The language we speak is a language of conquest and invasion. English is a west Germanic derivative.
Barry⌠this is inded a struggle. Your online personna appears incapable of subtlty or intelligent application of thought⌠you obviously enjoy this baiting nonsense in a wholehearted yet ultimately futile attempt at getting a riseâŚbut I will indulge your fantasy with an explanation⌠but you first need to clear you mind (should not be too difficult) and b e p r e p a r e d to listen - see I am saying it slow
First up the inverted commas should have given you a hint I was not talking literally. Cook was indeed on a voyage of discovery and certainly did not have the 'resourceâs for an invasion⌠now here is the subtle bit so please be a good boy and pay attention as it gets a twicky for fuckwits⌠during Cookâs time, âdiscoveryâ was really concerned with making a claim on new âundicovered landsâ. Once claimed for Blighty, further 'expeditionary âforcesâ would begin the process of colonization - usually without so much as âby your leaveâ from the local indigenous populations- often involving killing the males and giving the local ladies a good dose of the clap or syphilis⌠with me?
So in effect, Cookâs discovery WAS all a precurser for eventual colonization.
Now as others have stated above for your delectation, colonization in those bad old days was no different to invasion as it was never asked for, never agreed by and always exploited the locals - bit of killing, raping and old fashioned genocide or slavery wasall part of good old Blightyâs âcolonizationâ - sounds alot like invasion to me⌠but hey thatâs splitting hairsâŚ
Now Barry online personana is not presented as the brightest spark, but please tell me even a fuck wit such as yourself can see this simple logic? If not, please make sure you get up and go to the bathroom before you take a piss at night.
1 Like
The discussion was âCookâ was the invader hence me posting it, go back and look, please do, and to help you the land he discovered was perfect for dumping convicts as being exciled was the ultimate setence in those days, the colonies were lost so it all fitted together, they are more debatng pioints BUT Cook was a voyage of discovery not invasion.
I stated this right at the start, the ignorants think Cook invaded ha ha, deary me. Debating Cook and after âdiscoveryâ (loose term as the Dutch were in the area for a while) should be exactly that debating not taught as a fact, again what I posted, please read, youâll understand it after a couple of goes.
I have to say Bazza, while I have very much enjoyed much of your content on Sotonians, weâre getting into that downward spiral again. No-one will censor you, but few will take you seriously when you shift all your arguments onto other things, whether itâs personal attacks, or simply more complete bollocks, every time the fact well runs dry (and we all know that there has been a drought since the early '90s).
It simply isnât acceptable, or indeed, tenable, to go around self-proclaiming your total victory in this environment. To borrow a trope from Scooby Doo and almost murder it (itâs fine, theyâve got Scrappy Doo on their hands), you might have gotten away with it if not for those meddling voters.
This ainât TSW, and while I acknowledge that the UI does have like functionality, thereâs no culture of using it. Weâve got votes here, and strong participation in the system. I know that you canât necessarily equate popular acclaim with quality - One Direction are a thing, after all.
Attracting downvotes is no bad thing, but it does look a bit rubs if youâre doing that, claiming youâre the most legendary and correct political poster in existence (I paraphrase to enliven and keep people interested), while your in-thread opponents are attracting votes faster than a political opponent promising âfree shit for all, and anyone else who wants someâ.
All of that aside, itâs nice having you here, but my personal opinion is that youâve been a bit OTT, and that you might have got banned by less tolerant moderators on other sites, or given a lot less time by your fellow posters there. Youâve got a lot of people whoâll stick by you and defend you, myself included. Frankly thatâs been getting a lot more difficult for me personally over the last few weeks.
People like you, Bazza. Not everyone, surely - but thatâs the peril of being a Marmite type character, one I fully understand. No-one expects people to be all things to all people, but I think youâve been shown considerably more respect than youâre banging back to people. Thatâs your choice, but you canât call it some fascist left sandal wearing conspiracy when the pool of people that eventually runs of patience inevitably coalesces. Call it causality.
TLDR; stop being a twat.
Originally posted by @pap
I have to say Bazza, while I have very much enjoyed much of your content on Sotonians, weâre getting into that downward spiral again. No-one will censor you, but few will take you seriously when you shift all your arguments onto other things, whether itâs personal attacks, or simply more complete bollocks, every time the fact well runs dry (and we all know that there has been a drought since the early '90s).
It simply isnât acceptable, or indeed, tenable, to go around self-proclaiming your total victory in this environment. To borrow a trope from Scooby Doo and almost murder it (itâs fine, theyâve got Scrappy Doo on their hands), you might have gotten away with it if not for those meddling voters.
This ainât TSW, and while I acknowledge that the UI does have like functionality, thereâs no culture of using it. Weâve got votes here, and strong participation in the system. I know that you canât necessarily equate popular acclaim with quality - One Direction are a thing, after all.
