But the fact that you dismiss the roughness of settling those areas as something so simple where jerking off over Europe in comparison shows your bias is beyond simple disagreement.
Well yeah, I'm trying to be a bit contrarian. Washington was a pretty swell guy. The point wasn't "Europe is great", but that there were vastly greater barriers to continental domination (and thank God for that) than Indians and scorpions.
If it soothes you, I trash Europe to Europeans, because let's be real, it's a complete mess right now. I'm an equal opportunity trasher, but there's no real point in trashing Europe to Americans who already hate Europe, or America to Europeans who already hate America.
but that there were vastly greater barriers to continental domination
Not really. I think the harsh form of Nature in the Americas is vastly more of a barrier to conquest than anything Europe had. Hannibal brought elephants over your mountains, whereas beasts of burden literally bred for it regularly could not make the trip through. The mountains will bury you in snow or steep cliffs, and you beat them just to find endless dry deserts of death.
You are focusing on the living elements, when the literal terrain was the greatest obstacle of all, and one that Europe did not have to nearly a comparable extent. Especially not combined.
And then you add the Indians on top of it, and its just cruel.
Most Europeans were born with their continent already settled, and countries were formed by men drawing maps. America had modern (relatively) men have to undertake possible suicide missions just to claim 100 mile stretches of it for the country.
Even Spain and Portugal managed to do it. And if you know anything about these countries, it's not that they're especially competent. It's because when there are no opposing forces, you can simply bypass mountains and deserts and locate yourself in hospitable places.
America had modern (relatively) men have to undertake possible suicide missions just to claim 100 mile stretches of it for the country.
It's because when there are no opposing forces, you can simply bypass mountains and deserts and locate yourself in hospitable places.
Which is simple when your borders are either already founded nations or literal water on all sides. Not having 1/3rd of your massive country bisected by such terrain from top to bottom.
Especially when a huge fertile place filled with resources exists on the other side of it, meaning you can't just skip it to settle in Nebraska because its easy.
For their own profit.
Most wars are for profit for the leadership and government, so Europe's thousands of years of war and border changes makes this irrelevant.
Well yeah, I'm trying to be a bit contrarian. Washington was a pretty swell guy. The point wasn't "Europe is great", but that there were vastly greater barriers to continental domination (and thank God for that) than Indians and scorpions.
If it soothes you, I trash Europe to Europeans, because let's be real, it's a complete mess right now. I'm an equal opportunity trasher, but there's no real point in trashing Europe to Americans who already hate Europe, or America to Europeans who already hate America.
Not really. I think the harsh form of Nature in the Americas is vastly more of a barrier to conquest than anything Europe had. Hannibal brought elephants over your mountains, whereas beasts of burden literally bred for it regularly could not make the trip through. The mountains will bury you in snow or steep cliffs, and you beat them just to find endless dry deserts of death.
You are focusing on the living elements, when the literal terrain was the greatest obstacle of all, and one that Europe did not have to nearly a comparable extent. Especially not combined.
And then you add the Indians on top of it, and its just cruel.
Most Europeans were born with their continent already settled, and countries were formed by men drawing maps. America had modern (relatively) men have to undertake possible suicide missions just to claim 100 mile stretches of it for the country.
Even Spain and Portugal managed to do it. And if you know anything about these countries, it's not that they're especially competent. It's because when there are no opposing forces, you can simply bypass mountains and deserts and locate yourself in hospitable places.
For their own profit. Yeah, they did that.
Which is simple when your borders are either already founded nations or literal water on all sides. Not having 1/3rd of your massive country bisected by such terrain from top to bottom.
Especially when a huge fertile place filled with resources exists on the other side of it, meaning you can't just skip it to settle in Nebraska because its easy.
Most wars are for profit for the leadership and government, so Europe's thousands of years of war and border changes makes this irrelevant.