Board index › Topical Discussion › Politics, Philosophy, and Religion

Britain caused many of the world's problems

Page 3 of 4 [ 62 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4  Next

Previous topic | Next topic

NationalSocialist
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 76

07 Apr 2011, 5:08 pm

cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
Henbane wrote:
I'm also a bit suspicious about his historical knowledge given that he has also said that Britain was the 'junior partner' to the US in WWII in 1940. Given that the US hadn't joined the war at that point it made him look both ignorant and pathetically subserviant.


Yup. We stood on our own in Europe. To carry on fighting like that took an awful lot of balls. We may have been less powerful militarily than the other 'big three' major players but we still had an Empire then, which was essentially destroyed by the war.


I think you'll find that you carried on fighting because you started a war with Germany and then went on to turn down several peace offers from Germany, but alas to no avail, no, the British wanted "total war", which in itself was an unusual phrase to use since their so called war affort was consistent almost entirely of exterminating millions of civilians through bombing, culminating in the most sadistic act of the war, the daily firestorm attacks over a defeated people, truly chilling.


Who invaded Poland in 1939? Two days after Poland was invaded France and Britain declared war.


The Soviet union for the second time, Britain going to war to save Poland worked all right then I take it..................oh.


Germany did 16 days before the Soviet's


The Soviet's first invaded Poland during 1920.



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

07 Apr 2011, 5:15 pm

NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
Henbane wrote:
I'm also a bit suspicious about his historical knowledge given that he has also said that Britain was the 'junior partner' to the US in WWII in 1940. Given that the US hadn't joined the war at that point it made him look both ignorant and pathetically subserviant.


Yup. We stood on our own in Europe. To carry on fighting like that took an awful lot of balls. We may have been less powerful militarily than the other 'big three' major players but we still had an Empire then, which was essentially destroyed by the war.


I think you'll find that you carried on fighting because you started a war with Germany and then went on to turn down several peace offers from Germany, but alas to no avail, no, the British wanted "total war", which in itself was an unusual phrase to use since their so called war affort was consistent almost entirely of exterminating millions of civilians through bombing, culminating in the most sadistic act of the war, the daily firestorm attacks over a defeated people, truly chilling.


Who invaded Poland in 1939? Two days after Poland was invaded France and Britain declared war.


The Soviet union for the second time, Britain going to war to save Poland worked all right then I take it..................oh.


Germany did 16 days before the Soviet's


The Soviet's first invaded Poland during 1920.


That was a different war, and the causes were fundamentally different. At the time Russia was in civil war and it was not even clear that the Reds were going to win. Their invasion of Poland was, to them, tantamount to reclaiming lost territory that had been part of Russia for 120 years or so. It doesn't make it right, but that war isn't relevant to the 1939 invasion where the goal was to invade and divide an internationally recognized sovereign nation.
Frankly I don't blame Britain for not wanting peace with the Third Reich. The puppet governments it enforced upon the occupied territories are deserving of nothing but contempt, and the British did the right thing not making peace with Hitler's empire


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

07 Apr 2011, 5:17 pm

NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
Henbane wrote:
I'm also a bit suspicious about his historical knowledge given that he has also said that Britain was the 'junior partner' to the US in WWII in 1940. Given that the US hadn't joined the war at that point it made him look both ignorant and pathetically subserviant.


Yup. We stood on our own in Europe. To carry on fighting like that took an awful lot of balls. We may have been less powerful militarily than the other 'big three' major players but we still had an Empire then, which was essentially destroyed by the war.


I think you'll find that you carried on fighting because you started a war with Germany and then went on to turn down several peace offers from Germany, but alas to no avail, no, the British wanted "total war", which in itself was an unusual phrase to use since their so called war affort was consistent almost entirely of exterminating millions of civilians through bombing, culminating in the most sadistic act of the war, the daily firestorm attacks over a defeated people, truly chilling.


Who invaded Poland in 1939? Two days after Poland was invaded France and Britain declared war.


The Soviet union for the second time, Britain going to war to save Poland worked all right then I take it..................oh.


Germany did 16 days before the Soviet's


The Soviet's first invaded Poland during 1920.


if the british are such a warmongering people why havent they invaded denmark, they have more than enough reason to if history is a judge in those matters(not to me though)?

i find the whole idea of using long gone actions to accuse people completely ridicoulous.

