Hummer Forums by Elcova  
Forums - Home
Source Decals

Source Motors
Custom. Accessories.

H2 Accessories
H3 Accessories
Other Vehicles

H2 Source

H2 Member Photos
H2 Owners Map
H2 Classifieds
H2 Photo Gallery
SUT Photo Gallery
H2 Details

H2 Club

Chapters
Application

H3 Source

H3 Member Photos
H3 Classifieds
H3 Photo Gallery
H3 Owners Map
H3 Details
H3T Concept

H1 Source

H1 Member Photos
H1 Classifieds
H1 Photo Gallery
H1 Details

General Info

Hummer Dealers
Contact
Advertise

Sponsored Ads










 


Source Motors - custom. accessories.


Go Back   Hummer Forums by Elcova > ETC. Forums > General Off Topic

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #22  
Old 06-10-2006, 05:53 PM
Andy C's Avatar
Andy C Andy C is offline
Hummer Expert
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Probably on my boat
Posts: 561
Andy C is off the scale
Default Re: History

Quote:
Originally Posted by h2co-pilot
Assuming that there is no land that has been occupied by the same peoples and customs for 10 thousand years- Prolly not. Though, (thinking of long standing Aboringines of regions) Australia was not formed by war and it's settlers did not fight the native peoples. They obtained Independence gradually and only knew war from WWI- present and really none of their own. Maybe Australia.

(I haven't had my coffee yet so I'm a little crusty/confused- I may edit more later )

An extract from an Aboriginal history paper

"European settlers with more advanced technology arrived in 1788 from England and began re-colonizing.

They got on rather badly with the locals. Two primitive cultures based on force and exlptation (and nothing else in common) were bound to clash badly.
The European settlers were embarrassed by this, and the English ordered the Australian Governor to make a treaty with the native population. He was unable to do so, partly because of limited resources (life was not just brutish and short for the Aboriginal population) but mostly because there was no central Aboriginal authority to deal with. The Aborigines were in relatively small tribes, spoke many different languages and spent much of their surplus waring with each other. Negotiating with all of them was nearly impossible. The Local Governor reported this to his English command.
The English were embarrassed by this, and as a convenience they declared Australia 'Terra Nullius' (effectively uninhabited).
The European settlers passed many diseases to the Aborigines, who through their isolation for so long, had little resistance. In particular, two plagues of small-pox in 1792 and 1822 swept through the Aboriginal populations and wiped many of them out. There was also a plague of venereal disease, but many believe this was contracted from non-European fishermen in the north of Australia.
There was a low level war over a period of time. Aborigines would take sheep from local farmers (and eat them). Farmers would go and kill the Aborigines.
The area became the nation of Australia in 1901, and though it was basically democratic, Aborigines were not eligible to vote. They were not classified as 'Australians'.
The last mass-killing of Aborigines was in 1926 after a European-Australian was reported killed by an Aborigine, and a local-policemen collected a gang of people to kill the local tribe. The more senior authorities were embarrassed by this, and took steps to prevent it reoccurring. Generally Aborigines were encouraged to move to 'settlements' away from the European infrastructure where they would cause less trouble."

In fact Aboriginies were not given the right to call themselves Australians until 1967.

So that counts Australia out then.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 06-10-2006, 06:00 PM
Andy C's Avatar
Andy C Andy C is offline
Hummer Expert
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Probably on my boat
Posts: 561
Andy C is off the scale
Default Re: History

Quote:
Originally Posted by PARAGON
I'm not a big history buff and hated studying history because the manner in which it was attempted to be taught to me was through memorization. Memorize dates, names, places.

Anyway, I have a question others more steeped in history can help me with. Out of all of the New empires, nations, countrys that were brung about by war, revolution or some type of act of aggression. What empire, nation or country was not first ruled by the leader of the aggression. Napoleon leads France, Ceasar leads the Roman Empire. War heroes..... generals ........ the leaders come back to rule what they conqured.

My question is.... is this basically true and if it is who were the exceptions.

The British Empire - I think.
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 06-11-2006, 02:29 AM
PARAGON's Avatar
PARAGON PARAGON is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,247
PARAGON has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default Re: History

Quote:
Originally Posted by Andy C
The British Empire - I think.
You just made me realize.... I have no idea how The British Empire formed, yet.
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 06-11-2006, 02:50 PM
Andy C's Avatar
Andy C Andy C is offline
Hummer Expert
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Probably on my boat
Posts: 561
Andy C is off the scale
Default Re: History

Quote:
Originally Posted by PARAGON
You just made me realize.... I have no idea how The British Empire formed, yet.

We needed curry. The rest is history
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 06-11-2006, 04:02 PM
PARAGON's Avatar
PARAGON PARAGON is offline
Banned
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Posts: 24,247
PARAGON has a little shameless behaviour in the past
Default Re: History

Quote:
Originally Posted by Alec W
OMFG, LMAO
x2
Reply With Quote
Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:27 PM.


Powered by vBulletin Version 3.0.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.