Get Real! wrote:
Australia is off-topic in the CyPob, so take your boring feud elsewhere.
Paphitis wrote:
I have exposed Simon's colonial leniencies which were responsible for divide and rule in Cyprus...
...and this is not off topic when it comes to the Cyprus Problem.
I mean, what sheer imperial arrogance!
Simon, you should be ashamed of yourself!
Simon wrote:
You exposed nothing other than your own inability to grasp the facts.
I have no desire to see the British Empire return, nor do I support the actions it took in several countries, including Cyprus. So labelling me an 'Imperialist' simply because I speak the truth about history merely demonstrates your own mindset, which is that anything British is an anathema to you.
Paphitis wrote:
And what facts are they?
Read my posts (especially the last one) and you might find out.
Paphitis wrote:
I told you to not categorise the ANZACs as a British Force and your had to cause such a scene.
And I told you that I did not categorise ANZAC as anything because I did not mention them specifically. I mentioned British Empire Forces, and ANZAC in WWI were classed as Empire forces fighting for the British! You decided to cause a big scene because of your obsession with ANZAC. You come across as a complete nationalist looney! Trying to drag me into a pissing contest about how Australia is so much better than Britain.
Paphitis wrote:
Frankly, you were caught with your pants down.
How pathetic!
I was caught with my pants down? I've made you look like a mug mate. Anybody with half a brain can see that. Just take a look at what your own PM said just before WWI.
Opposition Leader Andrew Fisher states in a speech at Colac, Victoria Australians will stand beside her own (Britain) to help and defend her to our last man and our last shilling. Prime Minister Joseph Cook states in Horsham, Victoria "All of our resources in Australia are ... for the preservation and the security of the empire".
Or how about you have a little read of this...
"Let me begin by considering what, if anything, Australia contributed to the decision to invade Turkey in 1915?
Now, we must ask that question because, as we know, the Gallipoli campaign holds a very special place for Australians. Indeed it's said to be the event which above all others, brought Australia to nationhood, - through which 'we came of age'. And yet,
if 'nationhood' means anything, it would have to include the making of independent decisions in the best interests of Australians, of its own people.
Yet, clearly, that did not apply to Australia's decision to join Britain in its war against Germany, - or Turkey. In fact most Australians were then, - and have since remained, -
entirely ignorant of the reasons behind
Britain's decisions for war, and, needless to say,
they were not consulted on its wisdom or conduct. Moreover, an Australian government had simply gone along with Britain's war declaration, adding one of its own, - as again happened at the outset of WWII.
And so when in November 1914, our first volunteer troops left Albany, West Australia for France, as they were given to understood, the decision to disembark them in Egypt, then commit them to the invasion of Turkey
was an entirely British one.
Now while it goes without saying that from beginning to end of that campaign our troops fought most valiantly and selflessly under the most difficult of conditions, the very real sacrifices involved can in no sense justify or compensate for the
total lack of independent Australian decision-making. After all, this would have required a close knowledge of Britain's strategic thinking, Australia's agreement to become involved, and its full participation in the planning of operations involving Australian troops, -
none of which applied. "
Based on transcript of an ANU Emeritus Faculty talk of April 16, 2008 by Ian Buckley, adapted from his chapter 4 of 'Australia's Foreign Wars'.
http://www.britishempire.co.uk/maproom/ ... lipoli.htm
Fully independent my arse Aussie boy!