How our country became a colonized to the France ?

paris_vientiane · Guru

How our country became a colonized to the France ?

Date: Apr 5, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

chiip wrote:

The french has given a new style of structure to Laos: hierarchy in the lao administration, general law, education, health care, public work to laos; without french we would be more backward than we actually are . French were not able to settle industry or semi industry in laos : the road having access to sea port didn't exist, transportation was zero at that time. but what the french took from laos ? it is another question... but without french, be sure that laos wouldn't be like today, laos with its writing and culture would be erased from the world map and vientiane wouldn't be the capital of laos but one of northeaster province of Thailand... Why the french didn't take all the lao territory ? because the number of french troop was too small to occupy such a big area as laos was at that time, the Mekong river was an another big obtacle for them too and in the other hand wasfear of offending and to please to the british who were powerful colonialist who occupied china and burma and had big influence on thailand's policy, so taking only the left side of the mekong river suited them more...
It was the british who brought poppy from the south of america continent to grow in china and got huge amount of money from it as chineses were fond of smoking opium were a huge number of customers for britanic trade. The trade of drug was not prohibited at that time...Yeah ! white people or europeans are very very nice ...how many pains they inflicted to asian and african people...

Thanks god!!! I'm so lucky that I'm not Laos. I'm so lucky that French took only the Left Side of the River

thank God Lao is not keeka to Thai like Esarn.

Date: Apr 5, 2010

chiip wrote:

The french has given a new style of structure to Laos: hierarchy in the lao administration, general law, education, health care, public work to laos; without french we would be more backward than we actually are . French were not able to settle industry or semi industry in laos : the road having access to sea port didn't exist, transportation was zero at that time. but what the french took from laos ? it is another question... but without french, be sure that laos wouldn't be like today, laos with its writing and culture would be erased from the world map and vientiane wouldn't be the capital of laos but one of northeaster province of Thailand... Why the french didn't take all the lao territory ? because the number of french troop was too small to occupy such a big area as laos was at that time, the Mekong river was an another big obtacle for them too and in the other hand wasfear of offending and to please to the british who were powerful colonialist who occupied china and burma and had big influence on thailand's policy, so taking only the left side of the mekong river suited them more...
It was the british who brought poppy from the south of america continent to grow in china and got huge amount of money from it as chineses were fond of smoking opium were a huge number of customers for britanic trade. The trade of drug was not prohibited at that time...Yeah ! white people or europeans are very very nice ...how many pains they inflicted to asian and african people...

Thanks god!!! I'm so lucky that I'm not Laos. I'm so lucky that French took only the Left Side of the River

chiip · Guru

The french has given a new style of structure to Laos: hierarchy in the lao administration, general law, education, health care, public work to laos; without french we would be more backward than we actually are . French were not able to settle industry or semi industry in laos : the road having access to sea port didn't exist, transportation was zero at that time. but what the french took from laos ? it is another question... but without french, be sure that laos wouldn't be like today, laos with its writing and culture would be erased from the world map and vientiane wouldn't be the capital of laos but one of northeaster province of Thailand... Why the french didn't take all the lao territory ? because the number of french troop was too small to occupy such a big area as laos was at that time, the Mekong river was an another big obtacle for them too and in the other hand wasfear of offending and to please to the british who were powerful colonialist who occupied china and burma and had big influence on thailand's policy, so taking only the left side of the mekong river suited them more...
It was the british who brought poppy from the south of america continent to grow in china and got huge amount of money from it as chineses were fond of smoking opium were a huge number of customers for britanic trade. The trade of drug was not prohibited at that time...Yeah ! white people or europeans are very very nice ...how many pains they inflicted to asian and african people...

Date: Apr 4, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Payu wrote:

Esarn is still slaving by Thai and now they're become Thai, Esarn has more developed than Lao PDR.

lao never have peace until now. how you expect to develop if lao always have war and fight? you think if Thai have war like Lao, you think Thai will develop to? Think before you talk.

That's how the different of our ancestor and their ancestor did the different which reflexed to today.

Think before you talk dude!

Why we our ancestor like to make wars and fight?

Do you think only lao people fight and have war? don't be ignorant.

Date: Apr 4, 2010

Payu wrote:

Esarn is still slaving by Thai and now they're become Thai, Esarn has more developed than Lao PDR.

Who said Esan people still being slave for Thai? Esan people is Thai and they have right same as normal Thai.

Money and education is the most important. Being a housekeeper, cleaner and driver in the wealthy family and they got monthly pay..free food, free accommodation and so on... This we called a slave?

Open your eyes, dude! There is no slaving in Thailand since King Rama V or over 120 years ago!

Date: Apr 4, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

Payu wrote:

Esarn is still slaving by Thai and now they're become Thai, Esarn has more developed than Lao PDR.

lao never have peace until now. how you expect to develop if lao always have war and fight? you think if Thai have war like Lao, you think Thai will develop to? Think before you talk.

That's how the different of our ancestor and their ancestor did the different which reflexed to today.

Think before you talk dude!

Why we our ancestor like to make wars and fight?

Date: Apr 4, 2010

Payu wrote:

Esarn is still slaving by Thai and now they're become Thai, Esarn has more developed than Lao PDR.

lao never have peace until now. how you expect to develop if lao always have war and fight? you think if Thai have war like Lao, you think Thai will develop to? Think before you talk.

Payu · Member

Esarn is still slaving by Thai and now they're become Thai, Esarn has more developed than Lao PDR.

