To: elmatador who wrote (24118 ) 9/2/2001 5:51:47 AM From: Maurice Winn Respond to of 29986 ElM, that's a superficial view. In fact, many of the Maoris liked the British coming because they brought lots of goodies and prospects for friendly tribes. For example, a tribe could swap a bunch of no good land for a dozen muskets. With the muskets, they could go and get a LOT more land from neighbouring tribes, not to mention a bunch of women. So it was a good deal. They could also escape the nasty clutches of the tribe and get a good income working in town for the British industrialists who brought capital and technology. That was a heck of a lot more attractive than running around in the bush, bare bum, waiting to be ordered to kill or be killed in war with neighbouring tribes. The idyllic fantasy of happy little bush babies makes good movies, but life was all too often short, brutal and miserable in the pre-Colonial days. It was a heck of a time in winter. Actually, it wasn't all that great for anyone, including the British settlers. In those days, the British brought the capital and knowledge and had lots of value to trade. Modern refugees entering an absurdly generous welfare state are a net loss to the locals. <Consider yourself lucky that there are no Attila 'The Hun' nowadays! > Actually, there are. We are colonizing the world right now. Japan figured it out decades ago. Me too. It's much easy to defeat people with a chequebook than a gun. The conquered actually choose to join up rather than offering resistance. I'm taking over the USA, for example, and China by proxy [QUALCOMM is investing in China]. But in a peculiar paradox, it's the USA taking over me by getting me to invest. Who is taking over whom? Maybe it's more like a marriage and CDMA is the baby. As long as it's voluntary, it seems to work okay. Mqurice