| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - European colonies in the New World
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


European colonies in the New World

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
Author
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:04
Well ask the Rapa Nui people what they think about that.
 
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:09
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Its population is mainly of external origin (chinese and other).
Another thing: Isthere anything at all that supports the idea that the mentioned "possesions" are military outposts that in any way help to get fish or oil from the sorrounding countries? Or is it only what you imagine. If not mention excamples 1: Excactly which of the mentioned places are of military significance.2:Which independent countries are threatened or intimidated or whatever You mean from such european military strongholds. What specific fish, oil or other ressources are "robbed" because of those military forces - please specify the location of the ressources.
3:How is it done. Go more into details and use more than one or two lines, at least if You want to convince anybody.


The Falklands show clearly that those "innocent" possetions are military posts. In that case, a microscropic island is claimming a good chunck of the potential Argentinean oceanic oil fields. Besides, from the same place, a decrepit but still dangerous superpower is claimming all the South American antarctic.

Let's forget about the Falklands now, and see the other outposts. Take French Guyana, for example, a place where the French make theirs launchings. No matter the French military presence is not feel in this hemisphere since Maximilian was shot by Benito Juarez Wink, the existence of those complexes and military bases of an overseas origin is a potential thread to the security of our countries in the region. South America hasn't forgotten the French nuclear experiments in the Pacific, where that country shown its disrespect for our health. We haven't forgotten the transport of nuclear fuel for our routes, either. France is an abusive country; at least that's our image here.

The rest of microscopic islands, like Curazao or Virgin Islands don't represent any thread, but they capture tourism to the other countries in the Caribbian, and not only to the Hispanic caribbean countries.






Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:10
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

Well ask the Rapa Nui people what they think about that.


We are in contact with all our citizens. By the way, the Rapa Nui has theirs own laws of immigration to prevent foreign agitators, like yourself, settle there.
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:12
Well ask this Rapa nui citizens opinion about Chileans taking their land:
 

Rapa+Nui_0_07_22-08-WEB

Chilean police recently attacked Rapa Nui activists on Easter Island, wounding 24 people as part of an effort to dislodge indigenous families from a disputed area. Police have shot at protestors and beaten some with batons; one protestor lost an eye according to recent accounts.



Edited by Carcharodon - 02 Apr 2011 at 13:14
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:14
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Easter Island is not a colony of Chile. It is part of our territory.
The same can be said about many  European "overseas" territories - at least formally (I frankly do not know about one that is still legally a "colony", though some has "home rule" or autonomy).
Everything may not be rosy in all those territories still under some kind of "dependency" to some European country, but I cannmot see everything is necessarily so much better if it is instead a faraway Capital in South or  North America, Australia or anywhere else. We may even question if rule by a nearby Capital is necessarily that beneficial.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:31
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

Well ask this Rapa nui citizens opinion about Chileans taking their land:
 Chilean police recently attacked Rapa Nui activists on Easter Island, wounding 24 people as part of an effort to dislodge indigenous families from a disputed area. Police have shot at protestors and beaten some with batons; one protestor lost an eye according to recent accounts.


Don't be stupid. Police are brutes everywhere. Mind the brutality of your own police. Mind your business. Easter Island is part of Chile, and we take care of it.











Edited by pinguin - 02 Apr 2011 at 13:32
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:37
Still there is obviously a dissatisfaction among Rapa nuians about the rule of the Chileans. According so some sources it seems that Rapa nuians always have to fight about nearly every square meter of their own land.
 
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:44
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Easter Island is not a colony of Chile. It is part of our territory.
The same can be said about many  European "overseas" territories - at least formally (I frankly do not know about one that is still legally a "colony", though some has "home rule" or autonomy).
Everything may not be rosy in all those territories still under some kind of "dependency" to some European country, but I cannmot see everything is necessarily so much better if it is instead a faraway Capital in South or  North America, Australia or anywhere else. We may even question if rule by a nearby Capital is necessarily that beneficial.


Remember the Monroe doctrine. Keep the Europeans out of the Americas. That's the doctrine that the U.S. used to justify its own interventions in the Americas. However, the doctrine broke down when the United States allowed Britain to fight the Falkland war, given its blessing to the European colony of the U.S.: Britain.

Now, Easter Island is not an "overseas" territory. That island's closest continental land is precisely Chile, and it is closest to South America than to any other major polynesian island. Our country didn't want a foreign power such as France, or even Peru, could put a military base there, just on front of our continental territory. We don't need a Falklands in front of our coasts.


Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:44
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Its population is mainly of external origin (chinese and other).
Another thing: Isthere anything at all that supports the idea that the mentioned "possesions" are military outposts that in any way help to get fish or oil from the sorrounding countries? Or is it only what you imagine. If not mention excamples 1: Excactly which of the mentioned places are of military significance.2:Which independent countries are threatened or intimidated or whatever You mean from such european military strongholds. What specific fish, oil or other ressources are "robbed" because of those military forces - please specify the location of the ressources.
3:How is it done. Go more into details and use more than one or two lines, at least if You want to convince anybody.


The Falklands show clearly that those "innocent" possetions are military posts. In that case, a microscropic island is claimming a good chunck of the potential Argentinean oceanic oil fields. Besides, from the same place, a decrepit but still dangerous superpower is claimming all the South American antarctic.

Let's forget about the Falklands now, and see the other outposts. Take French Guyana, for example, a place where the French make theirs launchings. No matter the French military presence is not feel in this hemisphere since Maximilian was shot by Benito Juarez Wink, the existence of those complexes and military bases of an overseas origin is a potential thread to the security of our countries in the region. South America hasn't forgotten the French nuclear experiments in the Pacific, where that country shown its disrespect for our health. We haven't forgotten the transport of nuclear fuel for our routes, either. France is an abusive country; at least that's our image here.

The rest of microscopic islands, like Curazao or Virgin Islands don't represent any thread, but they capture tourism to the other countries in the Caribbian, and not only to the Hispanic caribbean countries.
  I remember very weel the war over the Falklands ("Malvinas"). I shall not definately say who was "right" there (or probably least wrong), only that I do not see it is self evident it was 100% Argentina. It is a small territory, but to say "microscopic" is to stretch it a bit, and though it is very far away from Britain, i see no reason why Argentina should have the right simply by being "nearby" (there is some distance). Numerous countries have made "claims" on antarctic territories, including Britain, Argentina, Norway, Chile, though they are not internationally recognised.Perhaps some claims are more "legal" than others, but then give some good reasons.
I too remeber well the french nuclear tests in the Pacific, and have little sympathy. Still I do not see it is better any country from the Americas do the same, as happened in the past (U.S. nuclear tests). It seems South americans too are concerned about issues in places far away, so they do not necessarily dissaprove of "international meddling" after all?
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:49
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

Still there is obviously a dissatisfaction among Rapa nuians about the rule of the Chileans. According so some sources it seems that Rapa nuians always have to fight about nearly every square meter of their own land.


Conflicts exist everywhere. Chile has managed to resolve peacefully many conflicts. And the conflicts that exist there are not for an independent island, but for land rights, which are understandable and manegeable. However, you miss the point if you think Easter Islanders and anti-Chilean. They are more nationalistic than continental people.




Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:53
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:



Conflicts exist everywhere. Chile has managed to resolve peacefully many conflicts. And the conflicts that exist there are not for an independent island, but for land rights, which are understandable and manegeable. However, you miss the point if you think Easter Islanders and anti-Chilean. They are more nationalistic than continental people.
 
Well, it seems that many Rapa nuians at least want more autonomy than they have now and that they consider their existence, physically and culturally, threatened.
 
Here is a little film about Rapa nuian resistence:
 
Quote Easter Island: Saving the Rapanui
 
The Rapanui of Easter Island are facing extinction. They claim their colonial masters in Chile are not doing enough to ensure their survival.
 


Edited by Carcharodon - 02 Apr 2011 at 13:53
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:58
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:


...  I remember very weel the war over the Falklands ("Malvinas"). I shall not definately say who was "right" there (or probably least wrong), only that I do not see it is self evident it was 100% Argentina. It is a small territory, but to say "microscopic" is to stretch it a bit, and though it is very far away from Britain, i see no reason why Argentina should have the right simply by being "nearby" (there is some distance). Numerous countries have made "claims" on antarctic territories, including Britain, Argentina, Norway, Chile, though they are not internationally recognised.Perhaps some claims are more "legal" than others, but then give some good reasons.
I too remeber well the french nuclear tests in the Pacific, and have little sympathy. Still I do not see it is better any country from the Americas do the same, as happened in the past (U.S. nuclear tests). It seems South americans too are concerned about issues in places far away, so they do not necessarily dissaprove of "international meddling" after all?


If the Falklands were independent, there is a good chance they'll remain free. Actually, there are lot of small Caribbean states, with little population, that remain free. Even in front of crazy countries like Chavez's Venezuela. The problem is that the Falkland are seen as the military post of a superpower that has no business in South America. A superpower that only want to extract local resources for free. Even Brazil see things that way, and that's why it is developing its own nuclear subs; just in case (you don't need nuke subs to fight Ghana). In here, with one regional superpower fooling around (The U.S.) we have enough.