Date: Apr 4, 2010

What is the point to these senseless arguments? The point to history is not to dwell the on the right or wrong of anybody but to understand the causes of past actions so that conflict and cruelty can be avoided in the future. The majority of today's French people are not the same as those of 100 years ago. The same can also be said for the majority of Burmeses, Thais, Vietnameses or Cambodians. Aseans, Asians and people of the world should not be held captive by history because if we keep holding to the old gudges, prejudice, and rivalry of the past then nation states are doom to endless cycle violence that continuing to plague certain corners of the world.

Date: Apr 4, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

????

for the ones who can read french, you can find many answer about how Laos became french on this website (i just discovered it):

http://www.pavie.culture.fr

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Friday 2nd of April 2010 01:24:19 PM

if you think french the best why germany kick french ass in ww2 if american don't came to help your peoples what happen to french.

Do you have any other stupid comment like this, suggesting that i wrote things I didn't wrote (French "the best"... moreover, what does that mean?), and comparing situations that are so different? Do you know how many million of people germans killed (even children, women..) during WWII, just because they hate them. Do you know how much investment Germany did secretly before the war to prepare the invasion of many peacefull countries (Let me remind you that Laos was not in "peace" before french arrived)? Do you know that WWII was 50 years after the colonisation of Laos by France and that many things changed in the world during those 50 years?

You are French so you have your own point of view. But French shouldn't come to take over and control other country like that. Right or Wrong?

if french did not take over lao, lao will still be keeka thai. how long have lao been slave to thai? lao slave to thai longer than slave to french

In past.

Keeka Khamen.

Thai burned Khamen.

Keeka Thai.

Falang took from Thai.

Keeka Falang.

Falang get out.

but now still be Keeka.

Nai Keeka Viet.

Nok Keeka Falang.

Date: Apr 4, 2010

Here is a play by play map view of territories as different kingdoms rose and fell. What is left have been formalized with marked borders. One of our neighboring Champa empire dissolved by vietnam and cambodia. The politically aligned Lan Na empire with Lan Xang was also disolved Siam and Burma.

Its one of the best play by play view of SE Asian history ive seen so far.
http://www.angkor-planet.com/UK-hase.html

In the more modern way of competition, you buy it, promote your brand name, art and culture. It have been done with one generation versus a thousand year colonial rule and still meet with resistance to assimilate.

Date: Apr 4, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

????

for the ones who can read french, you can find many answer about how Laos became french on this website (i just discovered it):

http://www.pavie.culture.fr

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Friday 2nd of April 2010 01:24:19 PM

if you think french the best why germany kick french ass in ww2 if american don't came to help your peoples what happen to french.

Do you have any other stupid comment like this, suggesting that i wrote things I didn't wrote (French "the best"... moreover, what does that mean?), and comparing situations that are so different? Do you know how many million of people germans killed (even children, women..) during WWII, just because they hate them. Do you know how much investment Germany did secretly before the war to prepare the invasion of many peacefull countries (Let me remind you that Laos was not in "peace" before french arrived)? Do you know that WWII was 50 years after the colonisation of Laos by France and that many things changed in the world during those 50 years?

You are French so you have your own point of view. But French shouldn't come to take over and control other country like that. Right or Wrong?

if french did not take over lao, lao will still be keeka thai. how long have lao been slave to thai? lao slave to thai longer than slave to french

Same thing, idiot!

Date: Apr 3, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

????

for the ones who can read french, you can find many answer about how Laos became french on this website (i just discovered it):

http://www.pavie.culture.fr

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Friday 2nd of April 2010 01:24:19 PM

if you think french the best why germany kick french ass in ww2 if american don't came to help your peoples what happen to french.

Do you have any other stupid comment like this, suggesting that i wrote things I didn't wrote (French "the best"... moreover, what does that mean?), and comparing situations that are so different? Do you know how many million of people germans killed (even children, women..) during WWII, just because they hate them. Do you know how much investment Germany did secretly before the war to prepare the invasion of many peacefull countries (Let me remind you that Laos was not in "peace" before french arrived)? Do you know that WWII was 50 years after the colonisation of Laos by France and that many things changed in the world during those 50 years?

You are French so you have your own point of view. But French shouldn't come to take over and control other country like that. Right or Wrong?

if french did not take over lao, lao will still be keeka thai. how long have lao been slave to thai? lao slave to thai longer than slave to french

Date: Apr 3, 2010

paris_vientiane wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

????

for the ones who can read french, you can find many answer about how Laos became french on this website (i just discovered it):

http://www.pavie.culture.fr

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Friday 2nd of April 2010 01:24:19 PM

if you think french the best why germany kick french ass in ww2 if american don't came to help your peoples what happen to french.

Do you have any other stupid comment like this, suggesting that i wrote things I didn't wrote (French "the best"... moreover, what does that mean?), and comparing situations that are so different? Do you know how many million of people germans killed (even children, women..) during WWII, just because they hate them. Do you know how much investment Germany did secretly before the war to prepare the invasion of many peacefull countries (Let me remind you that Laos was not in "peace" before french arrived)? Do you know that WWII was 50 years after the colonisation of Laos by France and that many things changed in the world during those 50 years?

You are French so you have your own point of view. But French shouldn't come to take over and control other country like that. Right or Wrong?

Date: Apr 3, 2010

Laos and Thai are come from same ancester.

