The Best And The Worst Of Your Countries History.

[Seeker]

"George Washington, first President, declares that 2 terms are enough, 8 years is long enough for one man to rule a nation, and breaks with thousands of years of human history by turning his back on power."

This was probably the most inspirational thing in US history. Washington could have been an 'el Presidente' very easily, but actually held to his ideals instead. A real first. Even if he was a traitor to his rightful Sovereign.

[Chris 62]

Originally posted by El Awrence
For a historian, Chris, I find some of your statements incredibly biased and ignorant and based purely on national jingoism.

You know Martin, sometimes you surprise me with your stupidity.
When it comes to history, you don't know Jack.
And for the record, I find your half-assed leftest attitude both childish and annoying.

And just to nit pick I believe that the first heart transplant was performed in South Africa (or was it the first ever transplant, I can't remember) and Penicillin was developed in Britain pre WWII.

http://www.stanford.edu/%7Egenedong/httx/harttx.htm

http://inventors.about.com/gi/dynamic/offsite.htm?site=http://www.invent.org/book/book%2Dtext/77.html

Next case:

Say what? New England tries to get the US to invade Canada? You flunk American history? The reason Canada was invaded in Michigan (by Harrison) was because New England REFUSED to participate in the war. The easy way to do it would have been through New England, but those states refused to call up their militias, and even talked about succession at the Hartford Convention because they were so against the war with England (being almost fully Federalist).

Actually Imran, several New England MERCHANTS refused, and if you knew what you were talking about, you would understand that invading canada from New England in 1812 was geograpically almost impossible.
You can take that foot from your mouth any time, and keep in mind the serious effort was made on the NY front, where NY Militia under Renselaar refused to cross the border, only regular US forces crossed.
Here is an excellent account, by someone who was there:

http://www.militaryheritage.com/queenstn.htm

New England trying to invade Canada is one of the funniest things I've seen on this board, Chris .

Still laughing?
I was at your post.
Next case:

Allows? What do you think he should have done, threatened to invade?

Showing some backbone would have been nice, and considering how much Britain and France owed the USA in war debts, in real politik, Wilson had tremendous leverage, but was far to timid and a dreamer to use it.

Britain and France could have done what they want, especially since the US wasn't technically an Allied Power (Wilson signed on as an Auxilliary Power, because he didn't want to be seen as taking sides for the spoils of war... Hell, he didn't even want the war in the first place).

They did do exactly what they wanted, leading to uncle Adolph and his Nazi follies.

Realizing that he couldn't get the treaty he wanted, he pushed all out for the League of Nations, which could have worked if he wasn't so unyielding at home.

And Congress told him to stick it where the sun doesn't shine.

Once again, allows? Were we to invade? And as stated, if anyone should be blamed, it is FDR, who already divided up Europe with Churchill and Stalin.

Stop playing the fool, Imran, you should know better.
Russia was in rotten shape in 45, and could not have stood up to force of arms, and Stalin knew it.
FDR started the problem, but Churchill was totally against giving in to Stalin on Poland and several other areas, and Churchill's replacement, Atlee, was far more concerned with England's internal problems.

It would have been Vietnam times 10. Propping up an unpopular, brutal warlord in the face of a popular (even if Communist) movement. Disaster in the making.

Non-sense.
Mao only picked up support through the many battlefield failures of Kai-shek.
His support in 47 was no stronger then Kai-shek's, and was nonexistant in the south.
Better supported (say, through US airpower), the Communists would have stood boxed in the north west.
Another Vietnam times ten my ass!

And oh so forward looking

You know, IW, you have been dogging my ass a lot lately, if you have a point, make it.

Good as the moon landing was, it was 70% political, and 25% huge ****-off rockets, as scientific acheivements go, it was nowhere near the greatest.

Showing your ignorence boy.
At least 30 different sci breakthroughs (Such as Computers, Microwave tech, and velcro, just to name three came, to see nothing of things like freeze dried food and such).
Not bad for 75% political.

