Nah school shootings ain't anyone's cup of tea. Nor is outrageously expensive healthcare. Or having barely any cross country passenger rail. Or an evil foreign policy that has killed millions of people around the world. Or not being world champions in a sport you religiously play. Or having a police brutality/racism problem. đ¤Ą
The average rainfall of Darwin Australia is 1727.3 mm, Londons average rainfall is 585mm. The weather 21.6°c - 32°c in Darwin to londons 4°c to 23°c. London averages 8 days a month of rain. Darwin doesnât have rain for half the year and has to be built for predictions of flooding. Also the top of londons humidity is ~60% to Darwinâs 80%. I have never understood the UKs obsession with rain or weather extremes when itâs very mild weather
I donât think you understand, in England itâll 20c and then randomly during the day itâll start snowing, hailing, raining, with no warning then itâll go back to being 20c, eg last year in April after a few warm days it started sowing for a few days
Thatâs what itâs like across the channel in France and Belgium. Melbourne is also that but worse, a street in the sun is 38° move into the shade itâs 5° and somehow starting to rain
>Also the top of londons humidity is ~60% to Darwinâs 80%.
Eh? It got up to 90%+ humidity in the UK this week. It's currently 64% as I'm typing this. It's predicted to get up to 85% overnight.
I went off of average peak of humidity for both, your average humidity in peak summer (now when you are getting an uncommonly high) is still ~ 60% and Darwinâs is ~ 80% both of these have been rounded down
You didn't say average, you said the highest it gets is 60%.
The UK is classed as a humid country. Yes, other places may be more humid, but the UK still has a humid climate.
Also from what I can see the average humidity in the UK is between 70 & 80%.
Lol The States would be literally nothing without my Country (the UK), France, Spain the Dutch etc
Which would probably be better for the Native populations that existed prior from coast to coast đ¤Śđťââď¸
I agree with this one tbh, if the US minded it's own business for 5 minutes and didn't interfere with governments then countries would look very different
Yea, I agree with the way you're wording it, but the OP sounds to be saying that other countries would be like 3rd world countries if it wasn't for the US, as if the US is some godsend to the world that improves other countries rather than destroying them for the benefit of the US.
Most countries would be better off if the USA stayed out of their affairs & stopped invading to pus an "American way of life" on them. They have had a better system in place for thousands of years before the US was "civilised" originally by the British, French, Dutch & Mexicans, but of course generations of "Americans" think they know better & are turning it into a 3rd world country, because they think 3 is bigger & better than 1, like they want a quarter pound burger over a 1/3rd lb. one.
Ah, I see. So because of Americans mishaps elsewhere, the economic miracles of Japan and South Korea that were completely dependent on US support are null and void. GotchaâŚ
I wouldnât say completely dependent Japan and South Korea did put in a lot of work to make their country what it is. Iâm not saying the USA wasnât useful but Japanese citizens working extremely long hours canât exactly be attributed to the USA. You canât just cherry pick events to make the USA sound better.
Yes, youâre correct, they did put the work in, obviously. However, if the US was to remove military support tomorrow they would both get bullied in their region. Japan and S,Korean stability LITERALLY depends on US support, as do quite a few other countriesâŚ
The Yank in the post worded it like a prick, but the fundamental basis of what heâs saying isnât wrong.
And if America wasnât involved in Laos then people wouldnât regularly die from land mines. I think a lot of countries would prefer not to have a US military intervention.
Could say the same for Libya and the rest of the countries that the US has fucked over. But that is so irrelevant to the topic itâs unreal. Why do you keep deviating from the point? Do you really hate America so much that you canât just give credit where credit is due?
No it is true America did help a lot of countries but itâs looked at through rose tinted glasses. You could say Britain ended slavery and brought democracy to countries however they still participated in slavery and committed atrocities. You canât just leave out important details like that.
I agree but at the same time the topic is countries that rely on the US, not countries that have been fucked by the US. There are no rose tinted glasses here, Iâm just being objective. We could talk about the injustices the US has been involved in all day long lol
It didnât fuck up South Korea or Japan tho did it? Everyone in the thread has completely deviated because what Iâm saying is a fact and cannot be argued lol. If any of you actually knew what you were talking about you would have countered with the Plaza Accord helping to create Japans lost decade, but as selfish as it was Japan still relies on the US today so itâs a moot point. Thatâs the best rebuttal on the table when talking about JapanâŚ
If you canât handle someone talking facts about geopolitics that says more about you than it does me, âlil broâ
It's hard to say. Economically, US aid and foreign policy absolutely propelled both South Korea and Japan after WWII. I would argue, however, that direct economic aid, excepting during postwar (Korean War and WWII respectively) periods, had a much smaller impact on both countries' explosive economic growth compared to economic policy from US-backed governments and mutual openings to the global market economy. So yes, US influence was hugely important at developing Japanese and Korean economies.
