Interesting scenario europe at war 2018

[Armand2REP]

We have an answer to keep them out....

 

[pmaitra]

^^ Keep them out? Who? The UK or US?

BTW, why is that missile doing Waltz up in the sky?

 

[W.G.Ewald]

From eastern forces though rather than them fighting amongst themselves. While we are at it lets not forget north america...those gun totting wankers haven't experienced enemy soldiers and tanks roaming across there streets killing and destroying everything at sight.

What? Didn't you see Red Dawn?

 

[pmaitra]

Mine too.

Europe deserves to be destroyed. Land of 700 million lazy idiots with a huge sense of entitlement.

I could agree with a large chunk of Europeans being a bunch of lazy wafer munchers today; however, their ancestors must get credit for ushering in the Industrial Revolution. Europe is what it is today because of the industrious Europeans who lived around 300-100 years ago.

Credit where it is due.

 

[Armand2REP]

^^ Keep them out? Who? The UK or US?

BTW, why is that missile doing Waltz up in the sky?

Keep the US from intervening in a European matter.

BTW, it is correcting its trajectory, not a waltz

 

[pmaitra]

Keep the US from intervening in a European matter.

BTW, it is correcting its trajectory, not a waltz

Yeah, I was just being humorous, not trying to offend you. I am a great admirer of certain things French, like the TGV.

Anyways, yes, that might act as a deterrent.

Any comments from you Mr. Ewald? In case of Anglo-Fench hostilities, will the US back the French, 'the co-participants in America's War of Independence against those pesky Brits,' or will it back the Brits against 'those high-nosed Anglophone-hating French?' Or will the US rally behind 'Mr. No Intervention Ron Paul?'

Also, could it trigger a civil war in Canada?

 

[Armand2REP]

Credit where it is due.

Please do, us lazy wine sipping cheese munchers might only work 32hrs a week with 8 paid weeks holiday but we have to work to keep it. We aren't the most productive per work hour by pretending to work all day. If you don't produce there is someone ready to take your job in a heartbeat. Not to mention if you don't pay taxes on full time work for a full 30 years you don't get a pension. Lazy Americans fool around half the day and get an SS check even if they only work a year.

 

[The Messiah]

That is only if there was a France vs UK war. What if the US comes to the aid of UK, which I believe it will, never mind Lafayette?

Yanks would roll the french in no time if they are given a base in england.

 

[civfanatic]

I could agree with a large chunk of Europeans being a bunch of lazy wafer munchers today; however, their ancestors must get credit for ushering in the Industrial Revolution. Europe is what it is today because of the industrious Europeans who lived around 300-100 years ago.

Credit where it is due.

The Industrial Revolution began in Britain. From where did Britain get the wealth and resources to finance their industrialisation? To whom did Britain sell the manufactured goods that their factories produced?

 

[pmaitra]

The Industrial Revolution began in Britain. From where did Britain get the wealth and resources to finance their industrialisation? To whom did Britain sell the manufactured goods that their factories produced?

They got their wealth and resources largely from all the countries that were part of the British Empire, India included. They got the idea of rocket artillery from India. Other than that, they (Europeans) got the steam engine, steam locomotive, IC engine, diesel engine, Humphrey Davy Lamp ... the list is big, all from among themselves, the Europeans. C'mon, they did not get these ideas from their colonies, did they? Let us be fair to them.

 

[civfanatic]

They got their wealth and resources largely from all the countries that were part of the British Empire, India included. They got the idea of rocket artillery from India. Other than that, they (Europeans) got the steam engine, steam locomotive, IC engine, diesel engine, Humphrey Davy Lamp ... the list is big, all from among themselves, the Europeans. C'mon, they did not get these idea from their colonies, did they? Let us be fair to them.

The Europeans were innovative, certainly. No one is denying that. They had to be innovative because they had nothing else going for them. They had no high-demand products, like spices or silk, that they could readily produce and sell, as the East did.

But it is important to understand that the Industrial Revolution, and Europe's great leap forward, came at the expense of the rest of the world. The industrialisation of Britain would have been impossible without colonialism. Without a ready source of natural resources and material riches in India, along with a huge market for cheap manufactured goods, the Industrial Revolution would have never taken off.

In 1700, India was the world's leading manufacturer of textiles. By 1850, it was Britain. The rise of a small island of 15 million came about thanks to the destruction of 150 million livelihoods.

 

[pmaitra]

The Europeans were innovative, certainly. No one is denying that. They had to be innovative because they had nothing else going for them. They had no high-demand products, like spices or silk, that they could readily produce and sell, as the East did.

But it is important to understand that the Industrial Revolution, and Europe's great leap forward, came at the expense of the rest of the world. The industrialisation of Britain would have been impossible without colonialism. Without a ready source of natural resources and material riches in India, along with a huge market for cheap manufactured goods, the Industrial Revolution would have never taken off.

