|
Post by nemapravdebreee on Mar 30, 2008 14:16:54 GMT -5
Texas , and other southern states were annexed by the US. Actually YOU"RE WRONG on this case. Texas people WON its independence from MEXICO in 1837 from Santa Ana and existed as an Independent Republic for many years prior to its annexation by the US, and after it won the war with MEXICO when it was declared in 1945 by Santa Ana !!! OriginsIn 1837, the Republic of Texas, having just won its independence from Mexico, voted to consent to its annexation by the U.S. Initially, when the Texas minister (ambassador) in Washington, D.C., proposed annexation to the administration of Martin Van Buren in August 1837, the request was refused since the administration anticipated that it would lead to war with Mexico. Texas withdrew the annexation offer in 1838, and chose to exist as an independent nation, recognized by the United States, United Kingdom, France and Holland. In 1843, Britain opposed annexation, but President John Tyler decided to support annexation. Despite the fact that Mexican dictator Antonio López de Santa Anna warned that annexation would be "equivalent to a declaration of war," Tyler signed the treaty of annexation with Texas in April 1844. The Senate overwhelmingly rejected it on June 8: 35 to 16. The Constitution requires a two-thirds majority vote in the Senate to confirm a treaty. James Polk, a strong supporter of territorial expansion, won the Presidency in November 1844. Tyler, knowing the Senate would not ratify the treaty, changed course and had his allies in Congress submit the annexation bill as a joint resolution in December. With President-elect Polk's quiet support, Congress approved annexation on 28 February 1845. The vote in the Senate was 27 to 25. Tyler approved the Joint Resolution, which called for annexation of Texas to be concluded by the end of December 1845, on March 1. However, as this was done via a Joint Resolution of Congress, some scholars believe it is not legal under international law This has led to questions about the Legal status of Texas. Consent and ratificationAfter extensive negotiation by the American chargé d'affaires to Texas, Andrew Jackson Donelson, nephew of former president Andrew Jackson, Republic of Texas President Anson Jones, former Texas president Sam Houston, and the Texas congress consented to the annexation. Texas ratified the Treaty on July 4. On 29 December 1845, President Polk approved Texas's admission to the Union as a state. A factor in the Texas annexation discussions in the United States was the realization of the northern states that there would be two new slave state Senators when Texas was admitted. Although Mexico had outlawed slavery completely years prior to Texas independence, slavery was allowed to continue in Mexican Texas, and continued to exist in Texas during its years as an independent Republic. Mexico broke off diplomatic relations with the U.S. in 1845 over the issue, which eventually led to the Mexican-American war the following year. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo ended the war when the U.S. ratified the treaty on March 10, 1848. The treaty allowed the U.S. to purchase California and other areas from Mexico on the condition that Americans would honor Mexican culture and values. The annexation of Texas was highly controversial amongst the states and contributed to widening American sectionalism leading up to the Civil War. On February 19, 1846, a ceremony was held to mark the official transfer of authority, and Texas President Anson Jones proclaimed: "The final act in this great drama is now performed. The Republic of Texas is no more." en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Texas_AnnexationI can do that too! Slavery began in earnest when Anglo-American settlers from the Southeastern United States crossed the Mississippi River. While the Spanish colonists did possess a few slaves, they were never successful in the creation of a sustainable agricultural economy. However, the question of slavery became a source of contention between the Anglo-American settlers and Spanish governors. Just as they feared the rise of the Anglo-American population in Texas, the governors and their superiors in Mexico City also grew distasteful towards the institution of slavery for various reasons. The Guerrero decree of 1829 conditionally abolished slavery throughout Mexican territories, further irritating relations between the two ethnicities. On April 6, 1830, Mexican president Anastasio Bustamante ordered Texas to comply with the emancipation proclamation or face military intervention. Incidents between locals and the Mexican revenue forts at Anahuac and Velasco caused minor confrontations between Texian militia and Mexican troops. In late June, a second Anahuac Disturbance ejected Mexican troops. The number of immigrants entering Texas quickly escalated. Santa Anna believed that the influx of immigrants to Texas was part of a plot by the U.S. to take over the region. Texas was annexed to the United States in 1845. After annexation, more elaborate restrictions were placed on free Negroes, such as punishments similar to those of slaves rather than free men. By 1850, the slave population in Texas had increased to 58,161, and was an estimated 182,566 in 1860. The Mexican-American War was an armed military conflict between the United States and Mexico from 1846 to 1848 in the wake of the 1845 U.S. annexation of Texas. Mexico did not recognize the secession and subsequent military victory by Texas in 1836; it considered Texas a rebel province. In the United States, the war was a partisan issue, with most Whigs opposing it and most southern Democrats, animated by a popular belief in the Manifest Destiny, supporting it. In Mexico, the war was considered a matter of national pride. Seeking to better control