Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


* * * - - 2 votes

Rule Britannia for global crimes


  • Please log in to reply
240 replies to this topic

#16    Setton

Setton

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,570 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Durham, England

Posted 22 May 2013 - 09:47 PM

View Postthe L, on 22 May 2013 - 09:24 PM, said:

Im not talking about suffering, racism, slavery for which British empire was well known.
Im talking about attack on another country and stealing their resources.

Second would be for selling drug.

So we're focusing on invasion rather than empire building? Excellent. Add most of South America to that list then.

If every country that ever took resources from another has to pay compensation, that's pretty much every country in the world at some point. I reckon we'd probably get very little because we're pretty good at not getting invaded (3 times in history, not bad) but we wouldn't be paying out that much either compared to other countries.

View PostArbenol68, on 22 May 2013 - 09:23 PM, said:

They'll have to give it all to the Aborigines.

Yep. And the few Native Americans left. As far as I know, those are the only two nations that never invaded another.

'Good' is not the same as 'nice'.
'No, murder is running your broadsword through someone because he worships a different God to you... Or is that evangelism? I get confused.'
When they discover the centre of the universe, a lot of people are going to be disappointed - They are not it.
I don't object to the concept of a deity but I'm baffled by the notion of one that takes attendance.

#17    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 May 2013 - 09:49 PM

View PostSetton, on 22 May 2013 - 09:47 PM, said:

So we're focusing on invasion rather than empire building? Excellent. Add most of South America to that list then.

If every country that ever took resources from another has to pay compensation, that's pretty much every country in the world at some point. I reckon we'd probably get very little because we're pretty good at not getting invaded (3 times in history, not bad) but we wouldn't be paying out that much either compared to other countries.



Yep. And the few Native Americans left. As far as I know, those are the only two nations that never invaded another.

Can you name those three times. Im just curious.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#18    Setton

Setton

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,570 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Durham, England

Posted 22 May 2013 - 09:57 PM

View Postthe L, on 22 May 2013 - 09:49 PM, said:

Can you name those three times. Im just curious.

Romans, Saxons and Normans.

Edited by Setton, 22 May 2013 - 09:57 PM.

'Good' is not the same as 'nice'.
'No, murder is running your broadsword through someone because he worships a different God to you... Or is that evangelism? I get confused.'
When they discover the centre of the universe, a lot of people are going to be disappointed - They are not it.
I don't object to the concept of a deity but I'm baffled by the notion of one that takes attendance.

#19    keithisco

keithisco

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,521 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southampton, Blighty!

Posted 22 May 2013 - 09:59 PM

View Postthe L, on 22 May 2013 - 09:49 PM, said:

Can you name those three times. Im just curious.

Actually that is an interesting question: I would suggest the Romans, and the Norsemen (1066 and all that). Cant really think of a third one because the Vikings tended to invade a small area and hold it just long enough to engage in a bit of rape and pillage. Their have been various attempts to Usurp the throne, but that does not really count I think. The Spanish tried it but ended up with a monumental FAIL (thanks to the British weather really)


#20    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 May 2013 - 09:59 PM

And how many times did British attacked others? lets say from 1800...

Edited by the L, 22 May 2013 - 10:01 PM.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#21    Setton

Setton

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,570 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Durham, England

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:03 PM

View Postkeithisco, on 22 May 2013 - 09:59 PM, said:

Actually that is an interesting question: I would suggest the Romans, and the Norsemen (1066 and all that). Cant really think of a third one because the Vikings tended to invade a small area and hold it just long enough to engage in a bit of rape and pillage. Their have been various attempts to Usurp the throne, but that does not really count I think. The Spanish tried it but ended up with a monumental FAIL (thanks to the British weather really)

Just up there. Anglo-Saxons :) Somewhere between conquest and settlement really.

Must have posted while you were typing.

As an aside, the Danes (vikings to most) invaded and held five (I think) of the seven English kingdoms for a number of years. Settled properly too (that's why they're referred to as Danes not vikings. Viking comes from the word vike meaning to raid :) )

View Postthe L, on 22 May 2013 - 09:59 PM, said:

And how many did British attacked others?

Several but that's not the same question.

If you're trying to decide who's worst off, the only question to compare is 'How many times was [country] invaded?'

If you're trying to decide who's most to blame, the question is 'How many countries has [country] invaded?'

Which would you like to ask? I'll tell you now, my history's better on the first one.

Edited by Setton, 22 May 2013 - 10:06 PM.

'Good' is not the same as 'nice'.
'No, murder is running your broadsword through someone because he worships a different God to you... Or is that evangelism? I get confused.'
When they discover the centre of the universe, a lot of people are going to be disappointed - They are not it.
I don't object to the concept of a deity but I'm baffled by the notion of one that takes attendance.