@vigilans the danish government were cowards, but they were left with little choice but to corporate, we are basically a peninsula to the german mainland, we were cut off to begin with.

i agree that the pocket governments were nothing more than PR, also why i agree the british had every right to step up for the countries that didnt have the means, i really cant see how mutual crimes of war changes this, it was war in a way humanity had never experienced and hopefully we will have learned a little from it.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


Last edited by Oodain on 07 Apr 2011, 5:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.

Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

07 Apr 2011, 5:18 pm

Oodain wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
Henbane wrote:
I'm also a bit suspicious about his historical knowledge given that he has also said that Britain was the 'junior partner' to the US in WWII in 1940. Given that the US hadn't joined the war at that point it made him look both ignorant and pathetically subserviant.


Yup. We stood on our own in Europe. To carry on fighting like that took an awful lot of balls. We may have been less powerful militarily than the other 'big three' major players but we still had an Empire then, which was essentially destroyed by the war.


I think you'll find that you carried on fighting because you started a war with Germany and then went on to turn down several peace offers from Germany, but alas to no avail, no, the British wanted "total war", which in itself was an unusual phrase to use since their so called war affort was consistent almost entirely of exterminating millions of civilians through bombing, culminating in the most sadistic act of the war, the daily firestorm attacks over a defeated people, truly chilling.


Who invaded Poland in 1939? Two days after Poland was invaded France and Britain declared war.


The Soviet union for the second time, Britain going to war to save Poland worked all right then I take it..................oh.


Germany did 16 days before the Soviet's


The Soviet's first invaded Poland during 1920.


if the british are such a warmongering people why havent they invaded denmark, they have more than enough reason to if history is a judge in those matters(not to me though)?

i find the whole idea of using long gone actions to accuse people completely ridicoulous.


What do you expect from a National Socialist? They venerate the past to the detriment of the present and future. An ideology of failure and longing for the 'good 'ol days'


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


NationalSocialist
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 76

07 Apr 2011, 5:19 pm

Oodain wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
Henbane wrote:
I'm also a bit suspicious about his historical knowledge given that he has also said that Britain was the 'junior partner' to the US in WWII in 1940. Given that the US hadn't joined the war at that point it made him look both ignorant and pathetically subserviant.


Yup. We stood on our own in Europe. To carry on fighting like that took an awful lot of balls. We may have been less powerful militarily than the other 'big three' major players but we still had an Empire then, which was essentially destroyed by the war.


I think you'll find that you carried on fighting because you started a war with Germany and then went on to turn down several peace offers from Germany, but alas to no avail, no, the British wanted "total war", which in itself was an unusual phrase to use since their so called war affort was consistent almost entirely of exterminating millions of civilians through bombing, culminating in the most sadistic act of the war, the daily firestorm attacks over a defeated people, truly chilling.


Who invaded Poland in 1939? Two days after Poland was invaded France and Britain declared war.


The Soviet union for the second time, Britain going to war to save Poland worked all right then I take it..................oh.


Germany did 16 days before the Soviet's


The Soviet's first invaded Poland during 1920.


if the british are such a warmongering people why havent they invaded denmark, they have more than enough reason to if history is a judge in those matters(not to me though)?

i find the whole idea of using long gone actions to accuse people completely ridicoulous.


If they had the chance they likely would have, they did invade Iceland during 1940 after all.



MotherKnowsBest
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 14 Nov 2009
Age: 52
Gender: Female
Posts: 1,196

07 Apr 2011, 5:20 pm

Oodain wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
Henbane wrote:
I'm also a bit suspicious about his historical knowledge given that he has also said that Britain was the 'junior partner' to the US in WWII in 1940. Given that the US hadn't joined the war at that point it made him look both ignorant and pathetically subserviant.


Yup. We stood on our own in Europe. To carry on fighting like that took an awful lot of balls. We may have been less powerful militarily than the other 'big three' major players but we still had an Empire then, which was essentially destroyed by the war.


I think you'll find that you carried on fighting because you started a war with Germany and then went on to turn down several peace offers from Germany, but alas to no avail, no, the British wanted "total war", which in itself was an unusual phrase to use since their so called war affort was consistent almost entirely of exterminating millions of civilians through bombing, culminating in the most sadistic act of the war, the daily firestorm attacks over a defeated people, truly chilling.


Who invaded Poland in 1939? Two days after Poland was invaded France and Britain declared war.


The Soviet union for the second time, Britain going to war to save Poland worked all right then I take it..................oh.


Germany did 16 days before the Soviet's


The Soviet's first invaded Poland during 1920.


if the british are such a warmongering people why havent they invaded denmark, they have more than enough reason to if history is a judge in those matters(not to me though)?

i find the whole idea of using long gone actions to accuse people completely ridicoulous.