Attracting downvotes is no bad thing, but it does look a bit rubs if youâre doing that, claiming youâre the most legendary and correct political poster in existence (I paraphrase to enliven and keep people interested), while your in-thread opponents are attracting votes faster than a political opponent promising âfree shit for all, and anyone else who wants someâ.|
All of that aside, itâs nice having you here, but my personal opinion is that youâve been a bit OTT, and that you might have got banned by less tolerant moderators on other sites, or given a lot less time by your fellow posters there. Youâve got a lot of people whoâll stick by you and defend you, myself included. Frankly thatâs been getting a lot more difficult for me personally over the last few weeks.
People like you, Bazza. Not everyone, surely - but thatâs the peril of being a Marmite type character, one I fully understand. No-one expects people to be all things to all people, but I think youâve been shown considerably more respect than youâre banging back to people. Thatâs your choice, but you canât call it some fascist left sandal wearing conspiracy when the pool of people that eventually runs of patience inevitably coalesces. Call it causality.
TLDR; stop being a twat.
Personal attacks? Go on I bet there are more personal attacks towards me on this thread alone than I have ever given to all since I have been on here.
This thread is 100% correct as well, donât just read my shite if you wish Iâll post some eastablished historians on the matter?
1 Like
And while we are at it, I find it amusing I start a thread everybody goes on it and moans about my posting ha ha, fucking get your own thread Iâll stay here and laugh at myself.
Interestingly, given the topic is Australia, Barry is like a fucking Boomerang⌠you keep chucking him away,and he keeps coming backâŚlike a bad case of genital warts left behind by âdiscoveringâ, colonising or invading sailors.
Without being a smartarse no one really knows if the boomerang is indigenous to Australia. Gay abandon keeps trying but knows nothing of the place, I suggest he looks a little further for his supposed invasion and starts with the 1st fleet for a âdebatingâ point not a factual one.
Barry
-
Everyone agrees with you that Cook was on a voyage of discovery
-
However, everyone apart from you is able to make the conection that during this period in history, voyages of discovery were not simple botantical or geographical expiditions but for seeking out new lands for colonization, exploitation of resources etcâŚ
-
In those days âcolonizationâ was indeed synonymous with invasion given that they in effect ignored the fact that indigenous people lived there, and simply enslaved or killed, raped and exploited these folk as if it was perfectly acceptable.
-
What the Australian university is attempting is to present this case as is⌠thereby correcting the misconception that discovery at this time was an innocent voyage of 'âdiscoveryâ
-
This is not an exeecise in PC, but an exercise of addressing a part in the history of Australia that is often glossed over and ignored at the expense of the indigenous population that have suffered abuse and prejudice to this dayâŚ
If you still consider this a fair game for your continued âgame of attritionâ - then this saysmore about you than any insult form me every could.
3 Likes
I have a feeling Barry enjoys an online debate 
1 Like
Indeed, its why we are here, but Barry seems to enjoy being a cunt more
It is not attrition/sematics it is fact, the voyage of discovery was not invasion.
Afterwards are debating points and cases, yes Cook opened to door to it, of course he did but the point being taught is very very important, it places him as the invader when he wasnât, he was an explorer on a mission of discovery, like Columbus and Drake before him.
Afterwards are points of view, teaching someone Cook was an invader is incorrect factually and it is as simple as that.
Read this
Originally posted by @areloa-grandee
Originally posted by @TedMaul
I have a feeling Barry enjoys an online debate
Indeed, its why we are here, but Barry seems to enjoy being a cunt more
Iâm only here to post youtube videos in any discussion
Originally posted by @Barry-Sanchez
It is not attrition/sematics it is fact, the voyage of discovery was not invasion.
Afterwards are debating points and cases, yes Cook opened to door to it, of course he did but the point being taught is very very important, if places him as the invader when he wasnât, he was an explorer on a mission of discovery, like Columbus and Drake being him.
Afterwards are points of view, teaching someone Cook was an invader is incorrect factually and it is as simple as that.
Read this
Drake wasnât an explorer. Far from it. He was an Spanish arse kicking privateer. That he âdiscoveredâ things is merely a bye product.
Megellen would have been a better example or Abel Tasman.
Ah yes Drake⌠and Raleigh(boy) ⌠both were fucking pirates⌠seriously Barry, what is this desire of yours to play the fucking clown/village idiot?
Most things in that day and age were, when you discover something it is for the first time, even for Tasman or Magellan.
What has that got to do with anything, disagree with what I have wrote not the person, where did I mention Raleigh?
PS. Good night⌠Enjoy your banter barry, rememebr that if you keep thsi up, you will be debating with yourself⌠which I gues you are used to⌠so to speak
Goodnight Mr Abandon.
Tasman and Megellen went on voyages of discovery. Drake did not. He went to raid the Spanish. Big difference.