GeforceThe original mission of the Republic’s army was to go out and destroy a nest of pirates around Dunkirk, which was hampering the trade of the Republic.
And hence the Dutch invented the word “overuren” 😀
GeforceI am of the mind that the Spanish were incompetent sailors. I don’t recall them ever winning any major naval engagement? :confused: Yet, despite being poor sailors, they seemed to be decent infantry. Their tercios upheld their military hegemony really until the Duc d’Enghien destroyed them at Rocroi in 1643.
In the early days of the Habsburg Empire they didn’t have to engage because they had a monopoly. They builded lots of ships, but mostly for trade and transport of troops I reckon. Therefor I think they were supprised by the fact that the Dutch and English would attack their ships on the sea rather than wait untill they are back on shore. 🙂 So they were probably not really incompetent, it was just a new form of warfare. Compare it to the fact that Americans today are not prepared for terrorist attacks against their regular troops. Different military tactics.
GeforceThat’s another item I’m curious about- how much were they expending to maintain their Spanish Netherlands and/or other areas of suzerainty? The amount of silver and gold that they were importing from the New World was considerable, yet not even enough to build warships to protect their treasure fleets. And this wasn’t just in the waning years of the Spanish Empire either.
They could keep the Southern Netherlands because of international trouble. The other option for the SN would be to support France and the Dutch Republic. But they realised that they would probably be absorbed into France anyway, and the Dutch were at that time not really interested anymore in the south, because that would mean these territories would compete against Holland (Amsterdam vs Antwerp).
The Spanish gave lots of autonomy towards the people living in the SN. Actually, they only had to pay taxes, which would have happened as well when they were under controll of the Dutch, or a lot worse, the French.
The gold from the New World was not half enough to back the military spendings. Unlike the 19th century colonisation, they didn’t exploit the New World, not because they didn’t want to, but simply because they didn’t have the manpower or even the money to start such an operation. They stole, raped, murdered whole populations in America, but apperently it didn’t make the state richer, maybe some companies or the king, but not the state as a whole.
GeforceThey were not incompetent, just, their days were behind them. The Spanish state was banckrupt, unlike the English. The fact that the Spanish lost in 1588 was because the fleet was based in the Netherlands I think, and the troops were already tired of fighting. In 1650, Spain was not a maritime power, only the Dutch and the British were. It simply didn’t have the money, not even with the overseas possessions.
Much as Spain lost its maritime hegemony to the English, the same fate was preserved for landwarfare, from now on the French (Louis XIV) were Europe’s continental power.
GeforceI have a question for you seafaring pot smoking Dutch pirate guys. 🙂
Does anyone have more info on Admiral Tromp’s annihilation of the Spanish Fleet? I hear that the spanish fleet he defeated was much bigger than the armada that the English trounced.
You mean the armada invencibile in 1588 or what? I think Tromp fought the English together with de Ruyter in the 1650’s war, not the Spanish. However, it could be that you refer to the occupation of the Dutch of the city of Duinkerke. I doubt that this Armada was bigger than the one in 1588 because it was clear that after the Thirty year war Spain was no longer a superpower which it was under the leadership of Philips II. In fact, it couldn’t even protect the Netherlands anymore from the French. The 1588 action was an act of arrogance towards queen Elizabeth, the latter one was a last attempt of Spain to protect the Netherlands from French occupation. However, the alliances changed like every minutes back then.
GeforceCould be Brad, but these outposts were no colonies like in the 19th century. They were based on trade rather than on military pressure I think. Therefor I find it strange to read the VOC created Batavia manu militari. I mean, the Dutch were just not able to have a large expeditionary force like the British or the French a century later. The army of the Republic was composed of just 30 000 men, the Spanish troops in the southern Netherlands were at the fall of Antwerp in 1585 more than twice the amount!! Apart from that, only the province of Holland and Utrecht were important. 30 000 men was nothing, even back then.
GeforceThanks for the info. I know the WIC were a bunch of pirates, hijacking Spanish ships with silver (Piet Heyn). You say the Republic (or at least Holland) was rich, however, it was not at all powerfull. It’s military capabilities were limited compared to England, France or the Spanish Netherlands. I don’t know much on historical warfare in general, but it’s difficult to understand the Republic was so rich and prosperous, when formally, it was still at war untill 1648! I know it wasn’t 80 years of constant warfare, but for such a small country, they proved either to be very powerfull or on the other hand very smart (f.i. blocking the port of Antwerp so Amsterdam could take over its role). Is this the evidence that a country which is economically a superpower doesn’t need a strong defence, as long as it doesn’t become arrogant (like the Stadhouders were in the 18th century).
Also, was the VOC a multinational? I mean, did people from other countries invest in it?
