Should England have to pay reparations for their crimes during the imperial period?

Should England have to pay reparations for their crimes during the imperial period?

Other urls found in this thread:

telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/26/hong-kong-democracy-campaigners-demand-return-to-british-rule-as/
youtube.com/watch?v=WnAvNdVyJB0
twitter.com/SFWRedditVideos

No. Fuck off.

I thought they dealt with all that, and that is why we have Australia?

Fuck off. They never invented slavery but where the ones to abolish it. They cilivized countries who were lost beyond belief. If anything, they should be praised for being an amazing, couragous counry. Admitting mistakes is the first step towards internal destruction. Take a page our of Austria's and Germany's book.

>crimes
What laws did they break?

No.

Yes the eternal Anglo is a danger to society and should pay reparations

Yeah lets use your taxes to pay for crimes you didn't commit. Fuck off.

Yes. Give USA reparations

No, England should be paid by all countries now civilised through British influence.

Shouldn't the world be thanking Britain for introducing civilization to indigenous shit holes?

Hong Kong knows what's up.
telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/06/26/hong-kong-democracy-campaigners-demand-return-to-british-rule-as/

You can start by providing sauce.

>They never invented slavery but where the ones to abolish it
To be fair while we didn;t invent slavery, we did invent the atlantic slave trade so we could have that sweet sweet sugar.
Still if we pay reperations then everyone else who got civilised by us pays denbts

>Should England have to pay reparations for their crimes during the imperial period?
What crimes? Conquering vegetation? Invading uninhabited islands in the pacific ocean? Your Empire was a joke.

>Should Mongolia have to pay reparations for their crimes during Genghis Khan's rule?

Ahmed, calm your tits. You know that is wrong.

yus

>You know that is wrong.
Not really. Vikings conquered the most advanced countries during their raids, and Sweden did it once more during the Swedish Empire.

The vast majority of Britain's colonization took place on uninhabited islands and countries riddled with sub-humans. Hardly an achievement. The British Empire is exaggerated.

India and China were top tier civilisations before we destroyed them

"conquered" Running away from armies to attack unprotected villages...


hahahah dumb swede.

you do realise Britain has been in every major European war, and at the same colonised 1/3rd of the planet, India and China are the most populous countries on the earth, and we defeated them with a handful of men
here is the Viking empire, which colonised such populous countries as Iceland and Greenland lol

yes i want to see them burn

>Vikings conquered the most advanced countries during their raids
What are those?

I'm confused as to why we're giving India money still.

They have a fucking space program, we don't even have that.

They aren't using the money we're sending because we're "Sorry we made your country" for the poor shits that were there before.

Clearly they don't fucking need the money if they can spend it on a fucking space program.

Yes.

No they weren't. Both were riddled with sub-humans.
There's a reason your own Queen has viking blood coursing through her anglo veins.
>you do realise Britain has been in every major European war
Because no one is scared of attacking you. Sweden hasn't been in many, because people are scared of us.
>and at the same colonised 1/3rd of the planet
I'll say it again. Colonizing uninhabited islands in the pacific ocean is hardly an achievement.
>India and China are the most populous countries on the earth, and we defeated them with a handful of men
Not white countries, so not an achievement.
>here is the Viking empire
The North has successfully invaded Britain. Britain has never successfully invaded the North. Pathetic excuse for a country really.
You won't get free education from me you leech. Pay for school or educate yourself.

