Irish Slavery

[Red XXX]

I feel American started out all wrong in the first place!

The over reaction to a Tax on tea - was objected to as it ' violated your rights as Englishmen'!

You then adopt a legal system based largely on the works of Edward Coke, William Blackstone and John Locke with three basic rights - life, liberty and property - all Englishmen!

And your obsession with guns is based directly on the English Bill of Rights of 1689 we've just moved on a bit.

And as for that Tea have you ever paid us back for it …. even Benjamin Franklin thought that the destroyed tea should have been paid for!

 

[mikexmoran]

My Best friend is 100% Irishman....and you'll never meet a more honest, trustworthy, or loyal person ever. I've also seen him kick 3 guys asses and beg for more! He would walk 10 miles past a BP station, to the next company, to fill up an emergency can, if his car ran out of gas.

Ta!

All very true. The British (English) did plunder the world and did a lot of bad - as imperialists did.

Alas, history can't be rewritten. We should never forget. But we can't let it ruin our today or the future.

Peace & Love

Ta! More Irish American Presidents than any other flavor. (So says I...I will not even count O'bama)

That was a very interesting and worthwhile read. Thanks! I would rep you but the system won't let me.

I could and did. I'll share have the rep point given with you.

irish girls are sexy brunettes with a sexy accent

Ta, but I would say redheads.

:wtf:

ibid

Don't misunderstand me: i love English people. I've lived in London for many years, i've got biz, many friends and lovers there. But it is a fact that everything that has been touched by the Empire has gone rotten. Look where there is war, turmoils and terrorism in the world and check if by any chance that place was a colony of the Empire.

Smart and sexy. I'm sure you're the ruin of many happy men.

 

[BlkHawk]

I feel American started out all wrong in the first place!

The over reaction to a Tax on tea - was objected to as it ' violated your rights as Englishmen'!

You then adopt a legal system based largely on the works of Edward Coke, William Blackstone and John Locke with three basic rights - life, liberty and property - all Englishmen!

And your obsession with guns is based directly on the English Bill of Rights of 1689 we've just moved on a bit.

And as for that Tea have you ever paid us back for it …. even Benjamin Franklin thought that the destroyed tea should have been paid for!

No, no, no. Our obsession with guns is so the queen can't come waltzing into our homes whenever she wants to and start pushing us around. Why I understand that every single day in the UK she just randomly walks into people's homes and starts poking them with her finger:orangecat:

If you don't get that reference you need to watch more of The Simpsons

 

[Red XXX]

No, no, no. Our obsession with guns is so the queen can't come waltzing into our homes whenever she wants to and start pushing us around. Why I understand that every single day in the UK she just randomly walks into people's homes and starts poking them with her finger:orangecat:

If you don't get that reference you need to watch more of The Simpsons

The Queen isn't your problem .... just wait for the next one!

 

[Rey C.]

You then adopt a legal system based largely on the works of Edward Coke, William Blackstone and John Locke with three basic rights - life, liberty and property - all Englishmen!

Ius Romanum

And as for that Tea have you ever paid us back for it …. even Benjamin Franklin thought that the destroyed tea should have been paid for!

The firearms we gave you before WWII covered the bill. Send those (now) antique guns back and we'll send you some antique tea in exchange.

 

[BioDefenseGrad]

Uh, the theory of divine right of monarchs is from history. I don't (and shouldn't have) presume to know its popularity now. But as is the case here, there are always people who cling to archaic theories. To deny that is wishful thinking. But you are correct, in that (as I have said) I am not an expert on the current social/religious state of your nation. If I offended any of you, that was not my intention.



I don't know that it is factually true that the UK is the most godless country in the world - data that I've seen points to it being about the same as Germany and more religious than Australia and other places. But still, why does the monarch still have anything to do with the church? Just a carry-over from your history?



If that is indeed the case, then I am pleased to hear that all is now good. So what's the problem in Northern Ireland? Why are there still "issues" there?

