In the cycle of time, some nations have just plain gotten screwed. What's the worst one off, though? From luck, of course.

Poland had the bad luck to be next to Austria, Prussia, and Russia, and that never seemed to help them. I mean, unlike the Nazis, the Soviets never had to give back what they took in 1939.

Belgium has the misfortune to be on a major route between Germany and France. An awful lot of important battles have been fought there and just south in French Flanders, and not just in World War I.

My unluckiest nation ever would have to be Paraguay. In the War of Paraguay, they got the worst luck, they were boxed in by hostile nations with 30 times their population. They acutally won for a while, but when Argentina entered the war, they had to stop. For four years they fought, and in the end, Paraguay lost something like 3/4 of its working men. This ruined its economy, that and the fact that, after they lost occupied Uraguay( the reason for the war in the first place) they lost the route to the sea, and were landlocked. Before the war, they had the highest GDP in the Americas, after the war, well, look at them now. And this was 150 years ago!
The War of Paraguay was also the bloodiest war in the Americas, even moreso than the American Civil War, which is a close second.

The Congo. Years of war, millions dead, etc.

Poland. Just as an example, the three partitions of Poland between Russia, Prussia, and Austria in 1772, 1793 and 1795 ultimately dissolved the country.

In the mid-17th century a Swedish invasion rolled through the country in the turbulent time known as "The Deluge." Numerous wars against the Ottoman Empire, Russia, Cossacks, Transylvania and Prussia ultimately came to an end in 1699. During the following 80 years, the waning of the central government and deadlock of the institutions weakened the nation, leading to anarchistic tendencies and a growing dependency on Russia. In Polish Democracy every member of parliament was able to break any work or project by shouting 'Liberum Veto' during the session. Russian tsars took advantage of this unique political vulnerability by offering money to Parliamentary traitors, who in turn would consistently and subversively block necessary reforms and new solutions.

Vietnam:

Having to deal with French colonialism, followed by a brutal Japanese occupation, then the French want to come back, then the nation gets split, then they are torn in a terrible war between the two countries involving, 500,000 American troops and a lot of American planes turning jungles, villages and Vietnamese into charred debris, and topped up by a war with China...not really great luck.

That they are still a nation says something for the people.

Belgium ? Ha, if it was that bad then why are they so prosperous now ?
Paraguay ... 150 years ? that's nuthin, but good pick.
Poland - between 2 big empires ... Very good pick ... though it could have been 3 empires. :D

I present you Romania:
From the first recorded documents after the dark ages we find a torn nation standing between 3 of europe's largest empires.
To the North & NE - we find the Russian Empire
To the West - the Hungarian/Austro-Hungarian Empire
To the South - the Ottoman Empire

This was reflected in the political map of the country. It was split in 3 nations, speaking the same language, same ancestry, same stuff.

For about 600 years (aprox) unification was prevented to preserve the intrest of the 3 empires in the area. Sure we had a brief several months of unification in 1600-1601 but they it was quickly put down.
A bit after this Phanariot rule was appointed by the ottoman empire in Moldavia and Wallachia. So the country was preety much forced to stay underdeveloped and to pay enormous amounts of tribute to the Sublime Porte. Armies, trade fleets & stuff were forbidden. Foreign trade with other nations was also forbidden, only trade with the turks was allowed - so you can imagine the prices if they had the monopoly.
This happened in Moldavia & Wallachia. Transilvania itself didn't do any better with the Austro-Hugarian Empire.
During the Habsburgic Empire RomaniansTransylvania experienced one of the worst oppression in the form of the Magyarization policies of the Hungarian government.
(And nowadays the ****ers- read magyars living in transilvania- want their language to be the official one in translivania:mad: - but that's OT ...)

In the late 19th century, the diplomatic situation in Europe allowed the 3 nations to be united (eventualy) in one big country and eventually it was recognized by the neighbouring empires.
The period between 1877-1939 is considered the Golden Age of Romania. The absence of ottoman empire's laws of preventing developement allowed Romania to become a modern (at that time), industrialised country. (railroads, large factories were also forbidden before ...)
In WW1 - several millions died, Romania was left with 1/3 of it size but the territorial integrity was remade after the peace.

Anyway i should also mention that in it's whole history, Romania was invaded by Russia at least 12 times. And this happened at the outbreak of WW2, about 1/4 was taken.
We found ourselves on the wrong side of this war (we had a fascist dictatorship). During this time there were lots of civilian casualties because the allies bombed lots of major cities.
So we switched sides a bit afterwards and joined the russians in the war. In return, or armies (just like Poland's IIRC) was put in the front line, it was not supplied with ammo and stuff like that ... that's what they did to all countries the red army "freed" from the german influence. Suprisingly some ppl actually survived that.
At the end of WW2 Romania was agreed (by Churchill) to fall in the influnece of the Soviet Union. So obviously the teritories they invaded at the beggining of WW2 remained torn form Romania (and they still are).

So till 1989 life just sucked, as it did in all Eastern Europe. And Ceausescu's neverending dictatorship really "helped". I'm sure these kinds of stuff happened in all Eastern Europe. When the Danube-Black Sea canal was built, convicts, soldiers and "disliked" citizens were sent to work there. Lots of them died from exhaustion and were not fed ... as it was intended. And other such common things.

Nowadays, post 1989, people still don't know what happened during the 1989 revolution. The revolution in romania was the only one opressed in blood. So ppl still don't know who gave the order to shoot. Those that got rich during the communist regime by cooporating with the Secret Police (Securitatea) are the most powerfull ppl in the country today. The torturers & executioners roam free and all are rich, despite the cries of those they tortured ...
Today the country is still in a "transition period" to democracy (even though 17 years have passed) because we are ruled by exactly the same people that ruled us during the communist period (minus Ceausecu and his wife). So we have to wait for them to die of old age and let the newer generation that doesn't have blood on it's hands take over. Untill then, the country will always be in a transition period.