>Because no one is scared of attacking you. Sweden hasn't been in many, because people are scared of us.
we haven't been directly attacked by a European country since the fucking Napoleonic wars you autist
>Sweden hasn't been in many, because people are scared of us.
or because you were too pussy to fight in any, ever since the Russians neutered, you faggots have opted out of everything apart from allowing yourself to get fucked by Somalis
>I'll say it again. Colonising uninhabited islands in the pacific ocean is hardly an achievement
There aren't even enough islands in the pacific ocean to make up 1/100 of the fucking planet, look at a map for once in your life
>Not white countries, so not an achievement.
if they were so easy to conquer why did you spend the entirety of the 18th - 20th century playing in the snow and doing fuck all
>The North has successfully invaded Britain. Britain has never successfully invaded the North. Pathetic excuse for a country really.
first of all I assume you are referring to Denmark, and when you say Britain you mean northern England
why haven't we invaded you back, why would we, there is nothing to take but some scraggy rocks and snow, we saved Norway from the Nazis, but apart from that, we stay away from Scandinavia, because it's full of autists like you

BUT all this doesn't change the fact that you are Swedish, and you people have never invaded the west anyway, you are congratulating yourself for the success of the Norwegians and Danes, and it's fucking tragic

Yes, sins of our fathers must hold true.

After England has paid reparations we will gas every Jew for the murder of Jesus.

Wow you really think muh Vikings were analogous to the British empire?
You're a really fucking stupid specimen, Sven.

>we haven't been directly attacked by a European country since the fucking Napoleonic wars you autist
Have you already forgotten what happened during WW2?
>or because you were too pussy to fight in any
No, not really. Countries have plenty of reasons to invade Sweden, since we have the most beautiful women, an amazing landscape, very lucrative and prosperous industrial complex. Britain should have tried at least, as revenge for us fucking your shit up during the viking era. But no, you and the rest of the world are too big pussies. Only Russia has tried, but that's our colony so it's not really an argument.
>There aren't even enough islands in the pacific ocean to make up 1/100 of the fucking planet, look at a map for once in your life
The rest of your colonization consist of sub-human civilizations. So there's that.
>if they were so easy to conquer why did you spend the entirety of the 18th - 20th century playing in the snow and doing fuck all
Why should we? We had everything we could possibly need, right here in Europe.
>first of all I assume you are referring to Denmark
Sweden went west as well (to Britain). There are rune stones in Sweden to confirm.
>and when you say Britain you mean northern England
I fail to see your point.
>why haven't we invaded you back, why would we, there is nothing to take but some scraggy rocks and snow
See "Countries have plenty of reasons to invade Sweden, since we have the most beautiful women, an amazing landscape, very lucrative and prosperous industrial complex. Britain should have tried at least, as revenge for us fucking your shit up during the viking era."
>we saved Norway from the Nazis
Sure you did.
>BUT all this doesn't change the fact that you are Swedish, and you people have never invaded the west anyway
We have. Like I said, rune stones to confirm. Then we also have the Swedish Empire.


Now go brush your tooth.

No everyone should just forgive one another.

>Wow you really think muh Vikings were analogous to the British empire?
You're right. The two can hardly be compared seeing as the British Empire was so pathetic. Fighting vegetation in the pacific ocean. Mhh, what a military achievement.

The history of vikings in Britain is quite long and often complex, but it ends with William the Bastard blowing you the fuck out in the South, eventually only the north (Yorkshire, Durham and the rest) were a strong hold against of the Anglo-Danes (yeah Danes, not Swedes). So instead of fighting the Bastard just paid the Danes to go home, so the remaining Danish Lords took their armies and left what were effectively farmers. The Bastard then decimated the North, to ensure it never became uppity again, in an event that would become known as "The Harrying of the North". The North never recovered from it.

>tldr: Don't trust vikings, they're the Jews of Northern Europe.

There were no danes, norwegians or swedes back then, wise-ass. And no, you didn't blow anyone "the fuck out".
>So instead of fighting the Bastard just paid the Danes to go home, so the remaining Danish Lords took their armies and left what were effectively farmers.
Had to pay them? Thought you were blowing us the fuck out? Pathetic. We're in your land and you have to pay us to leave. Holy shit, you can't make this up.

