Tell me about this country Veeky Forums. How come it is surrounded by powerful and historically rich countries...

>do you have examples of them being vile and disgusting?
They didn't allow the French to continue the Maginot line on their territory and made it clear what continuing it along the French-Belgium border would be considered a hostile act. Nor did they allow them to deploy troops after September because of MUH NEUTRALITY, but cried for help the minute Germans invaded them in May, making the Allies abandon they defensive positions they had been preparing since September and advance into the country, resulting in the infamous encirclement by the end of the May.
In other words, Belgium and its schizophrenic neutrality are directly responsible for the Fall of France and everything that followed afterward.

>Was it historically important or influential ? Why is it independent ?
I've always wondered this about the low countries in general.

So being neutral is vile, but invading a neutral country is perfectly ok ? The French also had plans to go through Belgium
I'd like to believe you that they are a vile people, but I see no proof of your claim.

The Belgae were homogenous compared to modern Belgians, they spoke a Celtic language.

>I don't understand then why the Belgians fought for their independence
Because they felt underrepresented and had a somewhat distinct cultural identity, just like the South in the American civil war.
>"Belgium" already existed 2000 years ago.
What? There was a Celtic tribe named Belgi in the area at the time, but they have nothing to do with the people who live in in the area right now, no more than the French have to do with Franks or the English and Angli.

>"Belgium" already existed 2000 years ago.
It didn't. There was a people called Belgae (who were Celts) and a province called Gallia Belgica (which was far larger than modern Belgium).

>What? There was a Celtic tribe named Belgi in the area at the time, but they have nothing to do with the people who live in in the area right now, no more than the French have to do with Franks or the English and Angli.
That exactly what I'd like to know. What happened to them ? Ancient Belgae was even bigger than today's Belgium.

>So being neutral is vile, but invading a neutral country is perfectly ok?
Where did I say that? Just don't expect the people you refused to cooperate before to rush to help you the minute the neutrality is violated, jeopardizing their own strategic position. Besides, you must be pretty retarded to believe Belgium would remain neutral in case of a military conflict between France and Germany, especially after WW1, yet they persisted in their delusions.

>Ancient Belgae was even bigger than today's Belgium.
What do you mean "Ancient Belgae"? There was a prominent Celtic tribe, which was defeated by Caesar, who killed a lot and take even more as slaves, it was Romanized by 100 CE, then partially Germanized by the invading Franks in the 6th century, erasing any cultural continuity. There was no "Ancient Belgae" as in a state with defined borders and cultural identity.

I don't know much about history, but what you say seems completely retarded to me.
>Just don't expect the people you refused to cooperate before to rush to help you the minute the neutrality is violated, jeopardizing their own strategic position.
You don't cooperate if you are neutral, otherwise you are not neutral. Crying for help when you are small and neutral seems like the only thing to do.
>Besides, you must be pretty retarded to believe Belgium would remain neutral in case of a military conflict between France and Germany, especially after WW1, yet they persisted in their delusions.
Belgium didn't want war, so neutrality seems like a reasonable choice. And after WW1, Belgium wasn't neutral anymore.

>What do you mean "Ancient Belgae"? There was a prominent Celtic tribe, which was defeated by Caesar, who killed a lot and take even more as slaves, it was Romanized by 100 CE, then partially Germanized by the invading Franks in the 6th century, erasing any cultural continuity. There was no "Ancient Belgae" as in a state with defined borders and cultural identity.
I didn't know that, thanks. So why does Belgium exist today and why has it kept the name ?

>So why does Belgium exist today
Because, as stated before, they declared their independence with British support. And, apart from German/ Italian unification and the associated shennanigans, by the late 19th century annexing countries wholesale had already gone out of fashion in the West.