Date: Apr 3, 2010

paris_vientiane wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

????

for the ones who can read french, you can find many answer about how Laos became french on this website (i just discovered it):

http://www.pavie.culture.fr

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Friday 2nd of April 2010 01:24:19 PM

if you think french the best why germany kick french ass in ww2 if american don't came to help your peoples what happen to french.

Do you have any other stupid comment like this, suggesting that i wrote things I didn't wrote (French "the best"... moreover, what does that mean?), and comparing situations that are so different? Do you know how many million of people germans killed (even children, women..) during WWII, just because they hate them. Do you know how much investment Germany did secretly before the war to prepare the invasion of many peacefull countries (Let me remind you that Laos was not in "peace" before french arrived)? Do you know that WWII was 50 years after the colonisation of Laos by France and that many things changed in the world during those 50 years?

don't bring it up if you don't want me say any thing past is past for get about that, this is new generation.

paris_vientiane · Guru

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

????

for the ones who can read french, you can find many answer about how Laos became french on this website (i just discovered it):

http://www.pavie.culture.fr

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Friday 2nd of April 2010 01:24:19 PM

if you think french the best why germany kick french ass in ww2 if american don't came to help your peoples what happen to french.

Do you have any other stupid comment like this, suggesting that i wrote things I didn't wrote (French "the best"... moreover, what does that mean?), and comparing situations that are so different? Do you know how many million of people germans killed (even children, women..) during WWII, just because they hate them. Do you know how much investment Germany did secretly before the war to prepare the invasion of many peacefull countries (Let me remind you that Laos was not in "peace" before french arrived)? Do you know that WWII was 50 years after the colonisation of Laos by France and that many things changed in the world during those 50 years?

Date: Apr 3, 2010

Don't blem any country!

Blem that we had the weaked kings in the past, blem that we we had a weaked Government, blem that we had the lazy and weaked people and army

We are poor, don't you get it? We should eat more Omega3 to traet our brain to get smarter!

Date: Apr 3, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

????

for the ones who can read french, you can find many answer about how Laos became french on this website (i just discovered it):

http://www.pavie.culture.fr

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Friday 2nd of April 2010 01:24:19 PM

if you think french the best why germany kick french ass in ww2 if american don't came to help your peoples what happen to french.

American have always been helping here & there throughout history,but when thing didn't turn out right, they'll get all the blame for it?
Now I see what it's like from their side of point of view as I grew up in this country.
It seems like what ever the Americans did is ever enough for the world that have so much expectation from them is either " DAMN IF THEY DO & DAMN IF THEY DON'T ".

Date: Apr 2, 2010

paris_vientiane wrote:

????

for the ones who can read french, you can find many answer about how Laos became french on this website (i just discovered it):

http://www.pavie.culture.fr

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Friday 2nd of April 2010 01:24:19 PM

if you think french the best why germany kick french ass in ww2 if american don't came to help your peoples what happen to french.

Date: Apr 2, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

Whatever Laos or Siam or Franch or UK all will end at year 2012. OK?

Forgive each other today! You mother never teach you guys here?

You watches too much science fiction movies Brother, let' get back to reality.. this is reality we were talking about . not some science fiction movie you just mention...

paris_vientiane · Guru

????

for the ones who can read french, you can find many answer about how Laos became french on this website (i just discovered it):

http://www.pavie.culture.fr

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Friday 2nd of April 2010 01:24:19 PM

Date: Apr 2, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

Dark Angel wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Can anybody tell me how the heck Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam became a colonies to the France ?? and when did that happened ??

Well, no teachers have ever taught you Laos history in the school. I don't blame you , I am still wonder about the truth about Laos but I made a research on my own still need more answer and explanation like you. I have studied about all the countries were involved with Laos such as China , Burma, Vietnam , Cambodia and Siam and also the France which were record ed and related to lead to the other and try to find the fact. For sure that Lang Xang always lost the war to the China and lost Sip song Phana to China , Burma invaded Lang Xang , Vietnam also invaded Lang Xang and caused Lang Xang to divide into 3 kingdoms. Then in 1779 Lang Xang become Thai colony until the French came in1897 and then Laos became the French colony until 1949 that Laos declare independent but it was not recognized until 1954. That is what I knew if I was wrong please correct me.

just one point.. if my memory is right...
Laos became totaly independant in 1954, but France had granted a large autonomy to Laos since 1946... it seams that most of the process occured step by step, gradualy, with no or very little fights/war/blood...
the terrific things came after this, when USA arrived and vietnam war began (war between communists and capitalists, in fact).

The points that have to be clarified for me:
- seems, according to what i have read that, at least at the begining of french "domination", french behaved much much better with lao people than siamese army or chinese thieves... I've read that french CONVINCED lao people to accept french colonialism, and did not FORCE them (i don't think the situation in Vietnam or Cambodia was the same... don't know in fact) but i would appreciate to have more details about this. is it really true, totaly true, partialy true, totaly wrong????
- then, on the "long term", most of people agree to say french were not very good administrators and did very little to develop the country. Some (above) even say they came to take/rob lao resources (anyway, nothing is "free".. french granted some kind of safety and military protection to lao people, but of course, they expected something in return... i think that's normal and we cannot blame french for this). Again, i would appreciate to have more details about this: what french exactly did in laos? both about good things (building cities, roads, train, better education, bring safety) and bad thing (put the administration in the hands of vietnamese, take resources, maybe not always respect local people as they should -i can easily guess and regret that all french in laos were not as respectfull as Auguste Pavie... but all french established in laos did certainly not behave as thieves too-)

As my "forum name" suggest, i'm very interested in the common history between France and Laos, but it's very difficult to get complete and precise information... and most important NEUTRAL information, not just colonial or anti-colonial propaganda, about this. Things are rarely all black or all white, but many people sadly enjoy to see things this way.

