cammerjeff
Tech Sergeant
Ed you have to remember when the Gulf of Mexico was named, and what the map looked like in the 1700's Mexico Surrounded the entire gulf all the way to present day Florida.
"All of Vlad's forces and all of Vlad's men, are out to put Humpty together again." (26 Viewers)
- Thread starter XBe02Drvr
- Start date
Escuadrilla Azul
Master Sergeant
- 2,320
- Feb 27, 2020
About the gulf names (from Wiki)
"Early 16th-century maps by Juan de la Cosa and Martin Waldseemüller described the gulf, though left it unlabeled. A 1584 map by Abraham Ortelius labeled it the "North Sea" (Mare de Nort). Hernán Cortés also called it by this name ("North Sea") in his dispatches, while other Spanish explorers called it the Gulf of Florida or "Gulf of Cortés". Other early European maps called it the "Gulf of San Miguel" (Latin: Sinus S. Michaelis), "Gulf of Yucatán" (Latin: Golfo de Iucatan), "Yucatan Sea" (Latin: Mare Iuchatanicum), "Great Gulf of the Antilles" (Latin: Sinus Magnus Antillarum), "Sea of Cathay" (Latin: Mare Cathaynum), or "Gulf of New Spain". At one point, the Viceroyalty of New Spain surrounded the gulf, and the Tierra Firme extended across what is now the southeastern United States.
The name "Gulf of Mexico" (English: Gulf of Mexico; French: golphe du Mexique, later golfe du Mexique) first appeared on a world map in 1550 and in a historical account in 1552. It has been the most common name since the mid-17th century, when it was still considered a Spanish sea. French Jesuits used this name as early as 1672. In the 18th century, Spanish admiralty charts similarly labeled the gulf as "Mexican Inlet" or "Mexican Sound." Until the separation of the Republic of Texas from Mexico in 1836, the Mexican coastal boundary extended eastward along the gulf to present-day Louisiana."
So Murica Gulf wasn't a name at any point. If it's ok for you, then good. The rest of the world will just call it Gulf of México anyway.
Reminds me of the Freedom Fries affair some 20 years ago.
"Early 16th-century maps by Juan de la Cosa and Martin Waldseemüller described the gulf, though left it unlabeled. A 1584 map by Abraham Ortelius labeled it the "North Sea" (Mare de Nort). Hernán Cortés also called it by this name ("North Sea") in his dispatches, while other Spanish explorers called it the Gulf of Florida or "Gulf of Cortés". Other early European maps called it the "Gulf of San Miguel" (Latin: Sinus S. Michaelis), "Gulf of Yucatán" (Latin: Golfo de Iucatan), "Yucatan Sea" (Latin: Mare Iuchatanicum), "Great Gulf of the Antilles" (Latin: Sinus Magnus Antillarum), "Sea of Cathay" (Latin: Mare Cathaynum), or "Gulf of New Spain". At one point, the Viceroyalty of New Spain surrounded the gulf, and the Tierra Firme extended across what is now the southeastern United States.
The name "Gulf of Mexico" (English: Gulf of Mexico; French: golphe du Mexique, later golfe du Mexique) first appeared on a world map in 1550 and in a historical account in 1552. It has been the most common name since the mid-17th century, when it was still considered a Spanish sea. French Jesuits used this name as early as 1672. In the 18th century, Spanish admiralty charts similarly labeled the gulf as "Mexican Inlet" or "Mexican Sound." Until the separation of the Republic of Texas from Mexico in 1836, the Mexican coastal boundary extended eastward along the gulf to present-day Louisiana."
So Murica Gulf wasn't a name at any point. If it's ok for you, then good. The rest of the world will just call it Gulf of México anyway.
Reminds me of the Freedom Fries affair some 20 years ago.
fubar57
General
Russia welcomes a U.S. decision to pause Ukraine military aid | CBC News
The Kremlin said on Tuesday that pausing U.S. military aid to Ukraine would be the best contribution to the cause of peace, but cautioned that Russia needed to clarify the details of the move by U.S. President Donald Trump.
Ok, lets all rain it in. A lot of political talk not related to Russias war of aggression in Ukraine.
Not singling any one person out, its all of us.
Not singling any one person out, its all of us.
I found this to be an interesting remark. Living in a Constitutional monarchy myself, maybe I should try to clarify.
