autogun said:

My original examples of "small countries" were:  Denmark, the Netherlands, Norway and Sweden. To which Max added Finland. These are clearly a whole order of magnitude smaller than Italy, Japan, and Germany, which are medium-sized.

That's very true, but also quite irrelevant.

You did not say medium-sized countries are more likely to cause trouble than small countries.

What you said is that big countries are more likely to cause trouble than smaller countries.

When Austria-Hungary started WWI, it was much smaller than the big countries of the world.

When Italy, Germany and Japan started WWII, they were all much smaller than the big countries.

And your examples of small countries likewise provide evidence that contradicts your position.

A thousand years ago, people from Denmark, Norway and Sweden were raiding England, Ireland, and other parts of Europe.

stancrist said:

A thousand years ago, people from Denmark, Norway and Sweden were raiding England, Ireland, and other parts of Europe

And you regard the geopolitics of the world of 1,000 years ago as relevant to the 20th/21st century?

autogun said:

And you regard the geopolitics of the world of 1,000 years ago as relevant to the 20th/21st century?

There's this place called the Middle East...

Moer seriously, the Viking raids are over and very little in specific effects can be traced to them anymore.  However, there are plenty of lingering general effects that have shaped the development of modern Europe, and through Europe's colonial period, the modern world.

But that starts getting us into taping a new edition of the Connections TV series, which would actually be quite amazing in my mind. 

Jeff (Jefffar) said:

There's this place called the Middle East...

Yes but what happens there now is not caused by things that happend 1000 years ago.

Jeff (Jefffar) said:

Moer seriously, the Viking raids are over and very little in specific effects can be traced to them anymore

The thing is with such long timelines there are massive shifts in the people that inhabit a given region. The Vikings not only raided, well technically they did since a Viking is by definition somebody on the warpath, out to raid and punder, but the peoples the Vikings originated from did trade and settle.
One "tribe", the Rus, setteled what is nowadays Russia. So it could be argued that the Vikings are resposible for the war in Ukraine... but its very, very indirect.

Why do the sons and daughters of the Emerald Island get upset when you point out they're prosperous because they finally got smart enough to act like Anglo-Saxons?

There's no humour in this thread.

autogun said:

And you regard the geopolitics of the world of 1,000 years ago as relevant to the 20th/21st century?

You made a generalized statement about historical behavior that did not appear limited to any specific time period.

DavidPawley said:

There's no humour in this thread.

There is no bathroom!