>Have you already forgotten what happened during WW2?
we declared war on Hitler, you fucking child
>No, not really. Countries have plenty of reasons to invade Sweden, since we have the most beautiful women, an amazing landscape, very lucrative and prosperous industrial complex. Britain should have tried at least, as revenge for us fucking your shit up during the viking era. But no, you and the rest of the world are too big pussies. Only Russia has tried, but that's our colony so it's not really an argument.
you were one of the last countries to become involved in the industrial era, plus you answer your own question here - Why should we? We had everything we could possibly need
>The rest of your colonisation consist of sub-human civilisations. So there's that.
we conquered 40 million Indians in Bangladesh alone with a couple of thousand men, they used rockets and guns against us, we still won, whilst fighting the war of 1812 in North America and the Napoleonic war in Europe, fucking die
>There are rune stones in Sweden to confirm
ayo hol up, you be sayin deez rune stones n' sheeeeit confirm we wuz kangz n' sheeeeeit
>I fail to see your point.
because northern England does not equal all of Britain, in the same way Denmark does not equal all of Scandinavia
>Sure you did.
they send us Christmas trees every year to say thank you, we get Norwegian pussy, why would we need smelly used Swedes
>Now go brush your tooth.
will do, but first it is my formal duty to warn you a pack of Somalis are dicking your sister captain Sweden

No because if they have to pay reparations for civilizing the world, we're going to have to pay reparations to black people. I would rather burn it all down than give in to those racist BLM fucks.

No fuck off nigger scum

you were one of the last countries to become involved in the industrial era, *in Europe
pic related

What would we pay them for?
All the foreign aid?
Building all their infrastructure?
Bringing law and civilization to their lands?
Freeing many natives around the globe from slavery?
Providing them with the basis of an economy?

What should our reparations be?
Getting all the money they made from what we give them?

>vikings
If any people conquered anything more worth while than we did, it was the French and Austrians who managed to rule vast swathes of central Europe

It's not like all that worthless sand we conquered was undefended by the French and Spanish either.

Whoa. I come in here to complain about niggers and then I run in to some eurocuck pretending to be a man.

Shouldn't you be supervising the line of migrants waiting to fuck your wife?

>you
I see you can't read, I was talking about William the Bastard, a Norman duke. The North was a stronghold for the vikings, around Jorvik (modern day York), the Bastard decided to pay you off instead of trying to fight his way to victory, seeing the mess he'd made of you faggots down south, you accepted.

You jewed out, chose monetary gain over your own pride and honour. Vikings are Jews.

Anyway Sven I hope you're enjoying your time in your cuck shed, but your delusional power fantasies are nothing but pathetic.

>we declared war on Hitler, you fucking child
Fail to see how that's relevant. Hitler invaded you and fucked your shit up. You needed help from America to survive.
>you were one of the last countries to become involved in the industrial era
So what about our natural resources? Didn't you need those for your industries?
>Why should we? We had everything we could possibly need
See previous response.
>we conquered 40 million Indians in Bangladesh alone with a couple of thousand men
Wow you conquered sub-humans. Congratulations. Clap clap. It's the equivalent of a nigger conquering a couple of ants.
>we still won, whilst fighting the war of 1812 in North America and the Napoleonic war in Europe, fucking die
Sweden practically fought all of western Europe (and Russia) during the time of Charles XII. Bigger accomplishment than yours.
>ayo hol up, you be sayin deez rune stones n' sheeeeit confirm we wuz kangz n' sheeeeeit
They're practically equivalent to historical documents. It's like me saying "ayo hol up, so you be sayin we wuz Empire and shit" as a response to you saying "Britain had an Empire".
>because northern England does not equal all of Britain
Don't have to conquer all of Britain to conquer Britain. Or did you, during your "Empire", conquer every last stone of India? Didn't think so. Tread carefully.
>we get Norwegian pussy
Best one so far. You don't get shit except paki pussy. Your own women are travelling to Turkey to fuck men because british """"men"""" are too ugly and pathetic. Then again, can you blame them? Anglo genes and all.
>will do, but first it is my formal duty to warn you a pack of Somalis are dicking your sister captain Sweden
You're thinking of Britain.

