the irony of a HK passport in the 1980s was that the face said "British Passport" and i think somewhere on the third page it mentioned something like "not valid for entry to the United Kindom". i've seen that passport with my own eyes, it belonged to a lady who studied with my wife at the same university.

You have to understand Americans can be a bit schizo about who to support on this. Did you know the British naval invasion of Manhattan Island was the largest attack on America until 9/11? Shock and awe and then the redcoats burned 1/3 of the city. The British took thousands of American prisoners and placed them on prison ships that made Abu Ghraib look like the Hilton. Corpses were left over a week before removal. Most prisoners on the ships ... died.

You have to understand Americans can be a bit schizo about who to support on this. Did you know the British naval invasion of Manhattan Island was the largest attack on America until 9/11? Shock and awe and then the redcoats burned 1/3 of the city.

I thought the Mexican invasion was the largest attack. That's why you'all are building a wall.

But is it to keep them out OR keep them in.

sent from my Wellcom A90+

the irony of a HK passport in the 1980s was that the face said "British Passport" and i think somewhere on the third page it mentioned something like "not valid for entry to the United Kindom". i've seen that passport with my own eyes, it belonged to a lady who studied with my wife at the same university.

Don't I know it! My partner had one of those.

You have to understand Americans can be a bit schizo about who to support on this. Did you know the British naval invasion of Manhattan Island was the largest attack on America until 9/11? Shock and awe and then the redcoats burned 1/3 of the city. The British took thousands of American prisoners and placed them on prison ships that made Abu Ghraib look like the Hilton. Corpses were left over a week before removal. Most prisoners on the ships ... died.

How long ago was that? Not as long ago as the Battle of the Boyne, which the Irish still remember. But probably before the Falklands was first settled?

Hong Kong and the Malvinas are two different pairs of shoes I-Birder. there was no other way than what the Brits had to agree to in 1984 and the face saving "50 years of a certain autonomy after 1997" was not something the British negotiators had to extract from the "Commies" because it was their idea to use HK as a guinea pig area for various capitalistic and democratic experiments.

It's not so much the handover to the Chinese I was against, but the removal of British citizenship from people who were born with it.

Hong Kong and the Malvinas are two different pairs of shoes I-Birder. there was no other way than what the Brits had to agree to in 1984 and the face saving "50 years of a certain autonomy after 1997" was not something the British negotiators had to extract from the "Commies" because it was their idea to use HK as a guinea pig area for various capitalistic and democratic experiments.

It's not so much the handover to the Chinese I was against, but the removal of British citizenship from people who were born with it.

Totally agree. My secretary was OK, her family live in Stamford in Lincs. but many of my other close colleagues were very concerned. Most sorted it out with a bit of enterprise, but no help from the UK government or FCO officials.

You have to understand Americans can be a bit schizo about who to support on this. Did you know the British naval invasion of Manhattan Island was the largest attack on America until 9/11? Shock and awe and then the redcoats burned 1/3 of the city. The British took thousands of American prisoners and placed them on prison ships that made Abu Ghraib look like the Hilton. Corpses were left over a week before removal. Most prisoners on the ships ... died.

How long ago was that? Not as long ago as the Battle of the Boyne, which the Irish still remember. But probably before the Falklands was first settled?

Long ago. Most Americans aren't very aware of the massive scale of the British naval attack on what is now Manhattan Island or the brutality shown to the prisoners. However all American children are taught that our revolutionary struggle against colonialism was against the British. I reckon Canadians may feel differently. So it's kind of a weird relationship. Mostly very positive with but some reservations.

Hong Kong and the Malvinas are two different pairs of shoes I-Birder. there was no other way than what the Brits had to agree to in 1984 and the face saving "50 years of a certain autonomy after 1997" was not something the British negotiators had to extract from the "Commies" because it was their idea to use HK as a guinea pig area for various capitalistic and democratic experiments.

It's not so much the handover to the Chinese I was against, but the removal of British citizenship from people who were born with it.

a sad story indeed.

You have to understand Americans can be a bit schizo about who to support on this. Did you know the British naval invasion of Manhattan Island was the largest attack on America until 9/11? Shock and awe and then the redcoats burned 1/3 of the city. The British took thousands of American prisoners and placed them on prison ships that made Abu Ghraib look like the Hilton. Corpses were left over a week before removal. Most prisoners on the ships ... died.

How long ago was that? Not as long ago as the Battle of the Boyne, which the Irish still remember. But probably before the Falklands was first settled?

Long ago. Most Americans aren't very aware of the massive scale of the British naval attack on what is now Manhattan Island or the brutality shown to the prisoners. However all American children are taught that our revolutionary struggle against colonialism was against the British. I reckon Canadians may feel differently. So it's kind of a weird relationship. Mostly very positive with but some reservations.

I looked it up in Wiki, and the article on Manhattan doesn't mention any massacre. The British held it from 1776-83. Too long ago to hold grudges. (The Indian Mutiny in 1857... tens of thousands of Britons brutally massacred.... but we don't hold it against modern Indians).

