Polynesia? Seriously!?

[Menzies]

Let's underline the essentials then...



4. Rome invaded
9. Religion
15. See 4
20. Natives of North-American = Iroquois when taken into context
21. Modern Norses
23. Mediterranean as much as Carthage or Greece
26. See 4
28. Don't see how the Baltics have anything to do with the Eastern blocks or Solidarnosch
29. Euh? Care to define.
31. Great Britain or Saxons, you can deduct as much regional politics as you'd matched UK with HongKong for centuries of occupation.
32. Refer to 4, 15 & 26 and better yet match them straight with 31.
36. Mongolia or China? Dalai Lama, perhaps? See 9.
40. See 31
42. Aztec, Inca, Maya... sounds familiar? Sub-culture
43. Mediterranean enough to be under Greece influence or control at the time
44. Al-Rashid's peninsula
45. Twice and over... the Vikings or the Norse.

YOU over-reacted on superfluous situations & specific historical hurdles while i took the current Modern state of the World to integrate what Canada now means to those aware of two simple facts; 1867 & 1982. Not the 50's.

G8 just to stress on another fact.

While i haven't commented on the rest of a weird list - it certainly doesn't acknowledge the validity of any of the other choices you've made.

We're (or *I*) not selfish in the least.

DART will go to Japan coastal areas if the UN wants us to intervene or if someone (member of the G8 too) requires the medical and the clean water supply efforts. Blame the Rwanda genocide for us being careful when sending troops in foreign lands.
While we're extremely busy (along with other countries, including yours) in Afghanistan to tackle the Talibans or some other extremists.
We also have a few strategic Frigates in a couple of critical spots as of now.

Please do try to rationalize some or all of these facts, Menzies.
And, if this might help... have a necessary glimpse in a not so far remote past worth of popular opinions. The link to the Inventions is also somehow revealing.

With Civs status & interpreted reasons or not.

Let's do this again then:

4, 15, 26: Rome got invaded to hell in their later days, doesn't mean that they are all of a suddenly unimportant.
9: Whilst the Holy Roman Empire was built around a religion it of itself was of massive influence to medieval Europe and of far more influence than Canada could ever be to History.
20. Canadians, Americans... What's the difference?
21. Canadians? The displaced child of England and France. Simply an extension by your own logic.
23. ...but entirely different. Again, what's the point of having Canada by your logic as we have represented North America with the Yankies, and your culture is an evolved form of English and French with a little bit of Yanky thrown in for flavour.
28. Here you show your true ignorance for pre-Canadian History quite well, well that and the Rome Conquered comments, but I'll let than one slide. If you don't know about Poland-Lithuanian I suggest you stop arguing for the inclusion of Canada, who have no historical significance and no stand along status as an "Empire" or "Civilization".
29. One of the lesser names there, but they have a very significant point in history to their name. The Vandals were a Germanic tribe that were the ones to sack Rome, hence leading to the word "Vandalism". I guess we should chuck Rome out on the street though because by your logic these guys conquered Rome and were hence far more important to history.
31. Uh... What? The Scots did not come from the Saxons and Great Britain was the Union of England (in the game) with Scotland. Scotland has an important history for Europe and are far more important than say... I don't know, Canada?! At least they had an impact on history that can be found without finding random inventions or quoting a couple of Nobel Prize winners (which it would be fair to point out is no measure of a "Civilization", but rather one or two individuals since its inception). Really, if you want to ask for Canada, you can't question Scotland.
32. Again with this arguement. The Celts would be a simple way of grouping a lot of groups which are historically important within Europe into a single group rather than having another 30 odd groups. You could have argued Gaul here, but hey... I'd also point out that Rome never "conquered" the Celts as such as they still had settlements throughout Britain that they never even dreamed of touching, but hey. When you're blinded by bias toward your own nation you get like this and ignorant of the rest of the world.
36. Oh wow! You're kidding right? That is one of the most offensive things I've ever heard. Really, that's worse than just saying that Canada is just America's hat! About a million times worse. Read it up mate!
40. Wales is a bit of a stretch, but still worth something. I'd probably just chuck them in with the Celts in truth.
42. Canada, America, England, Australia, New Zealand... Subcultures? Really, these were seperate entities, and just because they aren't in our Western historical records as great powers means nothing. They were as significant in the region as many of the "Civilizations" in the game currently and in previous versions. The differences between them were far greater than that simply between Canada, America, Australia etc.
43. Alexander the Great was actually Macedonian and you would probably be given death threads for saying that kind of biased misinformed rubbish in Macedonia. Really, you're worse than an American Stereotype with this sort of thing!
44. Uh... what? I'm just going to guess that you have no idea where Brunei is then. Because I can tell you know that you're more than the length of Canada off.
45. Well we have neither Vikings or Norse, and I was actually using the Danes as a placeholder when I made a list of numbers. Also, the kingdom of Denmark is far more than that and you are only continuing to develope an argument that by mere logic excludes Canada from being a "Civilization" in your own sense.

