so, the english are raping again

[Ste]

If anyone can find a similar list of Historic German battles I would be interested to see it.
I'm sure it's as long as the British one.
EDIT oh and perle - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar..._United_States
much much much longer than the British one. And it only starts in the 18th century.

[Perle]

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

He even managed to include the Peterloo massacre, which was British (English) people murdering other British (English) people.

LOOK ENGLISH ARE SO EVIL THEY EVEN KILL THEMSELVES! THEY CrAZy!

I did not have the time to take out the civil wars which are on the list. I managed to not include the war of roses(or whatever that was called), if you would like to help sort out the civil wars which i missed on that list, id be gratefull. But lets not forget, that list is damn long . the civil wars which are on it make out only a very small percentage of it.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by Perle

would you care to post me one country/people, which have even half of the list of wars the english people have????

This is idiotic. Practically all large European countries (Spain, France, Russia, and yes, your own beloved Germany and it's predecessor states.) have been directly involved in countless wars and acts of violence.

There is really no reason why you should specifically target Britain in this regard.

[Perle]

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

This is idiotic. Practically all large European countries (Spain, France, Russia, and yes, your own beloved Germany and it's predecessor states.) have been directly involved in countless wars and acts of violence.

There is really no reason why you should specifically target Britain in this regard.

really??? then post it man , lets compare the list.

lets start d+from 1200 and post every single wars/invasion that people from europe were engaged in and lets see who has waged more wars shall we?????

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by Perle

if you would like to help sort out the civil wars which i missed on that list, id be gratefull.

It's just a suspicion, but I think the "English Civil War (1642-1651)" may have been a civil war.

[Perle]

Originally Posted by Ste

If anyone can find a similar list of Historic German battles I would be interested to see it.

id seriously doubt it. germany as a nation only exists from the 18th century before that there was no such thing as germany.

Originally Posted by Ste

I'm sure it's as long as the British one.

i am pretty sure it is not. and they are still very very ashamed of their history. German politicians even consider it a tabu to talk about national pride.

Originally Posted by Ste

EDIT oh and perle - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Militar..._United_States
much much much longer than the British one. And it only starts in the 18th century.

[/quote]

it isnt near as long as the english one., but they are working on it. which isnt surprising. The us-politician elite are of british ancestry. They are just continuing the british empire.
was there even one american president which wasnt of british ancestry???


hmm maybe kennedy , but im not sure

[Perle]

Originally Posted by Proteus

It's just a suspicion, but I think the "English Civil War (1642-1651)" may have been a civil war.

hehe like i said I had to go and wanted to post it quickly , il correct the list and post it again. oooops

[SYMM]

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

25 Wars there

[Perle]

Originally Posted by JonnyBGood

What he wants is the west to build a time machine and go back and wipe themselves from the face of the earth.



PS Uh oh temporal paradox

nono, wiping out and killing people is the english way of solving things. I dont like things like massmurder and armed robery. Id just like the english to leave other people live in peace. But, unfortunately , that is not going to happen.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by Perle

lets start d+from 1200 and post every single wars/invasion that people from europe were engaged in and lets see who has waged more wars shall we?????

Why?

Are you seriously suggesting that France or Spain, for example, proved to be significantly less aggressive or brutal during that period than England/Britain?

This is especially ridiculous when you consider that all the major wars in Europe between the ending of the Hundred Years War (1453) and, effectively, now, have been triggered, in the main, largely by the acts of continental powers.

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by Perle

id seriously doubt it. germany as a nation only exists from the 18th century before that there was no such thing as germany.

The United Kingdom has only existed since 1801, so you should probably delete from your list all British wars before that date. (P.S. The Holy Roman Empire of the German Nation existed in 1512.)

[arbondigo]

Originally Posted by Perle

Id just like the english to leave other people live in peace. But, unfortunately , that is not going to happen.

Well if it's not going to happen then why talk crap all the time about our history? Most Brits are proud of our history, live with it

[Perle]

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

Why?