To quote the ambassador to Russia in 1944, Harriman, "Economic assistance is one of the most effective weapons at our disposal to influence European political events in the direction we desire..."

Interesting quote, Ramo, considering it was made BEFORE they even came up with the plan, so as to make it irrelivent.
Harriman did serve as truman' secretay of commerce, as a matter of interest.
Nice try at taking a quote out of context to attack a postion, BTW, but no dice.

[General Ludd]

I don't know about the heart transplant, but the initial discovery of penecilin was in England, and the further developement of it was in the USA, after they moved the project there to avoid the bombing during WWII.

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Osweld

I don't think Canada has a best or worst time, we've got an all around mediocre history.

Same here

Treatment of aborigines and the White Australia policy probably our worst moments.

Best recent good moment was probably the Sydney Olympics - although liberating East Timor would also be up there.

Leighton becoming number one tennis player?

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


Same here

Treatment of aborigines and the White Australia policy probably our worst moments.

Best recent good moment was probably the Sydney Olympics - although liberating East Timor would also be up there.

Leighton becoming number one tennis player?

Methinks you might be forgetting a certain atrocity, committed by a chap named Cappel or Happell or something like that, against the NZ cricket team.
I would be more specific but that would be petty...

[faded glory]

Honestly, the worst US thing about history I think, was most definetaly the Civil Rights struggle (of course, not that it shouldnt of happen. The fact that people tried to use force to prevent it from happening upset me)

The best was most definetaly when the brits were smited at yorktown.

But in my lifetime, the Best moment to come without a doubt, will be the declration of victory against the evil Terrorist's

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by ravagon


Methinks you might be forgetting a certain atrocity, committed by a chap named Cappel or Happell or something like that, against the NZ cricket team.
I would be more specific but that would be petty...

As a matter of fact I thought of mentioning that but I thought noone would get it and I didn't want to give the Kiwis a break. We admit nothing

[Tingkai]

deleted,

[Dr. Nick]

USA selflessly offers to rebuild world under "Marshall plan"

Alright, jingoism 1. Selflessly. Indeed, I am sure the US did it out of the bottom of their hearts as opposed to trying to counter Soviet economic expansion and the prevent the expansion of communist ideas in nations where traditionally communism had been quite popular, particularly all over Europe east of the Rhine. Added to that, I am sure Marshall was not thinking about all these European nations purchasing American goods and paying interests on American loans during the recovery, oh no, I'm sure they didn't. As a historian you should know that bias is unacceptable. Jingoism and nationalism based assumptions are even worse.

The Marshall plans were undertaken because the USA didn;t want Soviet influence to expand in Europe. If the Germans, French, British and Italians hadn't been given a chance to reconstruct, the might of Soviet arms or the influence of communist ideas in a miserable society, particularly in Germany and Italy where the people had taken the worst hits, would have probably added Germany and Italy to the tally of Warsaw Pact nations later. Also, the US knew that Europe was going to pay back these loans with interest. The US also knew that Europe was going to have to buy new capital goods from the US. The Marshall plans benefited the US and aided them in their own recovery as well.

USA puts first man on the moon, greatest scientific acchivement in world history

I don't see how wasting money just for some person to be planting footsteps on a desolate area with no real value can be classified as the greatest scientific achievement of all time. Space travel and space programs is one thing, putting man on the moon is another. Skylab was a bigger achievement than Apollo 11 from the by products of space travel technology concern us.

The USA could have done what Britain and France did after the great war, and make the axis pay out it's ass, which, BTW, was standard european behavior after wars for centuries, but the US say how counter-productive such things are, and as a result, Europe is now at peace for 50+ years, is an economic powerhouse, and views wars as unthinkable.

They did do exactly what they wanted, leading to uncle Adolph and his Nazi follies.

From the sociological point of view, you must realise that Woodrow Wilson and Truman were able to think more coldly about the issue. Large parts of Britain and France had been laid to waste, the civilian population had suffered in person the tragedy of both wars.

