Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JezWeCan!)
    You earlier posts revealed that you knew little, (if anything frankly) about the dreadful history of the Ottoman Empire. You will deny it, obviously, but we both know this is true.
    I'm having to repeat myself here. Not in order to restate points that you have argued in some manner against, which I try to avoid doing. But to draw your attention to things I've said, or not said, that you seem to be ignoring utterly. I never said that the British Empire was worse than the Ottoman Empire. I'm not interested in a game of "whose empire was most terrible". I didn't give a detailed history of the Ottoman Empire because that wasn't in any way part of the point I wished to discuss. That doesn't betray any kind of ignorance in the same way you not talking about the Roman Empire doesn't mean you are ill-informed on the matter.

    As to being wrong, you admitted it, in effect, when you finally conceded that the Ottomans were worse than us. That was my whole point.
    No, I haven't said that at all. Feel free to browse our exchanges and refresh your memory.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by offhegoes)

    "when you finally conceded that the Ottomans were worse than us."

    No, I haven't said that at all. Feel free to browse our exchanges and refresh your memory.
    (Original post by offhegoes)
    I haven't said the Ottoman Empire wasn't worse.
    Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

    You like Latin!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Perhaps we should have a national holidays to celebrate that, whilst the British Empire did many terrible things, other empires also did terrible things? Name suggestions?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JezWeCan!)
    Quod Erat Demonstrandum.

    You like Latin!
    I also haven't said that the sky isn't red. Surely you grasp that you've produced a much more textbook non-sequitur this time?
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by offhegoes)
    I also haven't said that the sky isn't red. Surely you grasp that you've produced a much more textbook non-sequitur this time?
    If you weren't admitting that the Ottoman Empire was worse, what were you saying then?

    Why make the comment at all?

    Statements that are made to no purpose, which don't follow on from the preceding sense...now what are they termed? Hmmm... I've got it!

    Non sequiturs.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JezWeCan!)
    If you weren't admitting that the Ottoman Empire was worse, what were you saying then?

    Why make the comment at all?

    Statements that are made to no purpose, which don't follow on from the preceding sense...now what are they termed? Hmmm... I've got it!

    Non sequiturs.
    Instead of discussing the atrocities commited by the British Empire, you have repeatedly clung to the defence that I must be wrong because the Ottoman Empire was, in your opinion worse.

    My statement was to help you avoid slipping into the strawman fallacy of portraying my argument as being that the British Empire was the worst in order to attack that premise, instead of actually arguing the points I made.

    So let's sum this up so far. You're telling me I said things which I didn't say. You're insisting I actually did say them, going as far as using the language of formal logic to assert the point despite their being no logic to your conclusion. So instead you're dismissing what I said as being irrelevant to the discussion. No doubt you'll come up with more reasons why I'm wrong and ill-informed without ever actually going to the bother of disputing anything I've said, instead resorting to ad-hominem attacks and harking back to what you felt I meant.

    Hope to be proved wrong. Doubt it.

    The British Empire commited an array of atrocities and these should be remembered as part of its history.
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by offhegoes)

    The British Empire commited an array of atrocities and these should be remembered as part of its history.
    History is an interpretation of events in which some facts are emphasised and others down played or not mentioned at all.

    It tells us more about the time it is written, almost, than it does about the time written about.

    Plus, the longer ago the events described, the greater the perspective. We can see the consequences, longer term. As a Chinese thinker when asked in the later twentieth century what he thought were the consequences of the French Revolution remarked "it is too early to tell."

    What we find of interest, worth remembering is different to what a historian a hundred years hence will notice.

    We are too close to the end of Empire to form a balanced perspective. What we are currently witnessing is a time in which the "atrocities" are being over
    emphasised, in my view, at the expense of the many many many positives.

    That there were "atrocities" no-one denies. But they must be considered in relative terms, in contradistinction to other Empires. And by the standards of the time.

    And balanced against the achievements which were of world historical importance. The British Empire rivals the Roman as a force for civilisation and good in the world.

    Why do you (and you represent a shallow, group think trend) constantly emphasise how dreadful the Empire was, and never acknowledge (do you even realise?) the immense achievements?

    Yes let's face up to the wickedness of the past, but it is all we ever hear about the British Empire.

    (The Turks are different, they err in the other direction, denyng the Armenian holocaust even happened. That is even worse)

    As I said in an earlier post, in the long term history will be very kind to the British Empire.

