Did we settle or invade Australia?

[runningman1]

Pretty much. There was no 'invaision' of aus or nz. Much as the anti white soapdogers can't get their heads round reality.

 

Of course there was an invasion! Just because the land was sparsely populated doesn't mean someone can just go and take it. Australia is still sparsely populated now, would it be ok for a stronger nation to "settle" there again?

[Jonny5]

How did you come to that conclusion?

Eh? You don't think that Spain is generally acknowledged to have conquered large swathes of South America?

Edited March 30, 2016 by Jonny5

[Quik]

Of course there was an invasion! Just because the land was sparsely populated doesn't mean someone can just go and take it. Australia is still sparsely populated now, would it be ok for a stronger nation to "settle" there again?

 

When did this 'invaision' occur?

[foxy lady]

Some people, who occupied the entire continent, yes, it's like that.

 

It's like how we claim settlement rights over the entire UK, and someone arriving by boat from Calais isn't simply allowed to shoot a few englishmen and take their land... Much like that.

 

Well actually it is exactly like that. Until someone occupies the land and marks a border, or do you think that a man setting foot on a continent means they have settled the entire continent.

If you are refering to the Norman Conquest of Britain it was another 500 years before the country became a united kingdom.

[runningman1]

When did this 'invaision' occur?

 

I would say it began in 1788, when Britain laid claim on the territory surrounding Botany Bay. Although there had been claims by western powers on territory before, none had been backed up by arms.

[Quik]

I would say it began in 1788, when Britain laid claim on the territory surrounding Botany Bay. Although there had been claims by western powers on territory before, none had been backed up by arms.

 

Is laying claim to a bit of land an 'invaision'? I never invaded anywhere without a great deal of violence. It was absent in Australia.

[tinfoilhat]

Well, the last time it happened to us was 1066 and we still call that the Norman Invasion and no one has a problem with it.

 

Before that we had two Roman Invasions, the second one successful.

 

Or were these events really colonisation?

 

I'm listening Nagel me old sausage

 

Both your posts have some validity to them - you can't use either settler or invader properly when it comes to austrailia really - I'm surprised the austrailian university hasn't spotted this. This would be interesting how they look at their own history on treating aborigines up to the present day.

 

I wonder if they prefixed every sentence with "Aww look" like every austrailian who ends up with a microphone stuck under his or her nose

[runningman1]

Is laying claim to a bit of land an 'invaision'? I never invaded anywhere without a great deal of violence. It was absent in Australia.

 

That is simply not true, About 20,000 aborigines died as a result of violence, many more as a result of being driven from the fertile coastal lands.

 

What was your old username?

[Quik]

That is simply not true, About 20,000 aborigines died as a result of violence, many more as a result of being driven from the fertile coastal lands.

 

What was your old username?

 

About 3k died. 3k whites died. Sad but lets move on.

[Nagel]

I'm listening Nagel me old sausage

 

Both your posts have some validity to them - you can't use either settler or invader properly when it comes to austrailia really - I'm surprised the austrailian university hasn't spotted this. This would be interesting how they look at their own history on treating aborigines up to the present day.

 

I wonder if they prefixed every sentence with "Aww look" like every austrailian who ends up with a microphone stuck under his or her nose

 

Actually I don't really care what word an Australian university uses to describe the takeover of Australia by Western people and ideas. It happened and it's a better place to live now.