Difference between revisions of "Debate:Is the American Occupation of the Hawaiian Islands justified?"
| Line 17: | Line 17: | ||
NO - just as the occupation of North America by a bunch of European immigrants and the bloody suppression of the aboriginal inhabitants cannot be justified! | NO - just as the occupation of North America by a bunch of European immigrants and the bloody suppression of the aboriginal inhabitants cannot be justified! | ||
| − | |||
Revision as of 00:30, March 20, 2007
Affirmative Opinions
What definies the right of one country to a portion of land? While I'm prepared to change my mind-- I am rather uneducated on the subject of hawaii-- I must take the following position: America was wrong to annex Hawaii initialy, but at this point there is nothing we can do to ammend the wrong; we can't exactly kick them out of the union just because we never should have taken over way back in 1898. We have inherited a Hawaii that our great-grandfathers wrongfully annexed. Even so, Hawaian culture has been integrated with American culture; Americans and Hawaians have become American alike; at this point our occupation of hawaii is justified. That is to say: Our occupation of Hawaii, though wrongfully attained by our forebears, is now in the best intrest of all concerned.
--BenjaminS 23:21, 30 January 2007 (EST)
- I kinda intended for this to be a one-time forum-type-thing. Like everyone gives their opinion once. -Working for Him 22:36, 4 February 2007 (EST)
Great! I will assuredly not give mine again.
--BenjaminS 19:23, 5 February 2007 (EST)
Negative Opinions
NO!!! We never had any right to Hawaii the Americans were there as missionaries bbut their children turned into greedy businessmen who stole Hawaii from under Queen Liliuokalani's nose! -Working for Him 22:49, 30 January 2007 (EST)
NO - just as the occupation of North America by a bunch of European immigrants and the bloody suppression of the aboriginal inhabitants cannot be justified!