Quotes About Territory

Over the previous 150 years, the border areas of Eupen and St Vith had moved back and forth between France, Prussia, Belgium and Germany, depending on the fortunes of war. In the Belgian elections of April 1939, more than 45 per cent of those in the mainly German-speaking 'eastern cantons' voted for the Heimattreue Front which wanted the area reincorporated into the Reich. But

The confrontation lasted about five minutes; then the display died out as quickly as it had begun, and everyone drank his fill of the muddy water. Honor had been satisfied; each group had staked its claim to its own territory.

Now it would obviously be absurd to press this analogy too far; it breaks down at many points. But I put it to you for this reason: What degree of co-operation or understanding would ever be possible between human beings and termites? When there is no conflict of interest, we tolerate each other. But when either needs the other's territory or resources, no quarter is given.

Commuting in London is basically warfare. It's a constant campaign of claiming territory; inching forward; never relaxing for a moment. Because if you do, someone will step past you. Or step on you.

Never stand between a dog and the hydrant.

Commerce in itself may favour peace, but when commerce is artificially shut out by a decree of Government from some promising territory, then commerce just as naturally favours war.

Get off my planet, you son of a bitch.

But then a counter-sect arose, embracing persons who thought they believed in Darwin's novel theory. What they actually believed in was Reformed Darwinism, a religious and social theory combining 'survival of the fittest' with 'Devil take the hindmost'. The important thing was to be a survivor. Take care of your tribe and your territory. Be selfish. God helps those who help themselves.

Conflict Tiger.

deep-seated hatred between the cattlemen and the settler."40 This should come as no shock; the only surprise is that the big cattlemen would sometimes deny their attitude toward settlers. A settler who exercised his perfect right to 160 acres along a stream could significantly impair a big cowman's range; if several did so, the range would be lost altogether, as happened, for example, along Shell Creek in the Big Horn Basin.

impatience gets the better of us. The politicians, no offense, see an impasse. So they give the word, and the armies clash. They take territory or destroy it, kill hundreds, sometimes thousands. And it all comes down to the ones who started talking giving in to frustration.

I don't feel we did wrong in taking this great country away from them. There were great numbers of people who needed new land, and the Indians were selfishly trying to keep it for themselves.

But before William Stoner the future lay bright and certain and unchanging. He saw it, not as a flux of event and change and potentiality, but as a territory ahead that awaited his exploration.

But before [William Stoner] the future lay bright and certain and unchanging. He saw it, not as a flux of event and change and potentiality, but as a territory ahead that awaited his exploration. He saw it as the great University library, to which new wings might be built, to which new books might be added and from which old ones might be withdrawn, while its true nature remained essentially unchanged.

It is the Arab world of the Middle East, holding 99.8 percent of that sector which, with such virulent hatred, would wholly exclude Israel from the minuscule territory that it occupies, which is presently under .2 percent of that region.76

A man from the west will fight over three things: water, women and gold, and usually in that order.

Which Israel should we recognize? The Israel of 1917; the Israel of 1936; the Israel of 1948; the Israel of 1956; or the Israel of 1967? Which borders and which Israel? Israel has to recognize first the Palestinian state and its borders and then we will know what we are talking about.

I don't see any situation where Israel will not be sitting on the Golan Heights.

I'm certainly not the first author to tiptoe into the conspiratorial, religious-tinged territory, but - and I hate to break this to the faithful - neither is Dan Brown.

In the crowded and difficult conditions of a steep hillside, houses have had to struggle to establish their territory and to survive.

I try to put myself in others' shoes: How does any country give up any sovereignty and expect to survive as a government? I don't think that any Philippine president, or any leader for that matter, can afford to give up any portion of territorial sovereignty. That would be political suicide.

A Country is not a mere territory; the particular territory is only its foundation. The Country is the idea which rises upon that foundation; it is the sentiment of love, the sense of fellowship which binds together all the sons of that territory.

We want to overcome our historical problems with Chile. The sea has divided us and the sea must bring us back together again. Chile has agreed, for the first time, to talk about sea access for Bolivia.

You're in my light and this is my special spot so go away.