I'd also Stress to point out that another member of the G8 is also not represented and in fact if you look at the 20 largest modern Economic Powers (also known as the G20) some 11 of them are not represented... The reason being that a differentiation is made between a Civilization and a modern state and whilst Canada is a modern state (and only in the G8 because of the politics of NATO) it is certainly not a "Civilization" or "Empire" as the Civs in the game should be. This is clearly for the reasons you yourself have previous mentioned as Canada:
1. Does not have its own independant history and Culture, as it is effectively an offshoot of England and France and in more recent times as an extension of America. Whilst this seems like an unfair statement if you read your own comments you'll see why I'm wording it as this.
2. North America is already well covered in terms of Civs with 3, especially considering the population of the region, the historical significance (which centres almost purely around the US) and other factors.
3. All of the states that may be considered to be connected to Canada are in the game hence it would not be a move that would diversify the game.
...and the others mentioned. Whilst you cite famous Canadians and Canadian inventions this must be put in context, if I were to poll a group of people for who was more significant culturally and historically most people would pick figures from the Civilization on the list well before any Canadian anyhow.

The worst part of it all is that you claim people's ignorance against Canada whilst ignoring the rest of the World. You even mentioned the dates of when Canada "became a nation" so to speak, but I was more concerned about when Canada was coming of age, which is something I thought that you yourself you have found more significant. The image of the modern Canada came about in the decades following WWII, though you as a Canadian should now all about that.

Now, I have a fun game. Let's play the who would be better, Australia or Canada game:

GDP per Capita: Canada ~$45,700 / Australia - $54,500
GDP Gross: Canada - $1.556 Trillion / Australia - $1.219 billion
HDI: Canada - 0.888 / Australia - 0.937
Population: Canada - 34,400,000 / Australia - 22,600,000

Not a whole lot to choose between there. Then chuck into that that Australia is a major player within their region whilst many people see Canada as America's Hat. Australia is ranked as one of the best countries to live in, rated second in terms of HDI. Australia is also well known for its strong economy as well as its unique landscapes. Not to mention Australia's importance in the modern World in terms of sport, Australia being the best Nation in the World at two of the 5 biggest sports in the World and were one of the best some 10 years ago at another of the 5, not to mention being a significant force in the World's largest sport in their own region. Being a major player in the Olympics and being known for their capability for hosting World Events. And you know what, I think neither you be in it, because they're not Civilizations, they are just not! They are both young nations that came out of Colonies of other nations. Maybe in another 100-200 years, maybe if they add another 20-30 Civs on, but right now it would just be silly to add either!

