America is not a christian nation!

[Emperor Harkonnen]

I thought that one of the reasons that USA didn't want to be under british control was that britain was against slavery, and USA needed the salves to maintain their economy

[Acriku]

It was mostly taxation.

[TMA_1]

taxation was part of it. It was mainly that there was no representation for issues like taxation and other things. THey didnt feel like british citizens anymore. Colonists began to feel like they werent even apart of the empire, and they soon got tired of that. The various taxings though were placed for good reason. americans faught in the french and indian war, which was an offshoot of the seven years war. The british obviously needed money for the massive debt they had from the war. The american citizens were pissy basically and wanted to feel like they were british citizens, not bags of meat that had to pay money to a government that didnt even control them.

Frankly I see nothing wrong with what england did. THey needed to pay for expenses for a war that america willingly faught in as a colony. They should realize that there would be expenses to be paid. They just wanted the best of both worlds, and were pretty selfish in their quest for independance.

dont kill me anybody! lol

[Acriku]

What they did wrong was try to tax people who disowned from them. You don't tax people outside of your country.

[TMA_1]

huh? what are you talking about? the portion tht england controlled was totally theirs. they could tax the people there because they were british citizens. They may not have been treated like them at times, but they were. This enables a government to tax in however they see fit. americans were not abandoned. they werent even used. The english crown was just extremely unsympathetic and didnt think about how the americans would feel if they overtaxed the,. They were running an empire with many many countires under their control. The british states were just a few of them. What a lot of historians dont teach to kids in school is that there were channels being made in parliment to try and give the american colonies better representation. If the americans would have been peaceful like canada was for it's independance, it may have taken a lot longer, but it would have happened eventually. We were totally in the wrong in my opinion.

[Acriku]

Interesting that you think we were wrong when you enjoy the benefits of it...

[TMA_1]

I cant help but not do so. also you are trying to divert my discussion. Me and edric have talked about this before. how you cannot make one complaint about america without an american saying, "yeah and you enjoy this freedom and you owe it a lot, blah blah". I dont owe america anything. I was born here and had no choice in the matter. I dont care where I live, and the only thing that keeps me stable with this government is my spirituality. My faith teaches me to be subserviant and to follow it's whims, even to death. I follow God, not this country. Besides I said these were my opinions. you havent delivered one good retort to the table. only your typical illogical debate tactics.

[Acriku]

I never said you owed America anything. Try to read what I'm saying, not assume what I'm saying. What I said was that you say it's totally wrong, but yet you reap all of the benefits of that "wrong"ness. I just thought that was rather interesting.

Also, I have brought quite a bit to this topic. I don't understand why you would say I didn't.

[ordos45]

http://www.livejournal.com/community/dark_christian/

http://pub56.ezboard.com/bdarkchristianity

Just a couple of links to submit, to where more on the debate might be found. I always enjoy reading these debates over Christian nation or not.

[TMA_1]

I said you brought nothing with the history of the revolution that we were just talking about. Also I couldnt help where I was born, and just because an evil occured does not mean it cant change for the better. america has gone through many alterations, that is the beauty of it. it can change and mold with the times. The wrongness that was done by the founding fathers and the rebels of early america is a historical wrongness, and an ethical one. It is in the past, and since I am not of that time it doesnt equate to me reaping the benefits of those evils. For example, why should americans have to pay reperations to the families of slave ancestors? it was not our doing, it was the doing of people many years ago. be fair acriku, and I can assume what I want because that is the nature of the beast.

great links ordos, Ill read them in more depth in a sec.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

yo TMA, you are the first person I have heard to acctually think that USA shouldn't have rebelled against Britain! I think the same thing. Britain should control them since they were british citizens.

I can't stand colonies trying to gain their independence with war and rebellions. When it is such a civilized nation as Britain they are dealing with then there are other solutions than war.

[Acriku]

Do you really think Britain would have recognized America as a separate colony without war?

[Emperor Harkonnen]

yeah they did to canada didn't they

[Acriku]

So you're saying that Britain would have left the American colonies to their self-rule and to keep the resources on the American land that Britain fought for, for the Americans and not for Britain -without war? I doubt that.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

how should I know. they did to Canada, why shouldn't they do it to USA also?

[TMA_1]

listen man, it took canada a long time to get independance. They went through it the hard way, going though the political avenue to get it. We could have protested through channels in politics, eventually there would have been sympathizers in brittain, and through years and years we could have recieved our independance. Instead we rebelled against a nation that had every right to tax us. of course they were pretty careless in their realization that if you tax too much you will piss people off, especially colonists. That didnt give us the right though to breed insurrection and rebellion. We could have been peaceful. But no, we americans have to be cowboys and fight our way out of everything. good grief where is the civility!?

