Does Rome or France conquering England have an effect on the way we should manage global emissions policy or not? Because if it doesn't, why are you mentioning it?
Do the different circumstances that India has during industrialization mean they should take a greater role in limiting their emissions or not? Because you mentioned just two items, medicine and technology, which are both positive. And you didn't indicate how they relate to emissions.
Instead of slipping in minor irrelevant facts that betray your bias, just state your opinion.
"Be civil."
"Civility" when discussing colonialism is just stacking the deck in favor of the colonists.
Read my post again. What is insulting? Describing behavior as cowardly, and then backing it up with two points that remain unanswered?
I could understand if the posts were baseless rants directly insulting the person I replied to with no content whatsoever, but that is not what happened.
All of the words in that post were appropriate, given the thesis.
I was not attempting to fully describe the differing circumstances surrounding industrialization of different states (, as I do not have the knowledge or ability to write a complete account); instead I tried to show that they have experienced different opportunities and circumstances through a limited example.