If you want to get back to inventions by the way Australia has things like prepaid postage, the refrigirator (not too many people have one of them eh?), Torpedos, Electric Drills, Sunscreen... There's an interesting story about Powered flight, Tanks, Utes, Pacemakers, Solar hot water, Blackbox flight recorders, plastic lenses, Digital Samplers (the basis of Hip Hop), Imax, Scram Jets... The list is huge! Also, I rate Australia's inventions better, but that might just be my Aussie bias coming through, though it doesn't reak as much as the Canadian bias here at the moment. Again, does this mean that Australia should be in... NO! All it means is that Australia did some important things in their short history so far. They are so many more Civs worth being in first.

The main ones are:
Carthage
Korea
Byzantium
Zulu
Sumeria
Mali
Maya
Vikings
Portugal
Netherlands
Khmer
Hapsburg
Poland-Lithuania
Celts or something like the Gauls
Tibet
Indus
Israel

This is again in no specific order. If I had to pick two new ones I'd go for Carthage and Korea. Again, these are all more important than Canada, and in fact pretty much all on the list of 44 are.

Also, I'd again point out that I liked the diversity that Polynesia gives the game, good work guys, keep up the awesome DLC!

Moderator Action: Trolling is not allowed here.

 

[aatami]

I've never seen so much pompous-arsed twitheadedness in all my life. Americans bashing Canadians, Canadians acting rightfully offended, the whole thread started with an undeniably racist/nationalist/manifest destiny undertone to begin with.

People, we're all people. When it comes down to it, we're all human beings, we all have buildings in our countries, and we all occupy four dimensional space. We're all proud of our national distinctiveness to a certain degree, but that gives nobody the right to say 'Your nation isn't as distinct or valuable to you as mine is to me, and your history means less to all of us than mine does to me'. It's a dispicable impulse that in this thread is being given free reign.

This.
BTW, I still don't see why they added the USA in there.

 

[esemjay]

This.
BTW, I still don't see why they added the USA in there.

I can understand, even as an American, this question. It has always felt a bit silly that the United States can start a game at 4000 BCE, and immediately turn on countries such as England and Rome. However, my view of the justification behind the inclusion is rooted in several facts.

The "Stock" Civilizations were quite obviously selected from several countries, throughout time, that were influential or memorable to Western culture or history; with a few miscellaneous groups that were influential or memorable to their geocultural region. These can be broken out into several groups, by era, with some debatable overlap.

In the Ancient Era, we have nations such as Aztecs, China, Egypt, Greece, Persia, and so on. In the Classical Era, you can add Rome, Arabia, etc. Then you have the medieval and renaissance era's, with England, France, Russia, Ottomans, and so on. Finally, you have the modern era-- with countries such as Germany and the United States. Why do I list Germany? Because Germany, as the nation that exists in the game, is younger than the United States. In order to fit the be included, and not simultaneously justify the United States, Germany would have to be the Holy Roman Empire-- or, as many seem to prefer (through the exclusion of the HRE by claim that it was an extension of Rome) be considered part of France and Rome.

The US is included, from a cultural standpoint, because of the impact it has caused since it's independence- and from the Romanesque imperialism that it almost immediately adopted. The United States, much like Germany, entered the political stage with a "bang." A colony deliberately entering into an open war with a world power, and drafting a form of government that has been modified and adopted by many states since it's inception has had a huge impact on the international community. The act, itself, served as inspiration- that a colony could stand against it's motherland with hope of victory. Being one of the driving forces behind industrialism and modern innovations, rivaling that of Europe to the point where one cannot effectively discuss one without the other. Vaulting from mere colony to world power in just a few generations. In the course of a few hundred years, the USA has found a way to project that power across the globe; integrating itself into world politics and economics.

Germany, much like the United States, really entered the world stage with World War I. I mean the Germany in Civilization- not to be confused with the Holy Roman Empire. Germany went from unmentioned side-story to spotlight in a little over 100 years; and then immediately afterwards with WW2. Granted, it's not the best thing to be remembered for- but Germany immediately went to "feared and powerful." So much so, that the world had to band together and take away their weapons and economy to "keep them in check." This doesn't happen often, and it is even more rare in modern history. Germany made a mark, and isn't going to be forgotten soon.