That's it. :) Sorry for any typos, i was typing fast. :D

Korea. Poland of North East Asia: Situated between three great empires (China, Japan, Russia). Split apart, fought over, isolated countless of times. Still divided into two countries.

Surely Armenia should be up there - unfortunately situated between the Roman and Persian empires, which meant that the main thing that happened there was Romans fighting Persians. When it got incorporated into Persia, it was time for years of Persians fighting Armenians in an attempt to impose Zoroastrianism on them. Armenia got so screwed about with that (a) its people are now among the most dispersed population in the entire world, and (b) the modern country of Armenia shares no common geography with the ancient country.

Other than Armenia, surely the most screwed countries are those of Africa that got exploited by the colonial powers. Congo is the obvious one there, I'd say: there was a time when you could buy a slave in Congo for the price of a missal. And so many people did that eventually the nation barely existed any more.

Oh, and not exactly a nation, but I'd say the unluckiest people in history are the Ainu. So marginalised and exploited that most people haven't even heard of them.

great comments here guys! well done!

Rumania is one that i hadn't thought of as well as Armenia. good points gentlemen.

Poland was the first nation i thought of when i saw the thread title.

also, the Jews, up until they even had their Zion, is as good a choice as any of the others imo. Palestine is also a good nominee in the post WW2 landscape. of course, they're not a nation per se. however, their ethnic peoples have dealt w/ a lot of crap over the years.

how about the Kurds? the Turks didn't want them and Saddam though it'd be better to just kill them off. that's pretty unlucky if you ask me.

Well, once again, the Kurds aren't really a nation, any more than the Jews are. Of course, the reason they're not a nation is because of the way the imperial powers divided up the Middle East, without any regard for "natural" ethnic boundaries. The plight of the Kurds is similar to that of many peoples in Africa, where countries were created by someone with a map and a ruler, lumping people with little in common into the same nation and splitting other peoples between nations. This is one of the key factors behind all the civil wars and things that have happened in Africa in the past hundred years.

Afghanistan. It managed to find itself a border zone between British controlled India and the Russian Empire in the 19th Century. British paranoia of the Russian Empire taking Afghanistan and using it as a base to invade India led to decades of interferance, which was somewhat pointless as the Russians wouldn't have done any better at controlling it either.

Then Afgnaistan became a battlefield in the Cold War with the Russians, Americans and Islamic Fundamentalists battling it out, although the Americans mostly did it by supplying local allies, including the fuindamentalists they opposed in Iran. The fighting never stopped when the Russians pulled out, and now the national infrastructure is non existent and most of the country is controlled by brigands. With the Taleban on the rise again, it doesn't look as if the American and British occupation is going to end Afghanistan's misery anytime soon.

Finland gets an honorary mention for me for WWII. The Soviets tried to bully Finland into handing over land that the Soviets claimed was necessary for the defence of Leningrad (against whom, exactly?). The Finns refused, so the Soviets invaded. Despite mounting a heroic resistance, the Finns were defeated by force of numbers and they had to cede the disputed territory. Then Germany invaded the Soviet Union and Finland became diplomatically isolated because it had stood up to Stalin, who was now helping to defend the world against Nazi tyranny.

that was a good post Gallienus :goodjob:

Don't worry, I won't keep it up :D

Well, once again, the Kurds aren't really a nation, any more than the Jews are. ...
You have your terminology messed up, Plotinus. :nono:
Both are nations, the kurds don't have their own state or country.

As long as you're not looking for porn stars I think you can trust wikipedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nation).

Then I apologise! But I don't believe that the Jews are a nation in any sense, any more than the Christians are.

I don't trust Wikipedia. I've read too many of its articles on religion-related subjects.

Well, look up your own definition someplace else, then. ;) Wiki is easily available...

And I don't want to go arguing about Jews and nations, that's bound to lead to distress.

I think I would have to say afghanistan, at least in terms of consistent misery and bad luck....

China. Ridiculously ahead vis-a-vis the rest of the world at the time and yet her rulers weren't able to parlay this into: a) utter destruction of the barbarians to the north, then b) overseas colonization and then c) world conquest. :mischief:

Maybe it's enough to reach a high level of civilisation, without having to go and wreck other people's? I'd say that if China has been less of a bully on the world stage than its power might suggest, that's a point in its favour. After all, conquest costs enormous money and resources. The Roman empire was at its peak during precisely the period when it stopped conquering other countries (the second century AD).

Almost the whole Africa... Has been one of the worst victim of colonisation ever. and not to mention the slavery imposed on it... Droughts, famine, floods, locust outbreak, u name it, they have it...

To be honest I don't think China was altogether too bothered about expanding it's empire much. Granted there's the disputed 1421 world travelling attempting to bring everyone under the Chinese system of tribute, but that was not so much a conquest... as China forfeit it all in favour of isolationist policy which I would say still exists today, much to the West's dismay.

As for the unluckiest nation... granted there's the subject of debating just what a nation actually is, but if I take a nation to be a people with a firmly established territorial claim, then there's quite possibly a fair few unlucky ones out there that none of us got to ever see. There's no real quantitive measure for how unlucky a nation has been in that definition, as from an outside viewpoint you can give it a sort of measure, but someone else sees it differently.

For example, when the Bolsheviks took over Russia. I know someone whose family lost a lot in that, and they were forced to flee to the west into Europe. Now, from their point of view they could say Russia was unlucky to have to go through the rules of Lenin, Stalin and later Bolsheviks. Other people could say however that what Lenin created was a social experiment not seen on any scale. The side effects of it were not intended. Where do we stand on this one?