#22    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:03 PM

View Postkeithisco, on 22 May 2013 - 09:59 PM, said:

Actually that is an interesting question: I would suggest the Romans, and the Norsemen (1066 and all that). Cant really think of a third one because the Vikings tended to invade a small area and hold it just long enough to engage in a bit of rape and pillage. Their have been various attempts to Usurp the throne, but that does not really count I think. The Spanish tried it but ended up with a monumental FAIL (thanks to the British weather really)

I would just add that Dutch gave British one of their greatest defeats. de Ruyter and Raid on the Medway.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#23    keithisco

keithisco

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,521 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southampton, Blighty!

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:06 PM

View PostSetton, on 22 May 2013 - 09:57 PM, said:


Oops, forgot about the Saxons...


#24    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:06 PM

View PostSetton, on 22 May 2013 - 10:03 PM, said:



If you're trying to decide who's worst off, the only question to compare is 'How many times was [country] invaded?'

If you're trying to decide who's most to blame, the question is 'How many countries has [country] invaded?'

Which would you like to ask? I'll tell you now, my history's better on the first one.

Because thats not how they teach you in schools.
British empire was great for many things. But also was awful for many others thing.
Because of British far east see us (Europe) as barbarians imperialists.
What British done in todays South Africa can be compared with regime such as Pol Pot, Hitler and similar. Imho.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#25    keithisco

keithisco

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,521 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southampton, Blighty!

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:10 PM

View Postthe L, on 22 May 2013 - 09:59 PM, said:

And how many times did British attacked others? lets say from 1800...

You got me to doing some InterWeb searching and I came across this from the Daily Telegraph showing the 21 (out of 22) countries NOT invaded at some point by Britain (Invasion is a bit strong because it includes Privateering raids sanctioned by the Crown or Govt.

Link to complete article (Courtesy Daily Telegraph): http://www.telegraph...Luxembourg.html




#26    keithisco

keithisco

    Majestic 12 Operative

  • Member
  • 6,521 posts
  • Joined:06 May 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Southampton, Blighty!

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:12 PM

View Postthe L, on 22 May 2013 - 10:06 PM, said:

Because thats not how they teach you in schools.
British empire was great for many things. But also was awful for many others thing.
Because of British far east see us (Europe) as barbarians imperialists.
What British done in todays South Africa can be compared with regime such as Pol Pot, Hitler and similar. Imho.

British? I thought it was the Voortrekkers that imposed Apartheid (if that is what you are referring to)

Either way, I am not responsible for what my forebears did within the Political context of the time, and neither do I feel personal guilt

Edited by keithisco, 22 May 2013 - 10:15 PM.


#27    FLOMBIE

FLOMBIE

    sapere aude

  • Member
  • 3,524 posts
  • Joined:22 Jun 2009
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Seoul/Berlin

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:14 PM

I think he is talking about the concentration camps.


#28    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:14 PM

keithisco, for now, I think that British concentration camps in south Africa and forcing Chinese to buy Opium is more then enough to realize that question about compesation is valid one.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#29    Big Bad Voodoo

Big Bad Voodoo

    High priest of Darwinism

  • Member
  • 9,582 posts
  • Joined:15 Nov 2010
  • Gender:Male

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:15 PM

View PostFLOMBIE, on 22 May 2013 - 10:14 PM, said:

I think he is talking about the concentration camps.

Yes. And opium wars as second example. But if needed I can trace many more.

JFK: "And we are as a people, inherently and historically, opposed to secret societies, to secret oaths, and to secret proceedings.
For we are opposed around the world by a monolithic and ruthless conspiracy..."

#30    Setton

Setton

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,570 posts
  • Joined:05 Feb 2011
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Durham, England

Posted 22 May 2013 - 10:17 PM

View Postthe L, on 22 May 2013 - 10:03 PM, said:

I would just add that Dutch gave British one of their greatest defeats. de Ruyter and Raid on the Medway.

Sorry, but I thought we were just discussing invasions? If we go into every battle this is going to be a very long thread.

Just to be clear, I'm not trying to belittle the raid at all. It was a daring move and brilliantly executed.

Although as an Englishman, I think it's my duty to point out that the Dutch outnumbered us hugely and it was just the sort of thing we expect from sneaky foreigners :P

View Postthe L, on 22 May 2013 - 10:06 PM, said:

Because thats not how they teach you in schools.
British empire was great for many things. But also was awful for many others thing.
Because of British far east see us (Europe) as barbarians imperialists.
What British done in todays South Africa can be compared with regime such as Pol Pot, Hitler and similar. Imho.

And now we seem to be on concentration camps. You just specified that the conversation is about invasion and sequestering resources! Make up your mind then let me know and I can try to answer.

Should point out that most of my historical knowledge is self-taught actually. Never enjoyed it in school.

View Postkeithisco, on 22 May 2013 - 10:06 PM, said:

Oops, forgot about the Saxons...

How dare you!

Not that I'm reenacting Saxons this weekend or anything :whistle:

'Good' is not the same as 'nice'.
'No, murder is running your broadsword through someone because he worships a different God to you... Or is that evangelism? I get confused.'
When they discover the centre of the universe, a lot of people are going to be disappointed - They are not it.
I don't object to the concept of a deity but I'm baffled by the notion of one that takes attendance.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users