Which empire was it that invaded Aotearoa and practically wiped out the indigenous people?

I wouldn't call the Maori an empire. Great seafarers, but hardly empire builders.

Which empire was it that invaded Aotearoa and practically wiped out the indigenous people?

That's what they do well. Case in point: Australia and the extermination fields for centuries. Such class and dignity.

Which empire was it that invaded Aotearoa and practically wiped out the indigenous people?

I wouldn't call the Maori an empire. Great seafarers, but hardly empire builders.

The Maori are the indiginous people victimised by the Imperialists. Maybe they skipped over that part where you went to school?

Which empire was it that invaded Aotearoa and practically wiped out the indigenous people?

I wouldn't call the Maori an empire. Great seafarers, but hardly empire builders.

I don't believe I read anything above in that brief sentence referring to any such Maori Empire. Did you...??

Which empire was it that invaded Aotearoa and practically wiped out the indigenous people?

I wouldn't call the Maori an empire. Great seafarers, but hardly empire builders.

The Maori are the indiginous people victimised by the Imperialists. Maybe they skipped over that part where you went to school?

The only invaders of Aotearoa that " practically wiped out the indigenous people" were the Maori.

Did you not know that there was an indigenous people before the Maori?

The British did not "invade" and they never " practically wiped out the indigenous people".

Maybe they skipped over those facts where you went to school?

Of course the USA is an empire. They rule the waves. Vassal states, protectorates, call it what you will... It sure aint charity.

Interesting article I found on the website where among others, Fidel Castro posts his thoughts

Why World War II ended with Mushroom Clouds

As far as the American leaders were concerned, a Soviet intervention in the war in the Far East threatened to achieve for the Soviets the same advantage which the Yankees' relatively late intervention in the war in Europe had produced for the United States, namely, a place at the round table of the victors who would force their will on the defeated enemy, carve occupation zones out of his territory, change borders, determine postwar social-economic and political structures, and thereby derive for themselves enormous benefits and prestige. Washington absolutely did not want the Soviet Union to enjoy this kind of input. The Americans were on the brink of victory over Japan, their great rival in that part of the world. They did not relish the idea of being saddled with a new potential rival, one whose detested communist ideology might become dangerously influential in many Asian countries. By dropping the atomic bomb, the Americans hoped to finish Japan off instantly and go to work in the Far East as cavalier seul, that is, without their victory party being spoiled by unwanted Soviet gate-crashers. Use of the atom bomb offered Washington a second important advantage. Truman's experience in Potsdam had persuaded him that only an actual demonstration of this new weapon would make Stalin sufficiently pliable. Nuking a "Jap" city, preferably a "virgin" city, where the damage would be especially impressive, thus loomed useful as a means to intimidate the Soviets and induce them to make concessions with respect to Germany, Poland, and the rest of Central and Eastern Europe.

<BR><BR>

And so the Americans were stuck with a Soviet partner in the Far East after all. Or were they? Truman made sure that they were not, ignoring the precedents set earlier with respect to cooperation among the Big Three in Europe. Already on August 15, 1945, Washington rejected Stalin's request for a Soviet occupation zone in the defeated land of the rising sun. And when on September 2, 1945, General MacArthur officially accepted the Japanese surrender on the American battleship Missouri in the Bay of Tokyo, representatives of the Soviet Union - and of other allies in the Far East, such as Great Britain, France, Australia, and the Netherlands - were allowed to be present only as insignificant extras, as spectators. Unlike Germany, Japan was not carved up into occupation zones. America's defeated rival was to be occupied by the Americans only, and as American "viceroy" in Tokyo, General MacArthur would ensure that, regardless of contributions made to the common victory, no other power had a say in the affairs of postwar Japan.

..and the Pacific ocean...

until.... Chinese Super-Weapon A 'Game Changer'

Nothing projects U.S. global air and sea power more vividly than supercarriers. Bristling with fighter jets that can reach deep into even landlocked trouble zones, America’s virtually invincible carrier fleet has long enforced its dominance of the high seas.

China may soon put an end to that.

U.S. naval planners are scrambling to deal with what analysts say is a game—changing weapon being developed by China, an unprecedented carrier—killing missile called the Dong Feng 21D that could be launched from land with enough accuracy to penetrate the defences of even the most advanced moving aircraft carrier at a distance of more than 1,500 kilometers (900 miles).

Analysts say final testing of the missile could come as soon as the end of this year, though questions remain about how fast China will be able to perfect its accuracy to the level needed to threaten a moving carrier at sea.

