[Arctic_Menace]

Wullu Wullu:

grainfedprairieboy grainfedprairieboy:

The cost to the British for the 13 colonies pales in comparison to the current cost to Albertans for the Maritimes and Queerbec!

Tell ya what boy. When Alberta contributes the same percentage of its population to military service as does Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Quebec we can talk. Loose those 5 provinces from the mix and we have about 12000 folks in uniform instead of 62,000. We all could have gone west and got jobs in your wonderous oil patch but decided on service instead.

My dad was born in Landis, Sask. and attitudes like yours used to piss him off to no end. He could remember going down to the local rail siding to get apples, potatoes and dried fish that were sent west for FREE from the very people you seem to loath, so that the folks in the prairies would not starve to death during the Dirty 30's. Guess we should have let em starve eh? Sorry not the Maritime way.

[Jaime_Souviens]

I think the question has to be, what if the United States never separated, because if it didn't do it in 1776, it would have done it eventually.

If the thirteen colonies remained in the Empire, it would have left slavery as well.

You could say that when Britian made slavery ilegal, that would have also been true for American Imperial possessions. ---But maybe the fact of Southern slavery would have stopped Britian from outlawing it.

Or, there would have been a war over that again anyway.

[ShepherdsDog]

Britain didn't require slavery because the majority of their cotton was purchased from the southern slave states. Then again, the labourers on plantations in British controlled territories weren't any better off than most slaves. African and Asian subjects of the Crown didn't gain many civil liberties until the mid 20th century, so how free were they really?

[Nietzshe]

grainfedprairieboy grainfedprairieboy:

The cost to the British for the 13 colonies pales in comparison to the current cost to Albertans for the Maritimes and Queerbec!

If you do not like paying your share, there's the door. Don't let it hit you on the way out of Canada. Thank you. I knew we Ontarians should never have supported Alberta all those years. We should have left the bitches high and dry.

[becks10]

Ever seen the episode of Sliders where the americans lost the war of independence, and the instead of the United States of America there was the British States of Ameirca.....there u have it LoL.

[twister]

Nietzshe Nietzshe:

twister twister:

had the british repealed thier taxes and gave the money back to the colonies this would had made it possible for other things....however, many things would have changed but somethings would have been the same... there still would have been a drive West.. there still would have been displacement of the first nations people. Still believe there would have to be two seperate countries Canada and America.

The British would never have repealed their taxes. The cost of maintaining their Empire was just too high. Had the Thirteen Colonies not revolted it is conceivable that the British would have united the colonies of Upper and Lower Canada with those of the Thirteen Colonies. Had this happened the new combined territory would have eventually been granted its own independence free of war just as Canada did in 1867. This would have created a monstrosity of a nation. It is my estimation this new nation would have been called Canada or just America. This would have become a superpower the likes of which the world has never seen. The availability of resources would have rendered this new nation utterly indestructible. The wealth of Great Britain during the period up to the eventual independence of this new united super-state would have been inestimable. As a result, Britain would have been far too strong for the Germans to have ever challenged. France would have been history, thankfully.

The key word was "HAD" the British repealed thier taxes, they never would have done that there is no doubt about that. I still believe though at some point things would have taken a different turn perhaps the Louisiana Purchase didn't happen or French colonies pulled out of upper Canada to set up colonies in the Southern US who knows but I am quite cetain that whatever would have happened we would not be one single entity America or Canada but rather several fractionalized countries with defined border such as europe is. Dreams of Cascadia California to Alaska including part of Yukon, Alberta and several western states come into view. Sigh...

[ShepherdsDog]

twister twister:

Nietzshe Nietzshe:

twister twister:

had the british repealed thier taxes and gave the money back to the colonies this would had made it possible for other things....however, many things would have changed but somethings would have been the same... there still would have been a drive West.. there still would have been displacement of the first nations people. Still believe there would have to be two seperate countries Canada and America.