    Anyway, I am done on this thread, wasted enough time on it, so won't reply to any response. Fill your boots. Goodbye!
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by JezWeCan!)
    Why do you (and you represent a shallow, group think trend) constantly emphasise how dreadful the Empire was, and never acknowledge (do you even realise?) the immense achievements?

    Anyway, I am done on this thread, wasted enough time on it, so won't reply to any response. Fill your boots. Goodbye!
    Couldn't resist one last unsubstantiated ad hominem attack could you
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XcitingStuart)
    But it is undemocratic, you fool.

    We elect / vote in people (MPs) who can vote for/against / propose legislation in the House of Commons (UK).

    We elect / vote in people (MEPs) who can not propose, appeal or amend legislation in the European Parliament (EU).


    You lose me as to why you'd sacrifice your democracy for something with little economic benefits.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    And here are the economic reasons as to why we should leave...
    1. We pay an EU Membership fee of £55 million a day. Half of this is invested into things in the UK, but we don't even get to decide how that is spent.
    2. Because we are subjected to a Customs Union, we can't make free trade deals with the biggest economies like United States, China and Japan.
    3. In this Customs Union there's the Common External Tariff. This is a 33% tariff on foreign agriculture goods. This was created to drive down competition between EU farmers and farmers in third world countries by disinclining businesses in the EU to source from them. (1) This stalls the development of many third world countries. Cruel right? (2) This however is also a disadvantage to us because it also drives up the food prices, so the cost of food is higher in the UK than in for example the USA. (3) This also creates regional monopolies in agriculture.
    4. In the Custom Unions there are quotas not to go over for food production in countries, namely the food production for fisheries. Any excess fish for example, is dumped, DUMPED. Not just a fine, but the food is wasted, especially when they could just input it into the market and drive down respective fish prices, and issue a hefty fine, or just give it to the 800 million people who go hungry around the world (making their part to reduce that problem.)
    5. The EU taxes carbon emissions. Sounds like a good thing, right? Well it isn't, because it doesn't rectify the problem. Energy prices increase, which drives business away to other countries. So end result is jobless people in the UK (increased unemployment) and no carbon emission reduction (they've only relocated to a different country not under EU taxation.)
    The decrease in living costs and the increase in wages benefits everyone.
    "fool"

    "We elect / vote in people (MEPs) who can not propose, appeal or amend legislation in the European Parliament (EU)."
    This is oversimplification and false. In fact, the below excerpt is from your own link

    (Original post by wikipedia)
    Under the co-decision procedure, they (the European Parliament and the Council of the European Union) each have up to three readings of legislative proposals put forward by the European Commission in which they can each amend the proposal, but must ultimately approve a text in identical terms for it to be passed
    Complaining you are not getting your way undemocratic


    ....Now lets see your "economic" reasons:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    1) You will appreciate that mentioning the GROSS figure is just a ploy to purport how UK is "wasting obscene amount of money" for an organization that supposedly rivals the nazis lol.

    If you really want to make a case on the "obscene" amount of money try inflating the NET cost of membership. (It will be between £6-7 billion a year)

    Besides, are you aware of any bloc or group or clubhouse that has a membership fees and you are able to decide how that is spent?
    Spoiler:
    Show
    2) If you have listened to Obama, he explicitly said brexit will put UK "back of the queue".

    Smart thinking if you are hoping for a trade deal with the US post brexit

    And the above scenario is similar in China's case as well.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    3) Way to go shifting a point of view. The fundamental basis of EU is a trade union with minimal financial barriers; aka free trade. In order to encourage trade between EU members, there are "taxes" levied on non-members. Plain and simple.

    Regarding your laughable comment, "This stalls the development of many third world countries" are you ignoring EU's foreign aid or just ignorant about the EU foreign aid?!
    Spoiler:
    Show
    4) If fishes are being dumped, the solution is not to quit EU but to reform. Basically you are just saying "let them waste whatever it is but don't use my name cuz I dont want the blame!". It's pathetic m8.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    5) I'm sorry are you saying we should encourage businesses to rely on coal and natural gas for their whatever operations?!

    Smh how abt we construct some nuclear power plants then? You know its going to give people a lot of jobs just like you want?

    ... So really your "economic" reasons are just astonishing and ludicrous
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TaintedLight)
    "fool"



    This is oversimplification and false. In fact, the below excerpt is from your own link



    Complaining you are not getting your way undemocratic


    ....Now lets see your "economic" reasons:
    Spoiler:
    Show
    1) You will appreciate that mentioning the GROSS figure is just a ploy to purport how UK is "wasting obscene amount of money" for an organization that supposedly rivals the nazis lol.