So, Germany and the United States both meet the criterion for being included as a civilization in the "modern" era... the main issue isn't the contribution to the world stage or to western culture, society or history- it's the time they have been around. Germany existed as several collapsed and invaded states prior to the current incarnation for thousands of years- but the US was "founded" by nations that have existed as long as the HRE. The only real difference, is that the U.S. had to be setup outside of Europe, while Germany had the good fortune of setting up camp in the middle of it.

So, then the second reason- which I'm sure more readers will be inclined to agree with: Civilization V was produced in the United States, and marketing towards American's is more successful when you allow them to play as George Washington. There's really no real comparison to explain that to someone who isn't American; but U.S. history is still so new and fresh, that a lot of Americans (myself included) enjoy trying to be the grandfather of the nation that accomplished and made possible the above statements. In short: the U.S. is a money-maker when marketing to the U.S.

 

[Louis XXIV]

If Polynesia is in this game, I want Canada then! You could make the same arguments for having Canada in the game as Polynesia.

They colonized the Pacific ocean thousands of years before anyone was traveling more than from island to island in the Mediterranean, inventing new ways of navigation that weren't topped until the Enlightenment?

Probably not the same arguments.

 

[Lheim]

They colonized the Pacific ocean thousands of years before anyone was traveling more than from island to island in the Mediterranean, inventing new ways of navigation that weren't topped until the Enlightenment?

Probably not the same arguments.

Canada broke away from Britain gradually and peacefully. In fact, our main asset is our essential boringness. When our financial institutions are stable in comparison to the world's more risk-taking neighbours and our news isn't full of news of our sons and daughters dying off in foreign lands while massacring tens of thousands of noncombatants, I consider that a relatively good place to be.

Boring as a word is often paired with idyllic. We're not ambitious to the point of taking the things we want from others.

That's sure worth the bashing we're getting.

I'm not going to argue for or against Canada as a civ. But this business of americans essentially saying Canada is America's hat and we're like the feeby cousins is arrogant. And it's essentially the attitude the US has taken to Canada for ages; in fact, one of the scandals of the wiki leaks for us was how the americans viewed our security arrangements during the Vancouver olympics.

Get this: apparently we were asserting our sovereignty (thereby displaying a 'typical' insecurity) too much to american security agencies by saying we'd take care of some things on our side of the border.

 

[Venereus]

Canada broke away from Britain gradually and peacefully. In fact, our main asset is our essential boringness. When our financial institutions are stable in comparison to the world's more risk-taking neighbours and our news isn't full of news of our sons and daughters dying off in foreign lands while massacring tens of thousands of noncombatants, I consider that a relatively good place to be.

Boring as a word is often paired with idyllic. We're not ambitious to the point of taking the things we want from others.

That's sure worth the bashing we're getting.

I'm not going to argue for or against Canada as a civ. But this business of americans essentially saying Canada is America's hat and we're like the feeby cousins is arrogant. And it's essentially the attitude the US has taken to Canada for ages; in fact, one of the scandals of the wiki leaks for us was how the americans viewed our security arrangements during the Vancouver olympics.

Get this: apparently we were asserting our sovereignty (thereby displaying a 'typical' insecurity) too much to american security agencies by saying we'd take care of some things on our side of the border.

Boring is still bad in gaming terms, though.

 

[forty2j]

We're not ambitious to the point of taking the things we want from others.

This goes back to what I mentioned before. Canada - in real life - is not playing to win. They're acting very much like a Civ V CityState would.

Let's review the victory conditions in Civ and see what a Canadian AI would most likely try to achieve.