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Wednesday 31st of March 2010 12:58:35 PM

To day Vietminh divided Laotians that's why we have Lao in Laos treated Lao abroad like we are enemies.

lao divide lao. that's why lao lost to Siam in the first place.

The word " Today " should not meant from the past !!

paris_vientiane · Guru

Anonymous wrote:

Whatever Laos or Siam or Franch or UK all will end at year 2012. OK?

Forgive each other today! You mother never teach you guys here?

I don't know for 2012... i hope this is just a story for children

Anyway, you are right.

History of each country in the world is full of conflics, invasions, drama, slavery (in most of the cases, the country is both attacker and victim, depend the year you are looking)... If we want those things to be over, behind us, and not start again, there is only one solution: forgive, accept all borders of all countries as they are now (only accept minor changes, and only with all the support of the concerned population).

Now, it's time for cooperation, exchange (cultural, economic, politic..), and friendship.

Anyway, it's always interesting to study history, try to understand what really happened and why, get off the basic thought where we see everything just black or white. This can be a good guide to avoid doing now the same mistakes we all did in the past. This is also necessary to undersand exactly who we are and where we come from... so be in peace with ourselfs.

To come back to our subject, like it or not, but French bring many things to Laos that still exist today: food (ragout, ban mi/sandwich : made with french baguette but lao style...) architecture (the center of many important cities in laos are typicaly french colonialist style and those buildings are beautifull -if well cared- and good quality)... I don't say Laos should remain french (oh no! certainly not, i'm happy to see that Laos is now free and independant), but for me all those things are full part of the Laos I know and i love today (i love much less, in fact i hate, some other rests of history like american unexploded bombs and mines).

Without the french colonial time, Laos would be very different from what it is now... better or worse, no one can know... We cannot be sure about what Laos would have become without french... but we can try to understand exacly what the french bring to Laos : both the good things and the bad things. This is just a way to better know and understand what is the Laos we know today. For me, this common past between our 2 countries is very interesting, because it create a real link between our countries. Many lao originated people live in France and love the 2 countries, many people in Laos speak french, more and more french people go to live and invest in Laos... that's just great and wonderfull friendship, just take it and enjoy it.

Just one last reply about what was writen above in another comment :

the French were too busy and respect the British and took only small part of Laos from Siam

I don't totaly agree: French leaved a large part of Laos to Siam, but anyway, they didn't took "only a small part"... they took most of Laos BUT Issan (isan is big but not so much, right?).

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Friday 2nd of April 2010 11:57:16 AM

Date: Apr 2, 2010

Whatever Laos or Siam or Franch or UK all will end at year 2012. OK?

Forgive each other today! You mother never teach you guys here?

Date: Apr 2, 2010

Hacker & Hecker wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

What a bunch of Colonial Frances Sympathizers! Lao people has a tradition of resisting foreign invaders and maintaining Lao independents. Siam burnt Vientiane to the ground twice and still did not diminish the Lao people's will to self-determination and independence.

Anonymous wrote:
He is right. No French, No Laos. Siam took all of Laos already. You think Laos can be free from Siam without French?
Laotian asked to French to take Laos from Siam from be slave of Siam and from mistreated the Laotian people but the French were too busy and respect the British and took only small part of Laos from Siam . If Siamese treated Laotian as brother country not like slavery country Laos would still be part of Thailand today.

Laos was never part of Siam in the first place.

Date: Apr 2, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

What a bunch of Colonial Frances Sympathizers! Lao people has a tradition of resisting foreign invaders and maintaining Lao independents. Siam burnt Vientiane to the ground twice and still did not diminish the Lao people's will to self-determination and independence.

Anonymous wrote:
He is right. No French, No Laos. Siam took all of Laos already. You think Laos can be free from Siam without French?
Laotian asked to French to take Laos from Siam from be slave of Siam and from mistreated the Laotian people but the French were too busy and respect the British and took only small part of Laos from Siam . If Siamese treated Laotian as brother country not like slavery country Laos would still be part of Thailand today.

Dark Angel · Guru

Anonymous wrote:

At today we still look like Thai colonized as everything import from Thailand and teenager like to copy fashion and new words from Thailand and some like to use Thai words mixed with Laos words

At today, some part of Laos will become one of states of China and Vietnam

100 years from now Laos will still be Laos, except the majority of population will
be either Vietor Chin descent.

100 years or 1000 years from now Laos still will be called Laos but who will own and rule Laos if the Laotian will not be well educated , still poor and will never be improved and get a helping hand to have the equal opportunity. So what are the future of Laotian beside farmers cheap labours in the factories and the streets that is the question the Lao people need the answer from the government. If Laotian became the minority and still not well educated , still be in poor and still be living in poverty and be discriminated by the foreign companies who would not train and hire the Laotian. What good it is to have a new China town , rubber plantation , casinos and 5 stars hotel and golf course which the Chinese and Vietnamese companies don't hire Laotian and bring their own workers to work in Laos. Laotian needs jobs and needs better education. Of course Laos will have more big and tall building and modern shopping mall good roads, bigger and modern airports , bridges ..etc how 's about educated and train the Lao people for the future jobs and create more jobs that is the best investment for the country and the nation. No doubt about it 100 years from now Laos still will be Laos but indirectly will be dominated and controlled politically and economically by foreigner . Tibet is still Tibet , Laos is still Laos but who own Laos and rules Laos. That is the new way to colonize Laos and slave the Laotian in the future. To talk about the truth and it hurt and also to know the truth about Lao history it is also hurt. No body could be able to defeat Laos without the help from our own Lao people. That is right jealousy, selfish , bribe , corruption and betray that is the reason why Laos always have been defeated over again and again.

