Libya's claims to Chad as described to the International Court of Justice, 1994:
Proposals and War Aims That Didn't Happen Map Thread
- Thread starter Beedok
- Start date
Crazy Boris
Banned
Chad: “we just want this little strip of territory”
Libya: “Hippity-Hoppity, half your land is my property”
I have a question and would be greatful if anybody can help, does anybody know if Austria-Hungary had any territorial claim against Italy in the First World War?
I know that Austria-Hungary saw Italy as a traitor because although they were techically allied to Germany and Austria, they first declared themselves neutral and then attacked Austria.
Would they just let them go unpunished if they had won the war? I never saw any references to any territorial claims about this
I know that Austria-Hungary saw Italy as a traitor because although they were techically allied to Germany and Austria, they first declared themselves neutral and then attacked Austria.
Would they just let them go unpunished if they had won the war? I never saw any references to any territorial claims about this
https://encyclopedia.1914-1918-online.net/article/war_aims_and_war_aims_discussions_austria-hungary said:
This was just more of Ghadaffy's insanity at play... the ONLY possible claim Libya could've had towards Chad under Uti Posssidetis Juris would've been to the Aouzou Strip... and the ICJ had already ruled against him on that, on the basis of the Treaty of 1955...
The only thing that would've made his death more appropriate would've been if they had hung him up by the heels in a gas-station parking lot and pelted his dead body with bricks
The only thing that would've made his death more appropriate would've been if they had hung him up by the heels in a gas-station parking lot and pelted his dead body with bricks
The A-H Empire really had far less territorial claims on Italy than Italy had on them... as the best thing that could've been hoped for by 1918 (after the Italians sidelined the idiot Cadorna) was sort of a draw, I'd think a "border adjustment" would be in order... maybe exchange Triento with its overwhelmingly Italian population for Friulia, to push the Italians away from the Julian March and Trieste...
And hey, next time you pick up a bottle of Moretti, think... does the old Friulian guy on the label look like he'd really be out-of-place in the A-H Empire?
Worlda version, pixel (28,71) should line up with the Nigerien(with an e not an a) province of Agadez
This looks like a happy subject of the A-H Empire to me....The A-H Empire really had far less territorial claims on Italy than Italy had on them... as the best thing that could've been hoped for by 1918 (after the Italians sidelined the idiot Cadorna) was sort of a draw, I'd think a "border adjustment" would be in order... maybe exchange Triento with its overwhelmingly Italian population for Friulia, to push the Italians away from the Julian March and Trieste...
And hey, next time you pick up a bottle of Moretti, think... does the old Friulian guy on the label look like he'd really be out-of-place in the A-H Empire?
On the right of this map shows the area claimed by Britain as New Albion between 43 and 37 degrees north.
For more detail: https://www.raremaps.com/gallery/de...asts-of-california-new-albion-and-ru-jefferys
Interestingly it says "Port Sr. Francis Drake not St. Francisco", despite it having been published 16 years before the discovery of San Francisco Bay.
Does that suggest that that either (A) the map was subsequently annotated, prior to scanning, (B) that it is a fake?
Or C) that it was actually discovered prior to when is commonly accepted, which is not at all common in the Age of Exploration. I think there are several such examples along the Pacific Coast.
I don't think it's either as other digitised copies of that map, also dated 1753, also have the same text.
Wikipedia says that the area now known as Drakes Bay had previously been called Bahia de San Francisco and that the two areas were confused, with the name San Francisco Bay coming to be applied to its current area when it was explored by the Spanish in 1769.
So it might be (C1) a previously named bay in a poorly mapped area was misattributed to a nearby bay by a later expedition whose more accurate maps caused the name to stick.
I love this map as it make me think of the map in Gulliver's travels. I can see now how Swift came up with that one as I see the speculation on the large island near Kamchatka.
On the right of this map shows the area claimed by Britain as New Albion between 43 and 37 degrees north.
For more detail: https://www.raremaps.com/gallery/de...asts-of-california-new-albion-and-ru-jefferys
Interestingly it says "Port Sr. Francis Drake not St. Francisco", despite it having been published 16 years before the discovery of San Francisco Bay.
Map of a sort of Greater Eritrea demand i’ve found randomly while surfing Google Images. It seems to be connected with a far-right Christian nationalist movement active in Eritrea and the Tigray region...