Originally Posted by steeljack (Post 462208)

Are we to blame ? .......unequivcally NO, I'm getting more and more angry about all this politically correct tripe that is being laid at the doors of White Northern european culture for the plight of the third world, a guilt trip laid on us by the likes of HMG Minister Peter Hain , the one guy more responsible for the disaster thats happened in Rhodesia (Zimbabwee) than Mugabe himself , the same story that is now begining to unfold in South Africa and Namibia , exporpiation of land and businesses from white productive farmers to bone idle lazy political cronies who prefer to let their peoples starve, but lets not worry Bono and father of the year Bob Geldorf :rolleyes: will arrange another pop concert and save everyone.

Re. the original question , was Britain to blame for the bloodbath that followed Indian and Pakistani independance .......No the people to blame are Ghandi, Ali Jinna , and Panjit Nehru......all three lived 'westernized' lives and none of them had any idea about the lives of the local populations but each had egos bigger than Tony Blair and George Bush's combined,
note, Ghandi never missed a photo 'op' in his "nappy" even though he had a good taste in his liking for Yorkshire woven woollen tweed suits, and was also partially responsible for the demise of the Lancashire cotton trade with his boycotts.

Linking to another thread about the Malay service medal and colonialism ....I think , this was one of Britain finest hours post WW2 , it was in a way Britains Vietnam and we won , wether it was because there were no TV cameras and the army (many of whom were 2 year national servicemen) were allowed to get on and do the job is up for speculation , but what is true is that two vibrant countries evolved from what at the time was called the "Malay emergancy'' Malaya and Singapore

ok rant over .......:cool: :cool:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 462443)

India and Pakistan should be thankful that it was the British who colonised them and not the Spanish. If the latter nation had occupied their lands, they would have completely eradicated the Muslim, Hindu and Sikh religions and cultures in the name of Roman Catholicism, just as they did with the Inca, Mayan and Aztec civilisations in South and Central America.

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 462707)

I've certainly had a few South Americans tell me they'd rather have been colonised by the British instead of the Spanish!

Originally Posted by Bagpuss (Post 462763)

If that had been the case we would have had an influx of South Americans

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 462942)

There's more here than you think...gringo. :eek:

Originally Posted by Bagpuss (Post 462960)

Like all the asians I'm sure there all here legally :rolleyes:

Originally Posted by Wynonie Harris (Post 462443)

India and Pakistan should be thankful that it was the British who colonised them and not the Spanish. If the latter nation had occupied their lands, they would have completely eradicated the Muslim, Hindu and Sikh religions and cultures in the name of Roman Catholicism, just as they did with the Inca, Mayan and Aztec civilisations in South and Central America.