Anyway, let's not complicate this with random thinkings. This came up because I couldn't say what happened to one nation was any more unlucky than another.

nice remarks AxiomUk. :)

the Bolshevik example is another i hadn't thought of. i have family (in-laws) who lost everything when Castro came to power. so, yeah, i suppose that these examples could suffice.

as for the "unintended side effects":
yup, there's always 2 sides (or more) to a story.

How about Bolivia? It's lost more than 50% of its territory since its creation and is now poor and landlocked. Prehaps #1 most unlucky for South America?http://www.turismobolivia.bo/assets/graficos/varios/map-guerras.jpg

How about Bolivia? It's lost more than 50% of its territory since its creation and is now poor and landlocked. Prehaps #1 most unlucky for South America?

Yes. But the whole of South America have been unlucky from the 1500s onwards. First came the Incan civil wars between Huayna Capac's son Huascar and Atahualpa. Then came the genocide of the native Americans by the Spanish and Portuguese conquerers. Those who survived were a) wiped out by European disease, b) forced to adopt European ways of life, c) work as slaves in silver mines, gold mines, expeditions to find El Dorado, plantations etc or d) driven to inaccessable areas of the continent.

The Spanish then lost the colonies in a bitter war. The independent colonies the spent the next century (give or take a few decades) destroying each other. During the Cold War the region can be describe as America's Warsaw Pact. To this day the countries of South America suffered from the rule of pro-US juntas, autocrats and oligarchs, marxist movements, conflicts ethnic groups and social classes, economic stagnation and widespread poverty.

The first that came into my mind was Romania, of course.

After that I would say Lebanon, maybe? And, if you count countries that don't exist any more, maybe the Aztecs, Incans, or Mayans?

To complete Heretic_Cata's article: And if that law (I don't know how to name it in English, "legea lustratiei") is not applied, all the EU money which might come in Romania will be absorbed by that people from the Secret Police you were talking about. The law says that any person who had a political position in the communist regime should not be able to participate in today's politics. But they don't want to vote it!!!

Yes. But the whole of South America have been unlucky from the 1500s onwards.

Paraguay did astonishing well for a century and a half, when it was administered by the Jesuits. Odd considering what a rotten time it had subsequently.

If historical examples are allowed, I'm going for the Dacians. They had the misfortune to have plenty of treasure and large deposits of gold and silver at a time when the neighbouring Roman Empire was strapped for cash and under the leadership of a new emperor looking for a military victory to boost his standing (Trajan).

After the failed attempt to assimilate the Germans during the time of Augustus, the Romans decided not to mess about and to simply exterminate the Dacians. They did such a thorough job of it that the land they conquered is named after them: Romania.

At least the Inca and Aztec people survived (although in reduced circuimstances), and they are both now experiencing a cultural revival. The Arawaks had it worse: they were utterly exterminated in the century after Columbus reached the Caribbean.

Acording to some, the dacians were asimilated.

Here is the top 5:
1. Poland: between several agressive Empire, partitionned 3 times, betrayed by France in 1939, occupied by the Russians afterward.
2. Palestine. Cursed with hollyness.
3. Belgium. Although neutral, Belgian is one of the country that has seen the most battles in history.
4. Congo: colonized by the Belgians, the most ruthless colonial power in Africa, and then plagued with civil war.
5. France: because it is full of French, and the natural assets of the country are not even enough to compensate for all the flaws of its inhabitants.

5. France: because it is full of French, and the natural assets of the country are not even enough to compensate for all the flaws of its inhabitants.

You make me laugh, Steph! But you forgot to add this to the list of reasons why Belgium is so unlucky: it's got all those French right next door, so many of them that the poor old Belgians even have to speak their language. I'm from Folkestone so I can sympathise with that.

Uganda's a candidate for suffering through Idi Amin and Milton Obote, then through a major AIDS epidemic.

"Poor Mexico, so far from God and so close to the United States!" (¡Pobre México! ¡Tan lejos de Dios y tan cerca los Estados Unidos!) -Porfirio Díaz, dictator of Mexico

The Phoenicians were quite unlucky, although perhaps not any more so than countless other nations that were destroyed or submerged during ye olden times.

Any backward and genocidal central African state would probably be the best candidate.

China from about 1800 to about 1970.

In 1800, China was doing ok, and was still a great power, but then....

The Taiping rebilion/civil war: 20 to 40 million casualties. :eek: It came close to rivaling WWII.

famine after Taiping rebelion further depopulates the country.

Punti-Hakka clan wars: 1 million

Russians take over Outer Manchucria. Japan and Western countries force the Chinese to agree to "unequal treaties". forcing China to open up to westerners. During second half of 19th century, China is exploited by imperialistic powers.

In 1900, Chinese try to stop the European imperialism. After a short war, and a siege of Beijing, foreign soldiers were allowed in Beijing in the most humiliating treaty in Chinese history.

In 1911, the Qing empire collapsed. A period of Warlordism follows. At least 2 million dei itn teh fighting.

In 1931 the Japanese annex Manchuria and establish a puppet state of Manchukuo.

In 1936 to 1945 the Japanese invade, and a long war is fought. The war devastated China leaving 15 million casualties, and 100 million refugees. The Japanese commited many atrocities while in China.

From 1945 to 1949, a Civil war erupted between the Kuomintang and the Communists. Mao Zedong of the Communists won, and the war costed some 4 million casualties.

In 1950 to 1953 Mao Zedong ordered the army to fight in Korea. Chinese took heavy casualties, as much as a million by some estimates.

During the 50's, and 60's, Mao Zedong created the "Great Leap Forward". It was designed to make the Chinese economy great again, but was poorly planed. Millions of peasants were forced from their lands into the factories creating a famine of 30 million casualties.

