David Cameron refuses to return Koh i Noor diamond to India Watch

FyreFight
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#61
Report 8 years ago
#61
Thank **** for that. After stating that he'd openly welcome Turkey into the EU when speaking on a visit to them, I'd be worried that he's on a worldwide appeasement tour.

Indicating that he'd happily give back such a sentimentally-valuable piece of our national heritage would be a step too far.

Thankfully, I don't think St. James's would be too willing to agree, and well done to DC for not bowing under pressure.
0
reply
Billinge1991
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#62
Report 8 years ago
#62
(Original post by Connor132)
Aside from the fact Britian recieved it in a treaty (even if the person was young) and that the treaty was signed in Pakistan and that Persian owners predate even the Indian holders.

Is it even Camerons to give away? I was under the idea it was property of the crown estate?
No, it's not Cameron's to give away. Though I'm pretty sure he's making plans :p:. And you're right, it was received and signed over to Britain. :yep: so it's legally ours, or, the Monarchs at any rate.
0
reply
Master Roshi
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#63
Report 8 years ago
#63
Stealing is wrong
0
reply
mathew551
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#64
Report 8 years ago
#64
It's ours!
0
reply
James10000
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#65
Report 8 years ago
#65
(Original post by manchild007)
Yes, thats been made very clear from Cameron's recent visit hasn't it? Odd that Cameron (and his entire delegation for that matter) brown-nosed India so much, since it doesn't need it no? :rolleyes:

The UK is a dying power, and the BRIC's represent the new growth in the world economy - so the UK NEEDS India MUCH MORE than India needs the UK frankly.

The economic importance of India is Overrated, a country with more poor than Africa, 55% of Indians live in Poverty and the Rich ones keep leaving the country and heavy protectionist regulation

India 33% of it is over run by Communist Rebels it has huge problems with Hindu Facist Human Rights abuses in Punjab and Assam , india exports terror to Sri Lanka , it created the Tamil tigers

http://www.assam.org/pages/record-hu...olations-assam

India is very overrated its only advantage is cheap labour costs,

Cheap Labour is not in short Supply and a Large Population doesnt consume

http://www.eetasia.com/ART_880037829...T_fdd22708.HTM

Brazil Russia good markets China and particularly India not so much

David Cameron went there for the same reason he went america, to expand trade with a country which is heading for bankruptcy
0
reply
Magic_007
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#66
Report 8 years ago
#66
(Original post by manchild007)
India is decades out (regardless of how much emphasis the 'West is putting on India as a greater competitor) from China, so that is a redundant reason to give in my opinion.
Fine, then, but in my opinion even if it is decades out as you claim, being backed with powerful allies is something.

India is statistically speaking too, 1.3% lower in terms of current real ex-capital flow rate growth from China too, but that's b/c (as I said), it is at an earlier part of the growth cycle than China (by a few decades).
So in other words, while India is at loss economically on it's rate of return on its investments, it has grown earlier than China did, right?
0
reply
Margaret Thatcher
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#67
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#67
(Original post by Chucklefiend)
Hanging on to nostalgic souvenirs of Britain's 'golden age' won't change that.
And, India isn't doing the same by requesting the diamond, how exactly?
0
reply
goodboy4444
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#68
Report 8 years ago
#68
OH....this is not fair.

koh i noor should saty where it is.If britain would be giving everything away like this....it would be NAKED one day.With only queen and her palace left and yes in the near future when UK will be paying back all the debts they could sell it to india...we would happy to give some extra cash to david cameron....with a small tip..!!!
0
reply
Chucklefiend
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#69
Report 8 years ago
#69
(Original post by Margaret Thatcher)
And, India isn't doing the same by requesting the diamond, how exactly?
India isn't hanging on the remnants of past glories by asking for the return of the diamond, they are asking for Britain to finish giving back what was taken from them.
0
reply
Margaret Thatcher
Badges: 3
Rep:
?
#70
Report Thread starter 8 years ago
#70
(Original post by Chucklefiend)
India isn't hanging on the remnants of past glories by asking for the return of the diamond, they are asking for Britain to finish giving back what was taken from them.
It's astonishing that you can't see the contradiction in your post.

Of course they are. The diamond is a symbol of their past pre-British Raj glory. They are requesting a modern country whose current populace had nothing to do with the Treaty of Lahore to return a remnant of Indian history. I can't see any other reason for this other than nationalism and nostalgia.
0
reply
peanut91
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#71
Report 8 years ago
#71
Finders keepers!
0
reply
CatatonicStupor
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#72
Report 8 years ago
#72
Oh, come off it. Who cares - it's a diamond, and for what it's worth it's just a vestige of our colonial days that we insist on hanging onto. We gave these countries their independence, so why can't we give them back a few trinkets we took?