Also from the sociological aspect, you of all people should understand the "revenge" attitude in a society that has been distraught in war. Remember American "we will bomb Afghanistan and turn it into a parking lot" after September 11th 2001. It only stands to show that the European need for revenge was just as natural than the American one after September 11th. In fact, I'd go as much as to say that if the Americans had that revenge attitude as a society after a small incident like that (small in comparison to the two world wars) it only stands to reason that Europe wanted revenge in Versaille and after WWII where France and Britain and Russia had lost tens of millions of men.

To reply to your reply, I find it distasteful that you label me as ignorant on history. I may not take history classes but I pride myself in having read and researched a lot of history and I can safely assert that no actions are done out of the bottom of anyones heart.

On the penicillin part I found the following:

In 1928, while working on influenza virus, he observed that mould had developed accidently on a staphylococcus culture plate and that the mould had created a bacteria-free circle around itself. He was inspired to further experiment and he found that a mould culture prevented growth of staphylococci, even when diluted 800 times. He named the active substance penicillin.

http://www.nobel.se/medicine/laureates/1945/fleming-bio.html

About the transplant I was wrong, the first transplant was in South Africa, and it was kidney.

[The Emperor Fabulous]

Chris, look at the link you gave! It says right at the top "Method of Production of Penicillin!" It never says it was INVENTED in the US! It talks specifically about how they needed LOTS of Penecillin and needed a way to produce it! Read the material before posting the links.

Anyways, I would look on a lot of fronts:

Best Politically: Creation of the U.S. Constitution

Worst Politically: The McCarthy Hearings

Best Socially: Abortion made legal by Rowe vs. Wade

Worst Socially: Slavery

Best Economically: Opening of the Panama Canal

Worst Economically: Great Depression

Best Militarily: Invasion at Normandy

Worst Militarily: Bay of Pigs Invasion

Best Event: America's win in Yorktown

Worst Event: September 11th, 2001

Best My Lifetime: U.S. Aided liberation of Afghanistan

Worst My Lifetime: School Shootings

[ravagon]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse


As a matter of fact I thought of mentioning that but I thought noone would get it and I didn't want to give the Kiwis a break. We admit nothing

Course Kiwi's got our own back in the last Americas cup.
One Australia ... glug glug

btw Horsie that wasn't you sneaking down to Southern NSW for a quick smoke away from Mrs Horse by any chance?
Gotta be more careful with those matches.

[faded glory]

Emp Fab.....

You picked Bay of pigs over fall of Siagon/Vietnam war?

Silly man

[faded glory]

ok.....now that its categorys huh.

Best Politically: consitution

Worst Politically: Bill Clinton and his scandals (embarrassing)

Best Socially: Civil Rights

Worst Socially: Slave's

Best Economically: Marshall Plan

Worst Economically: Oil Embargo of late 70's

Best Militarily: Gulf War

Worst Militarily: Fall of Siagon

Best Event: Yorktown

Worst Event: Union Break-up: 1859

[Tingkai]

Originally posted by Assur
You have to remember that the atrocities you speak of were comitted under King Leopold II and at that time the Congo wasn't a Belgian colony, it was the private property of King Leopold II until he died in 1909.

I am not aware of any major atrocities between 1909-1960, when the Congo was a Belgian colony.

Interesting. Something like 10 million people are killed in the Congo, but the perspective is that these murders were done by the Belgium king and his Belgium employees, but not by Belgium people nor Belgium the country.

[Tingkai]

For Canada:

The Best:
- The decision to allow French-Canadians to retain their language and religion after the defeat of New France. This sets the stage for Canada being a place where two dominant cultures live side-by-side in peace, a situation that is all too rare in this world. Admittedly, this decision is made by the English, but it can qualify as a Canadian event.

The worst:
- Definitely not the NEP (National Energy Policy)
- The treatment of First Nations people. These people were murdered (in at least one case, an entire nation - the Beothuks- was destroyed), had their land stolen, their culture destroyed, and yet they were better treated than native people in the States.