Did we settle or invade Australia?

[Cyclone]

No, you're still trying to redefine what the word means, and you can't.

[sutty27]

No, you're still trying to redefine what the word means, and you can't.

 

How are you defining it? because it looks to me like it is you redefining the word.

[Cyclone]

These apply

 

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/invade

 

the 2nd one being most apt, although soldiers were present and force was used.

[sutty27]

These apply

 

http://dictionary.cambridge.org/dictionary/english/invade

 

the 2nd one being most apt, although soldiers were present and force was used.

 

I wouldn't say that 1000 people is large number especially when you consider the size of Australia, 7.692 million km².

 

Using that definition the migrants entering Europe are closer to an invasion than the first British settlers in Australia.

[Cyclone]

Did it stop at 1000 then, no additional British ever landed on the continent?

 

Migrants to Europe aren't taking (stealing) any land or resisting eviction with violence, nor are they representatives of a state or a single cohesive group.

[sutty27]

Did it stop at 1000 then, no additional British ever landed on the continent?

 

Migrants to Europe aren't taking (stealing) any land or resisting eviction with violence, nor are they representatives of a state or a single cohesive group.

 

The British settlers didn't steal land, they settled it and that is what the migrants will do here, they will settle here on land that they do not currently own and against the wishes of millions of Europeans, using your logic they are an invasion that are stealing land.

[Cyclone]

It was used and owned by people who already lived there. That's pretty much the definition of theft.

 

Migrants who come here will purchase land (perhaps), or they won't. They won't just build a house in a park and claim the land as their own.

[sutty27]

It was used and owned by people who already lived there. That's pretty much the definition of theft.

 

Migrants who come here will purchase land (perhaps), or they won't. They won't just build a house in a park and claim the land as their own.

 

The land they built settlements on wasn't occupied.

 

Europe is used and owned by the Europeans that already live here, so Non European migrants are an invasion and are stealing the land when your definition is applied.

[Cyclone]

Your garden isn't occupied, Hillsborough park isn't occupied. Occupation is not a requirement for ownership.

 

Being in a public space is not theft. Taking land from the original owners to settle on it (the aboriginal Australian nomads) is.

[sutty27]

Your garden isn't occupied, Hillsborough park isn't occupied. Occupation is not a requirement for ownership.

 

Being in a public space is not theft. Taking land from the original owners to settle on it (the aboriginal Australian nomads) is.

 

The vast majority of Australia isn't occupied.

 

---------- Post added 06-04-2016 at 13:45 ----------

 

Your garden isn't occupied, Hillsborough park isn't occupied. Occupation is not a requirement for ownership.

 

Being in a public space is not theft. Taking land from the original owners to settle on it (the aboriginal Australian nomads) is.

 

How did the Aborigines get ownership of a continuant, the first human to exist must have owned the world and we are all descendants so we all own the world.