I looked it up in Wiki, and the article on Manhattan doesn't mention any massacre. The British held it from 1776-83. Too long ago to hold grudges. (The Indian Mutiny in 1857... tens of thousands of Britons brutally massacred.... but we don't hold it against modern Indians).

Look harder dude! What is this? British colonial brutality denial? Are you guys taught the truth about the dark side of your former empire or not?

This was pure shock and awe for its era. Similar to Bush in Iraq and Britain in the Falklands.

June-July, 1776 - A massive British war fleet arrives in New York Harbor consisting of 30 battleships with 1200 cannon, 30,000 soldiers, 10,000 sailors, and 300 supply ships, under the command of General William Howe and his brother Admiral Lord Richard Howe.

http://www.patriotfiles.com/forum/showthread.php?t=114909

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prison_ship

During the American War of Independence, more Americans died as prisoners of war on British prison ships through intentional neglect than died in every battle of the war combined.^{[6][7][8][9][10][11][12][13][14]} During the war, 11,500 men and women died due to overcrowding, contaminated water, starvation, and disease on prison ships anchored in the East River; the bodies of those who died were hastily buried along the shore.^[15] This is now commemorated by the "Prison Ship Martyrs' Monument" in Fort Greene Park in New York City....

"The heat was so intense that (the hot sun shining all day on deck) they were all naked, which also served the well to get rid of vermin, but the sick were eaten up alive. Their sickly countenances, and ghastly looks were truly horrible; some swearing and blaspheming; others crying, praying, and wringing their hands; and stalking about like ghosts; others delirious, raving and storming,--all panting for breath; some dead, and corrupting. The air was so foul that at times a lamp could not be kept burning, by reason of which the bodies were not missed until they had been dead ten days."

I fully admit I'd never even heard of it, despite being fairly well read in British history. It shows how much we can trust our historians. It sounds like the First Fleet, only worse.

My point stands, however. Too long to bear a grudge.

To be honest, I just learned about the massive naval invasion which was indeed historically large and the prison ship horrors only recently. I don't recall these details were taught in my American schools either!

To be honest, I just learned about the massive naval invasion which was indeed historically large and the prison ship horrors only recently. I don't recall these details were taught in my American schools either!

This is the first I've heard of it. Shouldn't be surprised after what Mel Gibson showed us in The Patriot!

^{Remember that this was common practice in the time to which we are referring.}

^{The Royal Navy had several mutinies around the same time - notably at Spithead and the Nore.}

^{Sailors were flogged around the fleet, The food was awful - scurvy was common, until Nelson's time, when limes from the Caribbean were issued. (Or so my books tell me)}

^{Remember further that the slavers lost much of their cargo from Africa to the American coast - although as many were lost by the African slave traders before they even got put on the ships.}

To be honest, I just learned about the massive naval invasion which was indeed historically large and the prison ship horrors only recently. I don't recall these details were taught in my American schools either!

A revisionist's work is never finished

SC

To be honest, I just learned about the massive naval invasion which was indeed historically large and the prison ship horrors only recently. I don't recall these details were taught in my American schools either!

Thanks for the honest answer!

History is nearly always written from biased sources. Perhaps we underplay the American Revolutionary War... after all, we sent incompetent generals, and ill-equipped troops, and expected them to do the job. They got beat. I knew the navy sent a large fleet, but always thought it didn't have much to do.

Back to the Falklands, however! Let's face the fact... like most wars these days, this potential war is all about oil. That's why I think the Falklanders will get shafted, never mind the rights and wrongs of it. Thatcher was almost forced to fight to maintain her gung-ho Britain First image, but I don't think Cameron would have the guts.

edit

Can't be bothered again............

Let the people speak and I'll be expecting all true democrats to defend the result, enough said.

edit

Can't be bothered again............

Let the people speak and I'll be expecting all true democrats to defend the result, enough said.

let the people of former German colonies Cameroon and Togo speak whether they would like to have German citizenship and become a part of Germany.

i expect all true democrats to defend the result

edit

Can't be bothered again............

Let the people speak and I'll be expecting all true democrats to defend the result, enough said.

let the people of former German colonies Cameroon and Togo speak whether they would like to have German citizenship and become a part of Germany.

i expect all true democrats to defend the result

Is becoming part of the mother country included in the deal? An association within the Commonwealth certainly.

One major difference between the Falklands and Cameroon and Togo is that the Falklands were virgin territory which was settled by the British; Cameroon and Togo were colonised.

edit

Can't be bothered again............

Let the people speak and I'll be expecting all true democrats to defend the result, enough said.

let the people of former German colonies Cameroon and Togo speak whether they would like to have German citizenship and become a part of Germany.

i expect all true democrats to defend the result

Is becoming part of the mother country included in the deal? An association within the Commonwealth certainly.

One major difference between the Falklands and Cameroon and Togo is that the Falklands were virgin territory which was settled by the British; Cameroon and Togo were colonised.

so in the next virgin territory i discover i can settle and claim it belongs to me?