>Shouldn't you be supervising the line of migrants waiting to fuck your wife?
Why is this coming from an American?

What about the french, the ottomans, the romans, the greeks, the germans, the belgians, the americans, the west africans who sold slaves, the arabs, the mughals, the ussr, etc?
Where do you draw the line?

>I see you can't read, I was talking about William the Bastard, a Norman duke.
I see you have a problem with reading comprehension. I wasn't talking about you specifically but Britain as a whole.
>the Bastard decided to pay you off instead of trying to fight his way to victory, seeing the mess he'd made of you faggots down south, you accepted.
He paid us because he knew he couldn't beat us.
>Vikings are Jews.
That's funny, considering pic-related.
>Anyway Sven I hope you're enjoying your time in your cuck shed
There's statistical proof that shows anglos are the biggest cucks on the planet. So there's that.

>Moronic Swede can't even recognise a meme brit/pol/ made during the last GE.

Further proof, were it needed, that this swedecuck is retarded.

>Sweden ragging on the UK
It's like getting criticized for being irrelevant by Aruba or Sri Lanka.

>Moronic Swede can't even recognise a meme brit/pol/ made during the last GE.
Just like you can't recognise that 90% of SwedenYES is fabricated or miscredited. You're really just calling yourself a retard.
We conquered you. You never conquered us. Case closed.

I see you have a problem with reading comprehension since William wasn't British.

>He paid us because he knew he couldn't beat us.
I suppose in those long days in the cuck shed a Swedish """"""man""""" has to have something to tell himself, a noble lie.

>Anglos
>Bigger cucks than Swedes

Fucking kek.

>I suppose in those long days in the cuck shed a Swedish """"""man""""" has to have something to tell himself, a noble lie.
You're the only one telling lies. If he could win the battle, why would he pay us? Money is worth more than a few soldiers. He paid us because he couldn't beat us. It's the only logical explanation.
>Fucking kek.
See pic-related.

>Fail to see how that's relevant. Hitler invaded you and fucked your shit up. You needed help from America to survive.
your response here has no place in the realms of reason, the question was, has a European power declared war on us since Napoleon, you said WW2, I said we declared war on Germany in WW2, not the other way round, so your response here, well.... it makes me think maybe your actually a nigger who has stolen a computer or something to type this trash down
> You needed help from America to survive.
we won the Battle of Britain in 1940, after this point the Nazis were concerned in Russia, so they wouldn't have been able to orchestrate another attack, also Hitler declared war on America, so they didn't come because we asked for help, they came because the Nazis were blowing their merchant vessels out of the fucking water
>So what about our natural resources? Didn't you need those for your industries?
sigh... we owned 1/3rd of the planet, why would we need you natural resources, please show an ability of thought reason and perspective
>Wow you conquered sub-humans. Congratulations. Clap clap. It's the equivalent of a nigger conquering a couple of ants.
this is going nowhere, pic is rockets used against us, I doubt even your country had that technology at the time
>Sweden practically fought all of western Europe (and Russia) during the time of Charles XII. Bigger accomplishment than yours.
no you didn't
>They're practically equivalent to historical documents. It's like me saying "ayo hol up, so you be sayin we wuz Empire and shit" as a response to you saying "Britain had an Empire".
source then, I fail to see how a couple of rune stones in Sweden prove that the local population of the time fought in western Europe
>Don't have to conquer all of Britain to conquer Britain.
erm
>Or did you, during your "Empire", conquer every last stone of India? Didn't think so. Tread carefully.
gee I wonder why, India and Pakistan are separate countries now

>We conquered you
Sweden never conquered England. The Danes had a good bash at it, but never Sweden.