1) Science - No. Canada is a modern-era nation, but has not yet established a manned space program of their own.
2) Domination - No. Canada has been involved in some notable wars - their involvement in Vietnam largely goes unnoticed, but it was there - but they have never taken the lead role. They have never, to my knowledge, sought to colonize any territory beyond the portion of North America north of Maine & Washington and east of Alaska. Nobody has ever called them a "Superpower".
3) Culture - No. It's been well established in this thread that Canada does not have a distinctive enough culture; depending on the region, is either English or French, and in both cases with a heavy American influence.
4) Diplomacy - No. Particularly when you consider that the current "Diplomatic" victory is more an Economic one. Canada has had a reasonable economy over the years, but not exactly a powerhouse. From a true diplomatic perspective, they can often act as go-betweens for parties who do not wish to speak to each other, but their strategy is more or less "be friendly with everyone, but have few allies".
5) Score - Hmm. Could Canada's goal be to gain a little of everything, hold the line, and run out the clock? That would be a unique AI..

Additionally - whom would you consider to be the great leader?

Unfortunately, we seem to be doing a poor job of heeding the request to move away from Canada. I regret to continue that.. but I just feel it's worth noting that stating a nation doesn't meet the criteria to be a Civ in Civilization should not in any way be considered an insult.

For the Americans.. I agree that BCE start for George Washington is quite bizarre, and makes the game feel "gamey" when playing as him. America would be more realistically represented if you starting playing as English/Dutch, and then in the modern era some colonies declared independence and you were given the choice of playing the colonies or the mother nation. But that piece aside.. America has a strong case for Science, Domination, or Diplomatic victories. (Probably in that order.)

 

[Lheim]

Additionally - whom would you consider to be the great leader?

Pierre Trudeau

Look him up, he's very quotable!

Trudeau: Well there are a lot of bleeding hearts around who just don't like to see people with helmets and guns. All I can say is, go on and bleed. But it's more important to keep law and order in the society than to be worried about weak-kneed people who don't like the looks of a soldier—

CBC reporter Tim Ralfe [interrupting]: At any cost? How far would you go with that? How far would you extend that?

Trudeau: Well, just watch me.

 

[brianshapiro]

I've never seen so much pompous-arsed twitheadedness in all my life. Americans bashing Canadians, Canadians acting rightfully offended, the whole thread started with an undeniably racist/nationalist/manifest destiny undertone to begin with.

People, we're all people. When it comes down to it, we're all human beings, we all have buildings in our countries, and we all occupy four dimensional space. We're all proud of our national distinctiveness to a certain degree, but that gives nobody the right to say 'Your nation isn't as distinct or valuable to you as mine is to me, and your history means less to all of us than mine does to me'. It's a dispicable impulse that in this thread is being given free reign.

A lot of Canadians themselves think describing their country in terms of such greatness is silly also.

I have many friends from Canada. They'd laugh off the conversation on this board and think people are being oversensitive.

 

[Louis XXIV]

Canada broke away from Britain gradually and peacefully. In fact, our main asset is our essential boringness. When our financial institutions are stable in comparison to the world's more risk-taking neighbours and our news isn't full of news of our sons and daughters dying off in foreign lands while massacring tens of thousands of noncombatants, I consider that a relatively good place to be.

Boring as a word is often paired with idyllic. We're not ambitious to the point of taking the things we want from others.

That's sure worth the bashing we're getting.

I'm not going to argue for or against Canada as a civ. But this business of americans essentially saying Canada is America's hat and we're like the feeby cousins is arrogant. And it's essentially the attitude the US has taken to Canada for ages; in fact, one of the scandals of the wiki leaks for us was how the americans viewed our security arrangements during the Vancouver olympics.

Get this: apparently we were asserting our sovereignty (thereby displaying a 'typical' insecurity) too much to american security agencies by saying we'd take care of some things on our side of the border.

