10 days on holday.

I'm at 10 days of holiday starting tomorrow, so, if you need me, try to find me in Zealand.

please miss me,

cheers,


MNIM

Ah, wait a moment, did he mean New Zealand or Zealand?

Is that staying as your sig now DJ?

LOL @ alka: would you expect me EVER to go even near jtull???
Zealand like in Zealand, the Netherlands.

yes is that not a rather small island?

No, it's quite big-at least for Dutch standards.

Not any more. The only thing Britain owns that is contested is Rockall, an island which is all rock. But they do still have problems in the former USSR.

i hate the ussr i wash bashed over the head weve just got charva gang territorey wars were i live

getting OT, are we?

anyway, Zealand is a collection of islands, which is one of our 12 provinces.
and yes, NZ is called after Zealand.

(lol. territory wars? the dutch have once ruled over France and Belgium, (briefly, after napoleon was defeated) and over the German empire, (a dutch duke was like... less than a year the German emperor, until he fell through the ice while battling some Frisians )

me naam is m on Mon May 12, 2008 6:23 pm wrote:LOL @ alka: would you expect me EVER to go even near jtull???
Zealand like in Zealand, the Netherlands.

I wrote that the evening when I came back, when I had a minute free time

Put it this way...Luxemburg has owned more than you then.

not really.. forgot to tell you that we have owned luxembourg too,
and of course we owned Manhattan (bought for a few gold coins and some sheep hides from the Indians) (it was called New Amsterdam by us)
we discovered Australia,
we discovered new zealand,
we owned the whole of Indonesia and Papoa New-Guinea,
we owned Suriname,
and we owned (and still do) some Caribbean islands. (to be exact, Aruba, Bonaire, Curacao, Sint Maarten, Saba and Sint Eustatius.

ah, now let me see. How much did britain own again?

yeah. true. but Britons just suck. (and you should know, you're welsh!)
oh. btw, the UK didn't completely own the contemporary USA, just the 14 north-western states, and pieces of Canada. (the French had like 1/2 of Canada.)

ehm, ow yeah, I forgot. we also owned the southern point of south-Africa.
and pieces of Germany, just after WW2. ow yeah, and Spitsbergen, the whale-fishing base.

but the truth to be told, we're better traders and fishermen than conquerors. the dutch put up trading- and supply-posts all over the world. Indonesia was just ours because the VOC wanted the monopoly there.

no they found tasmainia but missed australia!
rflol.

BTW, I didn't include the bits of the USA that we used to own. And the Netherlands never owned the Cape, just private Dutch explorers.

And yes, I would have preferred the English to have stayed in their own d*** country!!!!

if it wasnt for briton the world would be a darker less hightech place so thank us instead of jipping us

To start with- do you mean Britain or Britons? And we shouldn't say we were the reasons the world is as advanced. True Britain led Europe into the industrial revolution, but until then other countries such as France, Spain and Austria had completely dominated, and they also had industrialisation. It would be folly to pin European colonisation of the world also. Portugal, the Netherlands and Spain had explored much of the coast and the whole of Western Europe developed settlements in earnest before us and they would have occupied the vaccum we would have left untouched. The French would definitely have shared North America with Spain, Indian ports would definitely be owned by Europeans at least, and no-one would have left 'our' bits of Africa untouched. Germans were always the pioneers of science and mathematics for centuries and remain, in some extent, to this day. Britain was at the forefront of the world for around 200 years at the very most (1720-1920) and after that was gone, trailing in the wake of primarily America, bankrupted by WW1. I say to you, that even if Britain has increased the technological side of the world, then it has only sped up the process by about 20-30 years.

And I doubt that the world would be that less darker. What country could be more opressive than one that enslaves nations to its empire, restricts fredom of speech, and plunders its subjects, even of Britain itself, to fuel its upper class' incessant luxuries? An empire that for centuries even endorsed the slave trade, conquering a quarter of the globe to quench its thirst for domination.


Well yeah, at least we didn't have to worry about the Netherlands

Now the US is the new empire: it has almost as much overseas territories as Britain.

hey but Americans think that they are so briliant but NZ had the first powerd flight and the jet boat and we can play rugby better than any other team. oh and we got to mount everest before you.

hold on what do you mean we? what country?

ok ive worked this out
america=hasnt done much for the world exept couase alot of wars
great britian=triggered the indutrial reveloution and help make the world slighty more high tech(we still were mean)
new zealand=they just done some stuff and they play good rugby
japan=the worlds technilogical center they make most of the worlds eletronics

so the reason the world is as it is now is becouse of donations from lots of countries not just one

Yes. And America hasn't caused many wars- only war of independance, (partly) cold war, Gulf war, Afghanistan invasion, second Gulf war. And Germany did lots for science. And best of all Welsh people created the Welsh language. Cymru am Byth!

plz dont speak welsh its confusing

I was speaking in English. Except 'Cymru am Byth' which means 'Wales for ever'

Well it wasn't for him

Calm down Alka, don't worry.

we might never know anyway sorry alka if you dont like me ill try to change and ill try my best at grammar and stuff like that

back off you can look but please dont tuch

*hugs alk*

*gives alk cookie*

*throws sharp cookies at leewatson1*