Are you seriously suggesting that France or Spain, for example, proved to be significantly less aggressive or brutal during that period than England/Britain?

no, I am suggesting that england/britain has been significantly more brutal and aggressive than all the other european nations combined.

[Zharkov]

Originally Posted by Perle

no, I am suggesting that england/britain has been significantly more brutal and aggressive than all the other european nations combined.

That's a ludicrous assertion and one you have no hope of backing up.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by Perle

no, I am suggesting that england/britain has been significantly more brutal and aggressive than all the other european nations combined.

Then you are either grossly historically ignorant regarding the history of Europe, or you are ignoring the truth for the sake of your argument.

Which is it?

[Ninja_spammer]

Both MM, both.

[demiGOD]

i'm interested to know how adolf hitler inspired all his soldiers and the nazi and motivated them to do all those horrid things

[Ninja_spammer]

Big rallies, a loud voice and flashy light shows.


You can do anyhting if you combine those three.

Big rallies Assure that everyone else is all for whatever it is.

Loud voice means that the speaker is *very* important and correct..because you dont se anyone trying to shout down a man with a loud voice.

Flashy lightshows because well.......who can resist flashy lightshows, just watch the crowd at a fireworks display or a major car crash

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by demiGOD

i'm interested to know how adolf hitler inspired all his soldiers and the nazi and motivated them to do all those horrid things

If you're talking about the Holocaust, then people have been debating the pyschology and motivation of genocide for decades and there's still few solid answers.

(I hope this is not a counter-troll.)

[Lupin]

Originally Posted by Ste

If anyone can find a similar list of Historic German battles I would be interested to see it.

as a national state we only exist since ~ 134 years (1871).

obviously we wont have a long list of wars, but i have to admit that we were main proteges of 2 world wars so this is kind of enuff.

i doubt wars are like quantity > quality (you understand me here, right?).

ps: i dont know if this is still up in discussion, but to be proud of your country or not, does not have particular anything to do with history.

[Perle]

Originally Posted by arbondigo

Well if it's not going to happen then why talk crap all the time about our history?

because your history is crap. and I am confronting you with it. if the Englsih people were more aware of the crimes of their past(like creating the nation of iraq, playing out the ehtnical groups against eachother, robbing the country for 40 years, selling chemical weapons to brutal dictators), they wouldnt support a prime minister who dares to invade the country AGAIN. for the third ****ing time.

Look at Jammy jim, he didnt even had a clue what his country has done to the poor people of iraq for that last 85 years.

you have to be confronted with your past to learn from it and stay the **** home next time. You can not help people, all you do is steal and then leave the place all ****ed up.
lets see, which country was bombed before iraq???? ahhh yes, afghanistan in 2001 but wait a minute afghanistan???
wasnt atheir some encountrers between afghanistan and britain????



The First Anglo-Afghan War lasted from 1839 to 1842.

Fearing increasing Russian influence in Afghanistan, the British resolved to depose Dost Muhammad and restore former ruler Shah Shuja.

In the opening campaign in 1839 the British captured Kandahar, Ghazni and Kabul, and captured Dost Muhammad, sending him to India. Having restored Shuja to the throne, the British withdrew, leaving two envoys and a garrison in Kabul.

In 1841 the Afghans rose against the British in Kabul, killing both the British agents and surrounding the garrison. In early 1842 the garrison surrendered, and was offered safe conduct to return to India. However, the British force was ambushed in the Khyber Pass and massacred.

In retaliation, the British reinvaded, relieving the besieged British garrison in Jalalabad, and then pushed on to Kabul. Ninety-five prisoners from the earlier massacre were rescued, and the British destroyed the citadel and central bazaar of Kabul. However, as Shah Shuja had been assassinated by this point, the British decided it was unprofitable to occupy the country and withdrew.


but of course this wasnt enough, the country wasnt ****ed up enough by the english invaders. so lets go to round number 2

The Second Anglo-Afghan War:

The amir not only refused to receive a British mission but threatened to stop it if it were dispatched. Lord Lytton, the viceroy, called Sher Ali's bluff and ordered a diplomatic mission to set out for Kabul on November 21, 1878. The mission was turned back as it approached the eastern entrance of the Khyber Pass, thus triggering the Second Anglo-Afghan War. A British force of about 40,000 fighting men were distributed into military columns which penetrated Afghanistan at three different points. An alarmed Sher Ali attempted to appeal in person to the tsar for assistance, but unable to do so, he returned to Mazar-e Sharif, where he died the following February.