The weapon, a version of which was displayed last year in a Chinese military parade, could revolutionize China’s role in the Pacific balance of power, seriously weakening Washington’s ability to intervene in any potential conflict over Taiwan or North Korea. It could also deny U.S. ships safe access to international waters near China’s 11,200—mile (18,000—kilometer) —long coastline.

p.s: I knew a Dutch ex POW who was in a Japanese prison camp, before I get flamed...

Which empire was it that invaded Aotearoa and practically wiped out the indigenous people?

I wouldn't call the Maori an empire. Great seafarers, but hardly empire builders.

The Maori are the indiginous people victimised by the Imperialists. Maybe they skipped over that part where you went to school?

The only invaders of Aotearoa that " practically wiped out the indigenous people" were the Maori.

Did you not know that there was an indigenous people before the Maori?

The British did not "invade" and they never " practically wiped out the indigenous people".

Maybe they skipped over those facts where you went to school?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M%C4%81ori

"In 1840, New Zealand had a Māori population of about 100,000 and only about 2,000 Europeans. The Māori population had declined to 42,113 in the 1896 census and Europeans numbered more than 700,000.

...between 1840 and 1890 Māori lost 95 percent of their land (63,000,000 of 66,000,000 acres in 1890)."

That's a 58% population decline in 46 years for the Maori and the "non-invaders" population increased by only 35,000%. The "non-Invaders" also magically acquired most of the land during the same time period. I guess since the Maori only arrived around 1300 themselves, the "non-invaders" used that to justify their criminal acts.

Anyone read " Bury my heart at wounded knee " ?

Of course the USA is an empire. They rule the waves. Vassal states, protectorates, call it what you will... It sure aint charity.

Interesting article I found on the website where among others, Fidel Castro posts his thoughts

Why World War II ended with Mushroom Clouds

As far as the American leaders were concerned, a Soviet intervention in the war in the Far East threatened to achieve for the Soviets the same advantage which the Yankees' relatively late intervention in the war in Europe had produced for the United States, namely, a place at the round table of the victors who would force their will on the defeated enemy, carve occupation zones out of his territory, change borders, determine postwar social-economic and political structures, and thereby derive for themselves enormous benefits and prestige. Washington absolutely did not want the Soviet Union to enjoy this kind of input. The Americans were on the brink of victory over Japan, their great rival in that part of the world. They did not relish the idea of being saddled with a new potential rival, one whose detested communist ideology might become dangerously influential in many Asian countries. By dropping the atomic bomb, the Americans hoped to finish Japan off instantly and go to work in the Far East as cavalier seul, that is, without their victory party being spoiled by unwanted Soviet gate-crashers. Use of the atom bomb offered Washington a second important advantage. Truman's experience in Potsdam had persuaded him that only an actual demonstration of this new weapon would make Stalin sufficiently pliable. Nuking a "Jap" city, preferably a "virgin" city, where the damage would be especially impressive, thus loomed useful as a means to intimidate the Soviets and induce them to make concessions with respect to Germany, Poland, and the rest of Central and Eastern Europe.

<BR><BR>

And so the Americans were stuck with a Soviet partner in the Far East after all. Or were they? Truman made sure that they were not, ignoring the precedents set earlier with respect to cooperation among the Big Three in Europe. Already on August 15, 1945, Washington rejected Stalin's request for a Soviet occupation zone in the defeated land of the rising sun. And when on September 2, 1945, General MacArthur officially accepted the Japanese surrender on the American battleship Missouri in the Bay of Tokyo, representatives of the Soviet Union - and of other allies in the Far East, such as Great Britain, France, Australia, and the Netherlands - were allowed to be present only as insignificant extras, as spectators. Unlike Germany, Japan was not carved up into occupation zones. America's defeated rival was to be occupied by the Americans only, and as American "viceroy" in Tokyo, General MacArthur would ensure that, regardless of contributions made to the common victory, no other power had a say in the affairs of postwar Japan.

..and the Pacific ocean...

until.... Chinese Super-Weapon A 'Game Changer'

Nothing projects U.S. global air and sea power more vividly than supercarriers. Bristling with fighter jets that can reach deep into even landlocked trouble zones, America’s virtually invincible carrier fleet has long enforced its dominance of the high seas.

China may soon put an end to that.