Because you already send over your bacon. You have nothing else we want. :D



Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

07 Apr 2011, 5:21 pm

NationalSocialist wrote:
Oodain wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
Henbane wrote:
I'm also a bit suspicious about his historical knowledge given that he has also said that Britain was the 'junior partner' to the US in WWII in 1940. Given that the US hadn't joined the war at that point it made him look both ignorant and pathetically subserviant.


Yup. We stood on our own in Europe. To carry on fighting like that took an awful lot of balls. We may have been less powerful militarily than the other 'big three' major players but we still had an Empire then, which was essentially destroyed by the war.


I think you'll find that you carried on fighting because you started a war with Germany and then went on to turn down several peace offers from Germany, but alas to no avail, no, the British wanted "total war", which in itself was an unusual phrase to use since their so called war affort was consistent almost entirely of exterminating millions of civilians through bombing, culminating in the most sadistic act of the war, the daily firestorm attacks over a defeated people, truly chilling.


Who invaded Poland in 1939? Two days after Poland was invaded France and Britain declared war.


The Soviet union for the second time, Britain going to war to save Poland worked all right then I take it..................oh.


Germany did 16 days before the Soviet's


The Soviet's first invaded Poland during 1920.


if the british are such a warmongering people why havent they invaded denmark, they have more than enough reason to if history is a judge in those matters(not to me though)?

i find the whole idea of using long gone actions to accuse people completely ridicoulous.


If they had the chance they likely would have, they did invade Iceland during 1940 after all.


That was to prevent the Third Reich from using it as a naval base
Not unlike the Third Reich invading Norway as a means of preventing allied landings there preventing cut-off from vital Swedish iron


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


cdfox7
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,700

07 Apr 2011, 5:24 pm

Vigilans wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
Henbane wrote:
I'm also a bit suspicious about his historical knowledge given that he has also said that Britain was the 'junior partner' to the US in WWII in 1940. Given that the US hadn't joined the war at that point it made him look both ignorant and pathetically subserviant.


Yup. We stood on our own in Europe. To carry on fighting like that took an awful lot of balls. We may have been less powerful militarily than the other 'big three' major players but we still had an Empire then, which was essentially destroyed by the war.


I think you'll find that you carried on fighting because you started a war with Germany and then went on to turn down several peace offers from Germany, but alas to no avail, no, the British wanted "total war", which in itself was an unusual phrase to use since their so called war affort was consistent almost entirely of exterminating millions of civilians through bombing, culminating in the most sadistic act of the war, the daily firestorm attacks over a defeated people, truly chilling.


Who invaded Poland in 1939? Two days after Poland was invaded France and Britain declared war.


The Soviet union for the second time, Britain going to war to save Poland worked all right then I take it..................oh.


Germany did 16 days before the Soviet's


The Soviet's first invaded Poland during 1920.


That was a different war, and the causes were fundamentally different. At the time Russia was in civil war and it was not even clear that the Reds were going to win. Their invasion of Poland was, to them, tantamount to reclaiming lost territory that had been part of Russia for 120 years or so. It doesn't make it right, but that war isn't relevant to the 1939 invasion where the goal was to invade and divide an internationally recognized sovereign nation.
Frankly I don't blame Britain for not wanting peace with the Third Reich. The puppet governments it enforced upon the occupied territories are deserving of nothing but contempt, and the British did the right thing not making peace with Hitler's empire


Very true, Any way the Soviet's didn't sign the German–Polish Non-Aggression Pact of 1934



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

07 Apr 2011, 5:26 pm

MotherKnowsBest wrote:
Because you already send over your bacon. You have nothing else we want. :D


:lmao:

@vigilans technically denmark is a nationalist country and i am a socialist(with a healthy injection of liberalism)
so if im technically a national socialist i fear we have arrived at a paradox :lol:
//looks at clock, waiting for space time to rupture, sigh.

still i find this whole thread has an odd taste in my mouth.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


NationalSocialist
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 76

07 Apr 2011, 5:27 pm

Vigilans wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Oodain wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
Henbane wrote:
I'm also a bit suspicious about his historical knowledge given that he has also said that Britain was the 'junior partner' to the US in WWII in 1940. Given that the US hadn't joined the war at that point it made him look both ignorant and pathetically subserviant.


Yup. We stood on our own in Europe. To carry on fighting like that took an awful lot of balls. We may have been less powerful militarily than the other 'big three' major players but we still had an Empire then, which was essentially destroyed by the war.