Belgium has always been a fake country created by other countries for political gain, similar to Ukraine.
zapatopi.net/belgium/

>Why did "Belgium" already exist in the time of Julius Caesar
It didn't

>You don't cooperate if you are neutral, otherwise you are not neutral.
The very idea of Belgium being neutral was wishful-thinking, instead of facing the reality and aligning with France in the 1930s, they continued to claim to be neutral, known what in case of German invasion both France and the UK would rush to help. Hitler wouldn't have invaded Poland in the first place if the French army had been stationed in Belgium, nor would May 1940 would have been possible of the Maginot line had been constructed as it had been designed, all the way to the sea.
>And after WW1, Belgium wasn't neutral anymore.
It was, right until May 1940.

uhm no. Belgium is just the succesor of the Austrian Netherlands without Habsburgs. It has a more interesting hisory than Poland, Czech Republic, Greece and almost all other eastern European countries.

Belgium is an aberration. The north belongs to Netherlands, the south to France and the far east to Germany. And the same goes for Luxembourg.

I´m going to summarize a little history in order you have a general point of view.

Before Middle Ages Romans conquered those lands to some barbarians and later other barbaric groups was in the place and Belguim was formed by several Lordlands.

In middle Ages, At first it was part of Roman French Empire founded by Carlomagno and his successors. Later it was part from Sacred Roman German Empire. In 15th the Lords of Belgium-Holland were Lords of Austria too and they married with Spanish crown and for this reason Belgium was part of the Spanish Crown in 16 and 17th. Holland had several rebellions against Spanish Crown and Belgium was the mainly pro-hispanic empire zone in region for years (For this reason they are catholic surrounded by heretic :D)
In 1714 they were independent from Spain Crown.

In 1815 Holly Aliance created Netherlands (Belgium+Holland) but they get independence in 1830 due to incompatibilities (Belgium was catholic and protectionist and Holland was protestant and free trade).

> It has a more interesting hisory than Poland, Czech Republic, Greece and almost all other eastern European countries.
Just because you are American and cannot comprehend that history isn't just the last 300 years doesn't mean nothing happened before

...

Belgium is an artificial state created by foreign powers to perform as a buffer zone, a platform to fuck with others or a landing platform.

It's a tool with an interesting history as a tool.

>I'm Dutch though

>nation that started existing in 16th century
same thing

it may have started out that way but halfway through the 19th century through some very aggressive industrialization it had become an economic powerhouse.
When you get to 6th greatest economy on the planet with that little land to work with, something has gone right.

seconding this. Belgium is the one of the best countries in Europe.

eh, belgium's glory days are long past, WWI was pretty damn bad on the country

>t. Maxime Janssens

In fact all Belgians are Germans under cover

Yes, being geographically located in the blue banana, having coal mines and being recognized by all their neighbors as a neutral zone (until 1914). That's what went right.

And nothing, literally nothing of that was of any merit of the Belgian state or the belgian people.

interesting that geographical determinism is suddenly a valid theory when it doesn't apply to your own country

Thanks for the serious answers guys.

>Belgium is an aberration. The north belongs to Netherlands, the south to France and the far east to Germany. And the same goes for Luxembourg.
Based on what ? Language ?

>Why is it independent ?
Because of the Eternal Anglo.

Belgium was created by the English to sow discord between its' most powerful enemies, France and Germany, and to destabilize mainland Europe.

>Because of the Eternal Anglo.
>Belgium was created by the English to sow discord between its' most powerful enemies, France and Germany, and to destabilize mainland Europe.
Can I have a proof of that. It seems like a bad meme. I don't see how a country could force a people to revolt and become independent.

The origin of the Germanic tribe of the Franks, who would conquer France and Germany.
Charlemagne was Belgian.
The Capets came from Belgium.
Charles V was Belgian.

It only become independent thanks to French intervention under British supervision. And also thanks to Poland uprising against Russia and thus preventing the russians to arrive in force to support the Dutch forces.

The point stands.

>Germans
While they are certainly Kraut tier degenerate, culturally they're closer to the French

>Belgium was created by the English to sow discord between its' most powerful enemies, France and Germany
You don't need Belgium or Britain for that, the mere existance of both France and some sort of semi-unified Germany on the same continent is enough

The Franks came from across the Rhine you tard. Stop pulling shit out of your ass,

>Charlemagne was Belgian.
Lmao. He was as much a Belgian as Washington was a Native American

>Lmao. He was as much a Belgian as Washington was a Native American
None of you seem to agree.
Are Belgians Celtics or Franks ?

