.:SonicBomb:.
    Login or Register
::  Home  ::  Videos  ::  Your Account  ::  Forums  ::  RSS Feed  ::
 
 
::Content::
  • Atomic
  • - Aviation
    - Aircraft
    - Military
    - Explosions
    - WW2
    - Various
    - Hi-Def
    - Photos

    - Wallpaper

    - Nuclear

    - WWI

    - WWII

    Advertisment
    Search
    Custom Search
    User Info
    Welcome, Anonymous
    Nickname
    Password
    (Register)
    Membership:
    Latest: kevintaylor
    New Today: 0
    New Yesterday: 3
    Overall: 743

    People Online:
    Visitors: 0
    Members: 0
    Total: 0

    sonicbomb.com :: View topic - Police Arrest 3 in Slovakia in Nuclear Material Smuggling...

    Forum FAQ Search Memberlist Usergroups Profile Log in to check your private messages Log in

    View next topic
    View previous topic
    Post new topic Reply to topic  sonicbomb.com Forum Index » Current Events
    Author Message
    Teller25
    Cherokee (3.8 mt)


    Joined: Aug 22, 2007
    Posts: 254
    Location: Spain

    PostPosted: Sun Dec 09, 2007 10:06 pm Reply with quote

    We should clear some things, the first colony of Europeans ever in the U.S. was Spanish, in what is now Florida, and in the 1800’s half of the U.S. belonged to Mexico before it was stolen from them, (no waiting in line required for the invading troops ha?) but for the sake of the issue on this thread about stolen nuclear material I won’t go there any further.
    In case you haven’t noticed Mexicans and other immigrants do not only work in farms but in the cities as well. You say that the Economy is OVERemployed. You must have privileged information about the U.S economy that you should share with Mexicans and the U.S. government, because if hundreds of thousands of Mexicans risk their life crossing the border every year is because they do FIND a job very fast, otherwise they wouldn’t go. Believe it or not they always find a job, not a job that you or any European want to do but still a job.
    And if you don’t need MORE Illegal immigrants please explain to me why don’t Americans complete the wall? It is as simple as that, I’m sure it would cost them less than a single Supercarrier, but the President, the Governors and the Congress don’t do it, you know why?, because it would be bad for the economy, and YES they need them, otherwise they would do something about it, their only solution to immigration for decades has being doing nothing, because that is convenient for them. It’s not like they are doing some charity work here, the moment they don’t need more workers the government will stop the illegal immigrants flow not before.
    View user's profile Send private message
    Graviton
    Yankee (13.5 mt)


    Joined: Sep 03, 2006
    Posts: 1593
    Location: USA

    PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 12:24 am Reply with quote

    Teller25 wrote:
    We should clear some things, the first colony of Europeans ever in the U.S. was Spanish, in what is now Florida, and in the 1800’s half of the U.S. belonged to Mexico before it was stolen from them, (no waiting in line required for the invading troops ha?) but for the sake of the issue on this thread about stolen nuclear material I won’t go there any further.


    "Spain's" Florida was also stolen from the local Indians. Your argument does not hold water, since colonies all stole from each other at this barbaric time and for centuries. In fact, Spanish murdered and oppressed New World Indians into submission, threatening genocide. They even banned the tribal languages along with other abuses. They even stole South American tribal gold primarily routed through a port in coastal Venezuela.

    Great Britain experienced so huge amounts of piracy among whole communities until the end of the English Civil Wars of the 17th century. The Thames River communities saw obnoxious pillage as well as theft of transported goods among rival communities. In fact, all along the coastlines of the UK, rival communities often stole and pillaged from each other.

    Regents across the UK and Europe also ran ship investment companies based on profit from piracy of other countries' ships and coastal communities. Queen Elizabeth I notoriously ran a huge piracy network in mutual competition with rival colonial countries in Europe. France, Spain, and other countries were just as malicious. Even the Netherlands were in on the game -- the Dutch first settled New York in the New World before the British; NYC was called New Amsterdam before the British finally took it.

    It was finally the Puritans who cleaned up this mess in the 17th century UK, as well as tackling immense corruption common at that time.

    This is just a slice of common European experience. The continent was even worse for corruption, crime, and violence.

    We can't turn back the clock since times hugely changed in similar fashion on an ancient, GLOBAL legacy of European, African, and Asian migratory and military invasion practices, resettling vast political, racial, ethnic, and language boundaries.

    Let me also remind the forum of some additional, historical facts. The now USA southwest was sold by Mexican generalissimo and second term president Santa Ana to the US in the 1848 Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo for 15 million US dollars, and immense amount of money at that time. Therefore the southwest was not stolen, and the US troops evacuated territory south of the Rio Grande shortly after the treaty was signed.