Since we were cautioned not to go too far down the Canada road, I think we should drop it. My only point is it's entirely different than Polynesia. I don't think Civilization is the forum to redress concerns about the relationship between Canada and the United States. I think the achievement of Polynesia stands on its own without comparison to any other nation. Any argument for Canada shouldn't need to mention the United States.

 

[awesome]

Any argument for a civilization shouldn't need to mention another.

fixed

edit: though "conquered many civilizations to form a great empire" would be a great argument, just still not the only one

 

[Polish]

Just need to throw my two cents in for Poland-Lithuania;-) (Of course!)

At it's furthest extent, Poland-Lithuania consisted of territory essentially from the Oder to the Volga and the Baltic to the Black Sea, in other words much of central and eastern Europe.

http://baltic-review.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/12/Poland_Lithuania_commonwealth_800.jpg

The Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth (or Union) was a dualist monarchy of Poland and Lithuania. It was the largest and one of the most populous countries of 16th- and 17th-century Europe with some 400,000 square miles (1,000,000 km2) and a multi-ethnic population of 11 million at its peak in the early 17th century. It was established at the Union of Lublin in July 1569, and was destroyed by the 3rd partition of Poland in 1795.[1][2][3][4]

The Union possessed features unique among contemporary states: its political system was characterized by strict checks upon monarchical power. These checks were enacted by a legislature (Sejm) controlled by the nobility (szlachta). This idiosyncratic system was a precursor to modern concepts of democracy,[5] constitutional monarchy[6][7][8] and federation.[9] The two component states of the Commonwealth were formally equal, yet Poland was the dominant partner in the union.[10]

The Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth was marked by high levels of ethnic diversity and by relative religious tolerance,[11][12] though the degree of religious tolerance varied over time.[13]

After several decades of prosperity,[14][15][16] it entered a period of protracted political,[8][17] military and economic[18] decline. Its growing weakness led to its partitioning among its more powerful neighbors, Austria, Prussia and the Russian Empire, during the late 18th century. Shortly before its demise, the Commonwealth adopted a massive reform effort and enacted the Constitution of May 3, 1791, which has been described as the second oldest codified national constitution of modern history.[19][20][21][22]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Polish–Lithuanian_Commonwealth

 

[Zyxpsilon]

Also, I'd again point out that I liked the diversity that Polynesia gives the game, good work guys, keep up the awesome DLC!

A very interesting wall of text you managed to type there and i think you'll agree we started up this intelligent discussion on the wrong footing.

I can't compare history with current situations because it has become complex & highly diversified - just immigration has broken the mold of identity for pretty much everyone.

Nor would i even try denying Commonwealth achievements in a sense that European grasp over the entire planet & its resources is a major reason why "Associative" control matters or already gained a certain power over specific regions.

So, let's go back together on the Australia/Canada figures shall we... again, in a much wider perspective.

The Pacific giant worth of Barrier Reefs & great white sharks (the major lung of the Entire wildlife in oceans around the world) and its incredibly diversified fauna & animals (the proverbial distinctiveness that sets it apart from continental neighbors) or the North Pole (minerals, Bears & the seaway passage) to Saskatchewan wheat fields, Alberta Oil reserves or Québec HydroElectric power.

These are almost the only numbers i care to calculate.

Since to me... it's not a matter of international influence at any levels but rather if we can bring our common future in focus for reasons beyond the Economics or the Politics.
To defeat poverty & criminality. Famine & natural disasters. Pollution & lack of educations.

As we are looking down at our precious BlueMarble from Space, we can only judge our past and take steps to protect it from destruction.

Rank it.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

I'm not going to argue for or against Canada as a civ. But this business of americans essentially saying Canada is America's hat and we're like the feeby cousins is arrogant. And it's essentially the attitude the US has taken to Canada for ages; in fact, one of the scandals of the wiki leaks for us was how the americans viewed our security arrangements during the Vancouver olympics.

Should i add the longest undefended border on Earth.
Nobody has ever driven trucks & cars on the Windsor/Detroit bridge where goods & services are flowing like bottled water at the cheapest price possible?