GeforceHow’s the condition of the 1987 Ford Sierra 😀
GeforceI’ve seen it a couple of times. Shocking, that’s the least you can say.
GeforceGeforce,
You obviously dont see what goes on over here, these so called immigrants will get a house, possibly a job, ex ammount per week to live on and probably start yelling about human rights every time we English complain. But if we pleaded for a house and state hand outs we’d be extemely luckyAt the moment there are hundreds possibly thousands of English people expecting their insurances to mature after paying their premiums for the best part of their working lives, but getting a poor return ,Why? because the money is being channeled to finance our poorer “relations”
I, like most other middle aged Englishmen, have paid my taxes and my National Insurance stamp for the past 40 years, so these freeloaders can come over here and rip us off? I’m sick to death of political correctness and bloody left wing do gooders.
What happens when these people cant get jobs? hundreds of men hanging round street corners some turning to crime more than likely because they’re bored. There are a lot very angry people in this country, Ive never been a racist person or even homophobic but the whole situation is making me that way!!!!!
So dont preach to us here in the UK about welcoming these people into the EU!!!!
dave
Well, in that case, the UK indeed has a huge problem. In B. illegal immigrants don’t get such a luxury-treatment. In fact, they are treated more like prisoners. I’m not saying that’s the right solution, but at least we’re not overwelmed with immigrants. The problems we are facing here is Moroccans etc who have a Belgian passport, but behave bad. Many people would like to send them back to “their country of origin”, as an extreme-right wing party says, however this is impossible as they are already Belgians since two or maybe three generations.
GeforceHi Frank, good to see you’re back on Belgian soil. How was the trip?
GeforceSorry, I thought you meant NIMBY as an offence. In Belgium we use the word to describe a hypocrite.
But to ge back to the original topic. Yes, we face the same problems in Belgium. However, I’m not saying our gov’t is doing a good job currently on stopping illegal immigrants, but the fact that you need an ID-card in Belgium seems to scare of these immigrants. It has little to do with politics I reckon, but more with organisation. Therefor it could be usefull to have a look across the channel and see how they’re handling problems. It’s not always better, but sometimes it can be. Understand what I mean?
GeforceA NIMBY? Not in my backyard you mean? What does this have to do with it? :confused:
GeforceMost of the world doesn’t hate us. Most of the world admires the dynamics that makes the United States a great country. I love my country! I love what my country truly stands for. But I hate the current government’s policies. They are misguided. Bush has caused a great deal of damage on many fronts (economics, terrorism, national security). He has been a disaster. But I am hopeful this will be corrected in November!
For those of you who are not Americans, do not think that the entire nation is behind Bush and the idiots who are running this country. The country is truly divided. The war in Afganastan was(and is) necessary and I strongly support what we are doing there. We need to finish the job! We were attacked and this country had to take out that government that allowed the attack to happen. Iraq on the other hand is a disaster. Yes, the government there was terrible. But there are a lot of terrible governments that should be removed. But for this to happen, other countries must agree. The US shouldn’t do this alone. This is a job that belongs with the UN!
The United States has a lot of power, more power than most of the world combined. But there are limits to that power. In addition, the US needs its friends (I hope we still have some!). The US must understand that it absolutely must consult its allies and friends on issues that effect other countries (Canada, particularly Canada, the European Union, Japan, Australia, Israel, Mexico, even Russia). We must always use our power carefully.
I think the American people will fix the problem in Washington, DC, this November.
BRING BACK BILL CLINTON!
bkonner
Gee, long time ago we had a new member who actually had something interresting to say. Go on, mate!
GeforceSnapper you think the world is just the UK? You think other people don’t have the right to live in a prosperous country as well?
The EU is not perfect, and I can understand people’s fear that it’s growing too fast, because I didn’t like the expansion as well. Not because these countries should not join, but it’s done in an amateuristic way. I agree with Bkonner, however, I don’t think the post 9/11 era in the US is so keen on immigrants as well. But apart from your president, the USA is actually the best example that a multicultural melting pot can still be the world’s leading nation. It may sound strange from someone criticising US-politics often enough, but the US should actually be the example of how Europe should grow.
Hopefully, the economies of the new memberstates will improve rapidly, and instead of new immigrants going to the UK, some of them might even return to their country of origin.
We don’t have a crap health/education system. This however has nothing to do with immigrants, but because taxes in B. are a lot higher compared to the UK. In Scandinavia health care is even better.
I really don’t understand you British (not every individual but in general). You are anti-EU, you don’t like immigrants, however, you don’t like the only thing that could prevent illegal immigrants from entering “the empire” and that is an ID-card. You are anti-everything. Johnny Rotten was right. What do you actually want?
Sign In