the border region of Texas, which had few settlers, the Mexican government permitted a few hundred U.S. families to settle the area. This, however, led to settlement of Texas on a scale unanticipated by the Mexican government, as its inability to control the border allowed thousands more Americans to settle than had been agreed upon. English-speaking settlers quickly formed a majority in Texas. In the years after 1836, Texas consolidated its position as an independent republic by establishing diplomatic ties with Britain, France, and the United States. Mexico claimed the Nueces River — about 150 miles (240 km) north of the Rio Grande — as its border with Texas; the United States claimed the Rio Grande as the boundary, citing the 1836 Treaty of Velasco. Mexico, however, never ratified this treaty. Regardless, the United States used the treaty to advance its cause. In 1846, after Texas was admitted into the Union, Polk sent militia under General Zachary Taylor to the Rio Grande to protect Texas. Taylor ignored Mexican demands to withdraw to the Nueces. On April 24, 1846, a 2,000-strong Mexican cavalry detachment attacked a 63-man U.S. patrol that had been sent into the contested territory north of the Rio Grande and south of the Nueces River. The Mexican cavalry succeeded in routing the patrol, killing 11 U.S. soldiers in what later became known as the Thornton Affair after the slain U.S. officer who was in command. By then, Polk had received word of the Thornton Affair. This, added to the Mexican government's rejection of Slidell, Polk believed, constituted a casus belli. His message to Congress on May 11, 1846 stated that Mexico had "invaded our territory and shed American blood upon the American soil." A joint session of Congress approved the declaration of war, with southern Democrats in strong support because they saw the annexation of Mexico as an opportunity to increase the number of slave states. The United States declared war on Mexico on May 13, 1846. The Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo, signed on February 2, 1848 by American diplomat Nicholas Trist, ended the war and gave the U.S. undisputed control of Texas, established the U.S.-Mexican border of the Rio Grande River, and ceded to the United States the present-day states of California, Nevada, Utah, and parts of Colorado, Arizona, New Mexico, and Wyoming. In return, Mexico received US $15,000,000, — less than half the amount the U.S. had attempted to offer Mexico for the land before the opening of hostilities. Mexico lost more than 500,000 square miles (about 1,300,000 km²) of land, about 40% of its territory.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Mar 30, 2008 16:49:55 GMT -5
At least America is honest about it doesn't say "California is the heart of the United States"
Their name itself "The United States of America" implies that its not one state, but a union of many different ones.
|
|
|
Post by nemapravdebreee on Mar 30, 2008 21:35:27 GMT -5
If its not important to them then why did they go to war during their Civil War when the Confederate States split from the "United States of America." Seems only the Americans can fight to maintain their territorial integrity. Now stfu, I'm tired of your idiocy you hypocrite.
|
|
|
Post by nemapravdebreee on Mar 30, 2008 21:37:02 GMT -5
What do you think would happen today if Latino's left the union and declared independence? You don't think the Americans would fight? Even the Canadians did not rule out military intervention to drag Quebec back in to confederation during the Quebec crisis.
|
|
|
Post by terroreign on Mar 30, 2008 21:53:33 GMT -5
You can't compare california, which is still a very big mix of ethnic groups, to kosovo, which is basically 98% albanian
Find me a state that is 98% mexican, and I will support your case.
|
|
Fender
Commanding Moderator
Hardarse
Posts: 2,653
|
Post by Fender on Mar 30, 2008 22:03:30 GMT -5
At least America is honest about it doesn't say "California is the heart of the United States" Their name itself "The United States of America" implies that its not one state, but a union of many different ones. There is nothing honest in stealing territory.
|
|
Anthologic
Amicus
"Lord of all Reality"
Ha!
Posts: 1,237
|
Post by Anthologic on Mar 31, 2008 0:34:58 GMT -5
You can't compare california, which is still a very big mix of ethnic groups, to kosovo, which is basically 98% albanian Find me a state that is 98% mexican, and I will support your case. Wow, considering the borders of today's Kosovo were artificially made in 1945, you can actually compare it to drawing at the bottom tip of Texas, and seeing if it has an Mexican majority. Which it does. That's comparable.
|
|
Anthologic
Amicus
"Lord of all Reality"
Ha!
Posts: 1,237
|
Post by Anthologic on Mar 31, 2008 0:45:12 GMT -5
|
|
SuperAlbanian
Amicus
King of Gays
20%
CANARIS IS THE REAL KING OF GAYS! OH WAIT! HES THE QUEEN OF GAYS!!!!
Posts: 1,283
|
Post by SuperAlbanian on Mar 31, 2008 4:49:04 GMT -5
Interesting.... Don't forget Tibet either.... Tibet should follow Kosovo's footpath as it has gone through vast amount of ethnic cleansing and violence in its history too.
|
|
|
Post by Novus Dis on Mar 31, 2008 7:08:19 GMT -5
Their name itself "The United States of America" implies that its not one state, but a union of many different ones. An Albanian cannot comprehend what Kosovo means to Serbs. To you it is just land. To us it embodies the soul of every Serb and Serbia itself.
|
|
|
Post by Pejoni on Mar 31, 2008 7:12:41 GMT -5
Their name itself "The United States of America" implies that its not one state, but a union of many different ones. An Albanian cannot comprehend what Kosovo means to Serbs. To you it is just land. To us it embodies the soul of every Serb and Serbia itself. You dont destroy a place you call your soul, nor its citizens.