With British forces occupying much of the country, Sher Ali's son and successor, Yaqub Khan, signed the Treaty of Gandamak in May 1879 to prevent a British invasion of the rest of the country. According to this agreement and in return for an annual subsidy and vague assurances of assistance in case of foreign aggression, Yaqub relinquished control of Afghan foreign affairs to the British. British representatives were installed in Kabul and other locations, British control was extended to the Khyber and Michni passes, and the Afghanistan ceded various frontier areas to Britain. An Afghan uprising opposed to the Treaty of Gandamak was foiled in October 1879. A noted historian, W. Kerr Fraser-Tytler, suggests that Yaqub abdicated because he did not wish to suffer the same fate that befell Shah Shuja following the first war.

In a replay of 1841 the British managed to have their Kabul garrison annihilated. By 1881 the British had had enough, despite the victorous slaughter at the Battle of Maiwand in July 1880 - they left. The British gained some territory and retained a little influence but in a clever stroke they placed Abdur Rahman Khan on the throne. A man of such supple loyalties that he was acceptable to the British, the Russians and the Afghan people.

so ok, some invadings, some mass slaughter, then they placed a tyrant dictator puppet on the throne and left again. Maybe their bloodthirst was satisfied this time, but noooooo, we do know the english, you cant get rid of them
so here comes round number 3


hird Anglo-Afghan War and Independence

Amanullah's ten years of reign initiated a period of dramatic change in Afghanistan in both foreign and domestic politics. Amanullah declared full independence and sparked the Third Anglo-Afghan War. Amanullah altered foreign policy in his new relations with external powers and transformed domestic politics with his social, political, and economic reforms. Although his reign ended abruptly, he achieved some notable successes, and his efforts failed as much due to the centripetal forces of tribal Afghanistan and the machinations of Russia and Britain as to any political folly on his part.

Amanullah came to power just as the entente between Russia and Britain broke down following the Russian Revolution of 1917. Once again Afghanistan provided a stage on which the great powers played out their schemes against one another. Amanullah attacked the British in May 1919 in two thrusts, taking them by surprise. Afghan forces achieved success in the early days of the war as Pashtun tribesmen on both sides of the border joined forces with them.

The military skirmishes soon ended in a stalemate as the British recovered from their initial surprise. Britain virtually dictated the terms of the 1919 Rawalpindi Agreement, a temporary armistice that provided, somewhat ambiguously, for Afghan self-determination in foreign affairs. Before final negotiations were concluded in 1921, however, Afghanistan had already begun to establish its own foreign policy, including diplomatic relations with the new government in the Soviet Union in 1919. During the 1920s, Afghanistan established diplomatic relations with most major countries.


so lets see, the british empire ****ed up afghanistan, iraq, iran, india/ pakistan. waooo nice work

[demiGOD]

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

(I hope this is not a counter-troll.)

just honestly curious.. ive read about it a lot and saw movies and documentaries about it, but still would interest me on more inputs about it

[Lupin]

Originally Posted by Perle

no, I am suggesting that england/britain has been significantly more brutal and aggressive than all the other european nations combined.

if that is the case, what do you want to say actually?

[Perle]

Originally Posted by Marilyn Manson

Then you are either grossly historically ignorant regarding the history of Europe, or you are ignoring the truth for the sake of your argument.

Which is it?

I am not and i dont see a list from you. so where is it???
I wouldnt do it if i were you either.

what truth. if your telling the truth then back it up by facts. no coountry/people in europe invaded/waged wars on so many people on such a global scale like the nglish people. this is the sad truth. wars against everysingle conuty/people in the middle east. no other country has ever done that. I mean the arabs were happy that the germans were sending the africa corp. How ****ed up must an occupation army be for the natives to be happy that the nazis are coming.!!!!!!!