    It's sad and outrageous that revisionist types among Hispanics either forcefully ignore or are not informed of these facts listed above. Americans should also be reminded of them.
    View user's profile Send private message
    Teller25
    Cherokee (3.8 mt)


    Joined: Aug 22, 2007
    Posts: 254
    Location: Spain

    PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 6:08 pm Reply with quote

    I was expecting exactly that answer, “They thought me in elementary school that those dumb Mexicans sold it to us for only 15 million bucks” We all knew that, but you forgot to say that there was a bloody war that forced Mexico to sell half their territory for that ridiculous amount of money (would you now sell California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado and Texas to China for say, 500 billion yuan? or would that be stupid?), U.S. troops captured Mexico City in order to force that “agreement.” As a general rule, if you need to invade a country, kill its people, and force its government to sell you something, it is hardly a fair or legal sale.

    This is expressed very precisely by two American politicians: Joshua Giddings and Robert Toombs respectively.

    “In the murder of Mexicans upon their own soil, or in robbing them of their country, I can take no part either now or here-after. The guilt of these crimes must rest on others. I will not participate in them."

    "This war is a nondescript.... We charge the President with usurping the war-making power... with seizing a country... which had been for centuries, and was then in the possession of the Mexicans.... Let us put a check upon this lust of dominion. We had territory enough, Heaven knew."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican-American_War

    That happened 160 years ago and that stolen territory is now sovereign U.S. territory, and if you don’t need illegal workers, you SHOULD close the border, and if they want medical care maybe is because they are humans, not machines that you can throw away when they malfunction. They don’t want their territory back, they don’t want to leave their homes and go there but the economic situation in both sides of the border forces them to do so, they are not interested in voting in the U.S., or being Americans, they have their own country (what's left of it), they just want to WORK.
    View user's profile Send private message
    Graviton
    Yankee (13.5 mt)


    Joined: Sep 03, 2006
    Posts: 1593
    Location: USA

    PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 8:16 pm Reply with quote

    Teller25 wrote:
    I was expecting exactly that answer, “They thought me in elementary school that those dumb Mexicans sold it to us for only 15 million bucks” We all knew that, but you forgot to say that there was a bloody war that forced Mexico to sell half their territory for that ridiculous amount of money (would you now sell California, Nevada, Arizona, New Mexico, Utah, Colorado and Texas for say, 50 billions?), U.S. troops captured Mexico City in order to force that “agreement.” As a general rule, if you need to invade a country, kill its people, and force its government to sell you something, it is hardly a fair or legal sale.

    This is expressed very precisely by two American politicians: Joshua Giddings and Robert Toombs respectively.

    “In the murder of Mexicans upon their own soil, or in robbing them of their country, I can take no part either now or here-after. The guilt of these crimes must rest on others. I will not participate in them."

    "This war is a nondescript.... We charge the President with usurping the war-making power... with seizing a country... which had been for centuries, and was then in the possession of the Mexicans.... Let us put a check upon this lust of dominion. We had territory enough, Heaven knew."
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mexican-American_War

    That happened 160 years ago and that stolen territory is now sovereign U.S. territory, and if you don’t need illegal workers, you SHOULD close the border, and if they want medical care maybe is because they are humans, not machines that you can throw away when they malfunction. They don’t want their territory back, they don’t want to leave their homes and go there but the economic situation in both sides of the border forces them to do so, they are not interested in voting in the U.S., or being Americans, they have their own country (what's left of it), they just want to WORK.


    Wow, you spin history while you forcefully ignore other facts.

    It wasn't stolen from Mexico. Accept that.

    The greatest victims were the Indians of both countries. In spite of this iss the fact that many Indians in American territory among them were brutal and warlike, which painted fear that affected a bias against all European settlers. They kept slaves and also made attempts at genocide theirselves among other, rival Indian tribes, just as black Africans did the same to supply Europeans and theirselves with slaves -- the ancient Muslim slave trade route grew into this.

    You also make the terrible mistake of trying to take a modern day perspective in such ignorance of what really happened of a much wider scale. You also ignore the IMMENSE hardships BOTH sides' soldiers suffered. Especially hard for Americans was that very remote, unexplored world of war, VERY far away from routes of supply over mountains, hot deserts, valleys, and Gulf of Mexico ocean. Most of the American soldiers were not ever suited to the tropical weather, wearing oppressive woolen uniforms, while Mexicans wore cotton.

    This judgment of what is a valid price is not for modern Americans, Spaniards, or Mexicans to make. 15 million dollars was a colossal amount of money, and all done legally, and was very reluctantly passed by the Mexican congress for obvious reasons that they lost and are culturally proud people.

