How our country became a colonized to the France ?

Date: Apr 3, 2010

RE: How our country became a colonized to the France ?

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 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

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

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.

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

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.

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.

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:

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.

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 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

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.

paris_vientiane · Guru

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...

very interesting comment, completing mines

In Fact, seams at this time, it was a strong competition between european countries (the most "advanced" in the world at this time -England, France, Spain...-... time have changed...) to establish the largest "influence area" in the world. If french didn't took Laos, English would have probably done it...and french influence/power would have been weaken compared with our direct neightbours. That was the race for the first one who could do it... everywhere in the world.... stupid and sad competition, bringing many wars,drama, even slavery (specialy in Africa, at begining of colonisation)... i was never very interesed about this very sad past of my country (ask a german if he is really interested about WWII, you'll probably get the same answer) but i was also very happy, when i began to study the colonial history of France and Laos, that this events occured much later than other countries and that things happened, according to the informations i could get, much much better and respectfully than what have been done in Africa or also Vietnam/Cambodia (seems that France really took those lands by force/military action, just to take ressources without care at all of locals people... not at all the same story as Laos).

But as said above, never forget than all those things hapened more than one century ago. The world have changed, people have changed, and also mentality/minds have changed a lot in one century. We all care now about things and values no one cared at this time.

-- Edited by paris_vientiane on Monday 5th of April 2010 08:08:32 AM