The "Clutral Revolution" led to the near destruction of Chinese ancient heritage and identy.

After Mao Zedong was gone in 1976, China's sufferings finally began to end. Even today though, China has a dictatorship, though it is freer then it was under Mao.

The amount of suffering of China was incredible. I'm surprised it has hardly been mentioned.

^
It did suffer quite a lot during the last 2 centuries ... but the way i see it, it did preety well in the other past centuries. And the "From great to terrible" situation kinda makes ppl think it could have been worse. That's why no one nomineed it. (IMHO)

After Mao Zedong was gone in 1976, China's sufferings finally began to end. Even today though, China has a dictatorship, though it is freer then it was under Mao.

The amount of suffering of China was incredible. I'm surprised it has hardly been mentioned.
You should have mentioned the Tiananmen Square incident ... Are you from China btw :mischief: ? Am i going to be censored ? :spank:

Angola, one of the richest country of the world in natural resources, all sorts of gem stones, gold and silver open air mines, oversea oil reserves enough for Europe´s consumption alone. Yet scaveged by a decades of war, misery and famine. Has one of the biggest landmine fields in the planet, the accidents with mines are almost one by day, and as the highest percentage of prostate legs population in the world.

Fair to say, that is better that you´re country has no natural resources of value at all, for the greed of man destroys everything.

While not being that unlucky if compared to the examples already provided, I'd say the Papal States. In the Middle Ages they had enough power/influence to challenge the Holy Roman Emperor, until the King of France invaded. Relatively powerful during the Renaissance (Alexander VI and Julius II)... Fell victim to Napoleon. And finally:
During the Risorgimento and afterwards a moderately large territory dominating the centre of Italy was reduced to a tiny city-state. Nonetheless, the Pope still exerts lots of influence, and the Catholic Church seems to be very wealthy.

Btw, China was unlucky enough... I know of no other country in history with more peasant uprisings, civil wars, coups d'etat and internal division (which is still the case nowadays)...

Worse than that, the Papal State was reduced to absolutely nothing in the nineteenth century. It was only in 1929 that Vatican City was founded as an independent country.

^
It did suffer quite a lot during the last 2 centuries ... but the way i see it, it did preety well in the other past centuries. And the "From great to terrible" situation kinda makes ppl think it could have been worse. That's why no one nomineed it. (IMHO)

They had a 2 civil wars that was worse then World War I. (If you count the time of the Japanese invasion as part of the 2nd civil war it was worse) I can't see how it can get much worse then that, except for total Genocide.

You should have mentioned the Tiananmen Square incident ... Are you from China btw :mischief: ?

No. That is the 2nd time someone thought I was Chinese, though.

Am i going to be censored ? :spank:

The helicopters are comming for you...

@Fox Mccloud
With that post if I didn't know you beforehand I'd also mistake you for being Chinese. :D
Btw, China was unlucky enough... I know of no other country in history with more peasant uprisings, civil wars, coups d'etat and internal division (which is still the case nowadays)...
The funny thing is, if you ask the Chinese, they don't see all that as being particularly unlucky, but think of it as just the normal state of things after people screw up.

Overall I think we consider our luck to outbalance our bad luck. We're still surviving after all this time aren't we? ;)

Personally I feel that an insane amount of luck helped prevent China's complete partition by the major powers ala Africa in the time period between the late 1800s up to the early 1900s. There was absolutely nothing she could do about it if ever the colonial powers decided to do so. Witness how during the Boxer Rebellion (we prefer to call it the Invasion of the Eight Powers ;) ) foreign troops were able to waltz into Beijing and burn down the Summer Palace. World War I happening the time it did probably saved China too, as the major powers were weakened enough afterwards to be unable to take advantage of China's chaos. (Except for Japan, but she can't possibly gobble up China by herself.)

i dont know Dann, Japan did a pretty good job of gobbling up a good part of China, along with the rest of the Eastern Hemisphere

Poland, Sweden (not haveing the population to fight wars), vietnam

i dont know Dann, Japan did a pretty good job of gobbling up a good part of China, along with the rest of the Eastern Hemisphere
You know what I meant by gobbling up: complete defeat then gradual assimilation of the natives. :p Japan failed to do that to China.

And she attacked Southeast Asia primarily for the resources. Resources badly needed because of the bogged-down war in China.

@Fox Mccloud
With that post if I didn't know you beforehand I'd also mistake you for being Chinese. :D

Remember what I said last time you thought I was Chinese: 我是美国人。

The funny thing is, if you ask the Chinese, they don't see all that as being particularly unlucky, but think of it as just the normal state of things after people screw up.

Really? They don't see two civil wars worse then WWI* as unlucky? What do they teach in schools over there.

*The Taiping rebelion was definately worse then WWI, and the Chinese only put their civil war on hold during the Japanese invasion

Overall I think we consider our luck to outbalance our bad luck. We're still surviving after all this time aren't we? ;)

China has hundreds of millions of people. During the war of Resistance against Japan, the Japanese commited many atrocities and massacres, and despite the large casualties of the Chinese, and even though most of China's good industrial centers and ports were taken in the early part of the war, China could still field an army far larger then the Japanese could. Remember, this was all from a backwards country locked in civil war that had most of it's good industrial areas and ports taken away.

Personally I feel that an insane amount of luck helped prevent China's complete partition by the major powers ala Africa in the time period between the late 1800s up to the early 1900s. There was absolutely nothing she could do about it if ever the colonial powers decided to do so. Witness how during the Boxer Rebellion (we prefer to call it the Invasion of the Eight Powers ;) ) foreign troops were able to waltz into Beijing and burn down the Summer Palace. World War I happening the time it did probably saved China too, as the major powers were weakened enough afterwards to be unable to take advantage of China's chaos. (Except for Japan, but she can't possibly gobble up China by herself.)