South Americans are concerned with issues that affect us directly. And we fight for the freedom, independence and respect of our own countries. We are also known for the respect we have for the decisions of international institutions like the Haya Court, the U.N., the Catholic Church (that has mediated in some conflicts) and others.

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:59
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

Well, it seems that many Rapa nuians at least want more autonomy than they have now and that they consider their existence, physically and culturally, threatened.


What Rapa Nuians? Half the pascuences are continental Chileans. The rest are mixed.
Stop making this another "save the Xingu" stupidity.
It is a long time since Chile claimmed the island and save the natives from extinction. In fact, from the economical point of view, Easter Island lives on permanent subsidies.




Edited by pinguin - 02 Apr 2011 at 14:00
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 13:59
Just watch the film. There you can see who opposes Chilean colonialism.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:01
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

Just watch the film. There you can see who opposes Chilean colonialism.


Easter Island is not a colony, idiot. It is our territory. And Chile doesn't give away territory without a fight.
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:04
Rapa nui really belongs to the Rapa nuians. The Chileans are just colonial invaders. You have no more right to that island than European countries have the right to those places you complain about in the OP.

Edited by Carcharodon - 02 Apr 2011 at 14:05
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:04
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Remember the Monroe doctrine. Keep the Europeans out of the Americas. That's the doctrine that the U.S. used to justify its own interventions in the Americas. However, the doctrine broke down when the United States allowed Britain to fight the Falkland war, given its blessing to the European colony of the U.S.: Britain.

Now, Easter Island is not an "overseas" territory. That island's closest continental land is precisely Chile, and it is closest to South America than to any other major polynesian island. Our country didn't want a foreign power such as France, or even Peru, could put a military base there, just on front of our continental territory. We don't need a Falklands in front of our coasts.
  The word "oversea" to me simply meant there was a reasonable distance of water between it and the "mainland". If I take a look on my maps (perhaps You should do the same from time to time?) there is a distance of som thousands kilometres between "Rapa Nui" and mainland South America. For me it is not a "Front door distance". Neither is the Hawaiian isles "neighbours" to mainland North America or the Galapagos that close to Equador. But anyway, why should the relevance of territorial claims depend on distance alone?
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:10
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

Rapa nui really belongs to the Rapa nuians. The Chileans are just colonial invaders. You have no more right to that island than European countries have the right to those places you complain about in the OP.


Shut up, dumb. Easter Islanders don't want independence, they are fighting for the preservation of theirs culture, which is threatened by westernization.

European countries have no business in the Americas. Since 1776 the countries of the region has pushed away the invaders. Let's hope these powers return to Europe for good. We don't need them fooling around here.

Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:11
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Its population is mainly of external origin (chinese and other).
Another thing: Isthere anything at all that supports the idea that the mentioned "possesions" are military outposts that in any way help to get fish or oil from the sorrounding countries? Or is it only what you imagine. If not mention excamples 1: Excactly which of the mentioned places are of military significance.2:Which independent countries are threatened or intimidated or whatever You mean from such european military strongholds. What specific fish, oil or other ressources are "robbed" because of those military forces - please specify the location of the ressources.
3:How is it done. Go more into details and use more than one or two lines, at least if You want to convince anybody.


The Falklands show clearly that those "innocent" possetions are military posts. In that case, a microscropic island is claimming a good chunck of the potential Argentinean oceanic oil fields.
You mean Argentina is claiming all of the fields that belong to the Falkland Islanders? There's a better French claim (though not a good one) than an Argentinian one.
 
Countries should on the whole 'belong' to the people who live there, not to other people who want to make a grab for them.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:13
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:


Shut up, dumb. Easter Islanders don't want independence, they are fighting for the preservation of theirs culture, which is threatened by westernization.

 
At least some of them want a lot more autonomy which they explain in the film.

Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

European countries have no business in the Americas. Since 1776 the countries of the region has pushed away the invaders. Let's hope these powers return to Europe for good. We don't need them fooling around here .

Well, Chile has no business in Polynesia, that is not the Americas.

Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:16
Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

The word "oversea" to me simply meant there was a reasonable distance of water between it and the "mainland". If I take a look on my maps (perhaps You should do the same from time to time?) there is a distance of som thousands kilometres between "Rapa Nui" and mainland South America. For me it is not a "Front door distance". Neither is the Hawaiian isles "neighbours" to mainland North America or the Galapagos that close to Equador. But anyway, why should the relevance of territorial claims depend on distance alone?


Indeed. Hawaii situation is similar in many sense to Easter Island. The number of non-polynesians on those islands are high.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:29
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:


At least some of them want a lot more autonomy which they explain in the film.