>your response here has no place in the realms of reason, the question was, has a European power declared war on us since Napoleon, you said WW2
No, that was never what we were discussing. We were discussing whether or not countries have been invaded. Go back and see for yourself.
>we won the Battle of Britain in 1940, after this point the Nazis were concerned in Russia, so they wouldn't have been able to orchestrate another attack
Because America supplied you all along. Without them, you wouldn't have stood a chance. Not to mention all the other nations that Nazi Germany was fighting. You really are inferior to Germany. Always have been.
>also Hitler declared war on America, so they didn't come because we asked for help
America was supplying you long before that happened.
>sigh... we owned 1/3rd of the planet, why would we need you natural resources, please show an ability of thought reason and perspective
Why didn't you conquer Sweden before you sailed across the entire planet? Seems rather odd. Shouldn't you start colonizing in the areas closest to you? And take their resources first? Oh wait, you didn't dare to invade us because you were scared.
>this is going nowhere, pic is rockets used against us, I doubt even your country had that technology at the time
You're talking as if they had modern RPG's or something. Like I said, it's equivalent of a nigger conquering a couple of ants. It's not an achievement. It's not a feat.
>no you didn't
Yes we did. See continuing post.

Why should anyone pay for what their ancestors did?

>In 1700, a triple alliance of Denmark–Norway, Saxony–Poland–Lithuania and Russia launched a threefold attack on the Swedish protectorate of Swedish Holstein-Gottorp and provinces of Livonia and Ingria, aiming to draw advantage as Sweden was unaligned and ruled by a young and inexperienced king, thus initiating the Great Northern War. Leading the Swedish army against the alliance Charles won multiple victories despite being usually significantly outnumbered. A major victory over a Russian army some three times the size in 1700 at the Battle of Narva compelled Peter the Great to sue for peace which Charles then rejected. By 1706 Charles, now 24 years old, had forced all of his foes into submission including, in that year, a decisively devastating victory by Swedish forces under general Carl Gustav Rehnskiöld over a combined army of Saxony and Russia at the Battle of Fraustadt. Russia was now the sole remaining hostile power.
>source then, I fail to see how a couple of rune stones in Sweden prove that the local population of the time fought in western Europe
The Valleberga Runestone. The Yttergärde Runestone. The Djulafors Runestone.
>erm
>gee I wonder why, India and Pakistan are separate countries now
Did you conquer every single stone? Otherwise you didn't conquer India according to your logic.

youtube.com/watch?v=WnAvNdVyJB0

Britain commited no crimes during the imperial period, it was all charity work to surpport developing nations. Those nations should pay britain for its help.

>repurppose weapons factories into wind turbine factories
>interracial breeding programs

Ahhahaha that photo. Reminds me of those greentext stories about the future progressive world that used to circulate on Sup Forums

Those figures don't include men who let foreigners literally rape their women faggot.

Enjoy the cuckolding of your entire country.

>Being this retarded.

On the second page it's talking about representation within the study, it shows that Americans are overly represented, that's almost certainly due to methodological flaws. Looking at how they gathered their sample (going to cuck fantasist websites and asking them to fill out a questionnaire) is without question the cause of the problem.

To give you an analogous case, it's like if some researcher came to Sup Forums and asked if "do you believe that blacks are inferior to whites?" and then the next day reported that "100% of American men think blacks are inferior to whites". Clearly the way the surveyor gather her sample is leading to a bias in the data.

That said it might not be so bad for what she's trying to do. But for what you're trying to do (ie imply that other nations engage in cuck fetishism at a higher rate than Swedes) it's absolutely disastrous.

I'm fully aware that you're just going to shitpost after this, but feel free to keep posting that image, it just makes you look retarded.

>He paid us because he couldn't beat us. It's the only logical explanation.

No he paid you because he knew of your Jewish tendencies, after all "Viking" is just the Old Norse word for "piracy", why fight what you can just buy off?

>Those figures don't include men who let foreigners literally rape their women faggot.
You're the biggest cucks on the planet, as confirmed by statistical proof. Also, you can't compare rape statistics between different countries because of several reason.

