Is it true that WWII was a pyrrhic victory for UK?

Do you think it would have been better for most of the people to remain in the empire?

>UK
>Won WW2
They lost, just like France, Poland and all other european states sans the USSR

If the british themselves were more pious, yes.

You 2 are aware the Brits had the largest economy on earth until the 20's?

You 2 are aware the empire gave them access to huge amounts of resources and oil, and a practical monopoly on trade in Asia?

You 2 are aware the British had created an army of 8.8 million by 1918, and had the largest army of ww1 behind only Russia and Germany?

You 2 are also aware the British held the largest navy on earth until the late 40's?

It turns out the 'Empire' isn't just used to refer to the amount of land they had, you utter braindead retards.

>Triggered britcuck detected
LMFAO enjoy your pakis

Nice argument

Refute it if you can
>Pro tip: YOU CAN`T

>tfw you realize Brits are now laughing stock of the world, just because they decided to rather sacrifice their whole empire to beat the greatest evil in history when they had the option of joining it and actually expanding their lands

But he's right.

>greatest evil in history
No, that was communism.

Also, I think in some ways they are still one of three countries that rule the western world. I don't find them to be a laughingstock at all.

>No, that was communism

>public ownership of industry is somehow more evil than systematically murdering an entire race

Britain went into it with the absolute worst of intentions. The goal was preservation of the empire, and they hadn't the competence to achieve even that modest goal.
Brits are the laughing stock of the world because they tried to be the puppetmaster but the puppets turned and gang raped them.
More importantly, Nazis were not the greatest evil in history, stop kneejerking over /pol/, it just makes them feel validated.

this is a very bad post

Says the communist. Sure are a lot of Tatars, Mordvins and Karelians kicking around.
The USSR successfully murdered more races than the Nazis ever set out to, without even intentionally doing so.
Also, I sure would be happier if the pederast secret police owned industry rather than those nasty pederast capitalists! You can really taste the fucking difference.

What you said is true, but aren’t actual doctrines of socialism. The communist manifesto doesn’t order the murder of races.

Yes, the USSR did those things, but blaming it on communism is like blaming capitalism for the Native American Genocide.

the "not true communist" fallacy
Haven't we been over this enough times? I can't believe people still do this.

Not him and not a gommie , I was just scrolling the front page, but that's not remotely what he said. Your retarding comprehension is retard tier.

Have you actually read the communist manifesto, or any socialist literature?

I’ll ask you a question to see if it’s communist.

Do the workers control the means of production?

Yes: It is communist

No: It is not communist

It’s that simple.

Furthermore, you didn’t actually respond to my analogy.

If I said the genocide of the Native Americans is proof capitalism is evil, and you responded with ‘What does that have to do with capitalism?’, to which I responded with ‘Not REEEEEAl capitalism’, the logical fallacy appears obvious, doesn’t it?

Newsflash: Socialism is an economic theory, not a racial one. Associating the ideology with outside aspects makes literally no sense from a political perspective. It’s like blaming your neighbour you overcooked your dinner.

Your tired memes are as bad as your political knowledge.

Absolutely, It started even before WW2.
The experience of troops from Canada, Australia, NZ, etc. sowed a national identity within the commonwealth
They complete inability of the UK to defend its overseas territories in WW2 (such as Singapore) only intensified those national identities

Taking people's property by force for redistribution is indefensible.

...

>India
>one of the 4 great ancient civilizations, a constant center of culture and trade, an entire subcontinent with a culture as rich and diverse as Europe, China , or the Middle East
>shit-tier

Yes, and you gave it all up, just like that. You fucking suck.

>Not understanding Britain had to give it up due to the massive debt the Great Depression and ww2 put them in
>Saying You as if I was the prime minster at the time
>Not understanding Britain is still hugely influential today

The India of today is not the Indus Valley civilization.

Yes, but India was weak and divided in this moment.

>You 2 are aware the Brits had the largest economy on earth until the 20's ?

Capitalism isn't military power

>You 2 are aware the empire gave them access to huge amounts of resources and oil, and a practical monopoly on trade in Asia?

Yes but their "empire" were so spread out that it was more a embarrassment to take of it that an actual advantage... It was a very weak empire that fell apart very quickly

>You 2 are aware the British had created an army of 8.8 million by 1918, and had the largest army of ww1 behind only Russia and Germany?

Ridiculous, British army never been this big. At best 2 millions in 1918, but certainly more accurately like 1,5 to 1,7 millions of fighters whereas the French had ~ 3,3 M and Germans ~4M

British one could be at best, considered at the 6th army after the Austro-hungarian and their 2,8 M
>You 2 are also aware the British held the largest navy on earth until the late 40's?

British had the biggest navy but never had consequent and serious army.

I honesty had a hard time reading this post. Is English your first language?

Well he's the anti-british poster who keeps posting the meme that the british just conquered empty space... so it's 99% certain he's french.

lol, didn't think of that

>Capitalism isn't military power

We're discussing empire not military

>Yes but their "empire" were so spread out that it was more a embarrassment to take of it that an actual advantage... It was a very weak empire that fell apart very quickly

What are you even saying here? i can't understand your english

>Ridiculous, British army never been this big. At best 2 millions in 1918, but certainly more accurately like 1,5 to 1,7 millions of fighters whereas the French had ~ 3,3 M and Germans ~4M

It's true. Get over it.