Did you see the film? That is quite old. Today, Easter Islanders control the immigration to theirs island Confused..

Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:


Well, Chile has no business in Polynesia, that is not the Americas.


Easter Island is part of Chile.
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:31
Well, the film still corresponds with other information, from other sources about the matter.

Edited by Carcharodon - 05 Apr 2011 at 12:14
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:33
Nope. The film is outdated.

El 30 de julio de 2007, se publico la Ley N. 20.193, que reformo la Constitucion Politica de Chile, otorgando a Rapa Nui, junto al Archipielago Juan Fernandez, la categoria de territorio especial.

http://radio.uchile.cl/noticias/55895/

You have no idea about the topic. And it is not your business. This is a topic for Chileans (Continentals and Islanders) and not the business of Swedish people. We don't interfiere in your issues with Finns, Samis, Russians and other foreigners. Please don't interfiere in our internal issues.

Edited by pinguin - 02 Apr 2011 at 14:38
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:45
Opression is everybodies business, not only the ones that happens to live close to it. If Rapa nuians are opressed the rest of the world has the right to protest.
 
More discussions about Rapa Nui:
 
A basis for a judicial Decolonisation of Rapa Nui


Edited by Carcharodon - 02 Apr 2011 at 14:45
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:46
Baloney.

Look for better causes, like stopping the killings of the unborn in Sweden, hypocryte.
Back to Top
Carcharodon View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 04 May 2007
Location: Northern Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 4959
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Carcharodon Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 14:54
Well, the abortion debate we can take in another thread. But perhaps abortion is better than swamping the earth with unwanted children.
Back to Top
pinguin View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 15238
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote pinguin Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 15:07
Originally posted by Carcharodon Carcharodon wrote:

Well, the abortion debate we can take in another thread. But perhaps abortion is better than swamping the earth with unwanted children.


You can't kill humans to solve social problems. The end doesn't justify the means. A society that hates children is not a healty society and it is not an example for the rest to follow. There aren't unwanted children, only unwanted societies. Don't you understand that the hypocresy of yours society is transparent to the rest that watch you?

Now, let's go back to the topic, please.


Edited by pinguin - 02 Apr 2011 at 15:12
Back to Top
fantasus View Drop Down
Arch Duke
Arch Duke
Avatar

Joined: 07 May 2009
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 1943
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote fantasus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 15:53

Is the idea that to be ruled from a Capital located somewhere in the Americas is that better than to be ruled from anywhere else (or at least form anyone located in Europe) that reasonable or just?

Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 02 Apr 2011 at 15:56
Originally posted by pinguin pinguin wrote:

Originally posted by fantasus fantasus wrote:

Its population is mainly of external origin (chinese and other).
Another thing: Isthere anything at all that supports the idea that the mentioned "possesions" are military outposts that in any way help to get fish or oil from the sorrounding countries? Or is it only what you imagine. If not mention excamples 1: Excactly which of the mentioned places are of military significance.2:Which independent countries are threatened or intimidated or whatever You mean from such european military strongholds. What specific fish, oil or other ressources are "robbed" because of those military forces - please specify the location of the ressources.
3:How is it done. Go more into details and use more than one or two lines, at least if You want to convince anybody.


The Falklands show clearly that those "innocent" possetions are military posts. In that case, a microscropic island is claimming a good chunck of the potential Argentinean oceanic oil fields. Besides, from the same place, a decrepit but still dangerous superpower is claimming all the South American antarctic.

Let's forget about the Falklands now, and see the other outposts. Take French Guyana, for example, a place where the French make theirs launchings. No matter the French military presence is not feel in this hemisphere since Maximilian was shot by Benito Juarez Wink, the existence of those complexes and military bases of an overseas origin is a potential thread to the security of our countries in the region. South America hasn't forgotten the French nuclear experiments in the Pacific, where that country shown its disrespect for our health. We haven't forgotten the transport of nuclear fuel for our routes, either. France is an abusive country; at least that's our image here.

The rest of microscopic islands, like Curazao or Virgin Islands don't represent any thread, but they capture tourism to the other countries in the Caribbian, and not only to the Hispanic caribbean countries.






 
 
You have it backwards. The Falklands was a backwater no one thought about, with no military outposts, until it was seized by Argentina. The generals that ran that country needed a popularity boost, and so, in adolescent fashion, they thought they would look good by reinventing an old and extremly dubious claim on a worthless few islands, and charging in Rambo style.
 
The population of the islands in undoubtedly British, and has been for a long, long time. A military post is now maintained there only because of residual threat from Argentina, which never fully appologized for their outrage. The possibility of resources in the area is a very recent development.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 5>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.