[Nusselt]

yeah but on the positive side we had lots of little wars, the germans had two big ones

[Perle]

Originally Posted by Lupin

if that is the case, what do you want to say actually?

easy, english people be shamed, stay the **** home, teach your children other things about your history than just ww2. I know , its nice to be the good guys for once in your history. But still, try to talk about the other horrible crimes you have commited in your past. I have heard so many anecdotes of how the irish totally love german tourists. Ahh your germans , how nice, you fought the english and bombed their cities, here, have a beer on the house. How ****ed up must a people be for people to take sides with nazi history.

[arbondigo]

Originally Posted by Perle

because your history is crap. and I am confronting you with it.

I detect jealousy? You are crap. History can't be changed.

I see how you've managed to miss how half of our wars were with other European nations who had their own Empires too, quite convenient that really. But of course, only the British Empire caused atrocities . The world has completely changed since the days of when the British Empire was in its pomp, human rights weren't around at the time.

[arbondigo]

Originally Posted by Perle

easy, english people be shamed, stay the **** home, teach your children other things about your history than just ww2.

We're not ashamed, live with it. When you learn history in our schools then you can comment on what we were or weren't taught, until then shut up.

Originally Posted by Perle

I have heard so many anecdotes of how the irish totally love german tourists. Ahh your germans , how nice, you fought the english and bombed their cities, here, have a beer on the house. How ****ed up must a people be for people to take sides with nazi history.

Then you've never been to Ireland have you, or in fact anywhere in Europe.

[Lupin]

hehe, actually i am german.

noones history is wether clean nor perfect. you cant expect from ppl to be ashamed or proud of their history.

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by Perle

I have heard so many anecdotes of how the irish totally love german tourists. Ahh your germans , how nice, you fought the english and bombed their cities, here, have a beer on the house.

You're delusional. Go and get help.

[Perle]

Originally Posted by arbondigo

I detect jealousy? You are crap. History can't be changed.

jealousy???????

oh my god, 800 years of rape, masslaughter and robery. why the hell should I be jealous of that??

Originally Posted by arbondigo

I see how you've managed to miss how half of our wars were with other European nations who had their own Empires too, quite convenient that really.

really??? so invading france.scotland and ireland over and over and over again was what??? a friendly visit to the neighbours.
How about occupying and fighting syria, egypt, iraq,afghanistan, india, china, aboriginees, maoriees, indian natives, the turkish people, american colonists, so many african people, and the list goes on and on. were they all european powers???

Originally Posted by arbondigo

But of course, only the British Empire caused atrocities

I am under the impression that most of your countrymen believe that the british empire did not commit any attrocities at all. colonialism?? hey we were just bringing civilisation to the savages
be honest, how many percent of the english people are aware of the countless wars their country has waged over the entire globe???? How many know about the theft and robery in india, iran, afghanistan, egypt ,syria, iraq and africa??????



QUOTE=arbondigo]
. The world has completely changed since the days of when the British Empire was in its pomp, human rights weren't around at the time.[/quote]



really?? so tell me, what is the british army along with their american masters doing in Iraq??
hasnt the last 80-90 years of messing that country up been enough???

[Ste]

Originally Posted by Perle

Ones against France
# Battle of Bouvines (1214) - loss of Normandy
# Hundred Years' War (1337 to 1453)
# Loss of Calais (1558) - then England's last continental possession
# War of the Grand Alliance (or King William's War) (1688–1697) (due to France attacking Germany and Spain)
# Napoleonic Wars (1803–1815) (pretty much France against everyone, even the Ottomans were attacked)

Not much, if anything, to do with Britain
# Eighty Years' War (1598–1648) (to do with Dutch independance and Spain attacking them)
# Italian Wars (1494 – 1559) (mainly involved Spain and France, in fact I can't see much English mention at all in the wikipedia article on it)
# War of Devolution (1667–1668) (between Spain and France - nothing to do with us)
# War of the Spanish Succession (1702–1713) (Austrian Vs Spain in Italy, bringing in France then Britain, Holland and Germany)
# War of the Austrian Succession (1740–1748) (Prussia invading bringing in Britain, Spain, France and the Netherlands)
# Turkish War of Independence (1919-1923) (due to WW1, independance from the Ottoman empire)
# Malayan Emergency (1948–1960) (Unpopular Guerilla war against the government and the British in Malaysia)
# Konfrontasi (1962–1966) (Malaysia V Indonesia)

