London

>London
Invaded by Pakis
>Paris
Invaded by niggers and sand niggers
>Madrid
Invaded by sudacas
>Lisboa
Invaded by Pretos and Hues
>Amsterdam
Invaded by Indonesians
Was the colonization of land inhabited by inferior human beings the biggest mistake that the west has ever done?

The colonization of your mother's egg by your father's semen was the biggest mistake your parents have ever done.

t.Paki

Well user they really didn't get invaded, those countries willingly let them in.

I also just looked it up, only about 0.18% of the British population are refugees. Not an invasion if you ask me.

I'm of the opinion Pakistan and the surrounding countries should be wiped off the planet. That doesn't mean I'm going to tolerate /pol/ niggers shitting up this board, fuck off back to your containment zone.

theres more foriegners in australia then there are australians, and its not like the margins shrinking

Who's talking about refugees? London is less than 50% ethnic British

>population are refugees
Most migrants are not refugees.Just leeches that flood countries claiming muh payback due some made up historical opression
>Comparing europeans to niggers,pakis and sudacas

What makes someone a leech?

>>Madrid
>Invaded by sudacas
there are more spaniards in mexico than mexicans in spain

>Was the colonization of land inhabited by inferior human beings the biggest mistake that the west has ever done?
lmao

the superior west everyone

>Tenochtitlan was founded on an islet in the western part of the lake in the year 1325. Around it, the Aztecs created a large artificial island using a system similar to the creation of chinampas. To overcome the problems of drinking water, the Aztecs built a system of dams to separate the salty waters of the lake from the rain water of the effluents. It also permitted them to control the level of the lake. The city also had an inner system of channels that helped to control the water.

>During Cortés' siege of Tenochtitlan in 1521, the dams were destroyed, and never rebuilt, so flooding became a big problem for the new Mexico City built over Tenochtitlan.

>Mexico City suffered from periodic floods; in 1604 the lake flooded the city, with an even more severe flood following in 1607. Under the direction of Enrico Martínez, a drain was built to control the level of the lake, but in 1629 another flood kept most of the city covered for five years. At that time, it was debated whether to relocate the city, but Spanish authorities decided to keep the current location.

>Eventually the lake was drained by the channels and a tunnel to the Pánuco River, but even that could not stop floods, since by then most of the city was under the water table. The flooding could not be completely controlled until 1967, with the construction of a Deep Drainage System.

>The ecological consequences of the draining were enormous. Parts of the valleys were turned semi-arid, and even today Mexico City suffers for lack of water. Due to overdrafting that is depleting the aquifer beneath the city, Mexico City is estimated to have dropped 10 meters in the last century. Furthermore, because soft lake sediments underlie most of Mexico City, the city has proven vulnerable to soil liquefaction during earthquakes, most notably in the 1985 earthquake when hundreds of buildings collapsed and thousands of lives were lost.

>What makes someone a leech?
Leeching from SS while doing nothing other than fucking like rabbits to create more leeches
>there are more spaniards in mexico than mexicans in spain
People with european passport=/= actual europeans.There are 1.5 million South Americans in Spain

>Japan, Korea not at least partial European influence

bullshit

So are you saying that all immigrants are leeches? Is accepting immigrants an overall negative thing?

>russia
>european
pick one

>caring about Indians

>So are you saying that all immigrants are leeches?
Going by SS data 80% of them
>Is accepting immigrants an overall negative thing?
For the local population it is. Specially if they are barely human

>Liberia
>Never colonized by Europe
>One of the few African states that were 100% founded by Europeans

but without colonizatin Europe would be poor as fuck

>but without colonizatin Europe would be poor as fuck
>Switzerland
>Sweden
>Denmark
>Germany

You mean France and Britain would be poor as fuck.

Russia, Spain and Portugal as well but they're already poor as fuck.

Why have you ignored the russian colonies?

>Ethiopia
>under Italian rule for not even 5 years
>conquered but never controlled
>only thing Europeans built there was an ongoing hatred for Italians

t. Solomon Al nigger Abbis

Retarded Ameritrash meme. It's the opposite, many Europeans were actually hurt by colonization.

Same applies to Russia. Have you been to Moscow lately? It's full of central Asians, Chechens, Georgians and other trash.

It was controlled by the Italians for 5 years

Caucasians are the strongest race in the world

>>Switzerland
Made its wealth by being an area where people could hide and invest their ill-gotten gains, including those from colonization among other dubious enterprises

>>Sweden
>>Denmark
I'll concede this

>>Germany
Without colonization, Anglos and the other filth would still be manufacturing powers. Colonial countries, by choosing to be international financial vampires offshoring their work to third-world slaves opened the way for Germany to quickly surpass them by making their own high quality stuff by paying their workers a human wage. This even continues to this day, Germany being the fastest recovering first world nation from the 2008 crisis, even faster than the "world superpower" America, another Anglo internationalist mobster

Indonesians are not a problematic group. They are very integrated and even the leader of the nationalist party is partly indonesian. Our problem is kebab that was imported from the 60s.