    If you really want to make a case on the "obscene" amount of money try inflating the NET cost of membership. (It will be between £6-7 billion a year)

    Besides, are you aware of any bloc or group or clubhouse that has a membership fees and you are able to decide how that is spent?
    Spoiler:
    Show
    2) If you have listened to Obama, he explicitly said brexit will put UK "back of the queue".

    Smart thinking if you are hoping for a trade deal with the US post brexit

    And the above scenario is similar in China's case as well.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    3) Way to go shifting a point of view. The fundamental basis of EU is a trade union with minimal financial barriers; aka free trade. In order to encourage trade between EU members, there are "taxes" levied on non-members. Plain and simple.

    Regarding your laughable comment, "This stalls the development of many third world countries" are you ignoring EU's foreign aid or just ignorant about the EU foreign aid?!
    Spoiler:
    Show
    4) If fishes are being dumped, the solution is not to quit EU but to reform. Basically you are just saying "let them waste whatever it is but don't use my name cuz I dont want the blame!". It's pathetic m8.
    Spoiler:
    Show
    5) I'm sorry are you saying we should encourage businesses to rely on coal and natural gas for their whatever operations?!

    Smh how abt we construct some nuclear power plants then? You know its going to give people a lot of jobs just like you want?
    ... So really your "economic" reasons are just astonishing and ludicrous
    I don't have time to reply in full right now, but in reply to point 2, just because a country finds it unfavourable, doesn't mean they'd stop trading with us.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by TaintedLight)
    This is oversimplification and false. In fact, the below excerpt is from your own link
    So you're quoting a source that agrees with their point to try to rebut their argument, I must say I've not seen that done in some time.

    As for your economic point too, you do realise how insulting that comment is to America because it implies that suddenly America is incapable of negotiating several things at a time, and if I were you I would be listening to Trump, not Obama, I don't see how the current president is relevant when they're leaving office in 7 months.

    As for EU foreign aid, you might want to take a look at how much it is and where it goes, and then how to help people.

    Neither the gross budget contribution often used, nor the net are good measures, the best figure is the post rebate figure.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by XcitingStuart)
    I don't have time to reply in full right now, but in reply to point 2, just because a country finds it unfavourable, doesn't mean they'd stop trading with us.
    Take your time :yy:

    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    So you're quoting a source that agrees with their point to try to rebut their argument, I must say I've not seen that done in some time.

    As for your economic point too, you do realise how insulting that comment is to America because it implies that suddenly America is incapable of negotiating several things at a time, and if I were you I would be listening to Trump, not Obama, I don't see how the current president is relevant when they're leaving office in 7 months.

    As for EU foreign aid, you might want to take a look at how much it is and where it goes, and then how to help people.

    Neither the gross budget contribution often used, nor the net are good measures, the best figure is the post rebate figure.
    You sit back and stick to reading. I'll deal with any of the above if Stuart brings it up.

    Meanwhile, do you plan to respond in the other brexit thread?
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by The Roast)
    Hear! Hear!

    I fear that the 18-24 year cucks will be the end of it though...

    (Original post by Dandaman1)
    I've been watching the Brexit debate unfold from "across the pond" with great interest (a lot of us have, actually). As someone who lived in the UK for a while, I see it as a second home. Therefore I find myself with an emotional stake in this.

    My feeling, shared by many here it seems, is that you should leave. You're obviously not happy with your relationship with the EU, and why you would opt to remain shackled to something so undemocratic and restrictive is hard to understand. That choking, beaurocratic mass pulls you in ever closer by the decade. It eats away at your sovereignty, your identity, and castrates your economic and democratic freedom. Now you're being given what will probably be a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to leave.

    Use it.

    Will there be economic repercussions? Probably, but Britain is a strong nation, with strong diplomatic ties outside of Europe. See this as an opportunity to start something fresh, to build beyond Europe, and win back some pride.

    What great nation can't even determine most of its own economic policies, control its own borders, or decide some of the most basic things about products and services?
    No, the reason why we're remaining is because we are international country. We WILL remain, here some things I don't get about brexiters:

    > Why leave when we're #1 in soft power in the world because of EU.
    > Why leave EU if we're expected to be EU biggest economy in near future.
    > Why leave if we can go anywhere in Europe easily.
    > What about people who are on low wages/going to university/getting part-time job as a student? Unemployment will obviously rise.. what about those people hm? Wouldn't lack of investment and inflation sky-rocket tution fees again?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by TaintedLight)
    Take your time :yy:



    You sit back and stick to reading. I'll deal with any of the above if Stuart brings it up.

