Loco driving wheels:

My lot came from Yorkshire - quite a few are still there.

Many of us start with a Surname. ... a street number. ... a street. ... a suburb. ... a town/city/ ... a region (province/county/etc) ... a state. (possibly) ... a country. ... a nation. ... a geograpical region. ... a continent. ... a hemisphere. ... a planet. ... starting to get silly now ;-)

If you're from England and answer that you're from Europe, you wouldn't be wrong, but I wouldn't feel that you've answered my question. Ditto Asia. Ditto Africa. Ditto Australia (although that is one country) Ditto Antarctica. Ditto America.

Regards, Greg.P.

Reply to
Greg Procter
Loading thread data ...

Mexico has always been considered part of NA. The isthmus connecting NA & SA is Central America.

Reply to
Lobby Dosser

On 16/01/2011 1:27 AM, Lobby Dosser wrote: [...]

Geographically, sure, no problem. Culturally, not simple at all. Ask a Mexican if he's a Norteamericano, you'll get a more or less complicated reply.

Fact is, of course, that world-wide cuklture is developing. That's one of the reasons there is so much violence, both verbal and physical. People don't like changes, especially when the changes come with altered values. Also, values change as they transmitted and adopted elsewhere, so that the people who originated them feel uncomfortable, at least. Result: misunderstanding and suspicion on all sides. It's amzing, all thinsg considered, that we've muddled through the last 50 years or so without a major war. Whether we'll be able to muddle through the next 50 years is IMO an open question. For my grandchildren's sake, I hope it will be only relatively interesting.

"May you live in the most interesting of times" (Chinese curse)

Wolf K.

Reply to
Wolf K

Accoding to Wiki, Central America is considered a sub-continent, consisting of Belize, Costa Rica, El Salvador, Guatemala, Honduras, Nicaragua and Panama.

Reply to
MartinS

In that case, The UK should be a sub-continent of Europe and Ireland a sub-sub-continent. :)

Reply to
Lobby Dosser

Errr, yanks, with Britain's help, have slaughtered around 5 million people in various nations, generally for the "crime" of wanting self-government and freedom. 2 million in Vietnam! The Korean War has gone on for over 60 years. Your war against Cuba for 108 years. Not sure what you would consider a "major war".

Reply to
Greg Procter

Reply to
Greg Procter

I doubt he considers himself a "yank".

Reply to
Lobby Dosser

On 16/01/2011 7:45 PM, Greg Procter wrote: [...]

Ah, I see, your animus against the "yanks" has clouded your ability to be reasonable about language. You're not the first, you're not alone, and I don't anyone can claim to be free of this defect. Myself included. But I do try to edit out the unreasonable stuff. Really!

Have a cool one, Wolf K.

Reply to
Wolf K

My experiences with an Amirican lady many years ago stopped me gaining any such negative feelings. If had'nt of got married could have been useful at the UN by now.

Cheers, Simon

Reply to
simon

DR Congo - eight countries, >5 million dead? Though the lack of an easy way to blame The West (or Israel) means it generally got ignored.

Reply to
Arthur Figgis

I agree, it was (and still is) a horror. We haven't had a world-wide conflagration, though. We've avoided it in part because the West, the East, and increasingly China are definitely implicated in these localised miseries. Scratch below the surface of "tribal conflict" and "religious differences", and you'll find some strategic raw material. Or a strategic location. That's what it's about.

These wars are proxy wars, so to speak. Nasty as it that is, it's better than a world-wide war with billions dead, which it what would happen, since no losing side that could use nuclear weapons would refrain from using them.

I think it's actually a bright spot in the general gloom that there are who are horrified by these proxy wars, and want them stopped. In the long run, that gives me hope. In the short run, well, there have always been wars and rumours of wars.

Peace, Wolf K.

Reply to
Wolf K

The US's concept of reasonableness certainly wouldn't measure up in any reasonble society. For example, you have been threatening to destroy everyone in the World for the last 60+ years if and when 5% of the World's population attacks your 5% of the World's population. Another example: you will recognise Palestine as a nation when they stop defending themselves from your and Israel's agression and when they dump their democratically elected government.

Reasonable? Not even vaguely.

Reply to
Greg Procter

I'm not trying to accuse him of being a yank.

Reply to
Greg Procter

In which case, the key to peace and stability must be to have a long history of independence, b*gger all in the way of accessible resources, and be in the middle of nowhere.

Just like, erm, Afghanistan....

Of course. The little brown people aren't capable of doing /anything/ without the evil white man (or Israeli, or course!) making them do it. I blame Thatcher myself.

Reply to
Arthur Figgis

Are you repeating/paraphrasing what the President of Malawi said "After 16 years of independence ....." or do I have the wrong person and country ?

Cheers, Simon

Reply to
simon

PolyTech Forum website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.