Canada vs United States
Comments
-
Excludable wrote: »WillofGod/LiteTurtle/szym3n are morons
me and doug are smart
without United States, Canada would be nothing- if jefferson didn't buy the louisiana purchase, napoleon would have dominated the leader louissant, and sent his army to new orleans and set up an empire west of the mississppi
- if the above occurred, france would have easily destroyed united states and canada.
argue with me.
Okay, I'll break it down.
Jefferson got lucky and obtained the Louisiana Purchase.
IF he didn't get the offer, United States would have loss
-trade
-national security
-agrarian success
-$$$
-LAND
Napoleons brother, and general, Leclarc urged Napoleon to send an army to San Domingo or w/e to calm the hype led by the black leader, once that is achieved, they will send an army to New Orleans and set up an empire called "New France" in the west Mississippi.
-Spain is getting weak at this time, they will lose all of the west
-France could EASILY take the western side (mexico, california, etc.)
Once this is established, France could easily dominate the United States.
Who's next?
Canada.
France empire in West. GG.
Umm actually France wouldnt do that because Napolean sold it because he needed money for war efforts plus it was too far for him to control and secure the land, so it would have be more beneficial if he sold it, Thats what he did -
Before you ask people to argue yourself, why don't you search about it as well. It's always good to be able to go on either side, like a trial murder.
But by doing so, you're not saying you agree with the side or not, but by representing it, even if you don't want to take it's side, you're both looking at the whole thing more, and get not only more details, but the point of views from both sides. I thought long about this today, and did some research, was interesting, will type up some stuff later today perhaps about it. -
Before you ask people to argue yourself, why don't you search about it as well. It's always good to be able to go on either side, like a trial murder.
But by doing so, you're not saying you agree with the side or not, but by representing it, even if you don't want to take it's side, you're both looking at the whole thing more, and get not only more details, but the point of views from both sides. I thought long about this today, and did some research, was interesting, will type up some stuff later today perhaps about it.
Hey rex, did you actually carve your avatar? Anyways, I choose Canada cause I live in Canada!!!!
-
Thank you, someone intellectual.Before you ask people to argue yourself, why don't you search about it as well. It's always good to be able to go on either side, like a trial murder.
But by doing so, you're not saying you agree with the side or not, but by representing it, even if you don't want to take it's side, you're both looking at the whole thing more, and get not only more details, but the point of views from both sides. I thought long about this today, and did some research, was interesting, will type up some stuff later today perhaps about it.
You have no argument.Sexcludable wrote: »Exclude lost already.
close this thread plez.
That's the present, how about history itself?Shad0wK1LL wrote: »Canada!
And USA get slike 90% of their oil from Canada
without us, they would have to get their oil form Iran/Iraq.
GL with that -
The percent probably wouldve been higher cuz Canada and USA are right beside each other, it would cost way too much for USA to get their oil from other parts of the worldExcludable wrote: »Thank you, someone intellectual.
You have no argument.
That's the present, how about history itself? -
One event doesn't make a country better.Shad0wK1LL wrote: »we lit ur politcal building on fire
no Canadians died during this
just sayin'
That's like saying USA dropped the bomb on Japan. Does that make USA a better country in economics than Japan?
It's arguable. -
Excludable wrote: »WillofGod/LiteTurtle/szym3n are morons
me and doug are smart
without United States, Canada would be nothing- if jefferson didn't buy the louisiana purchase, napoleon would have dominated the leader louissant, and sent his army to new orleans and set up an empire west of the mississppi
- if the above occurred, france would have easily destroyed united states and canada.
argue with me.
Okay, I'll break it down.
Jefferson got lucky and obtained the Louisiana Purchase.
IF he didn't get the offer, United States would have loss
-trade
-national security
-agrarian success
-$$$
-LAND
Napoleons brother, and general, Leclarc urged Napoleon to send an army to San Domingo or w/e to calm the hype led by the black leader, once that is achieved, they will send an army to New Orleans and set up an empire called "New France" in the west Mississippi.
