NationStates

Keronians wrote:How so?

No, seriously, how so?

The Korean War (let's say that the armistice in 1953 was when it ended) was nothing more than a draw. DPRK failed in its objective, but the UN (by which I mean the USA) did as well. They were forced to change their objectives because they underestimated the Chinese.

If the goal of the Korean War was to keep SK free of Communist Control? We won. Considering that we only started fighting after NK invaded...

Conserative Morality wrote:

Keronians wrote:How so?

No, seriously, how so?

The Korean War (let's say that the armistice in 1953 was when it ended) was nothing more than a draw. DPRK failed in its objective, but the UN (by which I mean the USA) did as well. They were forced to change their objectives because they underestimated the Chinese.

If the goal of the Korean War was to keep SK free of Communist Control? We won. Considering that we only started fighting after NK invaded...

Is that why you pushed the North Koreans right to the Yalu River?

Truman changed his mind and decided that keeping South Korea free from Communism was good enough. On paper, the objective was to free South Korea, but in actuality they wanted to free the entire Korean peninsula from Communism.

*Stops before raging on about how McArthur was an incompetent fool*

Keronians wrote:Is that why you pushed the North Koreans right to the Yalu River?

Best defense is a good offense?

Shnercropolis wrote:what is the stupidest misunderstanding you've found in your textbook?

My science textbook said that a microorganism is any organism that can't be seen with the naked eye, but there is a microorganism that can be seen with the human eye.

That people didn't know the earth was round during Colombus' lifetime and dictatoral reign of South America.

The Matriarchians wrote:

Shnercropolis wrote:what is the stupidest misunderstanding you've found in your textbook?

My science textbook said that a microorganism is any organism that can't be seen with the naked eye, but there is a microorganism that can be seen with the human eye.

That people didn't know the earth was round during Colombus' lifetime and dictatoral reign of South America.

The first one, sure. Actually, most people didn't care much back then. I know I didn't. But "dictatoral reign of South America" What does that mean?

Farnhamia wrote:

The Matriarchians wrote:That people didn't know the earth was round during Colombus' lifetime and dictatoral reign of South America.

The first one, sure. Actually, most people didn't care much back then. I know I didn't. But "dictatoral reign of South America" What does that mean?

So, Farn, what was Jesus Christ like?

Keronians wrote:

Conserative Morality wrote:If the goal of the Korean War was to keep SK free of Communist Control? We won. Considering that we only started fighting after NK invaded...

Is that why you pushed the North Koreans right to the Yalu River?

Truman changed his mind and decided that keeping South Korea free from Communism was good enough. On paper, the objective was to free South Korea, but in actuality they wanted to free the entire Korean peninsula from Communism.

*Stops before raging on about how McArthur was an incompetent fool*

Objectives of the USA=/=Objectives of the UN force

Americans wanted to continue the war. Everyone else wanted to win the war.

So basically: NK lost, UN won, America tied.

Galloism wrote:

Shnercropolis wrote:what is the stupidest misunderstanding you've found in your textbook?

My science textbook said that a microorganism is any organism that can't be seen with the naked eye, but there is a microorganism that can be seen with the human eye.

What is it?

Maybe I know it and don't remember.

A socialist?

My history textbook for this year said that Bill Clinton was the 33rd president, and it was made the same year Clinton took office.

Farnhamia wrote:

The Matriarchians wrote:That people didn't know the earth was round during Colombus' lifetime and dictatoral reign of South America.

The first one, sure. Actually, most people didn't care much back then. I know I didn't. But "dictatoral reign of South America" What does that mean?

He controlled part of South America and was a dictator. Genocide is hard to do in a democratic society.

Hardened Pyrokinetics wrote:

Keronians wrote:
Is that why you pushed the North Koreans right to the Yalu River?

Truman changed his mind and decided that keeping South Korea free from Communism was good enough. On paper, the objective was to free South Korea, but in actuality they wanted to free the entire Korean peninsula from Communism.

*Stops before raging on about how McArthur was an incompetent fool*

Objectives of the USA=/=Objectives of the UN force

Americans wanted to continue the war. Everyone else wanted to win the war.

So basically: NK lost, UN won, America tied.

Objectives of the USA most certainly were the objectives of the UN force.

