Raoul's China Saloon (V5.0) Beta

The Bar Room => The BS-Wrestling Pit => Topic started by: kitano on November 05, 2012, 02:42:11 PM

Title: 9 out of 10
Post by: kitano on November 05, 2012, 02:42:11 PM
Quote
Every schoolboy used to know that at the height of the empire, almost a quarter of the atlas was coloured pink, showing the extent of British rule.
But that oft recited fact dramatically understates the remarkable global reach achieved by this country.
A new study has found that at various times the British have invaded almost 90 per cent of the countries around the globe.
The analysis of the histories of the almost 200 countries in the world found only 22 which have never experienced an invasion by the British.
Among this select group of nations are far-off destinations such as Guatemala, Tajikistan and the Marshall Islands, as well some slightly closer to home, such as Luxembourg.

(http://i.telegraph.co.uk/multimedia/archive/02388/BRITAIN_2388153b.jpg)

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/history/9653497/British-have-invaded-nine-out-of-ten-countries-so-look-out-Luxembourg.html
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: Raoul F. Duke on November 05, 2012, 05:08:11 PM
I'm finding this a little hard to believe.
When did Britain invade Greenland? Or Mexico? Or Brazil? Or Kazakhstan?!? mmmmmmmmmm
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: The Local Dialect on November 05, 2012, 05:36:22 PM
If you click on the link, they explain the reasoning. It is really a bit of a stretch. They are including pirates and explorers as "invaders."

Quote
Only a comparatively small proportion of the total in Mr Laycock's list of invaded states actually formed an official part of the empire.

The remainder have been included because the British were found to have achieved some sort of military presence in the territory – however transitory – either through force, the threat of force, negotiation or payment.

Incursions by British pirates, privateers or armed explorers have also been included, provided they were operating with the approval of their government.
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: BrandeX on November 05, 2012, 06:18:43 PM
In that event, you can say the exact same about several countries.
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: gonzo on November 05, 2012, 07:36:32 PM
Well , they've been given a pants-down by our old friends, the Yanks. They've managed something similar to the Brits, but without privateers etc, with Microsoft, McDollars etc. doing much of the work. And far more profitably too!! blblblblbl
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: Raoul F. Duke on November 05, 2012, 07:49:29 PM
Indeed. Still and all, "invasion" is a pretty strong word....I would maintain that "some presence" is not the same as "invasion"... kkkkkkkkkk
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: ericthered on November 06, 2012, 03:50:29 AM
Err...Denmark has never been invaded by Britain. True, they bombed Copenhagen because we backed the wrong horse during the Napoleonic Wars and made off with our entire navy, but there was no invasion...If the parameters for this study is to be accepted, then Denmark invaded North America when some befuddled Vikings landed there and Africa because that woman from "Out of Africa" pottered around and boinked Denys Finch-Hattton there for a spell.
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: kitano on November 06, 2012, 04:26:59 AM
I don't think it's invaded so much as 'kicked their ass once'

Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: Just Like Mr Benn on November 06, 2012, 12:39:07 PM
What you have to appreciate is that our invading countries and fighting wars against them is usually good for them.

For instance, Argentina. The first war against them helped them form a national identity. The second helped them get rid of their military junta and restore democracy.

Honestly, countries should be paying us to invade them. Of course we did allow many of them to show their gratitude with money, national treasures and cheap labour.

We're basically the Mitt Romney of nations. If your country isn't working, we come in, strip your assets and get you back on the right path for a very competitive commission.

You're welcome.
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: NATO on November 07, 2012, 02:31:22 AM
The Telegraph - a paper for people who not only thought the empire was virtuous and glorious but who also want to retroactively expand it.  bibibibibi
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: A-Train on November 07, 2012, 03:36:19 AM
What you have to appreciate is that our invading countries and fighting wars against them is usually good for them.

For instance, Argentina. The first war against them helped them form a national identity. The second helped them get rid of their military junta and restore democracy.

Honestly, countries should be paying us to invade them. Of course we did allow many of them to show their gratitude with money, national treasures and cheap labour.

We're basically the Mitt Romney of nations. If your country isn't working, we come in, strip your assets and get you back on the right path for a very competitive commission.

You're welcome.

Interesting. Add South Korea, The Balkans, Vietnam, (to a smaller degree), and perhaps, later, Iraq and Afghanistan.
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: zero on November 07, 2012, 09:39:36 AM
I always knew there was a reason I didn't like the Britons.
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: Monkey King on November 07, 2012, 01:01:28 PM
Quote
The Telegraph - a paper for people who not only thought the empire was virtuous and glorious but who also want to retroactively expand it.

Never really pegged Kitano as a Telegraph reader...what's next, Daily Mail links?    aoaoaoaoao
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: caley1313 on November 07, 2012, 02:22:37 PM
Don't know much about the English being such, but I do know that our good old USA spends circa $900 billion annually on the military industrial complex, more than the REST OF THE WORLD COMBINED. Hell, we don't have to invade em, we just got to send a few million dollar drones over to do our dirty work. Such is life. And today, Obama has been re-elected for another four years and nothing changes in both houses. More of the same. One would think that a little of that $9 billion should go towards keeping taxes down in these slow times.
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: kitano on November 07, 2012, 04:09:18 PM
Quote
The Telegraph - a paper for people who not only thought the empire was virtuous and glorious but who also want to retroactively expand it.

Never really pegged Kitano as a Telegraph reader...what's next, Daily Mail links?    aoaoaoaoao

I don't read it someone linked it to me on faceache

The Telegraph does sometimes have good articles in it, it's good to read a lot of viewpoints as well...
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: Fozzwaldus on November 08, 2012, 02:35:00 AM
I'd like to see a map of every country that has an Irish pub in it.

Now that's an invasion I could really get behind!! agagagagag
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: Monkey King on November 08, 2012, 03:22:52 AM
I mean, Guinness is nice and everything, but 80RMB a pint? (in certain Shanghai locations)...a criminal mastermind couldn't have done better...  ananananan agagagagag ananananan
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: kitano on November 08, 2012, 03:28:01 AM
I mean, Guinness is nice and everything, but 80RMB a pint? (in certain Shanghai locations)...a criminal mastermind couldn't have done better...  ananananan agagagagag ananananan

The really terrible thing is that it's about 5 pounds in England as well

It's totally reversed since I was a kid, wine was posh for when you treat yourself and beers and stouts were cheap. Now wine is cheap and you treat yourself to a Guinness or a non-piss lager every once in a while
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: piglet on November 08, 2012, 03:37:11 AM
having spent a lovely St Paddy's Day getting sloshed in Ningbo (NOT in the Irish pub but next door) I am with Fozz on that one. agagagagag
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: Monkey King on November 08, 2012, 03:54:52 AM
Quote
The really terrible thing is that it's about 5 pounds in England as well

Ugh...Every time I visit the UK now I turn into an old fart who complains about 'the price of things today...'
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: Fozzwaldus on November 08, 2012, 04:11:33 AM
in Dublin it's the cheapest (and best  bjbjbjbjbj) pint on tap.

4 euro, sometimes less.
Title: Re: 9 out of 10
Post by: dragonsaver on November 08, 2012, 04:15:05 AM
In Canada, 6 bottles costs about $11.00.  However, it is what I drink 90% of the time now.  No wheat in Guinniss  akakakakak