Quote:
Originally Posted by Fascist Canuck
No, USA and India are not British possessions. Yes, Ireland is a British possession. Using your logic, should you too not leave Quebec, since that province used to be a French possession long ago no?
|
What's the difference between the USA, India and Ireland? They were all members of the British empire that gained independence from it. This is all legally approved by every nation on earth. What does the fact that Quebec was once french have to do with anything? I don't think you understood my logic at all, but that's no surprise. Former french subjects had every right to remain here after the conquest because it's a clause of the Treaty of Paris of 1763 when France officially renounced to the land that was then known as New France. It's written black on white in this treaty that the french subjects who wish to stay may do so and have their rights to property and religion guaranteed by the conqueror.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fascist Canuck
Quebec was a colonial possession of France. It just so happens my British people slapped yours into the ground, told you to shut the hell up and do as your told, which is what you francophones should be doing today.
|
Well congratulations! Isn't that the position of the federal governement that only nations who have suffered oppression at the hands of another nation have the right to Independence? The way you put it, this sounds a lot like oppression. The more you talk, the more you justify Quebec Independence.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fascist Canuck
No, I do not think the USA and India obtained independence legally.
|
Sorry but you're the only one on this planet not to recognize the independence of these countries. Do us all a favor: go tell them! Go to the White House and tell this to everyone you meet, they will gladly surrender to your logic. If they don't, bring a gun with you! It'll work, I promise.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fascist Canuck
I would thus suggest more force should have been used to keep them in line. A shame my British people cling to their civility. Were I head of State at the time, I would have crushed both USA and India. Quite violent yes, but both the USA and India would today still be British possessions. Who would thus be right? My way, or the whiny, wimpy liberal way?
|
It would only have postponed the inevitable. Americans and Indians could have then claimed they suffered oppression at the hands of the British, which would have been true, and have their Independence recognized by everyone.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fascist Canuck
The Acadian people were never deported. They left of their own volition. Never forget it. I would suggest you follow their example if you dislike my Canada so much.
|
HAHAHA This one is funny. You obviously don't know what you're talking about. Even Queen Elizabeth II of the UK apologized to the Acadian people for all the harm that had been done to them at the time of the deportation. Learn your history, you live in NS you should know that!
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fascist Canuck
You speak of 'rational' decisions, yet it is you who seeks to tear apart an entire country, not I.
|
Who is talking about tearing a country apart? Canada currently has 10 provinces while it started with only four. It can easily survive with losing only 1 out of 10. Losing Quebec doesn't mean the end of Canada, far from it. You should have more confidence in your country's potential.