I think you'll find that you carried on fighting because you started a war with Germany and then went on to turn down several peace offers from Germany, but alas to no avail, no, the British wanted "total war", which in itself was an unusual phrase to use since their so called war affort was consistent almost entirely of exterminating millions of civilians through bombing, culminating in the most sadistic act of the war, the daily firestorm attacks over a defeated people, truly chilling.


Who invaded Poland in 1939? Two days after Poland was invaded France and Britain declared war.


The Soviet union for the second time, Britain going to war to save Poland worked all right then I take it..................oh.


Germany did 16 days before the Soviet's


The Soviet's first invaded Poland during 1920.


if the british are such a warmongering people why havent they invaded denmark, they have more than enough reason to if history is a judge in those matters(not to me though)?

i find the whole idea of using long gone actions to accuse people completely ridicoulous.


If they had the chance they likely would have, they did invade Iceland during 1940 after all.


That was to prevent the Third Reich from using it as a naval base
Not unlike the Third Reich invading Norway as a means of preventing allied landings there preventing cut-off from vital Swedish iron


The same Norway who Britain attacked first? April 8, 1940 British warships mined the fjords of Norway.



Oodain
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 30 Jan 2011
Age: 34
Gender: Male
Posts: 5,022
Location: in my own little tamarillo jungle,

07 Apr 2011, 5:27 pm

cdfox7 wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
Henbane wrote:
I'm also a bit suspicious about his historical knowledge given that he has also said that Britain was the 'junior partner' to the US in WWII in 1940. Given that the US hadn't joined the war at that point it made him look both ignorant and pathetically subserviant.


Yup. We stood on our own in Europe. To carry on fighting like that took an awful lot of balls. We may have been less powerful militarily than the other 'big three' major players but we still had an Empire then, which was essentially destroyed by the war.


I think you'll find that you carried on fighting because you started a war with Germany and then went on to turn down several peace offers from Germany, but alas to no avail, no, the British wanted "total war", which in itself was an unusual phrase to use since their so called war affort was consistent almost entirely of exterminating millions of civilians through bombing, culminating in the most sadistic act of the war, the daily firestorm attacks over a defeated people, truly chilling.


Who invaded Poland in 1939? Two days after Poland was invaded France and Britain declared war.


The Soviet union for the second time, Britain going to war to save Poland worked all right then I take it..................oh.


Germany did 16 days before the Soviet's


The Soviet's first invaded Poland during 1920.


That was a different war, and the causes were fundamentally different. At the time Russia was in civil war and it was not even clear that the Reds were going to win. Their invasion of Poland was, to them, tantamount to reclaiming lost territory that had been part of Russia for 120 years or so. It doesn't make it right, but that war isn't relevant to the 1939 invasion where the goal was to invade and divide an internationally recognized sovereign nation.
Frankly I don't blame Britain for not wanting peace with the Third Reich. The puppet governments it enforced upon the occupied territories are deserving of nothing but contempt, and the British did the right thing not making peace with Hitler's empire


Very true, Any way the Soviet's didn't sign the German–Polish Non-Aggression Pact of 1934


a promise the germans aperantly couldnt wait to break.


_________________
//through chaos comes complexity//

the scent of the tamarillo is pungent and powerfull,
woe be to the nose who nears it.


Vigilans
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 19 Jun 2008
Age: 35
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,181
Location: Montreal

07 Apr 2011, 5:39 pm

NationalSocialist wrote:
Vigilans wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Oodain wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
cdfox7 wrote:
NationalSocialist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
Henbane wrote:
I'm also a bit suspicious about his historical knowledge given that he has also said that Britain was the 'junior partner' to the US in WWII in 1940. Given that the US hadn't joined the war at that point it made him look both ignorant and pathetically subserviant.


Yup. We stood on our own in Europe. To carry on fighting like that took an awful lot of balls. We may have been less powerful militarily than the other 'big three' major players but we still had an Empire then, which was essentially destroyed by the war.


I think you'll find that you carried on fighting because you started a war with Germany and then went on to turn down several peace offers from Germany, but alas to no avail, no, the British wanted "total war", which in itself was an unusual phrase to use since their so called war affort was consistent almost entirely of exterminating millions of civilians through bombing, culminating in the most sadistic act of the war, the daily firestorm attacks over a defeated people, truly chilling.


Who invaded Poland in 1939? Two days after Poland was invaded France and Britain declared war.