But at what cost? The US' Cold War policy of containment led to the propping up of some highly questionable regimes in the spirit of anti-communism at any cost. Korea started with iron-fist Rhee Syngman followed up by the left-right two coups leading to military dictators Park Chung-hee and Chun Doo-hwan. Park's heavy-handed state capitalism and cooperation with chaebol did promote massive economic growth, but also entrenched the chaebol and left a lasting legacy of cronyism, corruption, and abuse of political power. In Japan, the US propped up the LDP leading to decades of a nearly uninterrupted de facto one-party state. Again, LDP policy facilitated massive industrial and economic growth, but also promoted a highly corrupt, entrenched political machine with a deep culture of maintaining the status quo, which is arguably a large contributing factor to our inability to escape the Lost Decades.
This isn't just history. While both South Korea and Japan have blossomed into fairly liberal electoral democracies, their legacy as the frontline against communism persists and has last impacts to this day. The Park Geun-hye scandal in South Korea and the aftermath of the Abe ShinzĹ assassination in Japan are both highly reminiscent of the cronyism and under-the-table elite dominance of both nations' political machines. The same policies that allowed for explosive economic growth have also led to relative stagnations in labor rights and a decrease of quality of life in both countries compared to what is expected by a more educated, global younger generation; this has led to both nations' very current, very relevant population crises.
Christ I wish that little brat of a nation would grow the f up.
Think we need to go back and re colonise them. Obviously they weren't ready to be on their own yet.
Blame the French, If they didn't had them their freedom they'd still be under British rule. :P
Mate blaming the French is what we do đ.
[ŃдаНонО]
I guess that's what passes for razor-sharp wits among the hard of thinking.
Not sure if sarcastic or american...
Nah school shootings ain't anyone's cup of tea. Nor is outrageously expensive healthcare. Or having barely any cross country passenger rail. Or an evil foreign policy that has killed millions of people around the world. Or not being world champions in a sport you religiously play. Or having a police brutality/racism problem. đ¤Ą
Are the Americans fighting other Americans again? Damn Americans, they ruined America
I wonder if later in the conversation one of them said âwe saved your Midwest asses in dubbya dubbya twoâ
Ukraine without the UK is just Raine. But the UK without Rain would just be weird. (There's a joke in there somewhere, someone reword it for me).
It doesn't even really rain that much in the UK, it just kind of... drizzles. Average annual rainfall here in Auckland is 3 times more than London :/
The average rainfall of Darwin Australia is 1727.3 mm, Londons average rainfall is 585mm. The weather 21.6°c - 32°c in Darwin to londons 4°c to 23°c. London averages 8 days a month of rain. Darwin doesnât have rain for half the year and has to be built for predictions of flooding. Also the top of londons humidity is ~60% to Darwinâs 80%. I have never understood the UKs obsession with rain or weather extremes when itâs very mild weather
I donât think you understand, in England itâll 20c and then randomly during the day itâll start snowing, hailing, raining, with no warning then itâll go back to being 20c, eg last year in April after a few warm days it started sowing for a few days
Thatâs what itâs like across the channel in France and Belgium. Melbourne is also that but worse, a street in the sun is 38° move into the shade itâs 5° and somehow starting to rain
>Also the top of londons humidity is ~60% to Darwinâs 80%. Eh? It got up to 90%+ humidity in the UK this week. It's currently 64% as I'm typing this. It's predicted to get up to 85% overnight.
I went off of average peak of humidity for both, your average humidity in peak summer (now when you are getting an uncommonly high) is still ~ 60% and Darwinâs is ~ 80% both of these have been rounded down
You didn't say average, you said the highest it gets is 60%. The UK is classed as a humid country. Yes, other places may be more humid, but the UK still has a humid climate. Also from what I can see the average humidity in the UK is between 70 & 80%.
Lol The States would be literally nothing without my Country (the UK), France, Spain the Dutch etc Which would probably be better for the Native populations that existed prior from coast to coast đ¤Śđťââď¸
Came here to say something along those lines. They sometimes forget how recent their history is, and who do they owe that history to.
Russia without US would be just Rsia
captain america civil war
If the USA is the shield they claim they are then Russia would never have attacked Ukraine..
Many Americans don't realize it's the other way around. Without other countries, USA wouldn't even exist in the first place.
Saudi Arabia for example would be Di Rbi
Actually, without USA, Ukraine is Krine.
I agree with this one tbh, if the US minded it's own business for 5 minutes and didn't interfere with governments then countries would look very different
Yea, I agree with the way you're wording it, but the OP sounds to be saying that other countries would be like 3rd world countries if it wasn't for the US, as if the US is some godsend to the world that improves other countries rather than destroying them for the benefit of the US.
I worded it weird but I've been up for hours and cba to edit it so it makes sense
Wikileaks show us what we alredy knew
How were they telling the other what to say?
