Quite a discussion concerning the whether or not the English were as evil as they were portrayed in "Braveheart" in the "just bought a copy of Braveheart" thread. So, I thought that I would expand it a little, but be advised, I have a very dim view of the lymies.
First of all, the Lymies did everything that Braveheart portrayed them as doing and more. True, us Scots did our fair share of bad things as well, but we were fighting for our freedom and had no intention of taking over England or stamping out English culture all together.
However, I'll drop the Scot versus lymie thing for the sake of making a semi-scholarly argument.
Most of the worlds major presnt day conflicts result from English policy. Take the Pakistan-India conflict which is currently escalating. Pakistan and India where once the same country. Before England gave up colonial authority over the area, it split the region into present day Pakistan and India. They supposedly put all of the Muslims in Pakistan and the Hindus and other religions into India. Well, they lumped the heavily Muslim dominated area of Kashmir into India. The Muslims in Kashmir have no voice and want to become part of Pakistan. The result of English policy in this region is a multi-decade conflict which is now on the verge of nuclear deployment.
Another case study is the plight of the Kurds. Once again, when the Brits gave up colonial authority over the region, they created borders as they saw fit with little regard to the people who would suffer. The Kurds for the most part were split into four different countries (Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and Syria). They are a hated minority in each of these countries. They are pursecuted and have no legal protections. The Northern No-Fly Zone that the U.S. enforces in Iraq is to protect the Kurds from total slaughter at the hands of Husein. The Kurds fair little better in the other countires in which they live. The U.S. will not help the Kurds in Turkey due to the Turkish government being the strongest Middle Eastern ally to the U.S.
Most of the current ethnic clensing in Africa is a result of British policy. Once again as the British pulled out, they drew borders as they saw fit. Tribes that had been at war for generations were grouped together into countries. Other tribes were split among severl different countries. The result has been brutal ethnic wars along tribal lines. In countries were one tribe has gained a majority over a rival tribe, the smaller tribe has been totally shut out of the government. The current situation in Rowanda is the best example of this. Nigeria and Bostwana are also great examples.
I hope you sensed a common theme to these examples. The British set about conquering most of the world, stripping it of rescources, and when they could no longer control their empire, they withdrew leaving behind nothing but a legacy of murder and hardship.
------------------
"God grants liberty only to those who love it and are always ready to guard and defend it." --Daniel Webster
First of all, the Lymies did everything that Braveheart portrayed them as doing and more. True, us Scots did our fair share of bad things as well, but we were fighting for our freedom and had no intention of taking over England or stamping out English culture all together.
However, I'll drop the Scot versus lymie thing for the sake of making a semi-scholarly argument.
Most of the worlds major presnt day conflicts result from English policy. Take the Pakistan-India conflict which is currently escalating. Pakistan and India where once the same country. Before England gave up colonial authority over the area, it split the region into present day Pakistan and India. They supposedly put all of the Muslims in Pakistan and the Hindus and other religions into India. Well, they lumped the heavily Muslim dominated area of Kashmir into India. The Muslims in Kashmir have no voice and want to become part of Pakistan. The result of English policy in this region is a multi-decade conflict which is now on the verge of nuclear deployment.
Another case study is the plight of the Kurds. Once again, when the Brits gave up colonial authority over the region, they created borders as they saw fit with little regard to the people who would suffer. The Kurds for the most part were split into four different countries (Iraq, Iran, Turkey, and Syria). They are a hated minority in each of these countries. They are pursecuted and have no legal protections. The Northern No-Fly Zone that the U.S. enforces in Iraq is to protect the Kurds from total slaughter at the hands of Husein. The Kurds fair little better in the other countires in which they live. The U.S. will not help the Kurds in Turkey due to the Turkish government being the strongest Middle Eastern ally to the U.S.
Most of the current ethnic clensing in Africa is a result of British policy. Once again as the British pulled out, they drew borders as they saw fit. Tribes that had been at war for generations were grouped together into countries. Other tribes were split among severl different countries. The result has been brutal ethnic wars along tribal lines. In countries were one tribe has gained a majority over a rival tribe, the smaller tribe has been totally shut out of the government. The current situation in Rowanda is the best example of this. Nigeria and Bostwana are also great examples.
I hope you sensed a common theme to these examples. The British set about conquering most of the world, stripping it of rescources, and when they could no longer control their empire, they withdrew leaving behind nothing but a legacy of murder and hardship.
------------------
"God grants liberty only to those who love it and are always ready to guard and defend it." --Daniel Webster