If the Europeans could divide and conquer China, which they could, they couldn't hold on for too long. The Chinese people would have become nationalistic, and theirs no way the Europeans could hold onto a huge territory thousands of miles away with 500 million people who see all of them as one people in one nation becoming increasingly patriotic and resentful of the Europeans.

If China was conquered by the Europeans it would have been the last to have been conquered, and the first to declare independence.

However, after independence, there may have been many Chinese factions split by the European borders, and they would fight in a huge civil war for control of the whole contry.

Remember what I said last time you thought I was Chinese: 我是美国人。
I know.
Really? They don't see two civil wars worse then WWI* as unlucky? What do they teach in schools over there.
We see it as the product of our people's stupidity, shortsightedness, greed, arrogance and powermongering combined. Luck has nothing to do with it. :p

We see it as the product of our people's stupidity, shortsightedness, greed, arrogance and powermongering combined. Luck has nothing to do with it. :p

Having your country go into a decline, and have huge civil wars right when the Europeans and Japanese become major powers is not good luck though....

Like I said, it's just desserts for our rulers not having the foresight to keep researching, innovating, staying ahead AND keeping their subjects content while they were still on top. :p

Let that be a lesson to all rulers everywhere.

Poland - between 2 big empires ... Very good pick ... though it could have been 3 empires.


Actually, it was Germany/Prussia, Sweden, Russia, Ottoman Empire, and Austria, so 5 great empires :)


Surely Armenia should be up there

What You haven't mentioned were the massacres of late XIX century and destruction of the nation that's happened in 1915. Also, they've had bad luck in Middle Ages. When they've reborned from Arab conquest, they've been conquered by Byzantines (many many byzantine generals were Armenians, though). Then came the Turks. The Cilician Armenia was established, but it'd bad luck - it decided to ally with the West, the crusaders. They've obviously failed. Then they've allied with the Mongols - and it was then that the Mongols have lost for the first time, and Mamluks were enraged.

Kurds have extremly bad luck right now: being divided between Iraq, Iran, Syria and Turkey they have unfortunatelly bad perspectives for gaining independance anytime soon.
The same applies to modern Assyrians: being conquered for ages, they were promised a state during ww1. It was not done, and heavy emmigration casued that it is right now very unlikely that they'll ever get it.

Jews, but also Palestinians

Byzantines (later Roman Empire); being stuck between Barbarians in the west and powerfull Sassanians in the east, torn apart by heresies. And when they finally managed to defeat Sassanians and gained kind of protectorate over them, came Arabs and took most of their territory, it's richest provinces, while Slavs and Longobards took definite most of their european provinces. The warlike emperor Heraclius was in a personal crisis, and died just in that moment, and internal fight for power ensued. Empire that stretched through southern Spain through northern Africa, Egypt, Greater Syria, northern Mesopotamia, Asia Minor, Armenia, entire Balkans and Italy was reduced to Asia Minor and a couple of exclaves in Europe. with its capital in constant danger.
When it finally regained its strenght and byzantine armies reached as far as Palestine, a new, Fatimid empire emerged among Muslims and its conquests were brought to a halt. Then it neglected its military land policy and in result when came the Seldjuks and the empire was once more lost half of its territory, this time Asia Minor. Then they've rebuilt their power again, but their titular province, Venice, gained for its help trade privileges that destroyed byzantine economy and as it could get no more, and just lose, it finally decided to destroy its former master. Hence 4th crusade. And when it seemed (once again!) that byzantine power is reborning under Michael VIII, small, but active turkish emirates (including ottoman) appeared on its grounds...
Later on, when the despotate of Mistra finally managed to re-conquer Greece proper and drive the Latins out of it, came the Polish-Hungarian defeat near Varna, Turks came and destroyed all that Constantine has achieved then.
Then there was the siege of Cople. Venice decided to send its fleet to late, someone's forgotten to lock one of the gates (Kerkoporta)...

I think

China from about 1800 to about 1970.

In 1800, China was doing ok, and was still a great power, but then....

The Taiping rebilion/civil war: 20 to 40 million casualties. :eek: It came close to rivaling WWII.

famine after Taiping rebelion further depopulates the country.

Punti-Hakka clan wars: 1 million

Russians take over Outer Manchucria. Japan and Western countries force the Chinese to agree to "unequal treaties". forcing China to open up to westerners. During second half of 19th century, China is exploited by imperialistic powers.

In 1900, Chinese try to stop the European imperialism. After a short war, and a siege of Beijing, foreign soldiers were allowed in Beijing in the most humiliating treaty in Chinese history.

In 1911, the Qing empire collapsed. A period of Warlordism follows. At least 2 million dei itn teh fighting.

In 1931 the Japanese annex Manchuria and establish a puppet state of Manchukuo.

In 1936 to 1945 the Japanese invade, and a long war is fought. The war devastated China leaving 15 million casualties, and 100 million refugees. The Japanese commited many atrocities while in China.

From 1945 to 1949, a Civil war erupted between the Kuomintang and the Communists. Mao Zedong of the Communists won, and the war costed some 4 million casualties.

In 1950 to 1953 Mao Zedong ordered the army to fight in Korea. Chinese took heavy casualties, as much as a million by some estimates.

During the 50's, and 60's, Mao Zedong created the "Great Leap Forward". It was designed to make the Chinese economy great again, but was poorly planed. Millions of peasants were forced from their lands into the factories creating a famine of 30 million casualties.

The "Clutral Revolution" led to the near destruction of Chinese ancient heritage and identy.

After Mao Zedong was gone in 1976, China's sufferings finally began to end. Even today though, China has a dictatorship, though it is freer then it was under Mao.