-Spain is getting weak at this time, they will lose all of the west
-France could EASILY take the western side (mexico, california, etc.)
Once this is established, France could easily dominate the United States.
Who's next?
Canada.
France empire in West. GG.
1. Jefferson didn't get lucky, he knew what he was doing. France was in war with almost all Europe (and the french were winning ), and Napoleon really needed the money. However by doing this purchase he contradicted one of his beliefs (The President of the U.S shouldn't be that powerful, yet he bought all that land without the Congress' permission)
2. France would dominate the U.S and Canada? Give me break, France had a superior navy, but the Americans had better leaders and the advantage of fighting in their own land.
3. France taking over Mexico? 5 de Mayo, thank you very much.
4.Before calling other people morons you should take some extra History classes or at least do some research, in my eyes the moron here is somebody else.Excludable wrote: »Atomic Bomb
Treaties
#1 Country in the World
Democracy
It's a clear thesis.
Don't forget total denial of human rights everytime the U.S is in war.
and actually the U.S is #2 now, China took the spot.
BTW, Democracy?
Presidents get elected by electoral votes, not by popular votes, that's not democracy. -
-
1. Jefferson didn't get lucky, he knew what he was doing. France was in war with almost all Europe (and the french were winning ), and Napoleon really needed the money. However by doing this purchase he contradicted one of his beliefs (The President of the U.S shouldn't be that powerful, yet he bought all that land without the Congress' permission)
2. France would dominate the U.S and Canada? Give me break, France had a superior navy, but the Americans had better leaders and the advantage of fighting in their own land. (Do you think that the americans actually won? The english army simply gave up.)
3. France taking over Mexico? 5 de Mayo, thank you very much.
4.Before calling other people morons you should take some extra History classes or at least do some research, in my eyes the moron here is somebody else.
Don't forget total denial of human rights everytime the U.S is in war.
and actually the U.S is #2 now, China took the spot.
BTW, Democracy?
Presidents get elected by electoral votes, not by popular votes, that's not democracy.
He bought Louisiana, by making a treaty. Constitution allows that.
And yes, it was lucky. The timing was perfect, and Livingston made a crucial decision, over the Atlantic Ocean.
Yes, parts of Mexico/California could easily be dominated.
Many historians call the Spanish holding Mexico as a "reserve." They were just holding on to it.
Britain had a better navy.
And George Washington was a terrible tactical general. His win:loss ratio is greater than 1:3.
Washington, however, was ingenious in keeping his army together.
Who said I said the president was elected by popular vote? -
But in order to make a treaty, you need the congress' permission to do it.Excludable wrote: »He bought Louisiana, by making a treaty. Constitution allows that.
(As I said earlier) "Checks and balances", just look up that term out.
That's not called luck, that's called planning your next move. (A.K.A You know what you are doing)Excludable wrote: »And yes, it was lucky. The timing was perfect, and Livingston made a crucial decision, over the Atlantic Ocean.Excludable wrote: »Yes, parts of Mexico/California could easily be dominated.
Many historians call the Spanish holding Mexico as a "reserve." They were just holding on to it.
They had Mexico because of the Gold Mines.
And yet they lost to France several times in battles involving ships, go figure.Excludable wrote: »Britain had a better navy.Excludable wrote: »And George Washington was a terrible tactical general. His win:loss ratio is greater than 1:3.
Washington, however, was ingenious in keeping his army together.
How is a bunch of Hilly Billys beat the English Army? He lost so many times, and yet he pulled it off and "beat" the English Army? (They never beat them, the English simply gave up on fighting) Doesn't that make him a great leader?Excludable wrote: »Who said I said the president was elected by popular vote?
Here:Excludable wrote: »Atomic Bomb
Treaties
#1 Country in the World
Democracy
It's a clear thesis.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy#Direct -
But in order to make a treaty, you need the congress' permission to do it.
(As I said earlier) "Checks and balances", just look up that term out.