-- Edited by Dark Angel on Friday 2nd of April 2010 04:05:51 AM

chiip · Guru

Bien le bonjour mon cher, on ne se voit pas souvent ce temp-ci !
Yeah ! you're right, but I think it is in a better way, but it still is a kind of slavery. In the former time it was gun talk but now it is money talk, in the former times, nobles don't care much about slavery 'cos they still have their slaves to support them and now the same situation happens : Ministers , Departments's Directors don't care much about it 'cos nothing could affect them but affects the grass root and simple people like farmers, small merchants, low raking officials and civil servants.

paris_vientiane · Guru

chiip wrote:

why wonder ? lao national were for 4 consecutive centuries slaves and have to pay tribute to their Masters ...even when laos got independence from france in the 200 th century we still have to encounter Indochina war which took so many lives, Oh my god ! what had the indochina people done to deserve such a punishment ? vietnam : many centuries chinese colonial, it lost the very vietnamese culture and writing.Cambodia lost two and a half million lives in only one decade ! Thai got benefit from our pain...and our death.

and poor Laos is now becoming under the strong economic domination of China. Guns have changes... the new gun is called money... but fundamentaly, i'm affraid the situations didn't changed so much :(

Date: Apr 1, 2010

What a bunch of Colonial Frances Sympathizers! Lao people has a tradition of resisting foreign invaders and maintaining Lao independences. Siam burnt Vientiane to the ground twice and still did not diminish the Lao people's will to self-determination and independence.

Anonymous wrote:

He is right. No French, No Laos. Siam took all of Laos already. You think Laos can be free from Siam without French?

Date: Apr 1, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

seems, according to what i have read that, at least at the begining of french "domination", french behaved much much better with lao people than siamese army or chinese thieves... I've read that french CONVINCED lao people to accept french colonialism, and did not FORCE them (i don't think the situation in Vietnam or Cambodia was the same... don't know in fact) but i would appreciate to have more details about this. is it really true, totaly true, partialy true, totaly wrong????

: Because Lao leader at the time was a loser that's why we lost indepedent so many times.

You think French came to ask Siam to let you free for free of charge?

kon lao huk lung gun. lao backstabbed each other. lao never get along.

chiip · Guru

why wonder ? lao national were for 4 consecutive centuries slaves and have to pay tribute to their Masters ...even when laos got independence from france in the 200 th century we still have to encounter Indochina war which took so many lives, Oh my god ! what had the indochina people done to deserve such a punishment ? vietnam : many centuries chinese colonial, it lost the very vietnamese culture and writing.Cambodia lost two and a half million lives in only one decade ! Thai got benefit from our pain...and our death.

Date: Apr 1, 2010

paris_vientiane wrote:

hehe... for me, that's worse : i'm not "lao aboard"... i'm french :p
My only link with Laos is my 100% lao wife ;)

No wonder you write in your side b'cos your French

Date: Apr 1, 2010

seems, according to what i have read that, at least at the begining of french "domination", french behaved much much better with lao people than siamese army or chinese thieves... I've read that french CONVINCED lao people to accept french colonialism, and did not FORCE them (i don't think the situation in Vietnam or Cambodia was the same... don't know in fact) but i would appreciate to have more details about this. is it really true, totaly true, partialy true, totaly wrong????

: Because Lao leader at the time was a loser that's why we lost indepedent so many times.

You think French came to ask Siam to let you free for free of charge?

chiip · Guru

In the reign of Chao Xaysetha 1566 Laos lost Chiangmay to Birmany Vientiane lost its independence 1569 the great Chao Soulyavongsa took power in 1637 and made Laos the center of culture and boudhism and as Laos is rich in forest products it became the center of commerce of south east asia. After the death of the great king in 1694 Laos was divided in three parts and each part became ennemies and were seized , Vientiane was burned down the genocide began and the three parts of laos became Siameses colonies untill the french came and took the left side of the mekong river as its protectorat or its colony if you prefer...

Date: Mar 31, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

paris_vientiane wrote:

Dark Angel wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Can anybody tell me how the heck Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam became a colonies to the France ?? and when did that happened ??

Well, no teachers have ever taught you Laos history in the school. I don't blame you , I am still wonder about the truth about Laos but I made a research on my own still need more answer and explanation like you. I have studied about all the countries were involved with Laos such as China , Burma, Vietnam , Cambodia and Siam and also the France which were record ed and related to lead to the other and try to find the fact. For sure that Lang Xang always lost the war to the China and lost Sip song Phana to China , Burma invaded Lang Xang , Vietnam also invaded Lang Xang and caused Lang Xang to divide into 3 kingdoms. Then in 1779 Lang Xang become Thai colony until the French came in1897 and then Laos became the French colony until 1949 that Laos declare independent but it was not recognized until 1954. That is what I knew if I was wrong please correct me.

just one point.. if my memory is right...
Laos became totaly independant in 1954, but France had granted a large autonomy to Laos since 1946... it seams that most of the process occured step by step, gradualy, with no or very little fights/war/blood...
the terrific things came after this, when USA arrived and vietnam war began (war between communists and capitalists, in fact).