The amount of suffering of China was incredible. I'm surprised it has hardly been mentioned.

I agree with you.

Whats really insane, is that they were more advanced than the whole world, fell into that trainwreck of a slump, and now are well on their way to superpower status all over again.:eek:

i think thats a testament to the Chinese, that they can dig themselves out a hole like that

I have to say that I'm surprised nobody has mentioned Ireland yet. Their culture destroyed, their native language all but forgotten, millions of people dead or forced to flee due to the many attempts to regain their freedom (not to mention the famine, and religious persecution). With more people of Irish descent living outside of the country than inside, they've had the worst luck of any Western European people. Even now they don't have full countrol of their island, over 900 years after they were invaded.

Bad luck to be situated so close to expansionist England.

"The luck of the Irish"? What irony! I wouldn't wish that kind of luck on anyone!

Even now they don't have full countrol of their island, over 900 years after they were invaded.

Yes, but most inhabitants of Northern Ireland want to remain part of the UK. That's why it's a problem.

...most inhabitants of Northern Ireland want to remain part of the UK. That's ... a problem.
What kind of problem willing to stay with the English can be? Hmmm... A mental one :mischief: ? ;)

Yes, but most inhabitants of Northern Ireland want to remain part of the UK. That's why it's a problem.
in engands attempted colonizations of ireland, they tried to enforce
protestantism as our religion. scottish settlers were brought in to northern ireland and the colony was more successful there. hence protestants were in the majority there, as most setlers were protsetant. anyway, when we by some miracle won independance the english said we were only getting the 26 out of 32 counties, end of story. a civil war ensued over whether to go with the
treaty or fight for the north. votes are being cast, i think every couple of years in ulster as to whether they want to rejoin. anyway, there is a huge deal of hatred between catholics and protestants in the north. catholics werent allowed to vote until the seventies.
large concrete walls separate cramped catholic housing areas and more
ordinary protestant ones. because of the separation, being catholic means
voting to rejoin and protestant to remain in hands of britain.
catholics want freedom of religion, protestants dont want to live in a
catholic majority country. this is of course a generalization.

It's pretty unlucky to be behind in tech and caught between two modern powers.

The Iroquois Confederation (AKA The League of Six Nations, centered in what is now New York State) seemed to be on the right track. They supported the victorious British against the French and her Huron and Algonquian allies, both long time enemies of the Iroquois, during the French and Indian War (Seven Year's War). However, the Iroquois union would soon be shattered in the very next war to be fought in Colonial America.

The Iroquois Confederation was caught between the British and the new United States during the American Revolution (War of Independence). The Tuscarora and the Oneida supported the Colonials while the Seneca, Onandaga, Cayuga, and Mohawks supported the British. After the war, all six of the nations were relocated into relatively large reservations that were very quickly reduced to very small tracts of land as more and more settlers moved into the unbelievably fertile lands of the frontier. Many Natives were relocated west time and time again as the US moved the border west over the following hundred years.

These six nations are now part of five hundred recognized Indian nations that still exist in the US. Affairs of state are reserved by the Federal Government, of course. Indian reservations have some measure of self government, and the individual tribes are still called nations in some documents and have some special status but they are all local in scope, much like a county or state government.

It depends on what situation the country is in, because all nations have great luck at times, and horrible luck.

I am rather indecisive at the moment, though if I needed to make a decision I would say Israel. I believe that this is one of the only nations that is hated more than the United States (in the Muslim world).

It depends on what situation the country is in, because all nations have great luck at times, and horrible luck.

I am rather indecisive at the moment, though if I needed to make a decision I would say Israel. I believe that this is one of the only nations that is hated more than the United States (in the Muslim world).

and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad wants to wipe them off the face of the earth,
and is building a nuke [orso ive heard, havent been watching news lately]

My unluckiest nation ever would have to be Paraguay. In the War of Paraguay, they got the worst luck, they were boxed in by hostile nations with 30 times their population. They acutally won for a while, but when Argentina entered the war, they had to stop. For four years they fought, and in the end, Paraguay lost something like 3/4 of its working men. This ruined its economy, that and the fact that, after they lost occupied Uraguay( the reason for the war in the first place) they lost the route to the sea, and were landlocked. Before the war, they had the highest GDP in the Americas, after the war, well, look at them now. And this was 150 years ago!
The War of Paraguay was also the bloodiest war in the Americas, even moreso than the American Civil War, which is a close second.Sorry, but Paraguay never had a way to sea. And it is Uruguay. Also, Uruguay entered the war once their own civil war was settled.
You didn´t mention that Paraguay was the only country without an external debt, and that´s why the USA an the UK banked us during the war against them. they got a triple benefit:
They benefited from mass armaments sales.
They further indebted us by banking those sales.
They forced Paraguay to accept their loans and so indebted it, also, the Paraguayans had to lay down their trade barriers and become a free-trade country, further impoverishing them.

It depends on what situation the country is in, because all nations have great luck at times, and horrible luck.
I have to disagree here. Maybe they all had better or worse times, but not too many had great luck or horrible luck... What great luck did the pre-Columbian countries from North and South America had? And, what great luck did Romania had? What horrible luck did England have, for example? Or Canada? Or even Japan?

I What horrible luck did England have, for example?
It is full of English!!
And even worse....
It is next to the French!!!

I What horrible luck did England have, for example?They´re just opposiute the French... couldn´t have pikced worse neighbours! :p Steph.

The English have to put up with the Scots and Welsh blaming them for everything that goes wrong there on top of having the French for neighbours and the curse of never being able to perform well at games we invent.

And also, they have the curse of having
no permanent friends, only permanent interests.

Israel - Territory that has been fought over since biblical times.