    Many overly biased people use a history book and shallow knowledge to make judgments far out of the perspective of those past times. This bias is possibly entrenched in pan-Hispanic nationalism that is on the rise. Revisionists will also never in vast hindsight and political motivation acknowledge what happened, and will never settle for a valid price based on your agenda of wanting to rewrite the past.

    The purchase was also not extorted after the defeats of major battles where many Mexican soldiers ran away. In fact, a "neutral" -- yet at that time the British government was not at all friendly to USA -- British agent made the connection for negotiations.

    15 million dollars was also a high price for the time in hostile country, considering that Napoleon's government got 7 million dollars for huge Louisiana Purchase that bought about 1/3 of USA from colonial France.

    I must also smile at cherrypicked descriptions by biased "witnesses" that always pop up. This is like justifying anti-Americanism through loose cannons like hardcore far leftists Cindy Sheehan, Sean Penn, or Harry Belafonte visiting and spewing vitriol at Chavez' Venezuela cocktail party banquet tours, against the same USA that gave most of them such wealth and fame (now turned into infamy).

    Quote:
    which had been for centuries, and was then in the possession of the Mexicans


    ... More of one-side revisionism.

    IT BELONGED TO SPAIN UNTIL 1821 ... NOT MEXICANS for centuries earlier.

    Quote:
    but the economic situation in both sides of the border forces them to do so, they are not interested in voting in the U.S., or being Americans, they have their own country (what's left of it), they just want to WORK.


    My ancestors and hugely many other non-Hispanic nationalities faced huge economic problems abroad. The Irish faced huge famine and oppression in the UK, for example ... BUT THEY WAITED IN LINE, LEGALLY! Far too many Mexicans and other Hispanics don't. Mexican illegals also STEAL national ID numbers and credit identifications, ruining rightfully born Americans, and this IS A CRIME! Illegal Mexicans overwhelm ID fraud in USA, as well as ruin other aspects of USA lives.
    View user's profile Send private message
    Teller25
    Cherokee (3.8 mt)


    Joined: Aug 22, 2007
    Posts: 254
    Location: Spain

    PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:17 pm Reply with quote

    Graviton wrote:


    You also make the terrible mistake of trying to take a modern day perspective in such ignorance of what really happened of a much wider scale. You also ignore the IMMENSE hardships BOTH sides' soldiers suffered. Especially hard for Americans was that very remote, unexplored world of war, VERY far away from routes of supply over mountains, hot deserts, valleys, and Gulf of Mexico ocean. Most of the American soldiers were not ever suited to the tropical weather, wearing oppressive woolen uniforms, while Mexicans wore cotton.

    This judgment of what is a valid price is not for modern Americans, Spaniards, or Mexicans to make. 15 million dollars was a colossal amount of money, and all done legally, and was very reluctantly passed by the Mexican congress for obvious reasons that they lost and are culturally proud people.

    15 million dollars was also a high price for the time in hostile country, considering that Napoleon's government got 7 million dollars for huge Louisiana Purchase that bought about 1/3 of USA from colonial France.


    Was the new stolen territory too rough for the invading troops? I think I’ll cry for them any moment now… It’s like saying, poor Hitler, those hideous French disabled the elevators on the Eiffel tower so he wasn’t able to see the city from there.
    15 millions is what a HOUSE is worth in some parts of California today, so I think you don’t have to be a Allan Greenspan to know that 7 HUGE states are not worth that under any circumstance, at whatever exchange rate or at any time in history. Obviously it was just a symbolic payment to make things “legal”.
    Using that logic, maybe you should have asked Saddam to sell you Iraq for 5 billions, it’s also “A LOT” of money nowadays. Or maybe North Korea, judging its size maybe its worth like $500, 000.
    View user's profile Send private message
    Graviton
    Yankee (13.5 mt)


    Joined: Sep 03, 2006
    Posts: 1593
    Location: USA

    PostPosted: Mon Dec 10, 2007 9:32 pm Reply with quote

    Teller, you are filled with bias.

    Your "crocodile tears" (fake tears of remorse) also reveal no keen interest in what is historically correct. You seem to be trolling against the facts of this portion of the thread.

    By the way, since 1835 Mexico was under a military dictatorship of Santa Ana, who forcefully changed the 1824 constitution of Mexico to bring his autocratic rule. So Mexican people ruled their own land? Facts simply don't support Mexican self-determination of citizens, and this military junta rule continued almost uninterrupted until 2000. Rule by Mexican government cannot reasonably be considered a victory for Mexican citizens under this form of military junta control.

    Also note the historical fact of how the USA troops were greatly outnumbered in nearly every battle with Mexicans. ... A fair fight with odds so slanted against the Americans? No. The Mexicans had every advantage of established fortresses and far better routes of supply within the regions of battle.

