Originally posted by Nashwan
So it was an Arab possesion for 603 years before being conquered.
Gribaltar also belonged to the Moors, from 711 to 1462, with a short break in the 14th century.
The Spanish held it from 1472 to 1713, or 241 years, compared to the 700 years previously it had been an Arab possesion.
The British have held it from 1713 to 2002, a period of 289 years .
So, Cetua is Spanish because the Arabs only held it for 603 years, but Gribraltar is Spanish because they held it for 241 years, compared to the previous 700 years for the Arabs, and subsequent 289 years for the British?
Sir,
You are absolutely out of focus, and this post is full of false hipothesys.
It's absurd to trow a line when there is no line to throw. Ceuta has been under Spanish influence (meaning by that the people living in Spanish Peninsula) since the roman empire was expelled from there by the barbarians. And the point is not why it is Spanish. It's obvious why. The point is why it shoud be Moroccan.
You must take some serious Spanish History lessons, for the whole historic substrate (in both cases, Gibraltar and Ceuta) evades you.
Gibraltar case is exactly the same as Japanese Islands taken by the Soviets in 1945. Nothing more, nothing less.
You have a treaty that backs that. But that's the only entitlement assisting Great Britain to claim that land as theirs. I'm not arguing with you wether they have right or not to have them nowadays, you are obviously not the subtlest and/or most intelligent person to treat this, and me neither. I just want to stress that putting Ceuta and Gibraltar in the same bag is absolutely, totally, senseless. This sole fact is enough to call you ignorant.
But yet you come with the Basque point...
Apart from disgusting and tasteless, is like standing up with your hand raised, yelling "here, here, I have no clue about contemporary history, but I'm ready to make whatever assertion whatever the feelings I hurt, just for the sake of my argument". And, let me tell you, you are right about Basques having no right to self determination. You know, if you were a Basque and express your points of view, and they happen to be that you want to be integrated in Spain, most likely you receive a bullet in your head, or a bomb under your car. If you were a Basque, and your town's citizen elects you as a Major, and you are not fitting the terrorist's point of view, you either resign or die....perfect democratic praxis, pristine freedom of speech, freedom of choices...
Sir, you have not the slightest idea of what you are talking about. Quit reading The Sun. Go back to History Classes, then read some contemporary, then form yourself an opinion. When you have that opinion formed, go learn some manners. And when you have some manners, have someone to theach you something about sensibility and common sense.
Insinuations like yours enrage me. When anybody talk so lightly over the blood of murdered innocent people I feel enraged. When anybody talk so lightly over the blood of people (ordinary heroes) dying in defense of my and, I hope, yours ideals, It makes me sick.
Personally, I'm not so concerned about Gibraltar being british or spanish as to it being a drug smugglers paradise, and money laundry factory. Yeah, british people must be really proud about Gibraltar economy & moral values. But I would never use such a depiseable argument to support my point.
I hope the rest would accept my appologies for the tone of this post but, Sir, your insinuation about Basque's lack of freedom is repugnant and an insult to any person who loves freedom. I do, and I feel insulted. So you can have all your arguments, all your points, and all your claims and take them wherever you want, or leave them here. I'm done with this tread and definitely I'm done with you unless I read your appology.
Sincerely,