Actually there is not a significant difference between our constitutional monarchy and your constitutional republic. The basic difference is that head-of-state is also the executional head-of-state and politically elected. Here, our head-of-state is mostly ceremonial and used for PR. The prime-minister is the executional head-of-state, meaning that he is the one actively leading the government. Like your president, he is elected by the people. The King has no saying in the daily governing of the country, however he is sometimes used as an impartial mediator, being officially apolitical and above the parties.
This of course is the theory. But if you want to talk to the active head of the state, you talk to the prime-minister, not the king.
edit: changed some stupid mistake
Last edited:
This is getting quite a bit of air time at the moment.
"We watched your conversation with the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskiy with horror and distaste," the letter said.
"We consider your expectations regarding showing respect and gratitude for the material assistance provided by the United States to Ukraine in its fight with Russia to be offensive," the letter continued.
"Gratitude is due to the heroic Ukrainian soldiers who shed blood in defence of the values of the free world."
"We watched your conversation with the President of Ukraine Volodymyr Zelenskiy with horror and distaste," the letter said.
"We consider your expectations regarding showing respect and gratitude for the material assistance provided by the United States to Ukraine in its fight with Russia to be offensive," the letter continued.
"Gratitude is due to the heroic Ukrainian soldiers who shed blood in defence of the values of the free world."
That's been obvious to observers watching this since Trump's campaign last year. It was only a matter of time. Like I said, there is only self-interest in this for the White House - its focus has nothing to do with Ukrainian security , or peace for that matter. It is designed to get praise for pushing for peace among MAGA supporters, like when Sergei Lavrov goes up in front of the UN and spouts off about Nazis in Ukraine and Ukraine starting the war - it's dog-whistle politics designed to assure the loyal fans back home that they are the victims in all this.
SaparotRob
Unter Gemeine Geschwader Murmeltier XIII
Gulf of America totally wrecks Johnny Horton's "Battle of New Orleans".
MiTasol
Major
It was named before the United States existed and when large parts of what is now the US (CA and TX and a swag of other parts) were parts of Mexico.
special ed
1st Lieutenant
- 7,107
- May 13, 2018
The naming of the gulf has nothing to do with the USA, but rather the two continents surrounding it. The USA did not name the continents, however did use the name of the continent in naming the country.
MiTasol
Major
And pretty much the same applies to the British Commonwealth countries as well except the head of state is the Governor General, not the Monarch. The GG liaises with the Monarch but is not subservient to him/her.
MiTasol
Major
On Ukraine JD Vance made a partially correct statement. He neglected to say that Britain and France had some small wars that the US was not involved in that they WON. Everyone knows of the very wonderful successes he would claim the US had in both Afghanistan and Vietnam and about what he obviously considers the massive failure Britain had against Argentina. It also seems Vance treats France's successes in Africa as American wins.
Therefore, to be far more correct, Vance should have said something like "than 20,000 troops from some random country that hasn't lost as many wars as the USA in the last 30 or 40 years."
I have heard more than one person say that the American "security guarantee" for Ukraine is about as safe as a condom with the end cut off.
Therefore, to be far more correct, Vance should have said something like "than 20,000 troops from some random country that hasn't lost as many wars as the USA in the last 30 or 40 years."
I have heard more than one person say that the American "security guarantee" for Ukraine is about as safe as a condom with the end cut off.
Last edited:
PM Albanese open to Australian peacekeepers in Ukraine
Follow the latest news headlines from Australia's most trusted source. Read in-depth expert analysis and watch live coverage on ABC News.
www.abc.net.au
Ukraine’s First Jam-Proof Drones Were Ungainly Triple-Stackers
The race is on between Ukraine and Russia to refine fiber-optic drones.
www.forbes.com
Ukrainian Trainees Assembled In The Open, And A Missile Streaked In
Dozens of Ukrainians reportedly died in the attack on Cherkas’ke.
www.forbes.com
Ukrainian Drones Blow Up 5 Russian Oil Pipelines, Refineries & Depots
It was one of the most damaging nights in Ukraine’s escalating campaign against Russian oil.
www.forbes.com
U.S. Is Starving Ukraine’s HIMARS. Where Can Kyiv Get More Rockets?
There are options.
www.forbes.com
Ukrainian Forces Kill 30 Russians At A Training Base in South Ukraine
It’s revenge for a recent Russian strike on a Ukrainian training base.
www.forbes.com