That's not called luck, that's called planning your next move. (A.K.A You know what you are doing)
They had Mexico because of the Gold Mines.
And yet they lost to France several times in battles involving ships, go figure.
How is a bunch of Hilly Billys beat the English Army? He lost so many times, and yet he pulled it off and "beat" the English Army? (They never beat them, the English simply gave up on fighting) Doesn't that make him a great leader?
Here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Democracy#Direct
Okay, but still, Jefferson made the right decision. Hypocrisy wouldn't matter.
Luck? How is perfect timing, not luck?
Spain had Mexico, because they dominated it first. Spain, however, was gradually losing their power.
Everyone loses battles. But Britain had the greatest fleet. Which is why it was called the Royal Navy.
"Hilly Billys" won the war, because they fought the war differently. Instead of European warfare, they played guerrilla. The Frontiersmen also had an amazing shot.
The capture of a whole army, turned the tide.
However, Nathaniel Greene isn't recognized greatly for his duties. He was a brilliant general.
Washington, just had the spirit, which held the army together. -
What did canada do for the states?
Canada collaborated with the states in the cold war, such as NORAD (North American Aerospace Defence command). And Canada has always tried its best in keeping its currency low so that the states could buy canada's resources cheap. -
Canadians pollution has gone 50% up because of USA. Due to the Jet Stream etc etc. Americans are definetly not a clean country and have started in many wars. They are economic debt (Bigtime) and cannot play hockey. What else must i say? Though, USA and Canada are big trading partners and have been friends for a while. Im not going to say which is one better. We need each other.
-
Excludable wrote: »WillofGod/LiteTurtle/szym3n are morons
me and doug are smart
without United States, Canada would be nothing- if jefferson didn't buy the louisiana purchase, napoleon would have dominated the leader louissant, and sent his army to new orleans and set up an empire west of the mississppi
- if the above occurred, france would have easily destroyed united states and canada.
argue with me.
Okay, I'll break it down.
Jefferson got lucky and obtained the Louisiana Purchase.
IF he didn't get the offer, United States would have loss
-trade
-national security
-agrarian success
-$$$
-LAND
Napoleons brother, and general, Leclarc urged Napoleon to send an army to San Domingo or w/e to calm the hype led by the black leader, once that is achieved, they will send an army to New Orleans and set up an empire called "New France" in the west Mississippi.
-Spain is getting weak at this time, they will lose all of the west
-France could EASILY take the western side (mexico, california, etc.)
Once this is established, France could easily dominate the United States.
Who's next?
Canada.
France empire in West. GG.
W/O the USA, Canada would have a backbone. W/O Canada, the US would just be another country thinking they are the greatest, and seeking power. We supply the power that you need, you drag us in to everything we do. -
And yet they lost to France several times in battles involving ships, go figure.
easy there tiger. if you can give me a single instance of a major naval battle between england and france that the english did not win... well... respect.
but seeing as the brits won all their major battles, those that were not won were proven inconclusive eg. fleets went too far out of range.
ship for ship actions dont count...
however i do agree that washingtons victory around yorktown was pretty key. british soldiers morale dropped massively because of it...
@Eirin... that flags in the nevada desert isnt it ^^
![[MOD]Rex](https://z8games.akamaized.net/cfna/forum/customavatars/68/navatar_3617368.gif){kind=avatar}
Categories
- All Categories
- Z8Games
- 1 Z8 Forum Discussion & Suggestions
- 15 Z8Games Announcements
- Rules & Conduct
- 2.5K CrossFire
- 715 CrossFire Announcements
- 714 Previous Announcements
- 2 Previous Patch Notes
- 322 Community
- 12 Modes
- 393 Suggestions
- 16 Clan Discussion and Recruitment
- 73 CF Competitive Forum
- 1 CFCL
- 16 Looking for a Team?
- 524 CrossFire Support
- 7 Suggestion
- 15 CrossFire Guides
- 37 CrossFire Off Topic