The points that have to be clarified for me:
- seems, according to what i have read that, at least at the begining of french "domination", french behaved much much better with lao people than siamese army or chinese thieves... I've read that french CONVINCED lao people to accept french colonialism, and did not FORCE them (i don't think the situation in Vietnam or Cambodia was the same... don't know in fact) but i would appreciate to have more details about this. is it really true, totaly true, partialy true, totaly wrong????
- then, on the "long term", most of people agree to say french were not very good administrators and did very little to develop the country. Some (above) even say they came to take/rob lao resources (anyway, nothing is "free".. french granted some kind of safety and military protection to lao people, but of course, they expected something in return... i think that's normal and we cannot blame french for this). Again, i would appreciate to have more details about this: what french exactly did in laos? both about good things (building cities, roads, train, better education, bring safety) and bad thing (put the administration in the hands of vietnamese, take resources, maybe not always respect local people as they should -i can easily guess and regret that all french in laos were not as respectfull as Auguste Pavie... but all french established in laos did certainly not behave as thieves too-)

As my "forum name" suggest, i'm very interested in the common history between France and Laos, but it's very difficult to get complete and precise information... and most important NEUTRAL information, not just colonial or anti-colonial propaganda, about this. Things are rarely all black or all white, but many people sadly enjoy to see things this way.

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Wednesday 31st of March 2010 12:58:35 PM

To day Vietminh divided Laotians that's why we have Lao in Laos treated Lao abroad like we are enemies.

lao divide lao. that's why lao lost to Siam in the first place.

paris_vientiane · Guru

hehe... for me, that's worse : i'm not "lao aboard"... i'm french :p
My only link with Laos is my 100% lao wife ;)

Date: Mar 31, 2010

paris_vientiane wrote:

Dark Angel wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Can anybody tell me how the heck Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam became a colonies to the France ?? and when did that happened ??

Well, no teachers have ever taught you Laos history in the school. I don't blame you , I am still wonder about the truth about Laos but I made a research on my own still need more answer and explanation like you. I have studied about all the countries were involved with Laos such as China , Burma, Vietnam , Cambodia and Siam and also the France which were record ed and related to lead to the other and try to find the fact. For sure that Lang Xang always lost the war to the China and lost Sip song Phana to China , Burma invaded Lang Xang , Vietnam also invaded Lang Xang and caused Lang Xang to divide into 3 kingdoms. Then in 1779 Lang Xang become Thai colony until the French came in1897 and then Laos became the French colony until 1949 that Laos declare independent but it was not recognized until 1954. That is what I knew if I was wrong please correct me.

just one point.. if my memory is right...
Laos became totaly independant in 1954, but France had granted a large autonomy to Laos since 1946... it seams that most of the process occured step by step, gradualy, with no or very little fights/war/blood...
the terrific things came after this, when USA arrived and vietnam war began (war between communists and capitalists, in fact).

The points that have to be clarified for me:
- seems, according to what i have read that, at least at the begining of french "domination", french behaved much much better with lao people than siamese army or chinese thieves... I've read that french CONVINCED lao people to accept french colonialism, and did not FORCE them (i don't think the situation in Vietnam or Cambodia was the same... don't know in fact) but i would appreciate to have more details about this. is it really true, totaly true, partialy true, totaly wrong????
- then, on the "long term", most of people agree to say french were not very good administrators and did very little to develop the country. Some (above) even say they came to take/rob lao resources (anyway, nothing is "free".. french granted some kind of safety and military protection to lao people, but of course, they expected something in return... i think that's normal and we cannot blame french for this). Again, i would appreciate to have more details about this: what french exactly did in laos? both about good things (building cities, roads, train, better education, bring safety) and bad thing (put the administration in the hands of vietnamese, take resources, maybe not always respect local people as they should -i can easily guess and regret that all french in laos were not as respectfull as Auguste Pavie... but all french established in laos did certainly not behave as thieves too-)

As my "forum name" suggest, i'm very interested in the common history between France and Laos, but it's very difficult to get complete and precise information... and most important NEUTRAL information, not just colonial or anti-colonial propaganda, about this. Things are rarely all black or all white, but many people sadly enjoy to see things this way.

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Wednesday 31st of March 2010 12:58:35 PM

To day Vietminh divided Laotians that's why we have Lao in Laos treated Lao abroad like we are enemies.

tinko · Guru

YYjhé ÿuè
ƒÄjzjzjyÿuÿ,"A ëV‹E‹Hù

-- Edited by tinko on Wednesday 31st of March 2010 01:43:06 PM

paris_vientiane · Guru

Anonymous wrote:

jealousy, selfish , corruption and betray Wow!

this is a perfect illustration of what I wrote just before (my last sentence).

This doesn't help our understanding at all

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Wednesday 31st of March 2010 02:06:07 PM

Date: Mar 31, 2010

jealousy, selfish , corruption and betray Wow!

paris_vientiane · Guru

Dark Angel wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Can anybody tell me how the heck Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam became a colonies to the France ?? and when did that happened ??