Against Spain
# Spanish Armada (1588) (they were about to invade us.)
# Anglo-Spanish War (1654–1660)
# War of Jenkins' Ear (1739–1742)

# Third Crusade (1189)
# First Anglo-Dutch War (1652–1654)
# Second Anglo-Dutch War (1665–1667)
# Third Anglo-Dutch War (1672–1674) (France invading with Britain and Germany helping)
# Fourth Anglo-Dutch War (1780–1784) (carried on from the seven years war)
# King Philip's War (1675–1676) (against Native Americans)
# Battle of the Boyne (1690) (in Ireland)
# Anglo-Irish War (1919–1921) (IRA attacking Britain)
# Seven Years' War (1756–1763) - the first "world war" (Great Britain, Prussia and Hanover against France, Austria, Russia, Sweden, and Saxony, Spain, Portugal and the Netherlands were involved too. All in North America.)
# American War of Independence (1775 to 1783) (practically a civil war)
# British-American War (1812) (Americans declared war on Britain and Canada)
# Anglo-Gurkha War (1814-1816)
# First Anglo-Afghan War (1839–1842)
# First Opium War (1839–1842) (China declared war on Britain)
# Crimean War (1854–1856) (Russia attacking the Ottomans, Britain and France defended)
# Second Opium War (or The Arrow War) (1856–1860) (also involving the US and France)
# Second Anglo-Afghan War (1878-1880) (complicated)
# Anglo-Zulu War (1879)
# Boer War ( 1880–1881 and 1899–1902) (British V Dutch in South Africa)
# Third Anglo-Afghan War (1919)
# Mau Mau Uprising (1952–1960) (Kenyan independance war)
# Cyprus Emergency (1955–1959) (Cypriot independance war but was mainly Guerrila warfare)
# Suez Crisis (1956) (Britain Allied with France and Israel)
# Brunei Uprising (1962) (British helped the government quell an opposition uprising)
# Aden Emergency (1963–1967) (Yemen independance)
# Falklands War (1982) (Argentina invaded)
# Kosovo War (1999) (This involved NATO not just Britain)
# 2001 Afghanistan War (2001–2002) (I was against it but the UN were for it)
# 2003 invasion of Iraq (2003) (I was against it as well)

Can not really be described as a bad thing that we got involved
# World War I (1914–1918)
# World War II (1939–1945)
# Cold War (1945–1991) (NOT A REAL WAR)
# Korean War (1950–1953) (mainly US but it was a UN mission for the British troops there)
# Gulf War (1990–1991) (Iraq invaded Kuwait, THE UN defended)
# Bosnian War (IFOR) (1995–1996) (Yugoslavia were attacking Bosnia - THE UN defended)
# Sierra Leone Civil War (2000) (we were helping)

Ok, I was bored. I grouped together most of the battles you listed, got rid of all of the civil war ones and the battles involved in other wars (and the crap ones like the cod war).
Doesn't look that impressive a list now does it?

[demiGOD]

the fruits of boredom

[Stew]

Originally Posted by Ste

Can not really be described as a bad thing
# World War I (1914–1918)
# World War II (1939–1945)

[Perle]

Originally Posted by Proteus

You're delusional. Go and get help.

oh yes, the english arrogance .

The natives say: get the **** out of our country and stop robbing us. get out and stay out you bloody thieves
The british invaders: You're delusional. Go and get help. In the meanwhile, we will take your natural ressources for nothing. dont bother trying to kick us out. Even if you succeed, we will come back sometime in the future. It could be 10 years it could be 50 years. But be assured, we will come back

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by Perle

oh yes, the enlgish arrogance .

Actually, I'm Irish.

