Debate: Which country is better - England or U.S.A?
Side: U.S.A!

You claim these but leave no sources or examples I have nothing solid to argue against.1922, the Klan “contributed $25 each to the Volunteers of America."Gandhi called parliament the epitome of corruption"http://www.rschindler.com/gandhi.htmExploitation of India:Britain Siphoned wealth from India, through unfair trade practices, excessive taxes, etc..http://jaidharma.sulekha.com/blog/post/2006/02/economic-exploitation-during-the-british-raj.htm Indian soldiers forced to fight for British imperialism, which it did not supporthttp://www.marxists.org/history/international/comintern/sections/britain/periodicals/labour_monthly/1940/04/x02.htm You didn't get the hint you forced us to join the League of Nations which meant that we were dragged into the second world war.In simpler words our involvement in the war is your faultWe didn't force you to do anything.So were most of the unimportant people in our country being 2nd class wasn't a bad thing at that time."Unimportant people" such as?You are a country 100 times our size, surely you wouldn't need our help when dealing with a country that is smaller than yours.In other words; hypocrite.In landmass the USA is about 40 times bigger than Great Britain, but in Military strengths our countries were nearly equal at this time.You feel we are obligated to help you in your war, but won't help us in ours?what makes you think its ok to nuke innocent towns.That wasn't the question. The question was, what made you think the Japanese were going to surrender. I've already explained the rationale behind the atomic bomb, do not try to side-track the debate.the monarchy hasn't failed they just went out of fashionKind of like how Communism went out of style, yes?You mean the Spanish armarda, I beleive we beat them.No, I don't mean the spanish Armada, don't you know your own wars? I mean the blockade of porto Bello.We had no involvement in that whatsoever, how is this relevant.Hundred years war:(1337 – 1453) Intermittent armed conflict between England and France over territorial rights and the issue of succession to the French throne. It began when Edward III invaded Flanders in 1337 in order to assert his claim to the French crown.Yeah, it certainly looks like your country had no involvement in that. {sarcasm}"Opium trade" We won that warYou don't get what I'm hinting at. Your country was illegally importing the drug opium into china, to get it's citizens addicted. In an attempt to control their market.This is a moral failure.How do you know that? Either way that didn't fail that was an accidentIt was a lack of safety precautions.We didn't not lose them they voted that they didn't want to join us any more so we let them have their independance. = LossGiving out condoms implies that under-aged sex is ok as long as you don't die of it.No, of course you'd rather they they die. Now that's a rational position! Teenagers now have the impression that there will be no consequences for sex and if they happen to get pregnant they can just abort the baby.This "impression" has little to nothing to do with condoms. Statistically speaking teenage pregnancy is a lot higher in places where condoms are not available. I suppose you prefer teenage pregnancy over teenage sex?Just becaue it "sells" doesn't mean its rightI didn't say it did, I'm just telling you why it is the way it is. There is nothing I can do about it.Are you saying pornography is ok?I'm saying pornography isn't hurting anybody. The only reason anybody has a problem with pornography is because of fundamentalism.