Also, is the period of English history detailed in the OP taught in the UK school system? We learn a lot about North American slavery here - even England's role in it. But again, this is something that I'd never heard of before. So, is it taught there?

Religion is only how tribal lines happen to be drawn in Northern Ireland. The enmity between Protestant and Catholic in Northern Ireland was closer to Hutu and Tutsi in Rawanda. Two groups fighting over access to limited resources and jobs. One side was favored by the colonial power over the other, so there was an added element of economic distortion.

It's really NOT about who's religion is better, and about poor people pitted against one another.

 

[BioDefenseGrad]

God help us, this could go on and on and on - you really need to look at the growth of Protestantism in Europe to help understand some of the issues.

If you think Elizabeth gave the Irish a hard time, look at Spain the Duke of Parma and his handling of the Dutch during this period ( The Spanish Fury ) or the French wars of religion!

If we were so bad, why on earth did the Irish attack the Spanish a catholic country when it came to it's aid or each other at the same time?

And when that old chestnut comes up that the British Empire was such a bad thing, why are so many countries part of the Commonwealth we can't have been that bad.

I'm sure if the USA wanted to join we could all find room for you! :lick:

The English WERE that bad, the Irish attacked the Spanish fleet due to lack of timely communication, an especially common occurrence in that century.

The real truth of that matter is that contact with the British Empire didn't have to be a mostly negative thing for the Irish, but that is the way it turned out. There are many societies that had a net benefit from contact with the British Empire, indeed what would become England benefitted from contact with the Romans. The Irish were never part of the Roman empire, perhaps that's the reason why England so rapidly surpassed Ireland in development. If Rome had colonized/conquered Ireland as well Ireland might have been an ally of the UK rather than in a master/slave relationship.

But that's the past and 99% of Irish and British people have moved on and get along just fine. Hell, look at the number of Irish people who've gone to the UK seeking work since the financial crisis.

 

[BioDefenseGrad]

Granted, I'm sure that the theory of divine right of monarchs is not nearly as popular as it was hundreds of years ago. But from what we were taught in high school, the theory is not totally gone. And since I am not (and have never been) plugged into English society or culture, perhaps I should have used the word "some" instead of "many". But it does seem that there is still some basis for the belief. Why would a monarch be the head of a church? What I mean is, how did that come to be and why is it still an accepted practice?

Another question for you, since you grew up in England (if you don't mind): what would you say is the reason for the intense hatred, that has existed for hundred of years, between Protestants and Catholics in the UK?

That's where you went wrong. How long have you been out of High School (probably at least 2 decades) and how old was that textbook when you received it? Not that it would have been accurate even 30 years ago, but inaccurate information becomes even more glaring with the passage of time.

 

[larss]

Granted, I'm sure that the theory of divine right of monarchs is not nearly as popular as it was hundreds of years ago. But from what we were taught in high school, the theory is not totally gone. And since I am not (and have never been) plugged into English society or culture, perhaps I should have used the word "some" instead of "many". But it does seem that there is still some basis for the belief. Why would a monarch be the head of a church? What I mean is, how did that come to be and why is it still an accepted practice?

Another question for you, since you grew up in England (if you don't mind): what would you say is the reason for the intense hatred, that has existed for hundred of years, between Protestants and Catholics in the UK?

I think the answers below pretty well cover it. I don't think I need to add anything else.

At the end of the day, blood feuds that last 500+ years are just plain stupid. As has been paraphrased by notables such as Ghandi and Martin Luther King, "An eye for an eye leaves the whole world blind."

To put it in US terms it's like the current relationship you's lot have with the Arabs.....they just don't get along Although it seems to be more of a problem in Scotland & Northern Ireland, than in England.

Mate if you're going to pontificate about issues like this you REALLY need a history lesson or two.
We (The UK) have to be the most godless country in the world, trust me nobody believes that the Monarch is God's representative on Earth, it's not as though she's the Pope or anything... The Monarch (The Queen) is The Supreme Governor of the Church, which is more or less a ceremonial role much like her other duties. The Archbishop Of Canterbury is the symbolic head and principal leader.