[demiGOD]

Originally Posted by Stew

this is the only moment that proved to me that ste and stew are actually 2 different persons .. pardon being rediculously off topic - pretty slick but not slick enough

[Perle]

Originally Posted by Proteus

Actually, I'm Irish.

who is the guy on the picture???

[Proteus]

Originally Posted by Perle

who is the guy on the picture???

That's Boris.

[Ste]

Originally Posted by Stew

Edited. You knew what I meant anyway.

[Marilyn Manson]

Originally Posted by Perle

if your telling the truth then back it up by facts.

I already have: Most continental wars (And by this we mean the most prolonged, bloody and destructive globally speaking.) between the period of 1453 and today, were largely European affairs, started, in the main, by the aggressive actions of continental European states.

Practically all of the European wars you posted earlier involved all of the great powers of Europe, and in practically all of them, Britain was far from being the chief aggressor. In fact, in many of them, Britain was actively combating the aggresive tendencies of others. (France under Naploeon and Louis XIV, Nazi Germany, etc.)

Many of these same states during this period were much, much more backwards in their policies towards their own subjects (not to mention other people's subjects.) than Britain.

Your argument that Britain is somehow more historically aggressive and brutal than all of the other states of Europe combined, is therefore absolute twaddle.

As for colonial wars, atrocities and exploitation: Well, here's news for you - Practically all European states had these, because, surprise, surprise, practically all European states had colonial empires. (Ever heard of Cortez's conquest of the Aztecs? Ever heard of the Algerian war of independence? Ever heard of Dien Bien Phu, etc?)

So, please feel free to refute this with a proper argument. And not just the unsubstantiated or mindless drivel that you've been posting so far. (Britain did bad things in my region! Britain is the cause of all the ills in the world! Britain ate my hamster!)

I want a proper argument, factually based, as to how Britain is essentially, as you claim, responsible for all the ills in the world.

I know you can't provide this, but nevermind.

[arbondigo]

Originally Posted by Perle

oh my god, 800 years of rape, masslaughter and robery. why the hell should be jealous of that??

We had an Empire that stretched all over the globe, i suspect that is the reason for your jealousy. Had it been the Germans or Iranians who had achieved this i don't think this thread would be on here about them would it.


[/QUOTE=Perle]really??? so invading france over and over and over again was what??? a friendly visit to the neighbours.
How about fighting syria, egypt, iraq,afghanistan, india, china, aboriginees, maoriees, indian natives, the turkish people, american colonists, so many african people, and the list goes on and on. were they all european powers??? [/quote]

Yes because we started every war with France. How stupid am i Now out of those list of "wars" you listed, i can't remember any with China, the aboriginees, maories. With India, the Moghuls ruled there before we went there and it became part of our Empire. To this day if an Brit goes to India he is treated very well and looked after. Why is this? It's because we gave them so much, yes we took too before you repeat yourself for the umpteenth time in this thread. You've also managed to avoid the French presence in India because it doesn't back up your "argument". You also forget the French and Spanish being present in America as well.

Turkey was formed from the collapse of the Ottoman Empire in 1923. Now before you say that that's our fault too, they sided with Germany in the First World War, they lost and their colonies were taken over by the Allies. (read Allies not just the British). Britain didn't even start this war either for your information.

Originally Posted by Perle

I am under the impression that most of your countrymen beleive that the british empire did not commit any attrocities at all.

Then you are an idiot.

Originally Posted by Perle

be honest, how many precent of the english people are aware of the countless wars their country has weged over the entire globe????

Anyone who's been to school are aware of the Empire, slave trade and America. So most of the population.

Originally Posted by Perle

really?? so tell me, what is the british army along with their american masters doing in Iraq??
hasnt the last 80-90 years of messing that country nup been enough???

If people can't live together then it's not our fault. Most of Iraq is Muslim yet they fight each other, whether or not we're there. Just look at what it was like under Saddam, he gassed the Kurds, yet they were Muslim. Here we have Christians, Muslims, Hindus etc all living together, yet you don't see mass murders. And what are we doing in Iraq? Looking for WMDs which don't exist officially, if they'd just said that there were going to get rid of Saddam then i think it would've been more acceptable than the reason they're using.