>British had the biggest navy but never had consequent and serious army.

Navy is also a very powerful tool, fuckwit. and I've proven they created a very large army.

Yeah, can't believe he was implying that a Navy isn't one of the most powerful parts of an armed force.

Churchill ruined everything back in WW1. Gallipoli caused a massive loss of faith in the english comand, and strenghted aussie and kiwi nationalism. He doomed the empire he spent half a century trying to save.

The empire was doomed the moment they chose home rule over decentralized federationism.

Britain's dominance over its empire was secured by their massive economic domination. Once the US began to overtake them, it was doomed unless they actively united the territories under one government.

It was a Pyrrhic victory for all parties except USA

What about the Soviet Union?

Their GDP practically doubled and they gained a ton of puppet states and land

>Capitalism isn't military power

This is retarded

>Yes but their "empire" were so spread out that it was more a embarrassment to take of it that an actual advantage... It was a very weak empire that fell apart very quickly

I think you mean an empire that gave them unprecedented power projection and enormous wealth

Ridiculous, British army never been this big. At best 2 millions in 1918, but certainly more accurately like 1,5 to 1,7 millions of fighters whereas the French had ~ 3,3 M and Germans ~4M

>British one could be at best, considered at the 6th army after the Austro-hungarian and their 2,8 M

regardless of army size the British army was in the top 3 or 4 in the world and had terrifying naval strength

>British had the biggest navy but never had consequent and serious army.

And you're ignoring naval strength as a measure of empire because ?

>Ireland
>1921

No, the Teutons still exist. We won't be victorious until every Teuton has been removed

How is Canada sparsely populated? We have more people than holland, Belgium, Portugal, Greece, Yugoslavia, Austria, Hungary, Scandinavia, Ireland etc.

The 4 great ancient civilizations are
England
Canada
Australia
New Zealand
You can't debate this

Their infrastructure was demolished, and they lost a good percentage of their population.

If it wasn't for their puppets they would've been irrelevant

This.

I hope you are just a troll and I don't have to explain this to you.

Canada is severely overpopulated retard, we can sustain a population of maybe 15 million people maximum. That's why we need colonies we have to send our excess Anglos to the carribean.

1. It had almost no population back then.
2. Average population density of the entire country is very low. It doesn't matter how much of that land it habitable.

No and I'am not an " anti-British" poster I'am just telling the truth about how overrated British propaganda made the British Empire

Empire is about having dominance and power over other populations living in your empire. Therefor, an Empire always need a Strong army to maintain the order and to defend it against other Empire.

It's clearly not the case of the British Empire which never been a strong and big permanent Army contrary to the French and the German one.

>It's true. Get over it.

>British had the biggest navy but never had consequent and serious army.

>Navy is also a very powerful tool, fuckwit. and I've proven they created a very large army.

You prove how retarded a big retard like you is by this picture.

Perhaps a big navy is tool, but the decisive point still the continental army...

The most important part is the continental Army and a Navy is only relevant when it comes to fight far war away in desert land.

The power of an Empire is decided by the strength of his army and his political regime. Naval power is only a tool to serve this two powers.

The British army was dog shit and always dog shit and his political regime is the weak constitutional regime which always need a lot of time to give the credit of war.

>I think you mean an empire that gave them unprecedented power projection and enormous wealth

A lot of Countries at this time had enormous resources possibilities like the German Empire, the Russian one with the immensity of his territory and the French one with his African Empire.

And Power of projection for which army ? This ridiculous army of 80K unable to take care of Boers ?

>regardless of army size the British army was in the top 3 or 4 in the world and had terrifying naval strength

Wrong, British naval army was good but the British continental army was completely shit and cannot compete with continental powers.

British empire was huge, but they were third or 4 in that chapter, portuguese and spanish were the first that discovered the world. french, dutch, british were a step behind

>The most important part is the continental Army and a Navy is only relevant when it comes to fight far war away in desert land.
With the prevalence of proxy wars or destruction of other Empires' colonial holdings I would say that is very important.

You're basically, like all Britbong, staying blind to the fact that the British Empire was essentially a Capitalist -Empire without any decent army able to match in size and quality the continental power armies and letting the French alone as the policeman of the world after WW1.

Staying blind to the fact that British regime was very weak compared to others

Staying blind to the fact that a big force of projection is good when you have a big army to project

That a big navy without a decent continental army is dooming you're empire to rely on the Frenchmen to fight in the trenches at your places

You deny that Canada and Australia aren't Empire since they're just desert land with only a few tribes and where British Settled ?

You Deny that the size of the British Empire wasn't for the British Empire a source of difficulties

You deny the fact that the populations under British domination were not ready to fight do death for the queen and therefor, their subjugation was very low and a source of embarrassment

Colonial Empire is a meme, the worst and most fragile type of Empire. Look how they fell after WW2.