>Unlike the majority of countries in Europe, crime data in Sweden are collected when the offence in question is first reported, at which point the classification may be unclear. In Sweden, once an act has been registered as rape, it retains this classification in the published crime statistics, even if later investigations indicate that no crime can be proven or if the offence must be given an alternative judicial classification.[11][28][29]

>Sweden also applies a system of expansive offence counts. Other countries may employ more restrictive methods of counting. The Swedish police registers one offence for each person raped, and if one and the same person has been raped on a number of occasions, one offence is counted for each occasion that can be specified. For example, if a woman says she has been raped by her husband every day during a year, the Swedish police may record more than 300 cases of rape. In many other countries only a single offence would be counted in such a situation.[8][11][15][29][30]

>In Sweden, crime statistics refer to the year when the offence was reported; the actual offence may have been committed long before. Swedish rape statistics can thus contain significant time-lag, which makes interpretations of annual changes difficult.[11][29]

We shall import millions of japanese women as reparations for building the entire world.

>he way the crime itself is defined and various related aspects of the judicial process affect the registration of offences in the official statistics.[11][28] The concept of rape can be defined narrowly or in a more expansive manner. In Sweden, the definition of rape has been successively widened over the years, leading to an ever larger number of sexual assaults being classified as rape.[3][12][13][31] For example, in 1992 a legislative change came into force which shifted the dividing line between sexual assault and rape. This legislative change resulted in about a 25% increase in the level of registered rape offences.[11]

>Changes in the legal process has also affected the number of reports. Until 1984, rape was only prosecuted in cases where the victim was prepared to press charges, with an additional restriction of a six months time limit. This resulted in numerous cases of rape and sexual assault going unreported.[11]

>The Swedish prosecution system is governed by the principle of legality and the "equality principle", which means that as a rule, the police and the prosecution service are required to register and prosecute all offences of which they become aware. This can be assumed to lead to a more frequent registration of offences than in systems with the inverse "expediency principle", where the classification of offences is negotiable on the basis of plea bargaining, and the prosecutor has the right not to prosecute, even when a prosecution would be technically possible.[11][29] English speaking common law countries operate an adversarial system.[32]

>Willingness to report crime also affects the statistics.[28] In countries where rape remains associated with a strong taboo and a high level of shame, the propensity to report such offences probably tends to be lower than in countries characterized by a higher level of sexual equality. A police force and judicial system enjoining a high level of confidence and a good reputation with the public will produce a higher propensity to report crime than a police force which is discredited, inspires fear or distrust.[11]

>The findings of the 2000 International Crime Victims Survey (ICVS) indicate that the respondents' satisfaction with the police is above average in Sweden, with almost no experience of corruption.[33] Sweden has also been ranked number one in sexual equality.[19]

>Widely differing legal systems, offence definitions, terminological variations, recording practices and statistical conventions makes any cross-national comparison on rape statistics difficult. Large-scale victimisation surveys have been presented as a more reliable indicator.[10]

>On the second page it's talking about representation within the study, it shows that Americans are overly represented, that's almost certainly due to methodological flaws.
Holy shit your reading comprehension is horrendous. It says that 57% of the cucks were Americans, and that the survey had a good cross-section of nationalities. It's basically per capita.

I won't even bother with the rest of your post if this is the standard.

Sweden Swedish Empire

Holstein–Gottorp
Polish–Lithuanian Commonwealth
(1704–09)
Ottoman Empire Ottoman Empire
(1710–14)

Autonomous Republic of Crimea Crimean Khanate
Moldavia
Wallachia
Cossack Hetmanate (1708–09)
Kingdom of Great Britain Great Britain
(1719–20)
Dutch Republic Dutch Republic
(1700)

Kingdom of England Kingdom of England (1700)

you said Charles fought them on his own, yet he had allies, thus your statement is wrong you smelly poo poo bum baby

>gee I wonder why, India and Pakistan are separate countries now, Did you conquer every single stone? Otherwise you didn't conquer India according to your logic.

no, you said you conquered all of Britain, when the "DANES" only conquered Northern England

we on the other hand conquered all of India and Pakistan, no more need for discussion

The definition of rape varies from country to country.

lol. Swedish """""""""""""""""""""""""""""""education"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""

England should give me my own Karen.