[Nusselt]

boris is american and he had sex with his publisher

[Zar]

Originally Posted by arbondigo

To this day if an Brit goes to India he is treated very well and looked after. Why is this? It's because we gave them so much, yes we took too before you repeat yourself for the umpteenth time in this thread.

Absolute rubbish, and i dont know where you have gotten this information from.

Indians treat ALL tourists with respect. Otherwise there wouldn't be any tourists now would there?

However the general consensus among the Indian population in India is that British people are a thieving bunch of thugs, who they discreetly despise more than anyone (apart from the Pakistanis of course).

I've been to India many times both as a tourist, staying in hotels, and staying for a while with Indian friends. That is all i can submit as evidence.

Yourself?

[arbondigo]

Originally Posted by Zar

Absolute rubbish, and i dont know where you have gotten this information from.

Indians treat ALL tourists with respect. Otherwise there wouldn't be any tourists now would there?

However the general consensus among the Indian population in India is that British people are a thieving bunch of thugs, who they discreetly despise more than anyone (apart from the Pakistanis of course).

I've been to India many times both as a tourist, staying in hotels, and staying for a while with Indian friends. That is all i can submit as evidence.

Yourself?

My Mum was brought up there when my Grandad was sent there to work in the British Embassy. Think they'll know a bit more than you. I have also been to India and can say that i was never once abused by Indians and was made to feel at home.

[Perle]

Originally Posted by Zar

Absolute rubbish, and i dont know where you have gotten this information from.

Indians treat ALL tourists with respect. Otherwise there wouldn't be any tourists now would there?

However the general consensus among the Indian population in India is that British people are a thieving bunch of thugs, who they discreetly despise more than anyone (apart from the Pakistanis of course).

I've been to India many times both as a tourist, staying in hotels, and staying for a while with Indian friends. That is all i can submit as evidence.

Yourself?

ofcourse its rubbish. like the rest of his , he really ymakes it easy for me to destroy his arguments with facts.

[Zar]

Originally Posted by arbondigo

My Mum was brought up there when my Grandad was sent there to work in the British Embassy. Think they'll know a bit more than you. I have also been to India and can say that i was never once abused by Indians and was made to feel at home.

Your mother must have been brought up a long time ago (and probably in a sheltered life). Times have changed, people are for more capable of voicing their opnion through technological means. My father has big clients in India which he visits at least 2-3 times a year.

Like i said - you won't be abused in India, they won't treat tourists badly. Any country that treated its tourists badly wouldn't make money.

Where have you been in India?

[arbondigo]

Originally Posted by Zar

Your mother must have been brought up a long time ago (and probably in a sheltered life). Times have changed, people are for more capable of voicing their opnion through technological means. My father has big clients in India which he visits at least 2-3 times a year.

Where have you been in India?

Yes she was brought up in a relatively sheltered life, but still she went to a local school where she learnt to speak Urdu and got to know the locals. She was brought up in Lahore, when it was still part of India, but later got moved to Delhi and stayed there until the 70s. Indeed times have changed i'm not denying that. What i am contesting though is that the British are hated in India, because quite frankly that isn't true, apart from maybe the south where we first colonised.

And in India i have been to Delhi and Mumbai

[Zar]

Originally Posted by arbondigo

Yes she was brought up in a relatively sheltered life, but still she went to a local school where she learnt to speak Urdu and got to know the locals. She was brought up in Lahore, when it was still part of India, but later got moved to Delhi and stayed there until the 70s. Indeed times have changed i'm not denying that. What i am contesting though is that the British are hated in India, because quite frankly that isn't true, apart from maybe the south where we first colonised.

And in India i have been to Delhi and Mumbai

I've only been to Delhi once so i can't really talk about it.

however...mumbai... describe it for me. You've even got google to help!

[Ninja_spammer]

Am i the only one to find it slightly amusing that perle sits bitching about evil imperialism whilst using the very technology and resources to came about from that imperialism?

Do not trust the man who would shelter 'neath your shield whilst blunting your sword.