Re: erratum [Re: no matter ...] & errors > I'm not sure what you mean by "let's you and him fight", but it is 
> important to remember that England was in control of Ireland
> for 300 years ...

Exactly -- "let's you and him fight" is a
way of dealing with troublesome populations
by moving them next to one another, so they
give each other, and not the Man, grief*.

So by my understanding (and, you all will
understand, with tongue firmly in cheek):

Ireland:  Irish?  Uppity barbarians overly
   fond of "risings".  Scots?  More uppity
   barbarians overly fond of "risings".
   Why not plonk down a bunch of the latter
   next to the former and kill two birds
   with one stone?

Israel:  Ex-ottomans?  Uppity barbarians
   (didn't they help kick out the Ottomans?)
   Zionists?  Uppity sorts who aren't happy
   with perfectly good land in Uganda.  Why
   not plonk down a bunch of the latter next
   to the former and kill two birds with one
   stone?

but not:

India: in which the muslims and hindus were
    originally intermixed to some degree,
    but Partioned due to their own conflict,
    not due to English resettlement policy.

Canada: in which the french and english were
    already established, and it was just the
    balance of power on the continent that
    determined events in the colonies.  The
    Acadians got resettled, but they don't
    seem to have been that good for picking
    fights with their neighbors, so no one
    had them plonked down next door.

-Dave

* this works best with a populace who,
given "one man, one vote", immediately
deduce "one less man, one less vote" --
eh, Magnan?