Even though 17 countries participated in the war, America was the driving force behind it. The commander was American, and the mission was handled by the USA. Truman and McArthur took important strategic decisions without even consulting the other nations. Why do you think Britain was so pissed during the war? All they did was tell the UN what they were doing.

America had too much power in the UN back then. It was the single biggest contributor to the budget, and during this time, the USSR was boycotting the UN.

Keronians wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:The first one, sure. Actually, most people didn't care much back then. I know I didn't. But "dictatoral reign of South America" What does that mean?

So, Farn, what was Jesus Christ like?

I was living at the other end of the Mediterranean when he's supposed to have lived. The first time I even heard about Christians was early in Trajan's principate, around 100 CE. I'd come down from Gallicia to Gades to do some shopping and there was some talk at the inn I was staying at about some people who were promoting a Jewish cult of some kind, whose central figure had been executed under Tiberius. I have to admit, I didn't pay all that much attention. I got a clearer story from Arch a few years later. He'd converted sometime during the 1st century and was all enthusiastic about Christianity. He claims I didn't talk to him for centuries afterward, but that's not true.

The Matriarchians wrote:

Shnercropolis wrote:what is the stupidest misunderstanding you've found in your textbook?

My science textbook said that a microorganism is any organism that can't be seen with the naked eye, but there is a microorganism that can be seen with the human eye.

That people didn't know the earth was round during Colombus' lifetime and dictatoral reign of South America.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say about people thinking the earth was flat, but so it makes more sense to me:

In the US, all the textbooks adamantly state that all Europeans thought the earth was flat until Columbus somehow proved it was round. Strangely enough, it's never stated that he ever found away around the Americas, just that somehow discovering a new continent that had previously little to no contact with the one he just came from proved the Earth was round, and he went straight back to Europe with all the shiny things the natives gave him.

In reality, some Greek philosopher whose name escapes me totally knew the Earth was round and took a guess at its circumference, and got pretty close. Sure, a lot of knowledge was lost in the Dark Ages, but there are still other ways to prove the Earth is round that someone would have figured out. The reason people simply seldom went West was because well, you'd be at sea forever, possibly literally thanks to hurricanes. The Vikings discovered North America and called it Vineland, then got chased off by less-than-amused natives (and/or disease). Columbus once went to Scandinavia (or claimed to), where the existence of North America was fairly well-known, so obviously he knew it was there. And then there's one more problem: Even before the Vikings, North America (and South America) had already been discovered... by the thousands of people who migrated there 40,000 years ago by walking across Russia into Alaska thanks to a handy-dandy land bridge that has since sunk into the ocean. And that's not even talking about the raping and pillaging Columbus and later "explorers" did.

Basically, the whole bullshit about Columbus is US propaganda about how we're so speshul and far more enlightened than even other white Europeans.

Then there's the whole story about the American Revolution, in which it's King George III oppressing the poor colonies by not giving them a say in Parliament, taxing us/them half to death and the righteous colonists taking up arms. Bullshit.

The Matriarchians wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:The first one, sure. Actually, most people didn't care much back then. I know I didn't. But "dictatoral reign of South America" What does that mean?

He controlled part of South America and was a dictator. Genocide is hard to do in a democratic society.

I thought that might be what you meant. In practical terms, Columbus only governed the island of Hispaniola, where Haiti and the Dominican Republic are today. He was spectacularly bad at it, too, so much so that the Spanish government not only removed him but threw him in jail. I'm uncomfortable calling the treatment of the native peoples genocide because I don't think there was an organized attempt to wipe them out. Their treatment was inexcusable and barbaric, certainly, but in context of the late 15th and early 16th century was about what you could have expected from anyone.

Keronians wrote:

Hardened Pyrokinetics wrote:Objectives of the USA=/=Objectives of the UN force

Americans wanted to continue the war. Everyone else wanted to win the war.

So basically: NK lost, UN won, America tied.

Objectives of the USA most certainly were the objectives of the UN force.

Even though 17 countries participated in the war, America was the driving force behind it. The commander was American, and the mission was handled by the USA. Truman and McArthur took important strategic decisions without even consulting the other nations. Why do you think Britain was so pissed during the war? All they did was tell the UN what they were doing.

America had too much power in the UN back then. It was the single biggest contributor to the budget, and during this time, the USSR was boycotting the UN.