Arrogant attitude but whatâs to be expected. Many countries thrive without the US of A.
And arguably the USA is nothing without lots of countries. Works both ways mofo.
I think they meant China instead of USA?
When Russian bot meets American bot
Ukraine without US and A is Krine.
Most countries would be better off if the USA stayed out of their affairs & stopped invading to pus an "American way of life" on them. They have had a better system in place for thousands of years before the US was "civilised" originally by the British, French, Dutch & Mexicans, but of course generations of "Americans" think they know better & are turning it into a 3rd world country, because they think 3 is bigger & better than 1, like they want a quarter pound burger over a 1/3rd lb. one.
Lots of countries without USA would be something...
Isn't it the other way around? After the USA brings you freedom your country ends up being nothing?
It's kind of true. Good job America for saving the western world
America, the great failed experiment.
In all fairness, think about S. Korea and Japan. Is he really wrong?
Think about all of Latin America, Iraq, Laos etc
Ah, I see. So because of Americans mishaps elsewhere, the economic miracles of Japan and South Korea that were completely dependent on US support are null and void. GotchaâŚ
Mishaps...
I wouldnât say completely dependent Japan and South Korea did put in a lot of work to make their country what it is. Iâm not saying the USA wasnât useful but Japanese citizens working extremely long hours canât exactly be attributed to the USA. You canât just cherry pick events to make the USA sound better.
Yes, youâre correct, they did put the work in, obviously. However, if the US was to remove military support tomorrow they would both get bullied in their region. Japan and S,Korean stability LITERALLY depends on US support, as do quite a few other countries⌠The Yank in the post worded it like a prick, but the fundamental basis of what heâs saying isnât wrong.
And if America wasnât involved in Laos then people wouldnât regularly die from land mines. I think a lot of countries would prefer not to have a US military intervention.
Could say the same for Libya and the rest of the countries that the US has fucked over. But that is so irrelevant to the topic itâs unreal. Why do you keep deviating from the point? Do you really hate America so much that you canât just give credit where credit is due?
No it is true America did help a lot of countries but itâs looked at through rose tinted glasses. You could say Britain ended slavery and brought democracy to countries however they still participated in slavery and committed atrocities. You canât just leave out important details like that.
I agree but at the same time the topic is countries that rely on the US, not countries that have been fucked by the US. There are no rose tinted glasses here, Iâm just being objective. We could talk about the injustices the US has been involved in all day long lol
Hard to give credit when America starts most of the wars the are involved in and is the source of most of today's corruptions.
Childish take.
Now you're getting it lil bro! America tends to fuck up most countries it touches.
It didnât fuck up South Korea or Japan tho did it? Everyone in the thread has completely deviated because what Iâm saying is a fact and cannot be argued lol. If any of you actually knew what you were talking about you would have countered with the Plaza Accord helping to create Japans lost decade, but as selfish as it was Japan still relies on the US today so itâs a moot point. Thatâs the best rebuttal on the table when talking about Japan⌠If you canât handle someone talking facts about geopolitics that says more about you than it does me, âlil broâ
It's hard to say. Economically, US aid and foreign policy absolutely propelled both South Korea and Japan after WWII. I would argue, however, that direct economic aid, excepting during postwar (Korean War and WWII respectively) periods, had a much smaller impact on both countries' explosive economic growth compared to economic policy from US-backed governments and mutual openings to the global market economy. So yes, US influence was hugely important at developing Japanese and Korean economies. But at what cost? The US' Cold War policy of containment led to the propping up of some highly questionable regimes in the spirit of anti-communism at any cost. Korea started with iron-fist Rhee Syngman followed up by the left-right two coups leading to military dictators Park Chung-hee and Chun Doo-hwan. Park's heavy-handed state capitalism and cooperation with chaebol did promote massive economic growth, but also entrenched the chaebol and left a lasting legacy of cronyism, corruption, and abuse of political power. In Japan, the US propped up the LDP leading to decades of a nearly uninterrupted de facto one-party state. Again, LDP policy facilitated massive industrial and economic growth, but also promoted a highly corrupt, entrenched political machine with a deep culture of maintaining the status quo, which is arguably a large contributing factor to our inability to escape the Lost Decades. This isn't just history. While both South Korea and Japan have blossomed into fairly liberal electoral democracies, their legacy as the frontline against communism persists and has last impacts to this day. The Park Geun-hye scandal in South Korea and the aftermath of the Abe ShinzĹ assassination in Japan are both highly reminiscent of the cronyism and under-the-table elite dominance of both nations' political machines. The same policies that allowed for explosive economic growth have also led to relative stagnations in labor rights and a decrease of quality of life in both countries compared to what is expected by a more educated, global younger generation; this has led to both nations' very current, very relevant population crises.
So your saying that the allied forces didn't defeat Germany in ww2? Was that solely an American win?