klaidonis
Chieftain
According to what think about their own history Mongols I happened to meet, you've read a wrong wiki article: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Golden_Horde
Let's Talk About the Civs that WON'T Make It In Despite Popularity
- Thread starter EMT
- Start date
Oh, it was a side-point 
I know exactly why England will make it in over the UK - England has existed since at least the time of Aethelstan (early 10th Century AD) and it's persistently mistaken for being the entirety of the UK 
I know exactly why England will make it in over the UK - England has existed since at least the time of Aethelstan (early 10th Century AD) and it's persistently mistaken for being the entirety of the UK klaidonis
Chieftain
Now that is really ridiculous.
Poland, Lithuania, their rise and fall to Russia, Poland uprisings of XIX century defined the past of Eastern Europe as we know it now. And Eastern Europe in the horrible form of the Warsaw Treaty defined the history of USA for about 50 years which mostly consisted of a nuclear stalemate between NATO/USA and the Warsaw Treaty/USSR.
Roots of the political history of half if not the whole XX century are in the history of Rzeczpospolita.
phungus420
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,296
And all that is under the subcontext of Russian domination of the region. Vietnam went through a rebellion against the French, beat them, got invaded by the US, beat them (with Russian material support), got invaded by China, and beat them with no help whatsoever; and in the meantime had the balls to overthrow the murderous Khmer Rouge and stabilize Cambodia without antagonizing the populace. And they did all of this within the last 50 years. That's incredible, it rocks the socks off of the military accomplishments of pretty much every nation on Earth, let alone the likes of Canada and Poland.
I think Phungus just won the thread and that Vietnam discussion should be moved to the 'Civs that you know will be a crime if they're left out' thread. Phungus definetly convinced me.
I'd still rather see the Khmer with better leaders than Vietnam personally though.I have lived in Viet Nam for a number of years and always thought it should be in. Maybe im a little biased because i really love that country, but i also know quite a lot about their history.
Phungus already talked a lot about their recent history, but they have been a distinct civilization (or whatever you want to call them) for thousands of years. Much, much more time than any of the european superpowers.
They have kicked and hold the chinese a lot of times, and they were the only asian country to resist the mongolian invasion.
To say that Poland, Hungary or Canada should be in before them is eurocentric ignorance of the worst kind. Sorry to say and i mean no offense, but it is what it is.
Phungus already talked a lot about their recent history, but they have been a distinct civilization (or whatever you want to call them) for thousands of years. Much, much more time than any of the european superpowers.
They have kicked and hold the chinese a lot of times, and they were the only asian country to resist the mongolian invasion.
To say that Poland, Hungary or Canada should be in before them is eurocentric ignorance of the worst kind. Sorry to say and i mean no offense, but it is what it is.
EdCase
Defender of the Faithless
That's simple, England via the British Empire changed the map of the world and shaped much of what is now regarded as modern post-industrial western culture.Left a rather sizable footprint elsewhere also.....
Canada wins medals for hockey.....................
klaidonis
Chieftain
The Russian domination itself was to some extent the result of series of wars with "the Crown" and of the struggle with Polish resistance afterwards.
Then let's include Afghanistan as a civilization. The Afghans repelled the British invasion, then the Soviet invasion and it is possible that they would repel the NATO invasion as well. Do they "rock the socks", too?
Yes, they do. Although they never did anything by themselves. You´re going to have a hard time justifying them as a civilization though.
klaidonis
Chieftain
Yeah, and after breaking off China Vietnamese history consists of almost permanent civil wars or other invasions. It's like if the history of England would have consisted of the Wars of the Roses only. A great civilization for sure.
I'd rather remain an ignorant eurocentric bigot, if you please.
phungus420
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,296
I already adressed that here:
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8944177&postcount=193
To recap, Afghanistan isn't a nation or peoples in the conventional sense, at least not in the way one can view or examine the nation of Vietnam, or Poland. Granted at present it is a "country", but every inhabited region on earth is, this is a system which has been forced on world by the 1st world nations, even if what constitutes the country is nothing more then lines on a map. Historically Afghanistan is nothing more then a barren mountainous region, inhabited by various ethnic groups who are often openly hostile to each other (and Afghans still cling to this archaic and self degrading societal structure even to this day). While Russia was invariably driven out of the region, that has more to do with the political maneuvering of the US then Russia. No unified Afghani peoples drove out Russia, instead the US and Russia basically played out a proxy war game using Afghani factions as pawns in the process. With the UK, they gave up, because there wasn't much reason to keep fighting and be involved with the ethnic and tribal conflicts in the region. Only really Alexander bothered with it, and even he ended up just marching through. Afghanistan is more of a place in the globe that tears itself apart and can't get lift itself out of neolithic era concepts, they just now endure these prehistoric struggles using modern weapons. To compare that basket case PoS region with the resolve, efforts and accomplishments of Vietnam and it's peoples isn't even remotely fair.