The British would never have repealed their taxes. The cost of maintaining their Empire was just too high. Had the Thirteen Colonies not revolted it is conceivable that the British would have united the colonies of Upper and Lower Canada with those of the Thirteen Colonies. Had this happened the new combined territory would have eventually been granted its own independence free of war just as Canada did in 1867. This would have created a monstrosity of a nation. It is my estimation this new nation would have been called Canada or just America. This would have become a superpower the likes of which the world has never seen. The availability of resources would have rendered this new nation utterly indestructible. The wealth of Great Britain during the period up to the eventual independence of this new united super-state would have been inestimable. As a result, Britain would have been far too strong for the Germans to have ever challenged. France would have been history, thankfully.

The key word was "HAD" the British repealed thier taxes, they never would have done that there is no doubt about that. I still believe though at some point things would have taken a different turn perhaps the Louisiana Purchase didn't happen or French colonies pulled out of upper Canada to set up colonies in the Southern US who knows but I am quite cetain that whatever would have happened we would not be one single entity America or Canada but rather several fractionalized countries with defined border such as europe is. Dreams of Cascadia California to Alaska including part of Yukon, Alberta and several western states come into view. Sigh...

Adam Smith himself advocated Britain turning the American colonies free because the cost of protecting and administering them was too high. The taxes wouldn't have been repealed by parliament because what government does that once the taxes have been put in place?

[Nietzshe]

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

grainfedprairieboy grainfedprairieboy:

8O

When exactly did it change from lebensraum (living space), racial purity and national prerogative that historians overwhelmingly subscribe to.......to the destruction of the US?

lol. By the destruction of the US, I meant by Hitler following his goals of racial purity and such. And since America was the only Superpower with more power then Germany at the time.

If I'm incorect, please inform me.

US military power was never greater than that of the Nazis until near the end of the war thanks to the destruction of much of Hitler's forces. Where Hitler's forces were constantly fighting and watching their factories be destroyed the US military growth was unhindered thanks to their cowardice in entering the war. In no circumstance did Hitler ever consider the USA as part of his plan. The only thing that ever concerned Hitler was the supplies they were sending to his enemies. Nothing more. Once he declared war on the USA his only concern was that nation's growing military power thanks to the fact it was virtually untouchable. It was after all protected by two huge barriers known as the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans. Hitler also counted on American cowardice and he was right to do so at the beginning. Problem is, the USA's military-industrial output far outstripped that of even Hitler's wildest dreams. This he had not counted on.

During Hitler's rise to power, the USA never even entered his mind. To Germans of the day, the USA were nobodies.

[Nietzshe]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Mr_Canada Mr_Canada:

Hmm...

I think our countries would have happened, but with far different values and goals.

I think they would become there own countries because the British would find it to hard to hold up British North America. They would most likely be made Far later. Probably Canada and America would both become indepentant countries near the sane time. Both Canada and America would still be in the Monarchy.

The entire world would be different though. Hitler only wanted to destroy the United States. If he didn't, what would he have done then? By doing that, he got himself into a war with 3 superpowers. (The UK, USSR and USA)

And what of the USSR? Would we all be communists today?

There is to much that would change, America has been here for 230 years.

Countries would have also formed differently aswell.But maybe not. Mexico would still have Texas and such, All the American lands America conquared would still most likely be with there respective owners. Like Alaska.

Canada..... I'm not sure about the French. They would have, Most likely, have been assimilated in today's type of world.

There are just so many possibilities on what could have happened....

What is it with some people and their comic book history. Had the American Revolt failed, North America would likely have formed a loose confederation, much like the pre Confederation Canada. Areas with higher population densities would have been granted self governing provincial status and perhaps even an eventual seperate dominion status. Other areas, with lower population densities, would have only been granted territorial status.

The Anglo Saxon thirst for new frontiers would have ensured eventual conflict with Mexico in the push westward and Russia couldn't afford to administer its Noth American territories. While different than it is today, I can't see North America ever having been ruled as one political entity, even if they had remained loyal to the Crown.

Uh, you do understand if they were loyal to the Crown and therefore part of the British Empire, they would in fact have been ruled as one entity or do you fail to understand the simple concept of imperialism??

[ShepherdsDog]

I understand that you're simple minded if you believe that the Empire was an authortitarian state ruled by one man. It wasn't that or an oligarchy. Self government was the natural evolution of the British system. Now go back to your toy soldiers and fanatsies.

