Replies

Then why not simply say "unimportant" rather than denying their recognitions are "real"? Word choices matter, ftD. You shot your mouth off with a choice of words aimed at belittling Saxe Coburg Gotha beyond the realm of factual analysis, hoping nobody would challenge it. It got challenged and now you are squirming to equate the attribute of lacking reality with the attribute of lacking importance.

I think this is the LOL part of the thread!

I will let the readers themselves decide if Saxe Coburg Gotha and the Vatican constitute world recognition of nationhood.

I mean with that recognition why were the Confederates looking to England or France!

This sort of thing is a habitual problem of your posting technique, ftD. You are readily capable of discussing events in factually grounded, non-loaded terminology. Yet instead of doing so you lace your posts with venom and unnecessary invective against all things southern or friendly to the south. You exaggerate and inflate negative attributes for no factually valid purpose, hence unimportance to you becomes a denial of reality all together. Remove the arsenic from your posts and people will take you more seriously. And I mean that as constructive criticism.

First, I think you best read your own posts if you want to see arsenic.

Second, as for your constructive criticism, I thank you and will give it the consideration it deserves.

I will let the readers themselves decide if Saxe Coburg Gotha and the Vatican constitute world recognition of nationhood.

I see you have taken to diverting attention from your own unnecessarily loaded terminology by misrepresenting my position. I have no quarrel with your right to characterize those countries as "unimportant" and asserting your opinions to that effect. But when you begin belittling their own nationhood as well by denying that their recognitions were "real" you've crossed the line into a realm of personal invective against all things that show even the slightest favor to the south. Doing just that is a bad habit of yours and you exercise it with far too great of a frequency around here.

I will note as a factual aside that the entire concept of diplomatic recognition's validity in establishing nationhood derives from the medieval role of the Vatican in crowning monarchs. A monarch's reign, and thus his government, was recognized as a legitimate one through his crowning by the pope or an archbishop. Thus I would not be so quick as you are to dismiss vatican diplomatic recognition as a matter of irrelevance.

"I will let the readers themselves decide if Saxe Coburg Gotha and the Vatican constitute world recognition of nationhood."

They don't. Saxe-Coburg-Gotha was a duchy loosely connected to Prince Albert of England (the one in the can). Even then, the nature of the "diplomatic recognition" by the Vatican is a reach.