From: esquel@sommarskog.se   
      
   Mark Brader (msb@vex.net) writes:   
   > Hmm.  Counting Russia as the continuation of the USSR and the   
   > previous Russia would be like counting the UK as the continuation   
   > of England, so I should have done both or neither, I guess.   
   > But WW2 didn't interrupt its existence, so I don't see why   
   > "same" would apply.   
      
   As you may have noticed, I did not count the UK.   
      
   I would say there is a difference. Assume that the revolt of the Bruces   
   had failed, and Scotland had remained part of England from 1300 and on.   
   But at some point there had been some dissent, which had led to a re-   
   definition of the country into United Kingdom or something else in 1707.   
   In this case, England/UK had been a the same level as Russia/USSR.   
      
   USSR arose on territory that previously was Russia, and I don't think   
   there was any new territory. It is true, though, and there were some   
   short-lived republics before everything settled.   
      
   The United Kingdom was a new entity, formde by two states had been been   
   in a personal union for a hundred years. But true, with England as the   
   senior partner, and Scotland only providing the royal family.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)