Jump to content
Join the Unexplained Mysteries community today! It's free and setting up an account only takes a moment.
- Sign In or Create Account -

Rule Britannia for global crimes


Big Bad Voodoo
 Share

Recommended Posts

Wrong. UK and commonwealth are rightous successors.

Also see analogy with Germans.

So you want all the other countries in the commonwealth to pay as well? They are in it voluntarily after all.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It is built because of Spanish armada, Colonialism, East India company, Industrial revolution etc.

Ofcourse its not completly built by others treasure.

Labour was always before capital and natural treasures.

People built it.

But... It was built partly by Boer gold and money from Opium. It would be nice for UK to erase that awful deeds.

Same as USA must compesate natives.

your so hung up on the boer war, listen when it comes to empires the British empire was slow off the mark, Portugal, Spain, France and the Netherlands or as they were known back in the day - United Providences, these had set up colonies long before Britain had a pot to pee in. back when they were 'empire building' England was nothing more than a impoverished nation. mainly run by privateers. - we didn't get our act together for at least a hundred years, with monarchy backed raids on Spanish ports such as Cadiz and Shipping trade routes by privateers, such as Sir francis Drake and Sir John Hawkins. also not forgetting raids on ports in Mexico and the Caribbean were the Spanish where shipping treasure back to Spain from Peru. etc.. the turning point for us came in 1588 with the defeat of the Armada. and the sources of our wealth came from the Caribbean, the lands known as the sugar islands. these alone funded our navy which enabled us to rule the waves and so gave us a monopoly on sea lanes and trade routes at one point 40% of world trade was passing through the port of Liverpool here in England alone. British Wealth was thanks to the Royal Navy. - when it comes to peace, look no further than Pax Britannica. not one mention that the Royal Navy paying captains and crews for every slave ship captured, and its inhabitants freed. you think the British Empire is bad. you simply have not compared it to the others which were far more brutal.

not one mention of the Arab trade which pre-dates the slave trade you only seem aware of, the moslems who were known as Turks back then use to raid southern europe, taking entire villages, as slaves. in fact in Cork in Ireland entire villages of young men where taken. the Arab slave trade was bigger than Atlantic slave trade.

Edited by stevewinn
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

British thought China and India are stuck, stoped,they need British energy and initiative and andventures spirit. Its racial thinking. British think they are more advanced, they developed banking, institution,political life. Racial thinking is about culture same as biology.

And all of that has what to do with me exactly? Please explain to me why I'm personally responsible and should pay? Because it's the British PEOPLE who'll be paying, not the government.

Welcome to the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So you want all the other countries in the commonwealth to pay as well? They are in it voluntarily after all.

Interesting idea.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

your so hung up on the boer war, listen when it comes to empires the British empire was slow off the mark, Portugal, Spain, France and the Netherlands or as they were known back in the day - United Providences, these had set up colonies long before Britain had a pot to pee in. back when they were 'empire building' England was nothing more than a impoverished nation. mainly run by privateers. - we didn't get our act together for at least a hundred years, with monarchy backed raids on Spanish ports such as Cadiz and Shipping trade routes by privateers, such as Sir francis Drake and Sir John Hawkins. also not forgetting raids on ports in Mexico and the Caribbean were the Spanish where shipping treasure back to Spain from Peru. etc.. the turning point for us came in 1588 with the defeat of the Armada. and the sources of our wealth came from the Caribbean, the lands known as the sugar islands. these alone funded our navy which enabled us to rule the waves and so gave us a monopoly on sea lanes and trade routes at one point 40% of world trade was passing through the port of Liverpool here in England alone. British Wealth was thanks to the Royal Navy. - when it comes to peace, look no further than Pax Britannica. not one mention that the Royal Navy paying captains and crews for every slave ship captured, and its inhabitants freed. you think the British Empire is bad. you simply have not compared it to the others which were far more brutal.

I know all you wrote and I dont think that BE was worst then any from their time with exception of conc.camps and opium trade.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

"Damn it all Carruthers have you read this stuff from this 'L' chappie? Can't be doing with this sort of stuff Y'know!

Get in touch with Admiral Ffyfe Ffortescue at his club there's a good chap....Tell him to send a

couple of gunboats to sort this bounder out will you? Dammit all, the old Queen would turn in her grave (Gawd Bless 'er!)

:rolleyes:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On October 11, 1865 Morant Bay rebellion started. Which become racial war and led by massacre by British goverment. To not say Im a anti British I will point out that it was a major issue for 2 years in Brittain. Was that legimite repression?

So Sky scanner abolishment is a step but thats a process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Welcome to the world.

I say the same sentiments to all the subjects of the British Empire
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A world where I pay because of something that happened 100 years ago? If you want Britain to pay so much for all the negatives contributions to human history, you be prepared to pay for all the positive contributions we gave.

Welcome to the world. :tu:

Not more then China, Germany, Greeks, USA to name a few.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I say the same sentiments to all the subjects of the British Empire

Perhaps you can. But what about future?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The English language and the Internet.

So because you speak English and invent internet you are allowed to have conc. camps?

Interesting point of view.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Halfpipe,

14v0jkx.jpg

2uym2yd.jpg

If you think that point to USA will delete above,.. it wont.

Remember when you point finger in someone, four fingers are pointed at you.

I still think British need to pay. Im sure Thomas Arnold would also think we need to pay if he was alive.

Now I will watch Bayern-Borussia.

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ofcourse you are not guilty. Because it wasnt you who put civilians into conc. camp. Neither British soldier who actually did that.