A squared kilometer of European worth at least 10 squared kilometers of colonial empire. Only a retard can't understand this.

The German Empire was clearly the bigger and stronger, a real Empire having dominance over Europe and continental power with a strong state, a strong army and a strong navy...

USA BITCH!!!!!!!!!!!!!
BTFO REST OF THE WORLD!!!!!!!!!!

you are so french it hurts, kek

>>India
>>Shit tier people

Butthurt Slav confirmed.

It would have been better for most of the people to have never been in the empire in the first place.

Pyrrhic victory would be putting it lightly

>>India was not insignificant.

Precisely my point. It wasn't called the crown jewel of the British empire for nothing.

You may be right. But as long as they extract resources and move on they will be okay. Isn't that what they did?

>Empire is about having dominance and power over other populations living in your empire. Therefor, an Empire always need a Strong army to maintain the order and to defend it against other Empire.

What a retarded assumption. The Romans didn't keep an active military force in most of their territories, most medieval empires had levied armies. The US was the only part that broke away militarily. Every time a colony did rebel (eg 1857), the brits still won.

>You prove how retarded a big retard like you is by this picture.

Okay?

>Perhaps a big navy is tool, but the decisive point still the continental army...

To which Britain created an 8 million strong force of.

I don't know.. They brought democracy.

>Britain is still hugely influential today

5th largest army
5th richest nation

They are, they control the west still.

Idc you dumb foreign ape don't tell my country can support more people dumb cunt it can't
I used to be able to walk through the middle of my street by 6pm in Toronto just 20 years ago now I can't because we have so many people and cars

Holy shit dude.. you are missing the point so bad

>they control the west still.

Then who does?

(((who))) indeed

USA

No I'm not
How can America be western when it's not even white?

Nah the most overrated is the mongols by a country mile.

Delusional. It was simply British policy to stop one superpower dominating Europe.

Alright Pat Buchanan

Well, Germany's still dominating Europe, so I guess that didn't work out so well

I love how retards(most of them neither living in the EU nor understanding it's structure) repeat this shitty butthurt I-hate-germans meme but they are never able to provide any evidence or examples for this claim.

EU can't be ruled by a single nation just google how they make decisions.

>repeat this shitty butthurt I-hate-germans meme
Lmao, calm down, Hans

No, the US rules North America. We generally let Euros do what they want.

No you don't, you only rule South America.
They got influenced by your republican scam but Canada is still a monarchy

It'd be a "haha calm down hans" if he wasn't totally right. People form entire political opinions on the basis of reading on Veeky Forums that "the EU is the damn KRAUTS NAZI GERMANY EUROPE DOMINATION" again

Honestly Spain are bigger fags in the EU than Germany are m8

>or Shit tier people such as Africans or India.
The only reason the EIC even expanded is because of the decline of the Marathas who bled every other power dry.
Until then they had lost most of the wars in the subcontinent.

Retard britbong, the Romans had a big influence over the people they dominated. They were pratically assimilated and used the Roman Law.

>Every time a colony did rebel (eg 1857), the brits still won.

Against Abos, Native, black and Poo in loo Oh my god, so impressive

>To which Britain created an 8 million strong force of.

Which is false and a lie from a retarded butthurt britbong :)

>downplaying the 1857 rebellion
>forgetting the opium wars
Stop b8ing. Where are you from m8?

ah, found the paki.

Yet Germany Scrambled to get its own colonies layer on boy.

>most british colonies don't use common law
>most british colonies aren't part of the Commonwealth.

its perfectly defensible,

the homeless's right to shelter overrides your right to keep your rental property empty.

the starvings right to food overrides your right to sell your food for ridiculous prices.

generally it won't come to a massive peasant rebellion killing all the bourgeoisie that resist.

you will get a "New Deal" instead, where a compromise is met, but realize pure unregulated capitalism is a recipe for eventual communist takeovers.

They entered the war to save Poland, the Soviet Union after liberating installed their own loyal government.

Soviets beat the British.

Right after America gained independence, Lincon set a tax on all goods higher than just the tea tax while Benji gave pirates large amounts of gold, that would attack americans anyway while trying his best to strength the executive power of president that he had previously so warned against. There is a lot of evidence that America was set up by British traders as a tax haven after the monarch started disbanding monopolies, most likely the Whigs. Today Americans must pay the IRS or go to debtors jail. And they still think their the best country in the world despite how many cults, brainwashing security agents, gangs, human trafficing is allowed to happen by the very people they elect.

>They entered the war to save Poland
No, they entered the war to stop Germany. Poland was just another puppet

>Which is false and a lie from a retarded butthurt britbong :)
He's got a point though, dingus. If we look at the numbers, Russia called on a total of 12 million troops throughout the entirety of the war, Germany 11 million, Britain and its dominions 8.9 million and France 8.4 million.

Those soldiers weren't all serving at the same time though. For example, in November 1943 the Wehrmacht had about 6.3 million active soldiers. By the end of the war around 17.3 million soldiers had served in the Wehrmacht, but claiming it had a strength of 17.3 million soldiers in 1945 would be objectively wrong

well guess how pissed Churchill was when the Soviets puppetted his puppet.