>no, you said you conquered all of Britain, when the "DANES" only conquered Northern England
I never said all of Britain. I said we conquered Britain. What's with anglos and reading comprehension? Can't you understand your own language?
>we on the other hand conquered all of India and Pakistan, no more need for discussion
Wow you conquered countries filled with sub-humans. Clap clap.

>I never said all of Britain. I said we conquered Britain.

I can't believe I didn't see the bait right from the start.

>UK vs UK
Go fuck yourself, UK.

No. Mainly because it's the Jews that benefited the most from the Imperial era of not only England, but of other European countries.

Jews were part (even leaders) of the slave trade/economy. Jews were lending money to both sides of any wars during that period, and making money from both sides. The Jews created all these ideologies/ideas designed to inflict as much suffering to the goys as possible. And these pass these crimes against humanity onto goys, because they're too infantile to take responsibility for the evils they've unleashed.

If you want your reparations, go after Jews. They have most of the world's wealth anyways, some of which were probably stolen from you (by them). Knowing Jews, they wouldn't part with their shekels and will fight you to the death for it.

>I can't believe I didn't see the bait right from the start.
Oh, so you were just trolling? Lmao fuck out of here. You were being serious from the start.
England vs Scotland.

Conquering a country means all of it autismo, if I took a tiny little island off the coast of Norway I wouldn't claim to have conquered Norway, you fucking Somalian pirate
>Wow you conquered countries filled with sub-humans. Clap clap.
again with this, if it was so easy, why did Sweden do jack all, and don't tell it's because you had everything you could have ever needed, thousands of Swedes escaped your shithole to go live in America, get back to your viking fantasy porn

Wait, you don't see what wrong with the sentence "I never said all of Britain. I said we conquered Britain"?

This is beautiful
>Runs his mouth on history
>Doesn't know the difference between Britain and England

no, the usa might have to eventually. i feel like in the modern day of mass media and global news coverage there will never be a real empire again. there's too much scrutiny and people know too much

>Conquering a country means all of it autismo, if I took a tiny little island off the coast of Norway I wouldn't claim to have conquered Norway, you fucking Somalian pirate
Fair enough.
>again with this, if it was so easy, why did Sweden do jack all, and don't tell it's because you had everything you could have ever needed
Why not? It's a valid argument. Why didn't Britain conquer Antarctica? Wait! Let me guess. Could it be because it wasn't worth it? DING DING DING DING!
>thousands of Swedes escaped your shithole to go live in America
Traitors exist in all countries. Besides, it was probably anglos living in Sweden who felt like they didn't belong, and who could blame them? Imagine walking around town, knowing that you're inferior to the natives. That must really suck.

>Could it be because it wasn't worth it?
>India
>"The jewel in the crown of the empire"
>Not worth it

Well I'm out of here.

This. Britain legally didn't hold India as a colony until after the Jew-run British East India Company, which had been administering India as a sort of giant private plantation, messed up Indian life so badly that they endangered everything by driving the Indians to revolt. This is exactly the pattern (on a smaller scale) in Eastern Europe, where Jew administrators ruled huge fiefs on behalf of gentile noble landowners, and squeezed the peasants so mercilessly that they guaranteed violence. Jews have no ability to think in the long term or see bad consequences for their brilliant schemes. Compare Muslims honestly thinking that they got away with Rotherham, when the anger is really only beginning to manifest.

Maybe it was worth it for you anglos. I was talking from a master-race perspective.