Well, no teachers have ever taught you Laos history in the school. I don't blame you , I am still wonder about the truth about Laos but I made a research on my own still need more answer and explanation like you. I have studied about all the countries were involved with Laos such as China , Burma, Vietnam , Cambodia and Siam and also the France which were record ed and related to lead to the other and try to find the fact. For sure that Lang Xang always lost the war to the China and lost Sip song Phana to China , Burma invaded Lang Xang , Vietnam also invaded Lang Xang and caused Lang Xang to divide into 3 kingdoms. Then in 1779 Lang Xang become Thai colony until the French came in1897 and then Laos became the French colony until 1949 that Laos declare independent but it was not recognized until 1954. That is what I knew if I was wrong please correct me.

just one point.. if my memory is right...

Laos became totaly independant in 1954, but France had granted a large autonomy to Laos since 1946... it seams that most of the process occured step by step, gradualy, with no or very little fights/war/blood...

the terrific things came after this, when USA arrived and vietnam war began (war between communists and capitalists, in fact).

The points that have to be clarified for me:

- seems, according to what i have read that, at least at the begining of french "domination", french behaved much much better with lao people than siamese army or chinese thieves... I've read that french CONVINCED lao people to accept french colonialism, and did not FORCE them (i don't think the situation in Vietnam or Cambodia was the same... don't know in fact) but i would appreciate to have more details about this. is it really true, totaly true, partialy true, totaly wrong????

- then, on the "long term", most of people agree to say french were not very good administrators and did very little to develop the country. Some (above) even say they came to take/rob lao resources (anyway, nothing is "free".. french granted some kind of safety and military protection to lao people, but of course, they expected something in return... i think that's normal and we cannot blame french for this). Again, i would appreciate to have more details about this: what french exactly did in laos? both about good things (building cities, roads, train, better education, bring safety) and bad thing (put the administration in the hands of vietnamese, take resources, maybe not always respect local people as they should -i can easily guess and regret that all french in laos were not as respectfull as Auguste Pavie... but all french established in laos did certainly not behave as thieves too-)

As my "forum name" suggest, i'm very interested in the common history between France and Laos, but it's very difficult to get complete and precise information... and most important NEUTRAL information, not just colonial or anti-colonial propaganda, about this. Things are rarely all black or all white, but many people sadly enjoy to see things this way.

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Wednesday 31st of March 2010 12:58:35 PM

chiip · Guru

Path to confagration fifty years of diplomacy and warfare.
In 1827, the decisive war against the lao and the systematic displacement of population from the est bank of the Mekong River that followed it furnished Bangkok with an abundant manpower. In 1866 after the fall of the Kingdom of Vientiane, Louis de Carne still observed “ Great rafts ( bearing) herds of slaves” floating down the Mekong River and band of slaves trudging along the dusty trail.
The traffic of slaves permanently depressed the Lao economy and the losses worsened with the passage of time its consequences were catastrophic and virtually irreparable for many generations. The penerial underdevelopment of laos and the physical apprearence of the lao population were the most visible results of the slave trade Jean Renaud observed..
Since a long time previous ( the lao) best elementhad been killed or reduced to slavery, this explained the puny aspect of the indigenes observed our first explorers. This dark past ( invation, enslavement, massive transfers of population... explained somewhat surprising distribution of this population : they had fled the best soil that was most accessible where raids were fatal to seak refuge in the high valleys, the forests where they felt more secure, they had regressed as well from the cultivating stage to the stage of gathering money.

9. THE CAPTURE OF LAO INTERNATIONAL TRADE.
In the year preceding the holocaust of 1827 as Siam achievements gained momentum not only where lao land and people progressively swallowed by Bangkok and its proxies but lao trades as well . The war of 1827 was the culminating of the prolonged commercial struggle that Bangkok ang Khorath authorities, eager to monopolize Laotian goods and trade was waged against Chao Anou and the lao since 1814 DGE. Hall remaked.

THE FINAL SOLUTION 1827 -- -1828.
BUT Anou’s fervent effort to reunite laos and repel Siam were doomed to fail. Fifty years after Taksin quonquer laos , the thai marched into Vientiane once more, this time the lao capital was razed to the grownd , allowing only grass, water and savage beasts to remain...This genocide of an entire people remained a veritable nightmare for its few survivors after Jules Hermand interviewed them in 1880 he called it “ la Grande guerre” Generally Chao phraya Bodinthondesha’s name is associated with the brutality, the subdued people dared call him only by the simple title Chao Kun (Chao is princely rank granted to tributary ruler by Bangkok...

Date: Mar 31, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Can anybody tell me how the heck Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam became a colonies to the France ?? and when did that happened ??

France seized control of most of present-day Laos from Siam in 1893 and gained the rest in 1907. The French administered the kingdom of Louangphrabang indirectly through its king, while French officials directly administered the rest of the country. They did little to develop Laos, which became the sleepy backwater of Indochina.

During World War II (1939-1945) Japan stationed troops in Indochina under an agreement with the French, who maintained their administration throughout most of the war. In the last six months of the war the Japanese seized control of Indochina and interned French officials and troops. The Japanese granted Laos nominal independence in 1945.

