Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
“The sun never sets on the British Empire.” So it was said in those days before WWI.
“Also sprach Charles V”, in the 16th century … ;D
In terms of greatest extent:1. British Empire – 33.7 million km2 (1923)2. Mongol Empire – 33.0 million km2 (1270 or 1309)3. Russian Empire – 23.7 million km2 (1866)4. Spanish Empire – 20.0 million km2 (ca. 1740-1790)5. Qing Empire, China – 14.7 million km2 (1790)6. Yuan Dynasty – 14.0 million km2 (1310)7. Umayyad Caliphate – 13.0 million km2 (720 or 750)8. Second French Colonial Empire – 12.3 million km2 (1938)9. Abbasid Caliphate – 11.1 million km2 (750)10. Portuguese Empire – 10.4 million km2 (1815)
La Rochelle had become the stronghold of the French Huguenots, under its own governance. It was the centre of Huguenot seapower, and the strongest centre of resistance against the central government. La Rochelle was, at this time, the second or third largest city in France with over 30,000 inhabitants.France was building the power of its Navy, leading the English to be convinced that France must be opposed “for reasons of state”.In June 1626, Walter Montagu was sent to France to contact dissident noblemen, and from March 1627 attempted to organize a French rebellion. The plan was to send an English fleet to encourage rebellion, triggering a new Huguenot revolt. Casualties and losses (as clearly seen on the attached document)Siege Army: ? La Rochelle:22,000 killedToiras:500 killed Buckingham: 5,000 killed(sorry to be over 22,000)
That is modern culture. Apologize for everything, we all know that if we say we are sorry that makes it OK right? I mean, it works in kindergarten. 😉
Indeed ! ;D
What about the Spanish Empire, the Portuguese Empire, the French Empire,
Umayyad (Arab) Empire, the Russian Empire (in 1917 the second largest contiguous empire to have ever existed on Earth. The Russian Federation is currently the largest state on the planet.) ? (Didn't check before posting, oops)An imperial political structure is established and maintained two ways: – as a territorial empire of direct conquest and control with force (direct, physical action to compel the emperor?s goals), – as a coercive, hegemonic empire of indirect conquest and control with power (the perception that the emperor can physically enforce his desired goals). The former provides greater tribute and direct political control, yet limits further expansion because it absorbs military forces to fixed garrisons. The latter provides less tribute and indirect control, but avails military forces for further expansion.Territorial empires (e.g. the Mongol Empire, the Median Empire) tended to be contiguous areas. The term on occasion has been applied to maritime empires or thalassocracies, (e.g. the Athenian and British Empires) with looser structures and more scattered territories.More apologies for … gonorrhoea and the Tuskegee experiment … :-http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-11457552
TMHO As sordid as politics can be, this post was first dedicated to the people who gave their lives to free Europe. Nobody forced them. They did it. Americans, Australians, Canadians, Britons, Polish, … and not only them: people from colonies and many other volunteers. At least, we must never forget them. (WWII politics in another post pls)
I think America today resembles the later period of the Roman republic. Rome grew because the farmers in central Italy wanted security, and they obtained it by military supremacy over their neighbours, combined with friendly relationships with them. Think American troops in Europe. Not exactly popular, but hardly hated or resented either.As Rome grew it came into contact with more alien powers like Carthage. These couldn't be assimilated so had to be destroyed. This led to the Roman state growing, and in turn to the rise of powerful families. These subverted the constitution to support their own interests.After a while the military became the most important force, and you had the imperial system which reflected that. In effect the whole empire became a protection racket run by the army.Will America follow the same route? We have already seen the army running a camp in Cuba to avoid the rules of the constitution. I would watch out for ex-generals running for office if I were you.
Agreed. The Republic failed due to its size, such a vast territory couldn't be ruled like a city-state as Rome was when they got rid of the last king. However the Republic fell under the ambitions of a patrician general. The Empire followed with its bad and good emperors but slowly crippling until the final blow. I wonder which similarities could be used to compare the USA with Rome ? The Republic, the Empire ? Its legacy ? Politics ? Pax Americana ?
I used those ones about NYC for a geography course. Quite interestinghttp://130.166.124.2/NYpage1.html http://www.columbia.edu/cu/lweb/indiv/lehman/guides/stats/ny.html#NYC
Nice.btw. I hope you also have a nice sunny saturday as I have 🙂
A bit rainy, a bit sunny, a bit cold after a warm sunny week ! Equinox effect 😉
More in U.S. follow Tea Party news
More than two in five, 43 percent, say they agree with the Tea Party's core principles…while 25 percent disagree
The number of people following Tea Party news has increased 8 percentage points since June to 50 percent, while the number in agreement is up 4 percentage points.
(emphasis mine) Increased this much in only 3 months! What's it going to do in a year? Are people finally beginning to wake up to the stupidity, evil, and illogic of the Left?
It also means they don't trust the Great Other Party …
No, but the early US is a good example of a country based on biblical principles. 🙂
I'd like to make clear that I'm not against any religion but more about a kind of clergy; biblical or other religious principles are not the problem. Principles are vital in any society, not the people who are trying to rule their alter ego.
