nationalist for a country he doesn't live there.
I'd suggest you talk to him but in my experience if you're Serbian he's probably dismiss you right off.
____________
We're on an express elevator to Hell, goin' down!
|
|
Wiseman
Known Hero
|
|
posted October 22, 2005 11:03 PM |
|
|
That reminds me of one Serbian ultra-nationalist, who claimed Serbs are a part of the great Aryan race.
Personally I get a huge kick out of listening to this kind of people.
____________
Truth may be out there, but lies are inside your head.
|
|
Lich_King
Honorable
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted October 23, 2005 01:20 AM |
|
|
Quote:
When you type it in bold and caps lock, it seems as if it was something bad...
Well nothing really bad at it, but I decided to get attention to my statement this way. People are people, they are both good and bad, no matter what nation you'll take...
But as most small, unique nations (and of course overproud too ), we don't like to be mixed with other, not really related nation groups.
____________
|
|
REIMA_RIPLEY_M
Tavern Dweller
|
|
posted October 23, 2005 09:08 PM |
|
|
quote Lich
LITHUANIANS AND LATVIANS ARE NOT SLAVIC PEOPLE ! They are Baltic people. At the middleages, there were 3 kingdoms of Balts - The lithuanians, latvians and prussians, however prussians got all vanquished by the crusaders and their country ruined.
And if I'm correct, Estonians are fino-ugrians, not slavs at all.
End
i usally dont upgrade lich to Power Lich
my country Norway culture got also vanquished by the
Christian Crusaders they killed every one who refused
to convert into christianity they Started this invasion
in 995 from other countries the war was a civil war
with other countries involved but they started to prepare the invasion a few decades earlier what they destroyed is freedom of religion
and certainly the Norweigian language which only partly exist
today it is exinct and the writting language
namned Rune is exstinct
it also just partly still exsiting
those who defended Norway against the Christian crusaders
lost the war
so the Norweigian Defenders managed to kill 2
Christian crusaders kings or more
so the resistance was big but it failed
after some Decades of war and
and the Crusaders made the Norrøn Religion Exstinct
So today I and the rest of the Norweigians
speak and Write Danish with many changes
but it is based on the Danish language
On Iceland They Speak partly Old Norse still
Old Norse was the Norweigian Language
so the Christian crusaders didnt destroyd it a 100%
is the Lituania language related to
on of the slavic language partly
LITHUANIANS AND LATVIANS ARE NOT SLAVIC PEOPLE ! They are Baltic people. At the middleages, there were 3 kingdoms of Balts - The lithuanians, latvians
isnt Poland a part of Baltikum
I were wrong when i stated they were slavic coutries
But i did knew they were Baltic countries
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for the facts anyway lich The Lich Weaver
you pointed The lich Staff and corrected my facts
what a great level 6 Spell
I meant this in a positive way
---------------------------------------------------------
And by the way is the Latvians less nationalistic
then Estonias and Lithuainians
Since Latvians have been a long time under Sweden
and the Soviet Union
and their gas prices is lower
then then in Estonia and Lithuainia
and the Latvians are very very very less religous
Then Lithuainians and Estonias
i am not complaining i am a Athesit
I know after the world war 2
Baltikum were under soviet
But the soviet Liberated my country Norway
and helped us a lot during world war 2
so the soviet retreated from Norway after Chasing the Germans away from Finnmark and Troms
And They gave us back Finnmark and Troms To big areas in Norway
the two areas was about the size of Lituainia Latvia and Estonia
The prussians we scandinavians have been at war with
those many times
and the Baskisk sepratist were also rivals to us Norweigians in the fishing industri
when the Baskisk had their own country they fished a lot a awful lot tooooooo Much
No Baskiland No Baskiland No Baskiland No Baskiland
No Fish To The Baskisk Sepratist no Fish No Fish
More fish to us norweigians Yeah more fish to us
The Baskisk live in France and Spain
By my opinon Two Rival country less
and more Whales and Fish and seals to Norway.
|
|
Lich_King
Honorable
Supreme Hero
|
|
posted October 23, 2005 09:47 PM |
|
|
Quote:
is the Lituania language related to
on of the slavic language partly
LITHUANIANS AND LATVIANS ARE NOT SLAVIC PEOPLE ! They are Baltic people. At the middleages, there were 3 kingdoms of Balts - The lithuanians, latvians
isnt Poland a part of Baltikum
I were wrong when i stated they were slavic coutries
But i did knew they were Baltic countries
---------------------------------------------------------
Thank you for the facts anyway lich The Lich Weaver
you pointed The lich Staff and corrected my facts
what a great level 6 Spell
I meant this in a positive way
---------------------------------------------------------
And by the way is the Latvians less nationalistic
then Estonias and Lithuainians
Since Latvians have been a long time under Sweden
and the Soviet Union
and their gas prices is lower
then then in Estonia and Lithuainia
and the Latvians are very very very less religous
Then Lithuainians and Estonias
i am not complaining i am a Athesit
I know after the world war 2
Baltikum were under soviet
But the soviet Liberated my country Norway
and helped us a lot during world war 2
so the soviet retreated from Norway after Chasing the Germans away from Finnmark and Troms
And They gave us back Finnmark and Troms To big areas in Norway
the two areas was about the size of Lituainia Latvia and Estonia
The prussians we scandinavians have been at war with
those many times
and the Baskisk sepratist were also rivals to us Norweigians in the fishing industri
when the Baskisk had their own country they fished a lot a awful lot tooooooo Much
No Baskiland No Baskiland No Baskiland No Baskiland
No Fish To The Baskisk Sepratist no Fish No Fish
More fish to us norweigians Yeah more fish to us
The Baskisk live in France and Spain
By my opinon Two Rival country less
and more Whales and Fish and seals to Norway.
Lithuanian language is related to indo-european baltic language group, not to any slavic group of language.
The tree is
Italic (Latin)
>>Romance
----Catalan
----French
----Italian
----Occitan (Provençal)
----Portuguese
----Romanian
----Spanish
Germanic
>>North Germanic
----Danish
----Faroese
----Icelandic
----Norwegian
----Swedish
>>West Germanic
----Afrikaans
----Dutch
----English
----Flemish
----Frisian
----German
----Yiddish
Slavic
>>Western
----Czech
----Polish
----Slovak
----Sorbian
>>Eastern
----Belarusian
----Russian
----Ukrainian
>>Southern
----Bulgarian
----Croatian
----Macedonian
----Serbian
----Slovenian
Baltic
>>Latvian
>>Lithuanian
Celtic
>>Brythonic
----Breton
<And so on...>
And No, Poland isn't a part of "Balticum", it's a slavic nation, not blatic, although Poland was closely related to Lithuania in the political affairs and country uniting and splitting... in the medieval ages.
Have no idea about being nationalistic in Latvia, Estonia or Lithuania, myself I'm not a nationalist and I respect (or try to) all nations equally... Nor I do understand gas related issues in your previous post and what it has to do with slavic nation issues (even more those related to Liches themselves)
Soviet union took our nation to times of fear, terror, lack of products, silly communist party related things...The results are the following: We aren't really developed as the rest of the Western European countries. So I hold no respect for Soviet union and it's characters, politics and the "winnings" of those times.
____________
|
| |
|
|
