It allowed countries that did not have necessary items to get them from other countries and those countries gave other things that they had a surplus of.
No, nobody has successfully invaded Britain since the Romans under Caesar and then Claudius. At that time, however, Britain was not a unified country. Britain's island, rough seas surrounding it, and great navy have prevented it from being invaded by foreign enemies. It could be interpreted that British history has been a history of invading other countries. In the case of Australia and New Zealand, for example, the British could be seen to have invaded these quiet peaceful countries and turned the lives of the indigenous people upside down. During the 16th and 17th centuries, Britain sought to expand its empire by colonising other countries such as India, Burma, Rhodesia, The Sudan, Nigeria, Kenya, Uganda and numerous other countries of Africa. At one stage, the British empire, achieved largely through invasion and colonisation, was the largest Empire in the world.
because they need to take their natural resources
A group of countries ruled by one other country is an empire
People in European countries were civilized.
None. All countries in America are sovereign states. Some may have ties by culture or language to the former colonising countries.
It influenced the Roman culture and between Rome and Greece, they provided the basis for the development of European culture, which was further spread by the colonising efforts of the European countries to other continents.
It began colonising Rwanda in about 1884.
Yes. By colonising Australia and declaring Terra Nullus he and the other people who invaded this country essentially stole the land.
The verb of colony is colonise.Other verbs are colonises, colonising and colonised.Some example sentences are:"We will colonise this land"."Britain colonises a new territory"."They began colonising the island"."We have colonised Uranus".
The word 'colonization' or 'colonisation', meaning 'the act of colonising', is a noun.
Theoretically both countries should have benefited. The colony should have become more developed and the coloniser should have enriched itself from the new resources. In practice this seldom happened. The colonising country did indeed enrich itself often to the detriment of the less developed country.
All of the above. (Transportation routes to other countries, Economic conditions in other countries and Weather in other countries.)
It is simply a political compromise in mutual praise and hypocracy for the balance of world power against communism. Otherwise America has always hated colonising
Original answer - French, English ans Spanish Amended answer - No - the treaty of Tordesillas in 1494 meant that Spain was effectively limited to colonising the Americas. It was therefore Portugal (not Spain) who joined England & France in colonising India.
Libya is a country. It does not have any other countries and it is not part of any other country.Libya is a country. It does not have any other countries and it is not part of any other country.Libya is a country. It does not have any other countries and it is not part of any other country.Libya is a country. It does not have any other countries and it is not part of any other country.Libya is a country. It does not have any other countries and it is not part of any other country.Libya is a country. It does not have any other countries and it is not part of any other country.Libya is a country. It does not have any other countries and it is not part of any other country.Libya is a country. It does not have any other countries and it is not part of any other country.Libya is a country. It does not have any other countries and it is not part of any other country.Libya is a country. It does not have any other countries and it is not part of any other country.Libya is a country. It does not have any other countries and it is not part of any other country.
Other countries, or your mother's bedroom. Other countries, or your mother's bedroom.