Everyone these days is harping on about how the monarchy is a waste of space, so why not start handing back things associated to them - the Koh-i-Noor and the Stars of Africa for a start. Maybe we can start cutting ties with Empire soon too - nice as the 'Commonwealth' is, it's just a polite way of saying "You're still ours" - and become a nation with its history put behind it. Honestly, America got away, and look how it turned out.

Unless the Koh-i-Noor and other associated trinkets are part of some crazy Illuminati/New World Order/Templar/Crazy conspiracy, we may as well hand them back. I've never exactly thought "You know what...let's go to London and see this diamond." - I'd be more inclined to think "Wow, this was a part of our colonial past. Let's go to India and see it, and learn about the days before and during the Empire."


But that's just me...one of the few people who isn't scared of people from the East and their influence.
0
reply
manchild007
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#73
Report 8 years ago
#73
(Original post by James10000)
The economic importance of India is Overrated, a country with more poor than Africa, 55% of Indians live in Poverty and the Rich ones keep leaving the country and heavy protectionist regulation

You can rant on about corruption/poverty all you want, but the fact is its the fastest growing economy in the world behind China and the fastest on a real-ex capital flow basis (the more important of the two statistics).

I'd rather trust the OECD (not to mention every other major economic think tank) alongside official statistics to be honest, than the biased opinions/bullcrap you've sprung together

Good try though.
0
reply
manchild007
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#74
Report 8 years ago
#74
(Original post by Magic_007)
So in other words, while India is at loss economically on it's rate of return on its investments, it has grown earlier than China did, right?
India is currently at an earlier stage of the economic cycle (economic reforms and thus growth in China began far ahead of that in India). Despite this however, on a spread-ratio basis (i.e. like stage for like), India's ROR is far ahead of that China at that stage (as I've already mentioned).

Ex-capital inflow and inflationary yield rates are much tighter than they were for China for example.
0
reply
Bunkd
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#75
Report 8 years ago
#75
I agree with 50% of the people in this thread. The other 50% just make me depressed and angry!
0
reply
Sakujo
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#76
Report 8 years ago
#76
(Original post by manchild007)
x
Considering the timing, tiny amount of rep power and the slight hint of brain damage in the neg rep I received I have concluded it was most probably you. Normally I don't return neg rep (sometimes I return it with pos rep) but since it was a retarded comment and you didn't leave your name you can expect something tomorrow
0
reply
SatanIsAwesome
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#77
Report 8 years ago
#77
(Original post by Chucklefiend)
Stop making absurd comparisons with completely irrelevant events. The simple fact is this: the diamond was taken under very questionable circumstances and is an ugly scar on British-Indian relations. Whether you like it or not colonialism is a thing of the past and hanging on to nostalgic souvenirs of Britain's 'golden age' won't change that.
Why won't you accept that the diamond is ours. My point is, just because something belonged to somebody in the past doesn't make it theirs.
Germany lost a lot of land for questionable reasons.
0
reply
Genocidal
Badges: 16
#78
Report 8 years ago
#78
(Original post by Chucklefiend)
You can't 'claim' something that is already owned, you can only steal it.
I think enough time has elapsed that we can consider it ours now. Anyways it is part of British history now.
reply
Chucklefiend
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#79
Report 8 years ago
#79
(Original post by Margaret Thatcher)
It's astonishing that you can't see the contradiction in your post.

Of course they are. The diamond is a symbol of their past pre-British Raj glory. They are requesting a modern country whose current populace had nothing to do with the Treaty of Lahore to return a remnant of Indian history. I can't see any other reason for this other than nationalism and nostalgia.
Of course it has cultural and historical significance to India, this is part of the reason it should be returned, but why exactly does this create a contradiction in what I am saying? There is a difference between wanting to retain the diamond as a trophy of Britain's conquests and wanting the return of the diamond because it represents a significant era of one's ancestral history. I would assert that the sentimental value of the Koh i Noor is much greater to India than it is to Britain, purely because it played a much greater role in their history.

I doubt we could even agree on whether colonialism was a good or bad thing, but I think the fact that Britain has relinquished control over many of its past colonies, speaks volumes. If colonialism is wrong then, it follows, plundering colonies for their treasure is wrong; Britain should acknowledge this by returning the Koh i Noor, as a matter of principle. And in so doing, further foster modern relations with India and signal Britain's move into a new age.

I have no more to say on the matter.
0
reply
aeterno
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#80
Report 8 years ago
#80
(Original post by Bramlow)
I actually think we should return it.

Will it set a precedent for returning other historical items? Possibly. Quite frankly, though, I'm not all that fussed. If the Elgin Marbles go back to Greece, I can see them in Greece.

The amount of goodwill we'd get from these gestures would be worth a lot, and would help people to realize that Britain is not (I hope) one of the bad guys of the world anymore.
Oh good, a sensible comment.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Do you have a role model?

Yes - I know them personally (295)
26.06%
Yes - they're famous (288)
25.44%
No I don't (549)
48.5%

Watched Threads

View All