The English have to put up with the Scots and Welsh blaming them for everything that goes wrong there on top of having the French for neighbours and the curse of never being able to perform well at games we invent.

1. Yeah!! what have the angelic unfortunate english ever done to those barbarous celts!
2.whats wrong with the french?
sure, they go on strike at the drop of a hat,and invaded on one occasion,
but who cares?
3. meh... invent an obscure game, and dont tell foreignors.

Israel - Territory that has been fought over since biblical times.

During which 1900 years Jews were an insignificant minority then.
Israel is just a bit more than half of century old.

Israel's had it pretty bad I'd say (Israel as in the nation of Israel, including but not limited to the modern State of Israel).

Brazil - in theory we were supposed to be a world power, in reality we're a world joke!

Think about it: in Brazil there are no earthquakes, no volcanos, no hurricanes, etc. We have a vast territory full of every resource one can imagine - gold, diamonds, alluminium, oil, uranium, we have it all. We also have a very large population which in theory should mean a huge a economy. We never suffered genocide and we fought very few wars - and the few we fought, we won. That means that no brazilian city was razed by a foreign power, no territory was occupied, etc.

In theory we should be the most succesful country in the world. In reality we are a big collection of failures and deceptions.

Of all the good things we have, in one we were very unlucky. Brazil is full of brazilians.

In theory we should be the most succesful country in the world. In reality we are a big collection of failures and deceptions.

And you could not even beat the French in 3 world cups... :D

@luiz
Give it more time. http://209.85.12.231/2135/53/emo/pat.gif You're still a young nation.

Wait a thousand years or so until mankind has ruined all other areas of the planet save Antarctica. Then you can hold the rest of the world by the balls with your vast freshwater reserves. :D

And you could not even beat the French in 3 world cups... :D
Argh!
That's the worst of all! We were defeated by the awful footballing grandpas!

France because of all the military jokes;)

France because of all the military jokes;)
And you can add a new one after the World cup: we could not even beat Italy :cry:

Well at least most of the Italian side didn't join the French team at half time ;)

There is absolutely no contest, it's Russia.

First they were oppressed by the Mongolian people, bearing the full brunt of the Mongolian assault. Once the Mongolians were done with Russia they didn't have enough spirit to get into Europe.

Then the czarist monarchy that oppressed the SERFS (aka slaves), all the way to the imperalistic era, the people were very much oppressed and beaten down, treated as useless cannon fodder and an endless supply of flesh...

Got brutally beaten in WW1, losing millions of soldiers, which in turn led to the Soviet Revolution...

Which oppressed its people even further.

Millions die due to starving and civil war.

The next thing to happen is WW2, Russia losing 20 million men to the Germans.

Assaults into Afghanistan, the Cold War, the iron curtain, and the communist rule for the next 80 years.

Only to emerge into the 21s century as a pseudo-democracy with an autocratic president, while most of the country is living in near poverty, most of it's wealth is sold off to private oligarchs who've had a death grip on the economy ever since.

Oh, and can't forget about Chechnya.


I don't think there will ever be a country that is unlucky as Russia. None of the countries mentioned earlier even come close.

Well at least most of the Italian side didn't join the French team at half time ;)
Did you notice we wear wearing white shirts? In case we need to wave them to surrender?

There is absolutely no contest, it's Russia.

First they were oppressed by the Mongolian people, bearing the full brunt of the Mongolian assault. Once the Mongolians were done with Russia they didn't have enough spirit to get into Europe.

Then the czarist monarchy that oppressed the SERFS (aka slaves), all the way to the imperalistic era, the people were very much oppressed and beaten down, treated as useless cannon fodder and an endless supply of flesh...

Got brutally beaten in WW1, losing millions of soldiers, which in turn led to the Soviet Revolution...

Which oppressed its people even further.

Millions die due to starving and civil war.

The next thing to happen is WW2, Russia losing 20 million men to the Germans.

Assaults into Afghanistan, the Cold War, the iron curtain, and the communist rule for the next 80 years.

Only to emerge into the 21s century as a pseudo-democracy with an autocratic president, while most of the country is living in near poverty, most of it's wealth is sold off to private oligarchs who've had a death grip on the economy ever since.

Oh, and can't forget about Chechnya.


I don't think there will ever be a country that is unlucky as Russia. None of the countries mentioned earlier even come close.
You forget the offensive way of thinking of the Russians. That's what you get if you attack everyone around you. Of course, the Mongol invasion was not a consequence of any of the brutal actions of the Russians, but all Europe and China suffered from the Mongols, so this is not something unique to make it more unlucky than other countries.
There are many countries which got beaten brutally in WW1, and communist regimes where everywhere near Russia at the time. And they were the ones to spread it forcefully everywhere, because except Africa, South America and other countries where the communists got voted by the people, the European people never wanted communists to rule them.
And you can't really say they are unlucky if Stalin killed 20 million people (which is true), because remember that Pol Pot (or how it is spelled in English) killed more!
So most of the unlucky moments you mentioned are a consequence of their attitude and thirst for conquer and power.

Usually when i think of an unlucky nation i imagine a small country that doesn't invade neighbouring countries on a regular basis, was NEVER a huge empire and that was NEVER a superpower. So Russia fails to be any of these things.
First they were oppressed by the Mongolian people, bearing the full brunt of the Mongolian assault. Once the Mongolians were done with Russia they didn't have enough spirit to get into Europe.
Mirc comented on this one.

Then the czarist monarchy that oppressed the SERFS (aka slaves), all the way to the imperalistic era, the people were very much oppressed and beaten down, treated as useless cannon fodder and an endless supply of flesh...
Name one european monarchy that did not opress the middle&lower classes.

The next thing to happen is WW2, Russia losing 20 million men to the Germans.
WW2 is a war where Russia was among the luckiest countries. Leningrad, Moscow, Kursk, Stalingrad - do these ring any bells ?