Apart from Northern Ireland and parts of the west coast of Scotland there is no enmity between Protestants and Catholics let alone "intense hatred" because by and large we don't give a fugg about religion in this country, we've moved on.

God help us, this could go on and on and on - you really need to look at the growth of Protestantism in Europe to help understand some of the issues.

If you think Elizabeth gave the Irish a hard time, look at Spain the Duke of Parma and his handling of the Dutch during this period ( The Spanish Fury ) or the French wars of religion!

If we were so bad, why on earth did the Irish attack the Spanish a catholic country when it came to it's aid or each other at the same time?

And when that old chestnut comes up that the British Empire was such a bad thing, why are so many countries part of the Commonwealth we can't have been that bad.

I'm sure if the USA wanted to join we could all find room for you! :lick:

 

[288gto]

Here we go from dumbass to moron...the kind of moron 3 points above retarded.

They compliment each other in a "I play with my poop" kinda way...

why isn't true what i'm saying? maybe off topic but has to do with past and now.

 

[288gto]

Yes, anti-Arab bigotry is (unfortunately) socially acceptable in the U.S. - and on this board. There is a reason for that (several, actually) that would be better left for another thread.

problem is they confuse arabs with muslims,nation with religion, and that leads nowhere.

 

[Red XXX]

Ius Romanum



The firearms we gave you before WWII covered the bill. Send those (now) antique guns back and we'll send you some antique tea in exchange.

I ask you what have the Romans ever done for us?


Oh yes - lend lease a year and a half after the war had begun!

And before that 50 WW1 destroyers that had been waiting for the scrap yard, 'possible the worst destroyers ever seen' and for that you got bases all over the Empire rent free on a 99 year lease!

And then there's the NA-73X …. it arrives exactly as we'd ordered it, but with a second rate engine - thankfully after a bit of tinkering by some English chaps we hand it back to you as the P-51 Mustang. Possibly the best piston engined plane the USAF has ever had ….

Our government even gave you the Jet engine …. so Rolls-Royce gave it to the Russians!

And then there's all the GI's my great aunt had to sleep with on the build up to D Day.:nannerf1:

:hugkiss:

 

[larss]

Red XXX[/URL][/B], post: 8189529, member: 55251"]I ask you what have the Romans ever done for us?

 

[Rey C.]

problem is they confuse arabs with muslims,nation with religion, and that leads nowhere.

True. But that's what prejudice is all about... whether it be against Arabs, Jews, Blacks or the Irish.

 

[Philbert]

And then there's all the GI's my great aunt had to sleep with on the build up to D Day.:nannerf1:
:hugkiss:

Like the thousands of Yank pilots flying daily over to Germany and elsewhere in Europe in the thousands of Yank bombers loaded with hundreds of thousands of Yank bombs , they were just doing their duty.
Hadda be done...

:tank::explosion:

 

[Rey C.]

I ask you what have the Romans ever done for us?

Only a good bit of who you are and what you have - and the same is true of us (in the U.S.). The contribution of Greco-Roman culture is pretty much unmatched in the Western world. So many cultures evolved from the path laid down by the Romans.

Oh yes - lend lease a year and a half after the war had begun!

And before that 50 WW1 destroyers that had been waiting for the scrap yard, 'possible the worst destroyers ever seen' and for that you got bases all over the Empire rent free on a 99 year lease!

And then there's the NA-73X …. it arrives exactly as we'd ordered it, but with a second rate engine - thankfully after a bit of tinkering by some English chaps we hand it back to you as the P-51 Mustang. Possibly the best piston engined plane the USAF has ever had ….

Our government even gave you the Jet engine …. so Rolls-Royce gave it to the Russians!