U.S. naval planners are scrambling to deal with what analysts say is a game—changing weapon being developed by China, an unprecedented carrier—killing missile called the Dong Feng 21D that could be launched from land with enough accuracy to penetrate the defences of even the most advanced moving aircraft carrier at a distance of more than 1,500 kilometers (900 miles).

Analysts say final testing of the missile could come as soon as the end of this year, though questions remain about how fast China will be able to perfect its accuracy to the level needed to threaten a moving carrier at sea.

The weapon, a version of which was displayed last year in a Chinese military parade, could revolutionize China’s role in the Pacific balance of power, seriously weakening Washington’s ability to intervene in any potential conflict over Taiwan or North Korea. It could also deny U.S. ships safe access to international waters near China’s 11,200—mile (18,000—kilometer) —long coastline.

p.s: I knew a Dutch ex POW who was in a Japanese prison camp, before I get flamed...

1) Satlin refused to help out against Japan because they had just finished a devastating campaign themselves and besides, he figured the Western allies took their time helping him in Europe. It was only after Truman told Stalin that they had a weapon that would end the war immediately did Stalin make a mad push in the Far East in a land grab.

2) A Chinese air craft carrier? The only air craft carrier the Chinese know anything about is the Minsk used in a Chinese theme park. It isn't a threat. However, analysts love to build it up to keep the money in Washington flowing into the defense budget. Much like how the Soviets were built up during the Cold War.

Anyone read " Bury my heart at wounded knee " ?

Yeah, really, what is it with English/Scots/Irish and slaughtering indigenous people? You never hear about German-American cowboys. Or Italain-American, Japanese-American, Ukrainian-American, Italian-American, etc. It's always those Brits & Irish. To this day, that old Irish tune, the Garryowen, is the marching tune of the US 7th Calvery (Indian-loving General Custer started that tradition I think)

1) Satlin refused to help out against Japan because they had just finished a devastating campaign themselves and besides, he figured the Western allies took their time helping him in Europe. It was only after Truman told Stalin that they had a weapon that would end the war immediately did Stalin make a mad push in the Far East in a land grab.

2) A Chinese air craft carrier? The only air craft carrier the Chinese know anything about is the Minsk used in a Chinese theme park. It isn't a threat. However, analysts love to build it up to keep the money in Washington flowing into the defense budget. Much like how the Soviets were built up during the Cold War.

1 - yes, thats what the article says.

2 - no, these are anti-carrier missiles with pinpoint accuracy, that extend the reach of Chinese defences

"China can reach out and hit the U.S. well before the U.S. can get close enough to the mainland to hit back," said Toshi Yoshihara, an associate professor at the U.S. Naval War College. He said U.S. ships have only twice been that vulnerable, against Japan in World War II and against Soviet bombers in the Cold War.

Carrier—killing missiles "could have an enduring psychological effect on U.S. policymakers," he e—mailed to The AP. "It underscores more broadly that the U.S. Navy no longer rules the waves as it has since the end of World War II. The stark reality is that sea control cannot be taken for granted anymore."

We can kill their one carrier before they can kill our dozen or so. An aircraft carrier needs a support fleet as well. China is a generation or two away from causing any real concern. But it sure helps raise funds to make them out to be scary.

Did you not know that there was an indigenous people before the Maori?

Interesting to note upon. Such theories and evidence about ancient explorers and settlements in NZ are still debated today. Loads of interesting material regarding alternative history and fringe archaeology in that part of the world.

Anyone read " Bury my heart at wounded knee " ?

dam_n good read!!!!

Did you not know that there was an indigenous people before the Maori?

Interesting to note upon. Such theories and evidence about ancient explorers and settlements in NZ are still debated today. Loads of interesting material regarding alternative history and fringe archaeology in that part of the world.

The Moriori were living in Aotearoa long before the Maori......they may have had a common ancestry, but nonetheless, the Maori virtually wiped them out upon arrival.

I was not referring to small pockets of Western or Asian settlements that may predate the Maori.

Did you not know that there was an indigenous people before the Maori?

Interesting to note upon. Such theories and evidence about ancient explorers and settlements in NZ are still debated today. Loads of interesting material regarding alternative history and fringe archaeology in that part of the world.

The Moriori were living in Aotearoa long before the Maori......they may have had a common ancestry, but nonetheless, the Maori virtually wiped them out upon arrival.

I was not referring to small pockets of Western or Asian settlements that may predate the Maori.

Very nice....The Moriori aren't discussed much within these circles. Wonder why?

It's unfortunate that most are ignorant of history and current events.

He is not ignorant of either one. He just interprets them differently from the loony left.