USA

Donut, I as a British citizen myself I would have to disagree with you to some degree, (not about the spelling btw )
Yes an imigrant can become British in title, but British isnt just a word written on a passport ...to be British is something I consider very speacial and very unique ... you can not just become British overnight, British is something much more than that ...it is hard to describe what I mean infact I'm not even sure what I mean, but I am sure that British is something in the blood so to speak, it is a belief, a culture it is many things. I am not sure you can say the same about been an American to be honest ..but as I am not one I suppose it is impossible for me to say.

[ 08-19-2002, 10:54 PM: Message edited by: Hesperex ]

[K T Ong]

Originally posted by johnny: Cloudy, it's easy really: Eat some cans of beans, hold your breath for a short while, tap on your stomach and sssspppEEEEEEEAAAAAAkkkkkkk.

It can't be that simple; you also need to control the movements of your rectum muscles in such a way that the sounds that come out will articulate meanings.

[K T Ong]

To Hesperex:

The Britannian Mystique is fine with me, just so long as you folks kindly refrain from imposing a Pax Britannica on the rest of the human race. We non-British have had quite enough of that, if you don't mind me saying it. (Not that I think it will ever be possible to turn time back to the 18th or 19th centuries...)

To MagiK:

It is a fact that in history the US has deliberately inflicted very considerable suffering on other peoples and nations. Go read this book, please. (And please, I'm not saying it's the fault of every American -- I'm sure most of the American members of this board would be absolutely nice people, for instance. .) And if you want to say of your post that you're not intending to put anyone down and merely saying what you know based on your experiences, I'm sure I'm entitled to cover myself with the very same qualifications.

But now China and Britain have remained completely innocent of commiting atrocities against members of mankind throughout the centuries! And no one hates them!!

[K T Ong]

Originally posted by Moni: But now China and Britain have remained completely innocent of commiting atrocities against members of mankind throughout the centuries! And no one hates them!!

Which is GOOD!! (And let it stay that way, please, pretty please...)

I was joking LOL. Remember Genghis Khan?
No need to mention the generations of British royalty. Just say "Africa"

[K T Ong]

Strictly speaking, Genghis Khan was actually Mongolian and not Chinese -- he was not of the Han race as we Chinese refer to ourselves. The Mongolians had their own distinct language and traditions, even today. During the late 13th century, after a long period of defending herself against hostile foreign forces from the North, the Chinese Empire finally got swallowed up by Mongolian forces -- and Tibet, too, be it pointed out, which became part of China ever since. Genghis Khan himself reputedly killed a few million Chinese.

[ 08-20-2002, 03:00 AM: Message edited by: K T Ong ]

Originally posted by K T Ong: Strictly speaking, Genghis Khan was actually Mongolian and not Chinese -- he was not of the Han race as we Chinese refer to ourselves. The Mongolians had their own distinct language and traditions, even today. During the late 13th century the Chinese Empire got swallowed up by Mongolian forces -- and Tibet, too, be it pointed out, which became part of China ever since. Genghis Khan himself reputedly killed a few million Chinese.

Which would make the modern day Chinese of Mongolian ancestry?
Prior to his attack on China, Genghis Khan and The Ong Khan were employed by the Chinese Empire to destroy others...they were perhaps not Chinese by race but the Empire of China was behind a lot of their misdeeds for many years in attacks on those tribes which the Chinese Empire felt to be a threat.

[K T Ong]

Originally posted by Moni: Which would make the modern day Chinese of Mongolian ancestry? Prior to his attack on China, Genghis Khan and The Ong Khan were employed by the Chinese Empire to destroy others...they were perhaps not Chinese by race but the Empire of China was behind a lot of their misdeeds for many years in attacks on those tribes which the Chinese Empire felt to be a threat.

Duhhhh... Dunno about the Ong Khan -- where'd ya get that from??

I suppose the key question would be whether those tribes were merely felt to be a threat or whether they really were a threat. From what I know, the Song Dynasty (which ended with the Mongol invasion) was a dynasty that was exceptionally pacifistic in outlook; anything having to do with war was frowned upon, and art and literature were heavily patronised instead. Consequently the emperors often paid the tribes gold to appease them, rather than attempt to wipe them out through violent means.

The Chinese were a bit nastier in the immediately preceding Tang Dynasty -- they did try to spread their Empire a little further, but were stopped by the Arabs in the Battle of Talas. And they never attempted to spread their Empire any further.

Originally posted by K T Ong: Duhhhh... Dunno about the Ong Khan -- where'd ya get that from??

From Leo D. Hartog's "Genghis Khan, Conqueror of The World" a translation of: "Djenghis Khan's Werelds Grootste Veroveraar" (New York, St. Martin's Press, c1989)

The Ong Khan was another (late 1100's-early 1200's) Mongol leader and father figure/friend to Genghis Khan in his rise from being just Temujin to being Genghis Khan and the leader of all Mongol tribes.

My History professor was very impressed with the term paper I handed in on the subject of Temujin's rise to Khan and if there were discrepencies in the paper's historical content, he would have noted them as he is beyond what you would call a Master of the subject and cuts no one any slack. (I got a 98 [img]smile.gif[/img] the best grade he gave me in two full semesters lol)

It is a very interesting book...not too thick to become too boring to read and extremely full of historical information from many sources.

I suppose the key question would be whether those tribes were merely felt to be a threat or whether they really were a threat. From what I know, the Song Dynasty (which ended with the Mongol invasion) was a dynasty that was exceptionally pacifistic in outlook; anything having to do with war was frowned upon, and art and literature were heavily patronised instead. Consequently the emperors often paid the tribes gold to appease them, rather than attempt to wipe them out through violent means. The Chinese were a bit nastier in the immediately preceding Tang Dynasty -- they did try to spread their Empire a little further, but were stopped by the Arabs in the Battle of Talas. And they never attempted to spread their Empire any further.

I cannot say from either memory or knowledge whether the tribes attacked were indeed a threat...you know how political schemes can be twisted to purvey lies as the truth. [img]smile.gif[/img]

But it was the post-Tang, Chin dynasty if I remember right which "employed" The Ong Khan and Genghis Khan to defeat tribes they felt to be a threat. Genghis Khan may have ended up turning on them when the Chin emperor died, I would have to dig out the book and read it to be positive. I do recommend it as good reading into the subject of Genghis Khan and life in 12th century Mongolia/China. It is full of references that lead to more good reading on the subject. [img]smile.gif[/img]