[Acriku]

Look at Canada, and then look at America. America has enormous resources of everything, from coal to wood to gold. That's not something you give away to colonists, is it? If so, then the war fought to get that land was for nothing.

[TMA_1]

THey didnt have the entire contenant. As a matter of fact, the english would have rather had the west indies or other more profitable places. The colonies of america were not that rich in deposits. The only thing going for them was tobacco, and soon cotton. Even at that time cotton was not a huge commodaty and far inferior to egyptian cotton. Textiles were the best export. That isnt saying much either. America for the english did not have very rich colonies. they were worthless compared to some others they had like india. You express what the whole of america has, they only had a sliver of the eastern coast. you should know that silly.

It was not that important to them. If the english really wished, they could have smashed the rebels, sent in their entire force of troops. They did not send in much at all though. It was more a matter of pride. They also had more important colonies to control. Now if the english knew the future of america, they would have thought different. They were people of their time though obviously.

We could have resolved it peacefully, but we didnt. You expressed ignorantly that we had a lot of resources. That wasent until we moved west. Wood of the mississippi river, oil of the mid and southwest, silver and gold scattered up the west coast. Rich deposits up in alaska. Those would all come much later after the revolution. it was similar to viet nam in a way. We just didnt want to lose. We had no real purpose to be there other than our own personal agendas like fighting communism. The british too had silly agendas for being there. nothing of importance, that is why they didnt defeat us, they figured it would be better to have an ally over in the americas rather than disgruntled colonists to constantly watch over.

[Acriku]

Ok, I see your point as to the resources (which you could have worded more nicely, this is a civil discussion after all). But, when should the colonists have tried peacefully to settle it? By the time the British landed in Boston, incidents have escalated and inevitably against the British troops (British Massacre). Britain was greedy, squeezing and exploiting the colonies to their will where protest and resistance was inevitable. Considering the situation, I am inclined to disagree with you.

[ordos45]

Ok, I see your point as to the resources (which you could have worded more nicely, this is a civil discussion after all). But, when should the colonists have tried peacefully to settle it? By the time the British landed in Boston, incidents have escalated and inevitably against the British troops (British Massacre). Britain was greedy, squeezing and exploiting the colonies to their will where protest and resistance was inevitable. Considering the situation, I am inclined to disagree with you.

*cough* British Massacre *cough* Only 7 people... *cough*

[Sardauker-Kirov]

Maybe England lost because of the naval difficulties in those days?

It's very stupid pouring thousands of troops in America traveling on the dangerous sea.

Just imagine a storm or hurricane, all troops would go down to the drain literally.

If America was located nearby the old world, then they wouldn't have a difficulty sending troops towards them.

And don't forget that ALOT of countries backstabs and sneak attacks you in those days.

If you send a portion of your army towards a other country, you would basicly be backstabbed by Germany, Franch or some other country.

And I think America was very important to England, they knew about the resources it had there. But it's hard controlling a country from afar.

And probably the governor of America wasn't that loyal at all to his fatherland.

[Emperor Harkonnen]

of course they were loyal to britain. the top positions would very likely be possessed by someone the british government trusted. A duke or baron for instanse.

and I don't think that every troop carrying ship would go down because of one storm. they were probably scattered over the atlantic ocean arriving at different locations on the american east coast.

[Sardauker-Kirov]

It's still dangerous now matter what.

And the governor could likely corrupt because of the resources and wealth in America.

It is a great chance for everyone to be in a far land, many stuff, many everything and take control of the continent.

No money for the mother country, money for US!

[Emperor Harkonnen]

it is those kind of people who make the world a bad place. The people who always have to oppose. I hate them >:(

Why can't they just be happy the way things are, damn rebels. what they make is chaos and dividing.

[TMA_1]

exactly ordos. There have been many "massicres" in our country. naming the boston massicre, which was started by some idiot solders that didnt take a snowball in their face well, is absolutely silly. It was not much of a massicre as it was a stupid thing for those solders to have done. Of course we have hyped it up though, because we americans need reasons for our actions.

The british were as greedy as any other nation. Look at the division of africa as colonies during the time of queen victoria. England, france, germany, belgum, and spain all took portions of the country equally. think about it, they took land that wasent their own and used it for profits. no single african was protected. They still arent now. Apartide is gone, but there is chaos that remains. Caused by the various greedy empires that wished to dominate the world. It wasent just the english or the dutch, it was a mix of all of the old and fallen empires. you seem to argue now just because you dont want to lose face. that is silly.