"had a population decline during the 1970s" - I wouldn't phrase it like that, I was looking for something more economically related and, to be fair, it sounds a bit disrespectful. But great quiz anyway.
No it's not a good comparison, especially in our context when it's all about facts and statistics, not euphemisms. Population decline often results from war, emigration for political, economic, refugee reasons, deportations, or mass killings. I just went through countries that had some bad stuff happen in 70s.
"Decline" implies that there was some sort of sloping curve on the population graph over a long period of time. What would be more accurate (by making clear this was not a gradual, natural occurrence) – as well as more sensitive – is to say "had a sudden population decrease", or, if that gives too much away, remove the "suddenly" and leave it as just "decrease". "Decrease" implies a broader sense of precipitating conditions – it *could* represent a slow decline, or it could denote something very sudden. Both words are *already* euphemistic, but "decline" almost sounds sarcastic, mocking – whereas "decrease" for some ineffable reason sounds more emotionally neutral to me. TL;DR ~ How about "sudden decrease", or even just "decrease", instead of "decline", because better feelings.
East Timor lost about as much of its population through the Indonesian invasion during the 1970s as Cambodia did because of the rule of Pol Pot. If you add the loss of life due to U.S. bombing, then Cambodia's relative losses are significantly greater.
Cambodia's population was declining in the 1970's, which means that the country had a population decline. It's really the shortest and easiest way to put it.
I think you're being a bit over sensitive. The quizmaster stated a fact and didn't say anything offensive. How you choose to interpret that fact is not his responsibility. One can't allow their sense of logic to become hijacked by their emotions if they want to retain credibility. Tolerance is important but this culture of over sensitivity has gone too far.
They are not. Though the Saudi kings have always attempted to project an illusion of religious piety and from the beginning their alliance with the Salafist clerics of Diriya was important in consolidating their power, they are, as Hatem pointed out, kings not clerics.
Yes, that's by definition. Both SA and Iran have religious ideologies behind their rule, but purely by political definition, Iran is a constitutional theocracy while SA is an absolute monarchy.
Yea sorry,i guess we did not quite get each other on that one ^^.
Yes i meant the islamic state.
And about the Vatican,i just wanted to say tell him that the Vatican is also a theocracy.I did not mean to consider the Vatican as being in Asia wich is of course incorrect ^^
I'm fine with considering them a theocracy, I however have a "slight" issue with calling them a country. And you should too, I'm pretty sure that could be considered an actual crime in some places. I guess that depends on the opinion of the CIA agent who will read it. Hi, Garry.
Honestly, there are two mistakes, you should include Honiara, capital of Solomon islands. secondly , the elevation of Lapaz,Bolivia is also above 2500m so you should accept both the answers.
Mike is just mistaken on the distinctions, that's all. Atomic bombs and hydrogen bombs are both nuclear weapons. No hydrogen bomb has ever been detonated in a war, though, thankfully.
Atomic bombs, of Hiroshima and Nagasaki infamy, just rely on nuclear fission - breaking apart of atoms - and are the first step on the way to hydrogen bombs. H-bombs are a combination of both fission and fusion and release many times more energy for much more explosive power. Both use nuclear reactions and both are classed as nuclear weapons.
China: has a massive GDP. India: People live in abject poverty. That juxtaposition was funny. I've definitely noticed a pro-China (or anti-India) bias on this website, where exactly what you say happens.
Hm, I am not sure if Russia would also qualify as an Asian country technically at war with its southern neighbor. I know it's a bit of a stretch, but it sounds somewhat correct.
Cambodia's population was declining in the 1970's, which means that the country had a population decline. It's really the shortest and easiest way to put it.
Also:the Vatican is a theocracy.
It must be a very strange continental divide for you to consider the Vatican to be in Asia, even by JetPunk standards
Yes i meant the islamic state.
And about the Vatican,i just wanted to say tell him that the Vatican is also a theocracy.I did not mean to consider the Vatican as being in Asia wich is of course incorrect ^^
Atomic bombs, of Hiroshima and Nagasaki infamy, just rely on nuclear fission - breaking apart of atoms - and are the first step on the way to hydrogen bombs. H-bombs are a combination of both fission and fusion and release many times more energy for much more explosive power. Both use nuclear reactions and both are classed as nuclear weapons.
I think you could easily remove one minute.
And a 3....2....1....
And a 3....2....1....