After Japan and its allies lost the war, a nationalist movement known as the Lao Issara (Free Laos) formed an independent government in Laos. However, France reoccupied Laos the following year, and the nationalists fled to Thailand. The French unified their Lao territories into a single country with the king of Louangphrabang, Sisavang Vong, as head of state. Under French supervision, the new government adopted a constitution and joined the French Union. In 1949 France granted Laos partial independence and extended an offer of amnesty to the nationalists in exile, most of whom returned to the country. A few dissidents under the leadership of Prince Souphanouvong, however, allied themselves with the forces of the pro-Communist Vietnamese liberation movement known as the Viet Minh, who were still fighting the French. The Lao dissidents called their movement Pathet Lao (Lao State). When Viet Minh forces invaded Laos in 1953, they handed over large areas of the country to the Pathet Lao. France accorded Laos full independence in 1953 as a constitutional monarchy, the Kingdom of Laos. Delegates to the 1954 Geneva Conference, who were negotiating France’s withdrawal from Indochina at the end of the First Indochina War (1946-1954), endorsed the country’s independent status.
Source(s):
http://encarta.msn.com/encyclopedia_7615…

Thanks for the Information Sir/Mam. as i' ve read the details upthere, our country really a backward country sine the Thirties something. it' didn't start when PDR take over the country at all.

Are you kidding me? After Lao PDR invaded Laos literacy rate has jumped up from 30% to 70%. Before 1975 Lao educational systems were equivalent to most our neighboring countries starting with Thailand, Cambodia and etc...after Lao PDR it has been taking the back seat comparison to our neighboring countries to this day.

If it isn't back ward then you certainly don't know the meaning of the word!

Any record show that, after PDR, take over the country and literacies rate had jump 30-70% ??

Date: Mar 31, 2010

At today we still look like Thai colonized as everything import from Thailand and teenager like to copy fashion and new words from Thailand and some like to use Thai words mixed with Laos words

At today, some part of Laos wil become one of states of China and Vietnam

100 years from now Laos will still be Laos, except the majority of population will
be either Viet or Chin descent.

Date: Mar 31, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Can anybody tell me how the heck Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam became a colonies to the France ?? and when did that happened ??

In 18 century when the industry revolution in Europe . Then the European countries were hunting for natural resources and colonies . So most of the counties in Africa middle east and south America and Asia countries were colonized by the European countries in Asia except Japan and Thailand which were not colonized by any one. China was not totally lost the whole country only some part to the British and Japan . Vietnam was colonized by the Chinese for hundreds of years so Vietnamese share the same new year with China and some Chinese culture as well. Cambodia was rule by Siam and then Laos lost the independent to Siam in 1779 and Chao Anouvong tried to get the independent back from Thailand and failed in 1828 , So Jao Anouvong family and blood line was destroyed and took to be prisoner of war and a lot of Laotian became slave for many hundred of years until the king of Thailand stop the slavery and then those Laotian becane Siamese citizen and then after the world war ll siam changed the name to Thailand. I just wonder if the French didn't come and take Vientiane , Champasak and Luang Prabang from the Siam what would happen to Laos.
Laos still exist in the world map or Laos would be part of Thailand like Lanna and Esan ( Perhaps Laos would be called Thai Vientiane, Thai Champasak and Thai Luang Prabang if Lao s are still part of Thailand). So something to learn from the history that Laos lost the war to China , Burma , Vietnam and Siam because we were not united (jealousy, selfish , corruption and betray ). Hope that the history would never ever repeat itself again. Today 21 st century there are the new way to hunt for colony by indirectly dominated the government economically and politically and hope Lao people could prevent that from happening to Laos and preserve Lao culture and be proud to be Lao people with wonder culture. There is no way to bring back yesterday but we could protect what we have now. So Lao people would become the minority and become second class citizen in our own country.

At today we still look like Thai colonized as everything import from Thailand and teenager like to copy fashion and new words from Thailand and some like to use Thai words mixed with Laos words

At today, some part of Laos wil become one of states of China and Vietnam

Ake · Senior Member

sigh....

-- Edited by Ake on Wednesday 31st of March 2010 04:33:48 AM

Date: Mar 31, 2010

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Can anybody tell me how the heck Laos, Cambodia, and Vietnam became a colonies to the France ?? and when did that happened ??

In 18 century when the industry revolution in Europe . Then the European countries were hunting for natural resources and colonies . So most of the counties in Africa middle east and south America and Asia countries were colonized by the European countries in Asia except Japan and Thailand which were not colonized by any one. China was not totally lost the whole country only some part to the British and Japan . Vietnam was colonized by the Chinese for hundreds of years so Vietnamese share the same new year with China and some Chinese culture as well. Cambodia was rule by Siam and then Laos lost the independent to Siam in 1779 and Chao Anouvong tried to get the independent back from Thailand and failed in 1828 , So Jao Anouvong family and blood line was destroyed and took to be prisoner of war and a lot of Laotian became slave for many hundred of years until the king of Thailand stop the slavery and then those Laotian becane Siamese citizen and then after the world war ll siam changed the name to Thailand. I just wonder if the French didn't come and take Vientiane , Champasak and Luang Prabang from the Siam what would happen to Laos.
Laos still exist in the world map or Laos would be part of Thailand like Lanna and Esan ( Perhaps Laos would be called Thai Vientiane, Thai Champasak and Thai Luang Prabang if Lao s are still part of Thailand). So something to learn from the history that Laos lost the war to China , Burma , Vietnam and Siam because we were not united (jealousy, selfish , corruption and betray ). Hope that the history would never ever repeat itself again. Today 21 st century there are the new way to hunt for colony by indirectly dominated the government economically and politically and hope Lao people could prevent that from happening to Laos and preserve Lao culture and be proud to be Lao people with wonder culture. There is no way to bring back yesterday but we could protect what we have now. So Lao people would become the minority and become second class citizen in our own country.

Why would you want us to be minority or second class citizen of our own country?

I think he meant... So Lao people would not become.....