※ 引述《plamc (普兰可)》之铭言：
: ※ 引述《revanchist (revanchist)》之铭言：
: : 此问题换另一个表述方式:
: : 英国如何才不会对华输入鸭片?
: : 答案是不可能.
: 你真的都不听别人讲捏
: 史实是
: 0.本来英国就没有想帮忙走私鸦片商，好好讲根本没事，是林则徐耍官威激怒义律
: 你不要又来说什么满清的错，我前面已经说n次，去追究死人骨头有错根本智障
: 这只是叙述事件经过而已
没有主动帮，但实际上帮了，两者都和输入鸦片不矛盾。
战争开打前，鸦片走私输入，打完继续输入。
人家在讲实质上的输入问题，
你在回应英国政府没想帮，根本没回应到点上，
营造个英国政府很好说话，满清官员低能搞事的氛围。
后者大家或许没啥意见，问题是前者到底有多少出于你幻想?
你这边提出好好讲没事，是说放弃要求就能避免战争。
还是英国会真的配合禁止鸦片?
有什么证据呢?
我倒是看到蛮多义律请求本国指示和权力都石沉大海。
~~
另一派死人描述的事情经过
Gentleman the Member for Mid Lothian (Mr. Gladstone). Speaking in the year
1840, about the Chinese War, the right hon. Gentleman said— They gave you
notice to abandon your contraband trade. When they found that you would not,
they had a right to drive you from their coasts, on account of your obstinacy
in persisting in this infamous and atrocious traffic. You allowed your agent
to aid and abet those who were concerned in carrying on that trade; and I do
not know how it can be urged as a crime against the Chinese that they refused
provisions to those who refused obedience to their laws whilst residing
within their territories.
1840年 议员的说法:
他们给过声明停止违禁品贸易，并且在发现不停止后有权驱逐人，
因为你们固执的坚持罪恶的交易。
你让你的手下帮助并助长那些参与交易者。
而我不知道，不提供口粮给拒绝遵从法律者却居于其境内者，
凭什么被算成中国的错。
: 1.鸦片战争后签南京条约，英国也没要求鸦片合法化
1889年的议员试图提议禁止鸦片提出的整理:
We had no right to go to war on such a ground, but unhappily we did go to war
and bombarded Canton and many other defenceless towns, and in the end
compelled the Chinese to pay to the smuggling traders an indemnity for the
opium destroyed. Still, we could not get them to legalize the trade.
我们没有合理基础开战，但还是打了，
并且让中国人赔偿那些走私商人，
但仍然无法让它们合法化鸦片贸易。
Ambassador, Sir H. Pottinger, tried it, and what was the noble reply made to
him by the Chinese Emperor? He said— It is true, I cannot prevent the
introduction of the flowing poison. Gain-seeking and corrupt men will, for
profit and sensuality, defeat my wishes, but nothing will induce me to derive
a revenue from the vice and misery of my people.
英国大使有要求，只是被皇帝拒绝了。
This was during the Government of Lord Palmerston. In this war the Chinese
were again defeated, the capital of China was taken, and the Chinese
compelled at the point of the bayonet to legalize the trade in opium under
the Treaty of Tientsin. Therefore, it was not till we had fought two
successful wars that we were enabled to bring about that result.
通过第二场战争，打到首都，才成功用武力让中国同意鸦片合法
I said that the Treaty of Tientsin legalized the trade in opium. But, after
a few years, the opium merchants began to complain that local dues were
placed upon opium in the interior, so high as to somewhat restrict the trade.
The Treaty of Tientsin, it appears, only provided for an Import Duty payable
at the Customs. And so they began, backed up by the Indian Government, to
agitate that we should urge upon China to abolish these inland imposts so as
to make it easier for opium to get up the country. And so we had the Chefoo
Convention in 1876, providing that there should be no "likin" imposts in the
interior, but that a certain fixed duty should be paid at the port in
addition to the Foreign Import Duty. This Chefoo Convention was not
considered to be sufficiently favourable to British trade by the Home
Government, and it remained unratified for no less than nine years. All that
time our Government continued to urge upon China more favourable terms. At
last the ratification was completed in the year 1885.
天津条约后，鸦片商人很快要求进一步调整内地的厘金。
在烟台条约中多年谈判才得到英国满意的结果。
Sir Thomas Wade, our Ambassador at Pekin, who wrote
the following despatch to the British Government in 1868:— We are generally
prone to forget that the footing we have in China has been obtained by force,
and by force alone, and that, unwarlike and unenergetic as we hold the
Chinese to be, it is in reality to the fear of force alone that we are
indebted for the safety we enjoy at certain points accessible to our force.…
Yet nothing that has been gained, it must be remembered, was received from
the free-will of the Chinese; more, the concessions made to us from time to
time have been, from first to last, extorted against the conscience of the
nation; in defiance, that is to say, of the moral convictions of its educated
men; not merely of the office-holders, whom we call mandarins, and who are
numerically but a small proportion of the educated class, but of the millions
who are saturated with a knowledge of the history and philosophy of their
country. To these, as a rule, the very extension of our trade must appear
politically, or what is in China the same thing, morally wrong: and the story
of foreign intercourse during the last 30 years can have had no effect but to
confirm them in their opinion.
1868年驻北京大使写:我们很容易忘了我们获取的一切都是透过武力，而非自愿。
这种强迫违背了国家的良心，不只是对官员/知识阶层，
还有百万计的受到历史知识与文化影响的大众，
因此，我们的贸易扩展(鸦片?)对我们和对中国都一样，是政治上/道德上错误的。
而当地过去30年来与外国的交流故事，只会强化这种意见。
: 2.1907年英国签约协助满清消除鸦片
: 1860年北京条约到1907年也才47年，不到半世纪，在历史尺度上是很短的时间
: 你要搞大历史叙述，请先记得大历史看的是长时间的趋势
: 所以英国明明没有要卖鸦片在先，有帮忙除鸦片在后，你说不可能
(突然发现你是用1860开始算，有点不知所谓。
既不是用鸦片战争也不是天津条约)
你是当英国内部从鸦片得利的人都不会做事吗?
本来就算无论道德，单从现实分析，
也是需要推算各方的利益与动机。
从，没有要卖但你不能阻止我卖。
到你必须合法让我卖，
最后不赚钱了，出于道德理由也不要卖了。
这样的思路转折明明是巨大的，
想厘清这问题却在这上面简化还讨论什么。
我还是很好奇你说的"可能"是什么东西。
如果你是想说等他赚个67年1840~1907，就会停了，
反正大历史来看也没多久。
那我只觉得被当白痴耍。
: 阿你自己爱羞辱满清、爱自己辱华，是你家的事，但幻想之前先顾一下史实如何?
有些东西本来就很难证明。或者有时当作听故事就算了，
但既然你说史实了，你要不要证实一下你的下列史实?
中国民众在鸦片战争到英法联军前，对外国势力不痛不痒
义律被激怒导致鸦片战争
鸦片战争不打英国就会主动禁止鸦片?