Shall we also stress on the fact that a few worldwide nuclear holocausts were escaped & prevented by espionage carried up by the unknowns? We're not done yet, it seems.

Would we become too much of an enslaved population underneath the invasion threats of anyone daring to shuffle their stacked debt for living above their means?

Must we shut down the pipelines of supply (Food, Energy, Brains and what else) to convince everyone control over resources is as sovereign to a state as the people whom sustains it with their taxes?
It doesn't matter to some.

But one day, they'll realize they were saved from instantaneous extinction by a master in disguise & a healthy dose of rational thoughts.

While we grab our gears and shovel up the snow off highways and return again this summer to what we do best; work for family in a society where Liberty is more important than foreign profits.

 

[brianshapiro]

Since we were cautioned not to go too far down the Canada road, I think we should drop it. My only point is it's entirely different than Polynesia. I don't think Civilization is the forum to redress concerns about the relationship between Canada and the United States. I think the achievement of Polynesia stands on its own without comparison to any other nation. Any argument for Canada shouldn't need to mention the United States.

Any argument for a civilization needs to talk about that civilization's place on the world stage.

In my view, Canada has always acted like the little brother to the United States, going along with it most of the time, and trying to moderate its aggressive behavior and keep it out of trouble and bar fights other times. -- So not just a feeble cousin, to be mocked, but its had a positive role. Like someone else mentioned, Canada has tried to be involved in peacekeeping, which is a good thing. Canada has also done other good things.

So I don't mean that as demeaning at all. Just an answer to the question "What is Canadian civilization?" I'm giving an honest answer, and if you think my honest answer is arrogant then you should challenge it and argue against it and not just claim its arrogant and that I'm a bad person for believing that.

I don't want to harp on Canada, I want people to think about the historical aspect of civilizations in that general sense. The question to me shouldn't be, what did such and such nation do on their own; but what did they do for history?

 

[Zyxpsilon]

Since we were cautioned not to go too far down the Canada road, I think we should drop it.

Ah, okay... let's leave at that unless challenged back into yet another real DLC addi(c)tion; Inuits, now and before anyone else.

I don't care if you came from the Mediterranean Sea... i can't even speak kanji or oil barrels gimmicks.
What i do know is this though; The arctic region is slowly becoming the next Klondike rush while glaciers are melting.

I think Nunavut is nearby - let me check, yep it was and still is.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

28. Here you show your true ignorance for pre-Canadian History quite well, well that and the Rome Conquered comments, but I'll let than one slide. If you don't know about Poland-Lithuanian I suggest you stop arguing for the inclusion of Canada, who have no historical significance and no stand along status as an "Empire" or "Civilization".

36. Oh wow! You're kidding right? That is one of the most offensive things I've ever heard. Really, that's worse than just saying that Canada is just America's hat! About a million times worse. Read it up mate!

Oh, and one last important precision.

Firstly...
Of all the ignorance i can be presumed to show or express - it's not your judgment to take publicly.

-- Poland was the only true Republic that actually worked for about six months in history with Solidarnosch.
-- Lithuania was expelled from the USSR by Michael Gorbatchev political reforms as were the other baltic republics.
Putting both on the same line reeks of not only provocation but mind-boggling idiocy.

Secondly...
Mockery won't stop me from proving you as offensive as you may wish to deduct from these facts;

-- The Himalayas are a shared region between the most populous regions of the World; China & India.
-- Mongolia is a DLC.
-- Tibetan plateau is home of legendary temples of the Buddhist faith and hidden fortresses beyond what even the Forbidden Palace represents.
-- The spiritual leader of Tibet is not a politician, nor would he consider religion as a major subject.
-- The Holy Roman Empire used both of the above tactics to gain power in Europe.

Are we "somehow" clear?
Or, must i explain myself a bit further down some truth rather than insults to my intellect?
By providing the calendar references to these facts?