Is becoming part of the mother country included in the deal? An association within the Commonwealth certainly.

With retrospective effect from 1 January 1983, as provided in the British Nationality (Falkland Islands) Act 1983, the Falkland Islanders have been full British citizens. From the Argentine position, the Falklanders are Argentine citizens and may request an Argentine birth certificate, Documento Nacional de Identidad, and Argentine passport, if they wish so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Falkland_Islanders

edit

Can't be bothered again............

Let the people speak and I'll be expecting all true democrats to defend the result, enough said.

let the people of former German colonies Cameroon and Togo speak whether they would like to have German citizenship and become a part of Germany.

i expect all true democrats to defend the result

Is becoming part of the mother country included in the deal? An association within the Commonwealth certainly.

One major difference between the Falklands and Cameroon and Togo is that the Falklands were virgin territory which was settled by the British; Cameroon and Togo were colonised.

so in the next virgin territory i discover i can settle and claim it belongs to me?

If you 'discover' it, I would say Yes.

But I think just about every island and atoll has now been discovered and is either recognised as belong to such-and-suchh a nation or, like the Spatleys, is disputed by differing nations.

No rock, however small, is now unclaimed.

If you 'discover' it, I would say Yes.

But I think just about every island and atoll has now been discovered and is either recognised as belong to such-and-suchh a nation or, like the Spatleys, is disputed by differing nations.

No rock, however small, is now unclaimed.

none of these nations have "discovered" the Spratleys and neither have i. can i file my claim and enter the dispute?

If you 'discover' it, I would say Yes.

But I think just about every island and atoll has now been discovered and is either recognised as belong to such-and-suchh a nation or, like the Spatleys, is disputed by differing nations.

No rock, however small, is now unclaimed.

none of these nations have "discovered" the Spratleys and neither have i. can i file my claim and enter the dispute?

If you're fool enough, have money to waste on lawyers, and actually want to live there, I suppose Yes. But even a Klingon needs some kind of justification for his claim!

edit

Can't be bothered again............

Let the people speak and I'll be expecting all true democrats to defend the result, enough said.

let the people of former German colonies Cameroon and Togo speak whether they would like to have German citizenship and become a part of Germany.

i expect all true democrats to defend the result

Is becoming part of the mother country included in the deal? An association within the Commonwealth certainly.

One major difference between the Falklands and Cameroon and Togo is that the Falklands were virgin territory which was settled by the British; Cameroon and Togo were colonised.

a zillion territories were not virgin but settled by the British and others robbing the "virgin" inhabitants their land and their rights, killing a lot of them and even now act with an arrogance as if the LORD himself has bequeathed the territories to them.

no, i am not referring to Israel! i mean the U.S. of A., Australia, New Zealand... just to name a few.

The white man's burden.

edit

Can't be bothered again............

Let the people speak and I'll be expecting all true democrats to defend the result, enough said.

let the people of former German colonies Cameroon and Togo speak whether they would like to have German citizenship and become a part of Germany.

i expect all true democrats to defend the result

Is becoming part of the mother country included in the deal? An association within the Commonwealth certainly.

One major difference between the Falklands and Cameroon and Togo is that the Falklands were virgin territory which was settled by the British; Cameroon and Togo were colonised.

a zillion territories were not virgin but settled by the British and others robbing the "virgin" inhabitants their land and their rights, killing a lot of them and even now act with an arrogance as if the LORD himself has bequeathed the territories to them.

no, i am not referring to Israel! i mean the U.S. of A., Australia, New Zealand... just to name a few.

Some nationalities need to learn when to shut up.

I'm going to post the what I deleted last night, as I thought to myself you would think I was deliberately flaming, I'm not, just take a deep breath and think about it.

The modern state of Texas, forged on the anvil of the Alamo, 1836.

The modern state of Germany, founded 1871

The modern state of Italy, founded 1871

British ownership of the Falkland Islands, founded 1833. Our claim to the uninhabited Islands pre-dates Germany, Italy, and the Alamo.

So give back Texas to the Mexicans, return Italy to the Principalities, and disband modern Germany, and we will gift the Falklands to Argentina.

We can't return them, Argentina never owned in them in the first place.

So deal? or no deal? or would you like to selectively pick the bits of history that suit you?

Just sayin'

Naam, you seem to be rather perversely going off the track, deliberately, I suspect.

Colonisation: yes, we Brits did a lot of it, so did the French, the Spanish, and the Portuguese. Two reasons why Germany didn't get many colonies: it wasn't a country even until 1871, and it started late when all the best bits were taken. Most of our colonies have, however, become independent since WWII. I'm not particularly trying to excuse colonialism; it's just what people did in those days.

"Virgin" territory is not at all the same kettle of fish (or colony of penguins). Nobody was living there when the British settled. There are actually very few places which were settled like this... Tristan da Cunha comes to mind. I can't think of any others off hand.