>Louis XVI, King of the Kingdom of France, sends aid to American Colonists during the American Revolutionary war
>Kingdom of France becomes a US ally
>Some smelly bitter peasants dislike that the King taxed the people a bit more to make up for the money sent to help the US
>They kill the King and end the Kingdom of France, starting the French Republic
>Act like they're allies with the US, ask for a shitton of money in return
>US informs them they are rebels who killed their ally, and they only owed money to the ally they murdered, the King, kindly asking them to fuck off
Are the French retarded?
If I owe a mate $20, I wont pay it to the guy who just murdered him for lending me the $20.

Attached: 1511045207078.png (273x277, 68K)

Other urls found in this thread:


>are the French retarded?
history's fundamental question

There's nothing wrong about your post.

This board is for the discussion of history, posting an irrefutable fact is not the best way to open a conversation.

just exposed the deep ungratefull nature of the anglo

>Thanks for killing my friend, here's all the money I owed him

the friend, is the people.

The friend is the order.

If they'd had a revolution that actually respected individual rights and the rule of law, we might have allied with them.

The people killed the King who sent the aid for sending the aid.
The friend is the King.

Only the retards who displaced the nobility. It's too bad Louis XVI wasn't tougher, he could've passed his reforms, and potentially tried to reform the nobility, too.

The friend is the state.

But in monarchy, the Dynasty is the state. The US is right to ignore them since they took power violently and can be considered tyrants.

>The US is right to ignore them since they took power violently
a bit like the founding fathers

there's a difference between taking power through a just war and taking power by murdering thousands of civilians

The order can't really change without the state changing.

Presumably, any debts associated before the American Revolution could be claimed by other countries to have been with the British. I'm not sure of any specific example of this.

>french help traitors
>the traitors betray them
>this is a shocking development
Literally everyone not from England has Downs

Attached: 1493320510479.jpg (1465x1209, 197K)

Where is the fucking treason?
The King who the debt was owed to was dead, the country was overtaken by traitors.

>where is the treason

"that these colonies are, and of a right ought to be, free and independent states"

Yeah that's why you're importing millions of muslims who fundamentally hate you, and your way of life.

>France lends money to American rebels for their fight against bongs
>A decade later, France is at war with all Europe and thus needs money
>Ask Americans to pay their debt
>"fuck ya frog, u changed ur gubmint so we aint owin' ya anythin"
>"here, i'm sidin with dem bongs against u, that'll teach ya for askin me money"

A proud moment of American history

Attached: 1446460457217.jpg (1692x2004, 718K)

>Hey, the British constitution says we get representation in parliament
>Well, if you're not going to uphold your end of the agreement then we're no longer your subjects
The treason happened in London by denying the rights of Englishmen which had been had for nearly a century by that point.

I love you, Englishbro, but the founding fathers committed righteous treason. Yes, it was treason, but that was because they were denied their rights as Englishmen by that Parliament which they had no representatives in.

>the british constitution
stopped reading there

We owed money to the King. The new government murdered the King.
>A proud moment of American history
Genuinely, held true to our values and honored a deceased ally.


Did... did you forget this existed? Are you bongs so deprived of your liberty by London that you forgot your own history?


pick one, or even better, pick up a dictionary

>Some smelly bitter peasants


>a body of fundamental principles or established precedents according to which a state or other organization is acknowledged to be governed
>Literally what it does
It's literally the solid foundation upon which your government is supposed to stand. Pull parliaments cock from your ears and eyes. Learn your history. Know your rights.

the irony is off the charts. anglos are jews.

reforms? the revolution was bout making a constitutional monarchy, it was about reforming royalty in France. Louis XVI swore to the people france would become a constitutional monarchy, he ran away, wether he was convinced to run away by scheming revolutionnaries who wanted the monarchy to die or he simply ran away because he really wanted it we'll never know

You are so wrong. Louis XVI wanted to reform the government well before the revolution, but the nobility wouldn't let him pass the laws he wanted to, and he wasn't a strong enough guy to force it though. He completely supported becoming a constitutional monarch, becoming the King of the French, rather than the King of France. He simply tried to leave the Paris area, as he feared for his and his family's safety. He was just going to a safe place of his in the countryside.
Where's the French Revolution guy when you need him? He knows all of this.

>American settlers overstep testy territorial bounds
>Britain protects American interests in the French and Indian War
>Britain asks for more contribution, less than what Londoners pay
>America says fuck you, smuggles, and ignores
>sides with France against Britain
>also skimps out on the debts to France
>realizes the incredible luck they're having
>Louisiana purchase
>Spanish-American War
>onto the Carribean and Pacific islands
>mideast and southeast asia

There's no stopping us boyos!

Attached: 1520109748667.jpg (682x1024, 116K)

>Fight a war to overthrow tyrannical british government
>Get help from french tyrant
>He lends away money (french tax money of course)
>French overthrow their tyrant
>Sorry, we only owed the king
It's bullshit, it's hypocritical and all the burgers defending their country know it.

The Founding Fathers weren't anti-monarchist, and were never radical republicans. Beyond that, neither George III nor Louis XVI were tyrannical.

>Fight a war to overthrow tyrannical british government
>Get help from french monarch