Assaults into Afghanistan, the Cold War, the iron curtain, and the communist rule for the next 80 years.
Petty border/influence fights.

Only to emerge into the 21s century as a pseudo-democracy with an autocratic president, while most of the country is living in near poverty, most of it's wealth is sold off to private oligarchs who've had a death grip on the economy ever since.
It's the same in most east european countries.

I don't think there will ever be a country that is unlucky as Russia. None of the countries mentioned earlier even come close.
Russia was so unlucky that it became a world superpower.
Russia was so unlucky that Napoleon couldn't conquer it because of the bad weather.
Russia was so unlucky that the nazis couldn't conquer Moscow because of the bad weather again.
Russia was so unlucky that it was prosperous enough to invade Romania about 12 times in it's history. (and i shouldn't start enumerating all the other countries it invaded)

I could go on and on.

First they were oppressed by the Mongolian people, bearing the full brunt of the Mongolian assault. Once the Mongolians were done with Russia they didn't have enough spirit to get into Europe.

The Mongols got well into Europe, Poland and Hungary too suffered Mongol invasion. Russia wasn't a great bulwark or anything, the Russian princies all paid tribute to the Mongol Khans. Ivan "Moneybags" ring a bell? The Kievan Rus were crushed allowing Moscow to rise as the new power in Russia, and eventually build a massive Empire.

If I had to pick the MOST UNLUCKIEST Nation ever I'd look beyond conquest, political history as many cases can be made for many countries that have had their run of bad luck even my own country of the US. But as for on-going day to day unluck I'd have to pick ... drum roll please ...

East Timor

They have....
1. The lowest per capita income in the world, less than $500 per year. (My electric bill was $300)
2. One of the highest infant mortality rate wold wide.
3. Unemployment rate over 50% nation wide.
4. In late 1999, about 70% of the economic infrastructure of East Timor was laid waste by Indonesian troops and anti-independence militias, and 300,000 people fled westward. 100% of the electrical was destroyed.
5. Has a GDP (Gross Domestic Product) growth rate of less than 1%.
6. Over 43% of the people live below the proverty line (for East Timor which I think is about $3.[j/k])
7. Less than $10 million exports and over $202 million imports.
8. Literacy rate less than 59%.
9. Floods and landslides are common; earthquakes, tsunamis, tropical cyclones are common as well.
10. Less than 1000 internet users.

(Thanks to the CIA World Factbook for this info, your tax dollars at work for us 'Mairicans')

This is day in day out bad luck and a over all sucky life style. Sure many countries have had periods in history of great dire. But it most cases it has pasted and they have had periods progress and peace. East Timor it just squeaking by trying to remain afloat. Just my opinion.

East Timor is a good choice. However, if we are discussing who is the absolutely most-unlucky, most marginalized group of people, who have been consistently pushed to the side since the beginning of human history, I think an excellent candidate would be the Khoisan people of southern Africa.

The Khoisan have always been badly off. Significant genetic and archaelogical evidence indicates that the Khoisan were perhaps the first group to break off from the main human family line and they have the genetic genetic variation of any human group. However, despite this, the Khoisan people have never held any significant power, had their own state, or even become 'civilized'. Even today, most Khoisan are hunter-gatherers or nomadic herders. Despite their head start, the Khoisan have had no advantages since then, and have become one of the most marginalized people in an already highly marginalized continent

I think I would have to say afghanistan, at least in terms of consistent misery and bad luck....
Agreeing. Between two invasions, a terrible opressive government, and a terrible economy I'd have to agree.
And it doesn't seem to be getting any better, does it? :rolleyes:

Agreeing. Between two invasions, a terrible opressive government, and a terrible economy I'd have to agree.
And it doesn't seem to be getting any better, does it? :rolleyes:

But that's only in the past half-century. You forget that just because life is bad in Afghanistan now doesn't mean that it always was. In the Middle Ages, a number of powerful empires were centered in Afghanistan. The powerful Mughal Empire was founded in Afghanistan, and later went on to conquer northern India.

But that's only in the past half-century. You forget that just because life is bad in Afghanistan now doesn't mean that it always was. In the Middle Ages, a number of powerful empires were centered in Afghanistan. The powerful Mughal Empire was founded in Afghanistan, and later went on to conquer northern India.

The Mughals were from Central Asia, more from Turkmenistan than Afghanistan.
However the Durrani Afghan Empire was indeed based in Afghanistan and was mighty, invading Persia and India. After Durrani's death it fell apart however...I believe that was the only Afghan Empire worthy of note.

.

The Mughals were from Central Asia, more from Turkmenistan than Afghanistan.
However the Durrani Afghan Empire was indeed based in Afghanistan and was mighty, invading Persia and India. After Durrani's death it fell apart however...I believe that was the only Afghan Empire worthy of note.

The Mughals (the Persian word for Mongols) were indeed from Central Asia. However, the first Mughal Emperor Zahiruddin Babur, was driven out of Turkestan by the Uzbeks in 1501, and later consolidated his power by capturing Kabul, the capital of modern Afghanistan, and making it the capital of his empire. While the Mughals were not Afghans, they ruled from Afghanistan, and the Afghans themselves were powerful within the empire.

While the Mughals were not Afghans, they ruled from Afghanistan, and the Afghans themselves were powerful within the empire.

For a short time however once Delhi was taken it became capital, and Afghan importance to the Empire was miniscule and Mughal rule established itself in the subcontinent and became the powerbase.
Though addmitadly there were Afghans, Persians, etc... in the Mughal ruling classes.

On another note the Afghan Sher Khan drove the Mughal Humayan from India, however Sher Khans powerbase was in Bengal and he he first established himself in Bihar.