By "UN", I mean "everyone not the USA", or more specifically, "everyone in Korea with half a braincell". Yeah, sure, the US forced them into invading North Korea, but they let the US take the lead so their own troops were less depleted come Chinese Counterattack time.

Tai Wang Yi wrote:

The Matriarchians wrote:That people didn't know the earth was round during Colombus' lifetime and dictatoral reign of South America.

I'm not sure what you're trying to say about people thinking the earth was flat, but so it makes more sense to me:

In the US, all the textbooks adamantly state that all Europeans thought the earth was flat until Columbus somehow proved it was round. Strangely enough, it's never stated that he ever found away around the Americas, just that somehow discovering a new continent that had previously little to no contact with the one he just came from proved the Earth was round, and he went straight back to Europe with all the shiny things the natives gave him.

In reality, some Greek philosopher whose name escapes me totally knew the Earth was round and took a guess at its circumference, and got pretty close. Sure, a lot of knowledge was lost in the Dark Ages, but there are still other ways to prove the Earth is round that someone would have figured out. The reason people simply seldom went West was because well, you'd be at sea forever, possibly literally thanks to hurricanes. The Vikings discovered North America and called it Vineland, then got chased off by less-than-amused natives (and/or disease). Columbus once went to Scandinavia (or claimed to), where the existence of North America was fairly well-known, so obviously he knew it was there. And then there's one more problem: Even before the Vikings, North America (and South America) had already been discovered... by the thousands of people who migrated there 40,000 years ago by walking across Russia into Alaska thanks to a handy-dandy land bridge that has since sunk into the ocean. And that's not even talking about the raping and pillaging Columbus and later "explorers" did.

Basically, the whole bullshit about Columbus is US propaganda about how we're so speshul and far more enlightened than even other white Europeans.

Then there's the whole story about the American Revolution, in which it's King George III oppressing the poor colonies by not giving them a say in Parliament, taxing us/them half to death and the righteous colonists taking up arms. Bullshit.

Eratosthenes. Met him once in Alexandria, nice fellow, but he wore the silliest comb-over.

Leaving aside the North America stuff, why is the standard story of the American Revolution incorrect?

Farnhamia wrote:

Tai Wang Yi wrote:I'm not sure what you're trying to say about people thinking the earth was flat, but so it makes more sense to me:

In the US, all the textbooks adamantly state that all Europeans thought the earth was flat until Columbus somehow proved it was round. Strangely enough, it's never stated that he ever found away around the Americas, just that somehow discovering a new continent that had previously little to no contact with the one he just came from proved the Earth was round, and he went straight back to Europe with all the shiny things the natives gave him.

In reality, some Greek philosopher whose name escapes me totally knew the Earth was round and took a guess at its circumference, and got pretty close. Sure, a lot of knowledge was lost in the Dark Ages, but there are still other ways to prove the Earth is round that someone would have figured out. The reason people simply seldom went West was because well, you'd be at sea forever, possibly literally thanks to hurricanes. The Vikings discovered North America and called it Vineland, then got chased off by less-than-amused natives (and/or disease). Columbus once went to Scandinavia (or claimed to), where the existence of North America was fairly well-known, so obviously he knew it was there. And then there's one more problem: Even before the Vikings, North America (and South America) had already been discovered... by the thousands of people who migrated there 40,000 years ago by walking across Russia into Alaska thanks to a handy-dandy land bridge that has since sunk into the ocean. And that's not even talking about the raping and pillaging Columbus and later "explorers" did.

Basically, the whole bullshit about Columbus is US propaganda about how we're so speshul and far more enlightened than even other white Europeans.

Then there's the whole story about the American Revolution, in which it's King George III oppressing the poor colonies by not giving them a say in Parliament, taxing us/them half to death and the righteous colonists taking up arms. Bullshit.

Eratosthenes. Met him once in Alexandria, nice fellow, but he wore the silliest comb-over.

Leaving aside the North America stuff, why is the standard story of the American Revolution incorrect?

Short Answer: Because monarchies are totally completely evil and King George VI hated Americans because they were Americans.

Tai Wang Yi wrote:Then there's the whole story about the American Revolution, in which it's King George III oppressing the poor colonies by not giving them a say in Parliament, taxing us/them half to death and the righteous colonists taking up arms. Bullshit.