|
|
|
Post by c0gnate on Mar 31, 2008 8:54:20 GMT -5
Give it a rest, boys. It's not that America is not comprised of stolen land. It is. And it's not that there are no large Hispanic (Mexican, Salvadoran, Guatemalan, Cuban, Peruvian, etc) populations here. There are. But few of them --if any-- want to secede from the United States. Immigrants, some legal, some illegal are coming in droves from these Hispanic countries looking for a better life. The last thing they want is to return California, Arizona, New Mexico, Texas and Florida to Mexico or Spain.
|
|
|
Post by albaniansoul on Mar 31, 2008 12:50:45 GMT -5
At least America is honest about it doesn't say "California is the heart of the United States" Their name itself "The United States of America" implies that its not one state, but a union of many different ones. There is nothing honest in stealing territory. The irony is breathtaking.
|
|
|
Post by ilirdardani on Mar 31, 2008 13:32:47 GMT -5
Their name itself "The United States of America" implies that its not one state, but a union of many different ones. An Albanian cannot comprehend what Kosovo means to Serbs. To you it is just land. To us it embodies the soul of every Serb and Serbia itself. You got it wrong my friend. To you its nothing but land. Remember that you came to the Balkans, you're not from around there, so for you its only land. As for us Dardanians, its the soul of each and every one of us, we've been here for thousands of years, and we have suffered numerous occupation, and yet at the end came up on top. If you want the soul that you've lost, go back to where you came from.
|
|
|
Post by Banatski on Mar 31, 2008 14:49:27 GMT -5
^^ Do you really have nothing excpet that fake illyrian thoery to justify the theft of our land? Is this what majority of Albanians believe? If so, you guys are totally deluded.
|
|
|
Post by ilirdardani on Mar 31, 2008 15:10:26 GMT -5
Don't concentrate on that dude, concentrate on the fact that your population came from Asia, and are a "SLAVIC" population, therefore you're cousins to the Russians and we know damn right that the Russians are not from the Balkans.
Your history shows that you came to the Balkans, you never existed on the Balkan history, until the 6th century on, so how you guys make up stories about Kosovo being your soul, is amazing.
You left your soul in Asia, where your cousins (or brothers if you may) live to this day. (the russians)
|
|
|
Post by vinjak on Mar 31, 2008 16:23:18 GMT -5
^^^^^
That is really a non argument Serbs did not arrive yesterday or a week ago nor a month ago and certainly not 5,10,15,20 etc years ago.
The argument you present means zero nor can it be ever considered on the basis you present.
Realistikly The issue is that we cannot now or ever live in the same state too much has happened for that to be ever realized. The question is what to do with Kosovo ? we have a valid claim as do you, my oppinion is this, If the World persists in Kosovo as a whole being Albanian it will be a frozen conflict with no end, and any opurtunity that may arrise through world events etc will be capitalised on by Serbia and its allies as a green light to attempt to take it back. What we need is a realistic solution and that is partition not only would that create some sort of peace between us but in time would lead to healing and probably a recognition by Serbia. You guys can laugh and scoff all you like about Serbias recognition but it is needed as the lobbying has divided the world and if Serbia recognised independence the rest of the world would also (by rest of the world I mean India, China, Russia,spain and all the others that will not recognize)
|
|
|
Post by Banatski on Mar 31, 2008 16:36:18 GMT -5
Don't concentrate on that dude, concentrate on the fact that your population came from Asia, and are a "SLAVIC" population, therefore you're cousins to the Russians and we know d*mn right that the Russians are not from the Balkans. Your history shows that you came to the Balkans, you never existed on the Balkan history, until the 6th century on, so how you guys make up stories about Kosovo being your soul, is amazing. You left your soul in Asia, where your cousins (or brothers if you may) live to this day. (the russians) Huh, what? At least we know where we come from (of course, if you accept slavic migration theory as valid). You have no idea where you came from, so you claim "illyrian" origin which is an utter nonsense. You are using illyrian theory just to feel more important than you really are and to persuade your people that you are doing a right thing (stealing territories). There is no more politically deluded nation than Albanians in that sense. Besides, we didn't come from Asia but from eastern Germany and western Poland. If you would feel better that we came from Asia then believe in that.
|
|
|
Post by Banatski on Mar 31, 2008 16:41:44 GMT -5
What we need is a realistic solution and that is partition not only would that create some sort of peace between us but in time would lead to healing and probably a recognition by Serbia. Hmmm.. Are you serious? By accepting a partition we are practically legalizing the theft of our land and accepting all the lies being told as truth.
|
|
|
Post by ilirdardani on Mar 31, 2008 17:27:50 GMT -5
Of course, Kosovos north for Presevo Valley. Simple as that.
But I know the Serbian govt would not agree, so partition is a no no for now, unless the new govt is willing to let Presevo Valley go, which of course was always within Kosovo.
|
|