I'll admit the Brunei error (my mistake, how honestly wrong can you get?!)... but i was referring to some tiny biddy islandish (Bahrain) provincial turmoil near Qatar. Since geographical sizes seem to matter in your biased opinions, i'd say Tasmania must be a lot more important on the world stage than Canada is, right? How about Anticosti & Porto-Rico? Heck, why not Jamaica & Sicilia? Hold it, history & revolutions gives you a spike of illumination and an urge to evaluate opinions? An opportunity to demean others, perhaps?
Between the Aussie arrogance in your posts and honesty, i select the latter.

No... scratch that, please don't bother an answer - i might have to laugh outloud too. For good reasons.

I guess not, cuz everyone here could read us both.

Moderator Action: That's now enough trolling.

 

[Zyxpsilon]

Double post.

 

[builer680]

Spoiler :

Oh, and one last important precision.

Firstly...
Of all the ignorance i can be presumed to show or express - it's not your judgment to take publicly.

-- Poland was the only true Republic that actually worked for about six months in history with Solidarnosch.
-- Lithuania was expelled from the USSR by Michael Gorbatchev political reforms as were the other baltic republics.
Putting both on the same line reeks of not only provocation but mind-boggling idiocy.

Secondly...
Mockery won't stop me from proving you as offensive as you may wish to deduct from these facts;

-- The Himalayas are a shared region between the most populous regions of the World; China & India.
-- Mongolia is a DLC.
-- Tibetan plateau is home of legendary temples of the Buddhist faith and hidden fortresses beyond what even the Forbidden Palace represents.
-- The spiritual leader of Tibet is not a politician, nor would he consider religion as a major subject.
-- The Holy Roman Empire used both of the above tactics to gain power in Europe.

Are we "somehow" clear?
Or, must i explain myself a bit further down some truth rather than insults to my intellect?
By providing the calendar references to these facts?

I'll admit the Brunei error (my mistake, how honestly wrong can you get?!)... but i was referring to some tiny biddy islandish provincial turmoil of Qatar. Since geographical sizes seem to matter in your biased opinions, i'd say Tasmania must be a lot more important on the world stage than Canada is, right?
No... scratch that, please don't bother an answer - i might have to laugh outloud too. For good reasons.

I guess not, cuz everyone here could read us both.

Spoiler :

Oh, and one last important precision.

Firstly...
Of all the ignorance i can be presumed to show or express - it's not your judgment to take publicly.

-- Poland was the only true Republic that actually worked for about six months in history with Solidarnosch.
-- Lithuania was expelled from the USSR by Michael Gorbatchev political reforms as were the other baltic republics.
Putting both on the same line reeks of not only provocation but mind-boggling idiocy.

Secondly...
Mockery won't stop me from proving you as offensive as you may wish to deduct from these facts;

-- The Himalayas are a shared region between the most populous regions of the World; China & India.
-- Mongolia is a DLC.
-- Tibetan plateau is home of legendary temples of the Buddhist faith and hidden fortresses beyond what even the Forbidden Palace represents.
-- The spiritual leader of Tibet is not a politician, nor would he consider religion as a major subject.
-- The Holy Roman Empire used both of the above tactics to gain power in Europe.

Are we "somehow" clear?
Or, must i explain myself a bit further down some truth rather than insults to my intellect?
By providing the calendar references to these facts?

I'll admit the Brunei mistake for having confused it with Qatar/Bahrain regional turmoil. But since geographical sizes seem to matter to you... how about Tasmania & Anticosti... both of which not important enough on the world stage? Well, not as much as your preciously smooth and wise Aussie arrogance, i suppose.

No... please, don't answer that. I might start laughing outloud, too.

I guess not, cuz everyone here could read us both.

Freaking Canadians.
Moderator Action: Stop the trolling.

 

[The_J]

Moderator Action: Seriously, it's enough now!