What I learned in my history textbooks "Quest of a Hemisphere" and "Birth of the Republic" was that the coloniest wanted their representitive bodies to be on par with parliament, not to be represented in parliament. (Just like Canada was from 1867 to 1982). As far as taxing us half to death--read the Whole Decleration of Independence--there were many reasons.

Azadi Raj wrote:

Tai Wang Yi wrote:Then there's the whole story about the American Revolution, in which it's King George III oppressing the poor colonies by not giving them a say in Parliament, taxing us/them half to death and the righteous colonists taking up arms. Bullshit.

What I learned in my history textbooks "Quest of a Hemisphere" and "Birth of the Republic" was that the coloniest wanted their representitive bodies to be on par with parliament, not to be represented in parliament. (Just like Canada was from 1867 to 1982). As far as taxing us half to death--read the Whole Decleration of Independence--there were many reasons.

All of which are bullshit. First, the taxation was completely legitimate (and necessary, considering the wars the American colonists forced Britain into). Second, most of your founding fathers were smugglers whose businesses were in danger because of some British legislation.

History
- All allies wanted Nazi war criminals to be prosecuted.
- Maps.... Vichy France apparently never existed, oh and neither did Slovak Republic... and other stuff as well.
- Italy apparently never had alliance with Germany & Austria in 1914...
- Britain was apparently always the "good guy". (implied)

Science
- Oxygen deprived blood is blue.
- Petroleum supply may end in next 50 years.

Geography
- Brazil should stop its "Exploitation of Amazon".... (because British never did that when they were developing, now did they?)

Resistant Materials
- Indian shanty towns are in some way better than civilized world...

Hardened Pyrokinetics wrote:

Azadi Raj wrote:
What I learned in my history textbooks "Quest of a Hemisphere" and "Birth of the Republic" was that the coloniest wanted their representitive bodies to be on par with parliament, not to be represented in parliament. (Just like Canada was from 1867 to 1982). As far as taxing us half to death--read the Whole Decleration of Independence--there were many reasons.

All of which are bullshit. First, the taxation was completely legitimate (and necessary, considering the wars the American colonists forced Britain into). Second, most of your founding fathers were smugglers whose businesses were in danger because of some British legislation.

Which wars did the colonists force the British into?

Farnhamia wrote:

Hardened Pyrokinetics wrote:All of which are bullshit. First, the taxation was completely legitimate (and necessary, considering the wars the American colonists forced Britain into). Second, most of your founding fathers were smugglers whose businesses were in danger because of some British legislation.

Which wars did the colonists force the British into?

French and Indian War, which basically started the Seven Years' War.

My textbook claimed that Watt invented the steam engine (though curiously they had the right info 50 pages later).

Oh and Socialism is shown as evil.

Hardened Pyrokinetics wrote:

Farnhamia wrote:Which wars did the colonists force the British into?

French and Indian War, which basically started the Seven Years' War.

I don't see as the Crown was particularly reluctant to defend its own colonists in North America. Nor were the British all that upset at having all of North America west of the Mississippi save Florida and the Gulf Coast fall into their laps at the end of the war. And anyway, the French and Indian War started because the colonists were expanding westward, developing trade with the Indians in the Ohio territory. What should His Majesty's Government have said, "I say, chaps, don't be annoying the French now, it could be frightfully expensive should we have to go to war over some silly little incident. There's good colonials, just stay this side of the mountains, shall we?"

Farnhamia wrote:

Hardened Pyrokinetics wrote:French and Indian War, which basically started the Seven Years' War.

I don't see as the Crown was particularly reluctant to defend its own colonists in North America. Nor were the British all that upset at having all of North America west of the Mississippi save Florida and the Gulf Coast fall into their laps at the end of the war. And anyway, the French and Indian War started because the colonists were expanding westward, developing trade with the Indians in the Ohio territory. What should His Majesty's Government have said, "I say, chaps, don't be annoying the French now, it could be frightfully expensive should we have to go to war over some silly little incident. There's good colonials, just stay this side of the mountains, shall we?"

Except the French already had control over Ohio. The American colonists waltz in and made asses of themselves, the French sent militia to see what was up, the Americans started shooting, and everything went to Hell. The territory gained WOULD have made up for the cost of the war, had the Americans not then started bitching about the taxes and had your silly little insurrection a few years later.