[Nietzshe]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Britain didn't require slavery because the majority of their cotton was purchased from the southern slave states. Then again, the labourers on plantations in British controlled territories weren't any better off than most slaves. African and Asian subjects of the Crown didn't gain many civil liberties until the mid 20th century, so how free were they really?

How free were they really? Why they were free to leave their jobs and work elsewhere. They were not forced to work at gunpoint. Wonderful. Another socialist do-gooder who has not a clue. These labourers were much better off than slaves. Do not utter such ridiculous remarks. The slaves were called slaves because that is exactly what they were. Their every movement was watched. They endured harsh punishment. There were unpaid. How does a labourer compare with any of this? A labourer, if unhappy with his/her conditions, could simply walk away. Christ on a stick! Does not anyone think before they post on here?

[Nietzshe]

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

I understand that you're simple minded if you believe that the Empire was an authortitarian state ruled by one man. It wasn't that or an oligarchy. Self government was the natural evolution of the British system. Now go back to your toy soldiers and fanatsies.

The Empire was ruled from the seat of London. That is why it was called an Empire. The territories under British rule had Governors who reported back to the ruling government in London. It most certainly was an authoritarian state. All Empires are. Why else would they be called Empires? The authority in this case being the British government. Orders made up in London were carried out throughout the Empire. This is authoritarianism.

[Mustang1]

Nietzshe Nietzshe:

ShepherdsDog ShepherdsDog:

Britain didn't require slavery because the majority of their cotton was purchased from the southern slave states. Then again, the labourers on plantations in British controlled territories weren't any better off than most slaves. African and Asian subjects of the Crown didn't gain many civil liberties until the mid 20th century, so how free were they really?

How free were they really? Why they were free to leave their jobs and work elsewhere. They were not forced to work at gunpoint. Wonderful. Another socialist do-gooder who has not a clue. These labourers were much better off than slaves. Do not utter such ridiculous remarks. The slaves were called slaves because that is exactly what they were. Their every movement was watched. They endured harsh punishment. There were unpaid. How does a labourer compare with any of this? A labourer, if unhappy with his/her conditions, could simply walk away. Christ on a stick! Does not anyone think before they post on here?

Brilliant, Captain Retardo – look up “indentured servants” and then apologize to Shep for being such an idiot. Also, you may want to investigate the plight of the Irish and the concepts of absentee land ownership and serfdom.

[grainfedprairieboy]

Wullu Wullu:

Tell ya what boy. When Alberta contributes the same percentage of its population to military service as does Newfoundland, Nova Scotia, New Brunswick, Prince Edward Island and Quebec we can talk.

As a former solider and current reservist I can certainly verify that the majority of Maritimers are there not out of patriotic duty but economic happenstance. This is not to take away from their service. Further, the military as a last resort to impoverishment is hardly something to boast about. On a final note, based on empirical data, a larger per capita representation of reservists come from Alberta and BC.

Wullu Wullu:

My dad was born in Landis, Sask. and attitudes like yours used to piss him off to no end.

I know the area well and they are far more concerned with being jailed for selling grain to anyone other then the feds, native issues and the gun registry. By the way, if your from Landis you have to be a Johnson, Muton or Miller.

Wullu Wullu:

He could remember going down to the local rail siding to get apples, potatoes and dried fish that were sent west for FREE from the very people you seem to loath,

I love the Maritimers. That’s why I want to give them a hand up instead of a handout.

Wullu Wullu:

so that the folks in the prairies would not starve to death during the Dirty 30's. Guess we should have let em starve eh? Sorry not the Maritime way.

The contributions had a negligible impact on the overall welfare of the people at the time but were certainly a nice gesture. Three-four generations later it is time to move on. You hold onto history like a Serb.

The depression and drought impacted Alberta and Saskatchewan far more than any other province. 1/3 of all farms were abandoned and only the hardiest stayed. It is true that food was donated from good folk in the Maritimes the same as farmers groups in the 80s sent pancake mix and flour to Maritimers to reciprocate.

[ShepherdsDog]

Sneezy St. Luci likely thinks that indentured servitude meant they wore false teeth. What a dumbshit.