http://forums.civfanatics.com/showpost.php?p=8944177&postcount=193
To recap, Afghanistan isn't a nation or peoples in the conventional sense, at least not in the way one can view or examine the nation of Vietnam, or Poland. Granted at present it is a "country", but every inhabited region on earth is, this is a system which has been forced on world by the 1st world nations, even if what constitutes the country is nothing more then lines on a map. Historically Afghanistan is nothing more then a barren mountainous region, inhabited by various ethnic groups who are often openly hostile to each other (and Afghans still cling to this archaic and self degrading societal structure even to this day). While Russia was invariably driven out of the region, that has more to do with the political maneuvering of the US then Russia. No unified Afghani peoples drove out Russia, instead the US and Russia basically played out a proxy war game using Afghani factions as pawns in the process. With the UK, they gave up, because there wasn't much reason to keep fighting and be involved with the ethnic and tribal conflicts in the region. Only really Alexander bothered with it, and even he ended up just marching through. Afghanistan is more of a place in the globe that tears itself apart and can't get lift itself out of neolithic era concepts, they just now endure these prehistoric struggles using modern weapons. To compare that basket case PoS region with the resolve, efforts and accomplishments of Vietnam and it's peoples isn't even remotely fair.
Klaidonis: I'd rather if you'd stop being so inconsiderate of other cultures, if you please.
He's completely right that adding more European civs would be too Eurocentric, but for other reasons. Poland or Hungary would be an even bigger cramp on an Earth map!
He's completely right that adding more European civs would be too Eurocentric, but for other reasons. Poland or Hungary would be an even bigger cramp on an Earth map!
Another extremely ignorant remark, sorry. Not too surprising if your "facts" lead you to the belief that Canada should be in.
Whatever you want. Request granted.
This is all really simple. Its all about crying because your country is not making it in.
klaidonis
Chieftain
Actually adding just Hungary would not be quite right. The empire was Austro-Hungarian and it was another striking example of forming a united monarchy, as it was with the Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth. The EU has deep historical roots.
phungus420, could you please enlighten me with an accomplishment of the Vietnamese which is not borrowed from China and is not connected to a war?
phungus420, could you please enlighten me with an accomplishment of the Vietnamese which is not borrowed from China and is not connected to a war?
Hungary was a power in it's own right until constant war with the Ottomans stagnated them. I even wrote a nice big post about it somewhere, not sure where it is. I'll dig it up later.
phungus420
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,296
Why? No one asks what accomplishments the Mongols made that weren't borrowed from China and weren't related to war. In fact the Mongols probably had a net negative impact on the development and progress of human society. Doesn't change the fact they were a noteworthy and "Great" nation, even if that greatness was earned through bloodshed.
klaidonis
Chieftain
And what an imprint did the Vietnamese leave on the world history besides beating USA once with the help of democratic congressmen?
phungus420
Deity
- Joined
- Mar 1, 2003
- Messages
- 6,296
This statement is foolish, and is totally divorced from reality. All we can conclude from it is that you're a conservative who feels the need to rewrite history when it doesn't fit your agenda. But it advances the conversation none, and in fact only adds merit to my argument while detracting from your own.
Edit: What role did these congressman play in the repulsion of China's invasion, or in the overthrow of the Khamer Rouge and the stabilization of Cambodia? What exact factual harm did these supposed Congressmen cause to the war effort; an effort which lasted nearly two decades, and resulted in dropping more ordinance in a single year then all of WWII, left 50,000 Americans dead, had over half a million troops deployed there during it's peak, created a compulsory draft of the male population of the US... what exactly did these congressmen do? The only step the US could have taken to escalate the war beyond the levels it was at it's peak would have been to use nukes which would have started WWIII, it's also pretty hard to justify that you're trying to help a peoples if you're nuking them. No that whole argument and rational is idiotic, and bears no relation to historical fact.
Similar threads