    Meanwhile, do you plan to respond in the other brexit thread?
    Which one, most probably?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by ckfeister)
    No, the reason why we're remaining is because we are international country. We WILL remain, here some things I don't get about brexiters:

    > Why leave when we're #1 in soft power in the world because of EU.
    > Why leave EU if we're expected to be EU biggest economy in near future.
    > Why leave if we can go anywhere in Europe easily.
    > What about people who are on low wages/going to university/getting part-time job as a student? Unemployment will obviously rise.. what about those people hm? Wouldn't lack of investment and inflation sky-rocket tution fees again?
    Because it isn't due to the EU
    Because there is more to it than being the biggest Economy, if the size of the economy were everything then why has 40 years of reform achieved nothing?
    Because we can easily travel after leaving too, last time you went to the continental EU did you need your passport? You'll find the answer is yes, so what exactly is changing? We go from no visa and a passport to...no visa and a passport.
    And rise by how much for how long and recovering when? Oh, I forgot, everybody is too busy being a short termist.

    If we're such an international country then why are we shutting out the world and not embracing it?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Because it isn't due to the EU
    Because there is more to it than being the biggest Economy, if the size of the economy were everything then why has 40 years of reform achieved nothing?
    Because we can easily travel after leaving too, last time you went to the continental EU did you need your passport? You'll find the answer is yes, so what exactly is changing? We go from no visa and a passport to...no visa and a passport.
    And rise by how much for how long and recovering when? Oh, I forgot, everybody is too busy being a short termist.

    If we're such an international country then why are we shutting out the world and not embracing it?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    What on Earth you on about? Go and look at everything you see see where its all made from, not everything is European, barely anything is. This " rise " also affects us in short-term because its us who is PAYING THE DEBT being WORSE OFF in short-term, also not to forget short-term could be 10 years or I could be 30 years by then I'd be middle aged and don't want that to happen as its almost half of my life time.
    We should help Europe fixing these problems, not leaving it then throwing the entire project away, don't forget who came up with the idea.. CHURCHILL, what will he do?
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by ckfeister)
    What on Earth you on about? Go and look at everything you see see where its all made from, not everything is European, barely anything is. This " rise " also affects us in short-term because its us who is PAYING THE DEBT being WORSE OFF in short-term, also not to forget short-term could be 10 years or I could be 30 years by then I'd be middle aged and don't want that to happen as its almost half of my life time.
    We should help Europe fixing these problems, not leaving it then throwing the entire project away, don't forget who came up with the idea.. CHURCHILL, what will he do?
    Sort term as in a few years, merely to reconcile the treasury reports necessitates either no real impact, or a stronger economy for it (or, far more likely, they are inaccurate). It also has to be remembered that increasing a debt that you write off has no effect on what is paid back.

    And Churchill did not create the idea, he endorsed it, and he wouldn't have had us join in the first place.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    Sort term as in a few years, merely to reconcile the treasury reports necessitates either no real impact, or a stronger economy for it (or, far more likely, they are inaccurate). It also has to be remembered that increasing a debt that you write off has no effect on what is paid back.

    And Churchill did not create the idea, he endorsed it, and he wouldn't have had us join in the first place.

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I have a personal reason to why I'm voting in. I know remain side is doing lies about we be poorer blah blah, we won't be much. My main reason to remain: get a part-time job and get df out of my parents house.
    • Political Ambassador
    Online

    21
    ReputationRep:
    Political Ambassador
    (Original post by ckfeister)
    I have a personal reason to why I'm voting in. I know remain side is doing lies about we be poorer blah blah, we won't be much. My main reason to remain: get a part-time job and get df out of my parents house.
    And somehow leaving makes finding part time work an impossibility?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jammy Duel)
    And somehow leaving makes finding part time work an impossibility?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    More harder, obviously unemployment will rise could only be a little but will lower chance of getting a job.
 
 
 
Reply
Submit reply
TSR Support Team

We have a brilliant team of more than 60 Support Team members looking after discussions on The Student Room, helping to make it a fun, safe and useful place to hang out.

Updated: June 8, 2016
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Would you like to hibernate through the winter months?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.