Belgians are descended from Franks, much like the French and the Germans. Doesn't mean Franks were Belgians

If Belgians are descended from Franks, how is Charlemagne, descending from the Franks and being born in Belgium, different from any other Belgian ?

By being born about 1100 years before the formation of the Belgian nation. He wasn't born in Belgium, he was born in the lands that, over a millenium later, would eventually become Belgium.

>didn't allow the French to continue the Maginot line
They begged the French to extend it, why would they invite the Germans a second time by leaving a gap?

Walloons maybe, but food, architecture, language is closer to Germany. In dutch there's an expression; Aken en Keulen zijn niet op een dag gebouwd. That proves even in medieval times the Dutch/Flemish felt more in common with Germans. Don't forget Guldensporenslag.

And why not ?
But the fact that the Walloons and Flemish don't feel much attachment for each other seals the deal.

Flemish feel about as close to the Walloons as they do to the Dutch
the only realistic prospect for flanders in a post-belgium world would be as an independent republic

>Aken en Keulen zijn niet op een dag gebouwd

Literally no one says that. We have a saying that Rome wasnt built in one day. But that probably only exists because if the historical very heavy catholic influence

Belgium is a non-country, end this farce.

Flanders is fucking amazing, amazing people, love the accent, love the nature, ironically loved the shitty roads.

Wallonia so shitty in comparison. Ugly, non-maintained real estate everywhere, also a lot of the people look like low iq french farmer types.

It'd probably be best for Flanders to revolt and join the Netherlands.

I think the time it takes for a country to be a real / proper country is about 100-150 years.
So yea, Belgium started off being supported by foreign powers, but to call them artificial in the modern day is nonsense.

They have been independent for nearly 200 years, thats plenty of time.
They are pretty irrelevant to history, as are a majority of European countries besides a few.

It was one of the richest parts of burgundy also they got independence from the netherlands in the early 19th century.
They rebelled because they had less power in the dutch parlaiment while having a bigger population.

As a Fleming I will be dead ere I share a country with cheeseheads

If Belgium was part of France, Netherlands or Germany, it would still be a very powerful economic region to have in your country. The Lowlands have always been a very populous place throughout history.

It's a hoax made up by Britain to declare war on germany in 1914

>tfw am Belgian

Facts about Belgian independence:

>Was activated by a play called "The Mute of Portici" in Brussels
>Mostly French-speakers catholics wanted to get out of the protestant Netherlands.
>French- and Dutch-speaking liberals wanted to create a United States inspired kind of government without monarchy.
>This plan was thwarted by all the surrounding kingdoms who were scared it could trigger a new
wave of revolutions of like the FrenchRevolution

>Belgian government was forced by France and England to pick a king both countries could agree on

>Was first gonna be a French king but then German speaking Leopold von Saxoncoburg was chosen, nephew of queen Victoria

Well i've read in some books that Belgium separated from the Netherlands after the 30 years war and the 80 years war were over, Belgium region was mostly Catholic unlike the rest of the Netherlands that was mostly protestant so i guess it was kinda like Ireland and Northern Ireland. Catholics separated from the protestants.

not really, the brabant regions including the city of antwerp were not catholic and the original plan was to liberate all of the netherlands
flanders was simply occupied by the spanish at the time of the peace treaty and a rather aggressive campaign by the spanish stomped out protestantism in flanders

afterwards the spanish netherlands shifted away from the 7 provinces culturally but had the 80 years war been a complete success belgium would have never existed or needed to exist

>great chocolate
>great pommes frittes
>great pedos
>one of the pedoelite hubs of the world

its an ok place but nothing really amazing.
thousands of pretty little villages tho.

why is there so much anal devastation towards Belgium? It's literally one of the few countries that dindu nuffin
>inb4 muh Congo
wasn't a Belgian colony when the atrocities happened

a lot of can be traced back to the wehraboo population blaming belgium for giving the english an excuse to declare war on germany in WWI
They're not the most rational or intelligent folks

retty much a non country.

And anti EU sentiment

I always thought it were ignorant anglo's spouting bullshit

bump