Its British goverment and state.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What a pathetic idiotic thread. I am sick and tired of people trying to blame the British Empire etc.. for the worlds troubles. The people who commited those acts are long dead as are the majority of those who suffered. A DIFFERENT TIME, DIFFERENT RULES!! move on, get the **** over it and lets sort out this ****ty world now instead of trying to appoint blame.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You cant justify why those kids finished in conc.camps.

Would you tell that Nazis helped Jews when they put them in conc.camps because they were not safe in Germany?

I can and did. And no, because the British did not put the Boers in camps to kill them. I repeat, would you rather they had been left to starve?

Roman state doesnt exist anymore. Neither Saxon. But British state exist. Also you are Saxons. So you cant sue yourselves.

The King of Norway is a direct descendant of Harald Sigurdson as is the Queen of Denmark, as well as being successor to Cnut. The states of Norway and Denmark still exist. Do we bill them for their ancestors' invasions of England? That's a far less spurious link than an elected government a century after the event.

That's just two examples.

Well I answer you why. Also read above.

You have given absolutely no decent reasons why 1800 should be a cutoff point. The only reason that has come to light is that you would like the British to pay, but not all the other countries.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have given absolutely no decent reasons why 1800 should be a cutoff point. The only reason that has come to light is that you would like the British to pay, but not all the other countries.

No because we have evidence for crime against humanity yet no one pay for it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I can and did. And no, because the British did not put the Boers in camps to kill them. I repeat, would you rather they had been left to starve?

This is wrong on so many levels yet you dont see it. Difference between Nazists and British in Boer case was that British saved bullets and gas.

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No because we have evidence for crime against humanity yet no one pay for it.

And we have no evidence of anything before 1800? Up until then people were just skeletons who lived in the ground, were they? As I said, plainly a modern historian.

This is wrong on so many levels yet you dont see it.

Enlighten me. And if you could deign to answer my question, it would be appreciated. As I answer yours.

Would you rather they had been left to starve?

It's a simple question.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

And we have no evidence of anything before 1800? Up until then people were just skeletons who lived in the ground, were they? As I said, plainly a modern historian.

Enlighten me. And if you could deign to answer my question, it would be appreciated. As I answer yours.

Would you rather they had been left to starve?

It's a simple question.

British left them starve.

Now your turn, do you think this how human look like when he/she eats regulary? Its a simple question. :tu:

Also we dont have nothing then historical records for Mongols raping.

kind2.gif

177.jpg

800px-LizzieVanZyl.jpg

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

British came in Transval for gold. For profit and did conc. camps. So seems to me that you are one plainly a modern historian.

Educate your self first when going into debate. You have a lot to learn.

I dont blame you. Your history profesor probably didnt told you about British concentration camps.

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

British left them starve.

Now your turn, do you think this how human look like when he/she eats regulary? Its a simple question. :tu:

You have not answered the question. Would you rather they were in these camps or left outside to starve?

Apparently answering questions is beneath/beyond you. However, I will answer yours.

No, that is not how a well fed human looks. In the case of picture 3, as has been covered, it is how a child with typhoid looks. I would need your sources to comment on the others. You will note, however, that while underfed, these people are still alive. They would not be without the camps.

Also we dont have nothing then historical records for Mongols raping.

Ah yes, those famed Mongols from Denmark and Norway... :wacko:

I repeat, slowly for the hard of thinking: Should we get money from the King of Norway and Queen of Denmark because their ancestors invaded our ancestors' country?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

British came in Transval for gold. For profit and did conc. camps. So seems to me that you are one plainly a modern historian.

Educate your self first when going into debate. You have a lot to learn.

I dont blame you. Your history profesor probably didnt told you about British concentration camps.

If you had read my posts, you would know that my history is self-taught. (Also, the Boer war would come under Modern History. Your claim to be a student of history is looking ever less believable).

If I specialise in any area of history, it is early Medieval. I invite you to follow your own advice: educate yourself.

And for God's sake, at least try and answer the questions. I'm getting rather bored now and not sure why I should entertain your delusions if you're unwilling to even read my replies.

Edited by Setton
Link to comment
Share on other sites

You have not answered the question. Would you rather they were in these camps or left outside to starve?

Apparently answering questions is beneath/beyond you. However, I will answer yours.

No, that is not how a well fed human looks. In the case of picture 3, as has been covered, it is how a child with typhoid looks. I would need your sources to comment on the others. You will note, however, that while underfed, these people are still alive. They would not be without the camps.

Ah yes, those famed Mongols from Denmark and Norway... :wacko:

I repeat, slowly for the hard of thinking: Should we get money from the King of Norway and Queen of Denmark because their ancestors invaded our ancestors' country?

Setton are you talking to yourself?

You ignore my posts. I answer you. And I will not repeat it because you are either lazy, ignorant or here for redicule.

Read son.

Also son those kids would be very much alive if British didnt came and burn their houses.

And if they didnt show up in their country at all.

I think its pointless to discuss with you. Sorry.

Edited by the L
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you had read my posts, you would know that my history is self-taught. (Also, the Boer war would come under Modern History. Your claim to be a student of history is looking ever less believable).

If I specialise in any area of history, it is early Medieval. I invite you to follow your own advice: educate yourself.

And for God's sake, at least try and answer the questions. I'm getting rather bored now and not sure why I should entertain your delusions if you're unwilling to even read my replies.

Setton,

you didnt study anything. If you did study history we wouldnt have discussion at all did British have or have not had conc. camps. Neither you would try to justify their deeds.

Rest of your post is redicule. As usual from your posts you posted today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.