    You need to try to take things at face value, and in the weight of their relative times. 15 million was an awesome amount of money back then, magnified even more with the relative cost of living and local economy of Mexico.

    The war cost 102 million dollars for the USA side, not including the 15 million dollars paid to the Mexican Congress, who approved of the deal. Most of it was for logistical cost of sending US troops abroad.
    View user's profile Send private message
    Teller25
    Cherokee (3.8 mt)


    Joined: Aug 22, 2007
    Posts: 254
    Location: Spain

    PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 2:09 am Reply with quote

    Graviton wrote:


    Teller, you are filled with bias.
    You need to try to take things at face value, and in the weight of their relative times. 15 million was an awesome amount of money back then, magnified even more with the relative cost of living and local economy of Mexico.

    The war cost 102 million dollars for the USA side, not including the 15 million dollars paid to the Mexican Congress, who approved of the deal. Most of it was for logistical cost of sending US troops abroad.


    Should the Mexicans pay the aggressor for the cost of the invasion of their own country?. It’s like if the Japanese had kept Hawaii and charged the U.S. for the cost of the bombs they dropped on Pearl Harbor, besides don’t forget that the Mexicans ONLY had 15 million U.S. dollars, they would have to borrow 87 million from the U.S. to pay them and “break even”. At those “fair” prices, if the Mexicans have had 102 millions back then, they probably could afford to buy the entire U.S. don’t you think? And maybe buy Canada with the rest of the money… Laughing
    View user's profile Send private message
    fastfission
    Cherokee (3.8 mt)


    Joined: Apr 14, 2007
    Posts: 425
    Location: Arzamas-16

    PostPosted: Tue Dec 11, 2007 2:32 am Reply with quote

    I note that there is a somewhat rosy tint being placed here on Mexico and the Spanish colonies in the Americas.

    I think it is fair to say that Spanish colonialism was amongst the most brutal, if not the most brutal, of all the European Powers. Their presence in the New World was a pestilence, literally and figuratively. Clearly those states formerly "owned" by Mexico and "bought" by the US are far better off for that change of ownership. Colonial Spanish culture and practices have in general been a drag, economically and culturally, on the New World. In that sense Grav is correct. The Hispanics do not play by the rules compared to other cultures which do not share a border with the US and migrate legally. In that sense the US has every right to defend it's borders from the social and economic basket case that lies to it's South.

    FF
    View user's profile Send private message
    KevinSarno
    Fizzle
    Fizzle


    Joined: Dec 08, 2010
    Posts: 1

    PostPosted: Wed Dec 08, 2010 11:12 am Reply with quote

    yeah! Spanish colonies is the most brutal and blood shed era. Philippines colonies over 200 yrs and they suffer.
    View user's profile Send private message
    lovelyme
    Fizzle
    Fizzle


    Joined: Jan 08, 2013
    Posts: 2

    PostPosted: Wed Jan 09, 2013 6:18 am Reply with quote

    Graviton
    wROTTE
    It's nonsense about USA "needing" foreign workers in an illegal manner. Mexicans and Latin-Americans drive down the pay of those workers too. Guest worker programs in a carefully monitored, bused procedure can solve the needs for working fields in the southwest's food fields.

    Something that outrages me is that Mexicans insist on getting drivers' licenses, free medical care, and more from USA, while the Mexican government denies these to foreigners to their country.

    Another outrage is the Mexicans insist that USA needs uncontrolled immigration, and they try to believe USA needs workers like in the 1880s-early 1900s UNDERemployment years, which is a lie, because USA is now OVERemployed. My European great grandparents had to wait in line at Ellis Island, New York, the LEGAL way, in the 1880s ... YES, LEGALLY. Times have greatly changed, but overwhelming Mexicans don't want to grow up and face facts that the times HAVE CHANGED.

    FACT: USA CANNOT be the overflow zone for immigrants from the world's 90+% nations facing barbaric cultural, socioeconomic, and political problems. USA simply cannot babysit the world, remove old, old tribal hatreds, or instill reasonable honesty or battle screaming corruption in 90+% of the world.


    YEAHH I AGREE WITH YOUR POST your really2 right...
    _____________________________________________________________
    Many people are finding that blow gun offer quite a challenging and fun sport.
    View user's profile Send private message
    Display posts from previous:   
    Post new topic Reply to topic

    View next topic
    View previous topic
    You cannot post new topics in this forum
    You cannot reply to topics in this forum
    You cannot edit your posts in this forum
    You cannot delete your posts in this forum
    You cannot vote in polls in this forum


    Powered by phpBB © 2001 phpBB Group
    | Privacy Policy || Contact us |

    Page Generation: 0.12 Seconds
    :: In the future we will all be robots ::