And then there's all the GI's my great aunt had to sleep with on the build up to D Day.:nannerf1:

:hugkiss:

Recall that the U.S. was still recovering from the Great Depression and a near collapse of the world's financial system. We didn't exactly have tons of money to spare or fields full of cutting edge military assets laying around that we could give to England or anybody else. And let's be honest, more than a few prominent Americans saw the Third Reich as a not-so-bad alternative to Stalin's red forces. But even if we had had more modern military goods to hand off to you, why would we do that? If we were to possibly wind up at war with Germany (and Japan) at some point, we should keep our powder dry for ourselves. If the English didn't like what we gave them, they could have always refused the aid or sent it back. Or dumped it in the ocean... like we did that stale tea D).

As for the current foreign bases, they benefit England (and all the other countries where they are located) a LOT more than us. I believe they should only continue to exist if done "Roman style": you pay for us being there and protecting you. Same with Japan. Same with Korea. Same with Israel. I'm not a true isolationist, but why are my tax dollars going to protect people who have the money to protect themselves? If they don't have the will to do that, and would prefer to (wisely) spend their money on domestic growth, education and infrastructure, then we should wean them off the teat of the American taxpayer and leave them to their own devices. We could and should use the money to rebuild the interstate running from Ohio into Michigan (and about a thousand other places). And we'll even let some Irish guys drive the bulldozers.

 

[Red XXX]

Rey C … I'm only teasing you - I'm half way to writing you a book, but life's to short so....!

When America goes to war it goes to war :ak47:

Half the UK's so called upper classes were secretly on the other side :eek:

The British Empire is commonly blamed for all the ills of the world, now America is taking the blame :ohsnap:

I do totally disagree with you about bases they can be a real value it just may not seem it :thumbsup:

I know you may feel you're pouring tax money down the drain, but if you're waiting for the European Rapid Deployment Force you may be waiting sometime

I do apologizes on behalf of the UK we may have to borrow the odd Aircraft Carrier from time to time but we do return them with a full tank :wtf:

You should appreciate that our Ministry of Defence procurement department at Abbey Wood have been very busy in the last year or two - buying designer office furniture etc for their new offices and cutting up millions of ££££ worth of aircraft :wallet:

 

[Rey C.]

No probs. I always enjoy chatting with you. And anyway, sooner than later, we'll both be answering to China (if we're not already), so I figure we better appreciate the good old days of our respective empires while we can - even if the good old days never really existed.

BTW, if I ever find a decent XJ-6C to buy & restore, there's an open modeling assignment in it for you. :hatsoff:

 

[Red XXX]

No probs. I always enjoy chatting with you. And anyway, sooner than later, we'll both be answering to China (if we're not already), so I figure we better appreciate the good old days of our respective empires while we can - even if the good old days never really existed.

BTW, if I ever find a decent XJ-6C to buy & restore, there's an open modeling assignment in it for you. :hatsoff:

I wouldn't worry about China to much ..... it's funny people are always quick to pick out the negative side of our countries? No one starts threads about how Britain was the first country to actively try and stop the slave trade, or how America with the Marshall Aid Plan effectively rebuilt Europe - no it's to easy to pick on our countries odd mistakes!

After all most European countries would rather just stick their heads in the sand and not get involved!

When I was at school my best friends brother had one of those XJ-6, it spent most of it's time broken down

Mwah XXX

 

[Rey C.]

Well yeah, whether we're discussing the Roman Empire, the British Empire or 20th Century America, there will be criticisms of any (perceived or real) abuses of power. As China continues to grow and flex its muscles, it'll increasingly face the same thing. One thing I do respect about China though: they tend to focus on what's good for China... and only China. They have an admirable infrastructure program. And they're determined to be lenders and not debtors. History has proven time and time again, he who holds the debt, calls the shots. Especially when interest rates rise, you'll hear less & less from the U.S. about anything that China does. If you see the 10 year Treasury touch 7% again, the Chinese can feed Christians to lions and we won't say much. But going forward, I guess it's just a question of whether or not they'll be able to keep it up or if they'll fall off track (too).


The 70's XJ-6 and XJ-S were really bad cars. But whenever I see an XJ-6C, it warms my soul. British Leylands was not the empire's finest moment. The new ones are better quality cars. But I test drove an XF last year and all I could think was, "what a nice Volvo."