In 1700, India was the world's leading manufacturer of textiles. By 1850, it was Britain. The rise of a small island of 15 million came about thanks to the destruction of 150 million livelihoods.

I think you and I have an agreement here.

 

[The Messiah]

I think you and I have an agreement here.

Of that there is no doubt.

 

[civfanatic]

India's 17th century manufacturing and craftsmanship were significantly superior to their Western European competition, and as a result India had little use for Western goods. Silver and gold from Europe were the primary medium of exchange. Between 1660 and 1690, European demand for Indian textiles rose steeply. These materials were bought mainly for "specie"--on average 34 tons of silver and a half-ton of gold was flowing from Europe to India every year, much to the chagrin of the European governments.

By the late 1600s, there was such overwhelming demand for Indian chintz, that ultimately French and English wool and silk merchants prevailed on their governments to ban the importation of these imported cottons from India. The French ban came in 1686, while the English followed in 1701. So much for free trade. Various Indian goods were banned and heavily taxed as Britain's Empire grew during the 18th century.

By the 1680s, hundreds of prosperous market towns dotted northern India, the towns occupied by traders in grain, moneylenders, retired military officers and other officials, and Muslim gentry. The millions of people on state salaries increased demand for manufactured and processed consumer goods, some goods supplied by the government sector of the economy, but most by the private sector. India's population grew from about 100 million in 1500 to about 150 million in 1700 compared with the population of Europe of about 83 million in 1700.

16th - 17th Centuries

 

[pmaitra]

^^

Great information CivFanatic. Thanks.

 

[Armand2REP]

What does any of that have to do with European war scenario?

 

[pmaitra]

What does any of that have to do with European war scenario?

Nothing. We digressed.

So, any speculation on my question to Mr. Ewald in post #26?

 

[civfanatic]

Yeah, I was just being humorous, not trying to offend you. I am a great admirer of certain things French, like the TGV.

Anyways, yes, that might act as a deterrent.

Any comments from you Mr. Ewald? In case of Anglo-Fench hostilities, will the US back the French, 'the co-participants in America's War of Independence against those pesky Brits,' or will it back the Brits against 'those high-nosed Anglophone-hating French?' Or will the US rally behind 'Mr. No Intervention Ron Paul?'

Also, could it trigger a civil war in Canada?

I think America would remain neutral in this scenario. Not sure about Canada though; many Quebecois (residents of Quebec) are quite proud of their French heritage, and quite a few even want independence. A civil war in Canada is certainly a possibility, and if that happens America will definitely intervene.

America actually faced a very similar situation in the 1790s, during the Anglo-French tensions following the French Revolution. The Democratic-Republicans (supporters of Jefferson) wanted to ally with France, mainly due to idealistic reasons as well as to repay the French for their assistance during the Revolutionary War. The Federalists, including Alexander Hamilton and his followers, wanted to ally with Britain due to strong cultural and commercial connections. Ultimately, however, Washington (the President at the time) chose neutrality because he feared the nation would be torn into two opposing camps.

 

[W.G.Ewald]

Yeah, I was just being humorous, not trying to offend you. I am a great admirer of certain things French, like the TGV.

Anyways, yes, that might act as a deterrent.

Any comments from you Mr. Ewald? In case of Anglo-French hostilities, will the US back the French, 'the co-participants in America's War of Independence against those pesky Brits,' or will it back the Brits against 'those high-nosed Anglophone-hating French?' Or will the US rally behind 'Mr. No Intervention Ron Paul?'

Also, could it trigger a civil war in Canada?

Americans probably have forgotten the French being at Yorktown and the Battle of the Capes. In WWI Yanks arriving in France said, "Lafayette, we are here." Today we would say, "Lafayette, who is he?" Really ugly things were said about the French during the Iraq war, like, "cheese eating surrender monkeys." So my bet would be supporting the Brits. But who knows? French separatism in Canada has never been strong, to my mind.

My opinion is that Dominic Sandbrook should start drinking decaf. So should some of you here.

 

[pmaitra]

Americans probably have forgotten the French being at Yorktown and the Battle of the Capes. In WWI Yanks arriving in France said, "Lafayette, we are here." Today we would say, "Lafayette, who is he?" Really ugly things were said about the French during the Iraq war, like, "cheese eating surrender monkeys." So my bet would be supporting the Brits. But who knows? French separatism in Canada has never been strong, to my mind.

My opinion is that Dominic Sandbrook should start drinking decaf. So should some of you here.

Yeah, I see that despite adopting so many things French, such as driving on the right, despite being a former British colony, the US has probably moved closer to Britain and further form France.