Question for British getbiggers

[Irongrip400]

I'm watching a two part series on Winston Churchill on PBS now, and its very interesting. First, as I see all of these proper Brits being interviewed, it makes me think, how do they see your prestigious country now, as it is invaded by foreigners? How would these people from the turn of the century view what it's like now?  Question two, who pays for all of the estates that the royal family and aristocracy have? Taxpayers?  That said, you have a beautiful country, but my how things have changed. I'm sure the US is shortly behind you.

[Branchs Ears]

Winston Churchill was a fucking great man and I'm sure he's rolling over in his grave over what England has become.

[Griffith]

After World War II, France was bankrupted and devastated by war, yet immediately after they still fought to keep their Empire.

The British on the other hand voluntarily decided to dismantle their entire Empire.

[gee38]

we were effectively bankrupt you bell end- so we did the right thing by our people and looked after our own country. we had a fifth of the globe in 1922- not bad for a tinpot island.

as for giving it up


you've got a muslim in the white house. the chinese laugh at you and whole cities are bankrupt. god bless america.

game over.

[Griffith]

we were effectively bankrupt you bell end- so we did the right thing by our people and looked after our own country. we had a fifth of the globe in 1922- not bad for a tinpot island.

as for giving it up


you've got a muslim in the white house. the chinese laugh at you and whole cities are bankrupt. god bless america.

game over.

The French were bankrupt as well and had a much smaller fighting force, yet they still fought to keep their Empire.

The British gave it all away.

[Henda]

Taxpayers foot the bill for those parsite fucks the royals

[GraniteCityDon]

The French learned from it which is why they wave a huge white flag before they even enter negotiations. The old school aristocracy would be disgusted by what we as a nation have become. We are quickly losing our identity and becoming a minority in quite a few places, and although the voice of the people speaks continually we are powerless to do anything because we are governed by an endless stream of arse bandits hell bent on taking it 12" up the shitter by Europe and America.

[B_B_C]

After World War II, France was bankrupted and devastated by war, yet immediately after they still fought to keep their Empire.
The British on the other hand voluntarily decided to dismantle their entire Empire.

French IndoChina ---- Vietnam

The British had to be fought out of Central Africa (Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi), Their abandonment of India after decades of resisting change there (Churchill etc) is shameful. Their current treatment of Diego Garcia (handed over to the USA) is shameful and illustrates their kowtowing to the USA.
They did not Voluntarily dismantle their empire - the shear amount of debt owning to (mainly) the USA meant they could not fight on and besides how can one honestly say one is fighting for freedom and liberty while at the same time denying it to other socities ( a still relevant question ....)

[B_B_C]

IN the early 50ies France Britain and Israel united to invade Egypt. Such was the opposition of the USA at the time that all three decided that the USA could not be trusted therefore:
 
France - dont get too close to USA, do our own thing 
Israel - manipulate the USA for get money and weapons
Britain - cling to the USA and its every whim like sh1t to the proverbial blanket

what has changes in the past 70 years?

[Griffith]

French IndoChina ---- Vietnam

The British had to be fought out of Central Africa (Kenya, Tanzania, Malawi), Their abandonment of India after decades of resisting change there (Churchill etc) is shameful. Their current treatment of Diego Garcia (handed over to the USA) is shameful and illustrates their kowtowing to the USA.
They did not Voluntarily dismantle their empire - the shear amount of debt owning to (mainly) the USA meant they could not fight on and besides how can one honestly say one is fighting for freedom and liberty while at the same time denying it to other socities ( a still relevant question ....)

I completely disagree.
Churchill wanted to fight on to keep the British Empire...which they and the colonies fought for in World War II.

These countries all benefited far more under British rule than if they weren't colonised.

The British brought with them infrastructure, legal system, education, skills etc.
Also, these colonies had a great deal of autonomy.

The only reasons the Americans put pressure on them was because it suited their own aims of weakening their rivals and leaving them as the sole western empire/superpower.

[Irongrip400]

Taxpayers foot the bill for those parsite fucks the royals

Boom, that's one question answered.

Also, the European "franchise" is great.  See what happens when it gets pulled out, like Africa and India.

[B_B_C]

I completely disagree.Churchill wanted to fight on to keep the British Empire...which they and the colonies fought for in World War II.These countries all benefited far more under British rule than if they weren't colonised. The British brought with them infrastructure, legal system, education, skills etc. Also, these colonies had a great deal of autonomy. The only reasons the Americans put pressure on them was because it suited their own aims of weakening their rivals and leaving them as the sole western empire/superpower.

perhaps its the way I wrote it but yes you ar right Churchill did campaign to keep the empire though how he squared that with democratic principles is rarely addressed.
And undoubtdly The British did bring benefits though in the end these were not enough to convince the colonised to stay colonised. One might make the same statements about the UKs ambigious membership of the EU though neither entry or exit from same is based on UK consent unlike the colonies of the late empire