The Soviet union for the second time, Britain going to war to save Poland worked all right then I take it..................oh.


Germany did 16 days before the Soviet's


The Soviet's first invaded Poland during 1920.


if the british are such a warmongering people why havent they invaded denmark, they have more than enough reason to if history is a judge in those matters(not to me though)?

i find the whole idea of using long gone actions to accuse people completely ridicoulous.


If they had the chance they likely would have, they did invade Iceland during 1940 after all.


That was to prevent the Third Reich from using it as a naval base
Not unlike the Third Reich invading Norway as a means of preventing allied landings there preventing cut-off from vital Swedish iron


The same Norway who Britain attacked first? April 8, 1940 British warships mined the fjords of Norway.


The British effort to mine the North Sea was an utter failure, and I would say, containing National Socialism justifies preemptive action. Considering the Third Reich in almost all cases acted as if its offensive moves were 'preemptive' actions, this is a moot point, as World War II became increasingly complex as it became clear that total war requires belligerence towards neutral nations, unfortunately. Practiced by the Axis and the Allies


_________________
Opportunities multiply as they are seized. -Sun Tzu
Nature creates few men brave, industry and training makes many -Machiavelli
You can safely assume that you've created God in your own image when it turns out that God hates all the same people you do


Awesomelyglorious
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 17 Dec 2005
Gender: Male
Posts: 13,157
Location: Omnipresent

07 Apr 2011, 6:52 pm

Unless there is seriously a lot more to this, this is all overblown nonsense. Unless David Cameron is undermining British interests, or being outright fallacious, then who cares?? Not a real issue. We might as well still be talking about Monica Lewinski or Condoleeza Rice's potential crush on GW Bush or some other false new item.



cdfox7
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Mar 2011
Age: 45
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,700

07 Apr 2011, 7:23 pm

Awesomelyglorious wrote:
Unless there is seriously a lot more to this, this is all overblown nonsense. Unless David Cameron is undermining British interests, or being outright fallacious, then who cares?? Not a real issue. We might as well still be talking about Monica Lewinski or Condoleeza Rice's potential crush on GW Bush or some other false new item.


No as Nick Clegg hopefully should keep him in check. The only way the Tory's can seriously undermine our interests is by letting Boris Johnson run the country.



TheBicyclingGuitarist
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 27 May 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,332

07 Apr 2011, 7:30 pm

Tequila wrote:
There are places where the British behaved terribly, I agree - but sometimes you just have to let it go. Unfortunately, some people can't do that. Blaming 'da Brits' for ever and ever will get you nowhere but simmering in your own bitterness.


I love the Brits, but they did horrible things to India. At least one of their governors did all he could to eradicate Indian culture back in the day. Of course he thought he was doing them a favor.

My late father traveled the world pretty much continuously several decades as a flight engineer in the U.S. Air Force through World War 2, Korea and VietNam. During WW 2 he served in the China-Burma-India Theater with the Army Air Forces. He told me that the Indian people were some of the nicest people he'd ever seen in his years of travel worldwide. He also said it made him sick to see how the British in India treated the native peoples.

Still, when one considers what the Nazi Germans did and what they wanted to do to other peoples, the British were practically saints by comparison.


_________________
"When you ride over sharps, you get flats!"--The Bicycling Guitarist, May 13, 2008


NationalSocialist
Blue Jay
Blue Jay

User avatar

Joined: 28 Mar 2011
Gender: Male
Posts: 76

07 Apr 2011, 7:41 pm

TheBicyclingGuitarist wrote:
Tequila wrote:
There are places where the British behaved terribly, I agree - but sometimes you just have to let it go. Unfortunately, some people can't do that. Blaming 'da Brits' for ever and ever will get you nowhere but simmering in your own bitterness.


I love the Brits, but they did horrible things to India. At least one of their governors did all he could to eradicate Indian culture back in the day. Of course he thought he was doing them a favor.

My late father traveled the world pretty much continuously several decades as a flight engineer in the U.S. Air Force through World War 2, Korea and VietNam. During WW 2 he served in the China-Burma-India Theater with the Army Air Forces. He told me that the Indian people were some of the nicest people he'd ever seen in his years of travel worldwide. He also said it made him sick to see how the British in India treated the native peoples.

Still, when one considers what the Nazi Germans did and what they wanted to do to other peoples, the British were practically saints by comparison.


A lot of Indians were very big fans of National Socialism and agreed with their fight against British imperialism. Take the Legion Freies Indien for example.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Indische_Legion




Image

Image

Image

Image