>Why not? It's a valid argument. Why didn't Britain conquer Antarctica? Wait! Let me guess. Could it be because it wasn't worth it? DING DING DING DING!
your really starting to loose your cool sven, knees weak arms are heavy
If you cannot see the correlation between Britain's wealth post empire and Britain wealth and influence during the empire, you must be smoking some pretty strong hash
>Traitors exist in all countries. Besides, it was probably anglos living in Sweden who felt like they didn't belong, and who could blame them? Imagine walking around town, knowing that you're inferior to the natives. That must really suck.
another case of not an argument, take a long walk of a short plank, Somalian pirate man

Sure.

But then Japanhas to pay China for Nanking.

Then China has to pay the US for trade war crimes.

Thanks England!

>germany
>honorary scandinavian
you descended from germanic tribes anyway. it's the other way around. you scandis are honorary germanics

No because anyone alive today is a solid ten generations removed from it.

This shit of expecting the living to answer for the dead is just pure bullshit.

You're one of those people. Why don't you go masturbate to a Stefan video instead of regurgitating his pseudo-intellectual bullshit rhetoric on here?
>you descended from germanic tribes anyway. it's the other way around. you scandis are honorary germanics
We don't descend from germans. We're both germanic and can trace our lineage back to Adam.

it's not pseudo-intellectual, it's actually pretty easy to understand, we invaded other countries and took their resources to make us richer
in the same way, umbatu obaloba took your sisters virginity to add another notch to his list of phallic triumphs

>we invaded other countries and took their resources to make us richer
But not Sweden. How come? Like I said, Sweden should have been one of the first countries you invaded, considering how close in proximity we were.
>it's not pseudo-intellectual
It is, and Stefan reeks of it too.

the Italian government owes me reparations because the Roman Empire enslaved the Germanic tribes of my ancestors

what exactly is there to gain by invading sweden? you have nothing worth having

thus the cycle continues, if you really want me to come over and fuck your sister I guess I will have to, to shut you up
but if you really want to know, maybe it would be smart to look into the History of England, the English civil war ended in 1651, after that our army was reformed, which the whole redcoat stuff, our first colony was in America in 1607 James Town, Virginia

MAYBE we didn't colonise Europe because, well I don't know
THERE WAS AN ENTIRE CONTINENT FULL OF NEW RESOURCES LIKE TOBACCO AND CHOCOLATE AND SUGAR, AND FURS AND SHEEEEEEEIT

why the fuck would we waste unnecessary time in Sweden, what for... some seals, more fish, Norway has oil but oil is relatively new in the history of man, Sweden my dear friend was a worthless target
now please go back to your Somali gangbang porn

Natural resources just like he said. Back to school, Jamal. You need to learn how to read.

>MAYBE we didn't colonise Europe because, well I don't know
THERE WAS AN ENTIRE CONTINENT FULL OF NEW RESOURCES LIKE TOBACCO AND CHOCOLATE AND SUGAR, AND FURS AND SHEEEEEEEIT
So why did you go to India and all the tiny islands in the pacific? Like I said, if you went to India for resources, it would have made more sense to go to Sweden (and scandinavia in general) for resources. You didn't, because you were scared. Simple as that.
>why the fuck would we waste unnecessary time in Sweden, what for... some seals, more fish
Holy shit you really don't know how rich Sweden is in minerals and forestation? Those were literally THE resources you wanted during this time and age.

Lumber and Furs in Canada

Sugar in the Pacific islands

Tobacco in America

Spices and Jewels in India

WHY THE FUCK WOULD WE NEED SWEDEN, WHAT RESOURCES ARE YOU REFERRING TO THAT WE DIDN'T ALREADY HAVE FROM OUR EMPIRE
AND WHY DO YOU WANT US TO INVADE YOU SO MUCH
is it because you want real men in your country for a change, Jesus Sven at least try to put up some kind of argument other than, WE WUZ CLOSE N SHEEEEIT

No, they should be grateful that we gave them the opportunity to advance.

sweden doesn't have any natural resources besides trees and fish. what the fuck? there's no way you're older than 20. there's a reason sweden was a nigger tier shit hole up until the mid 90s. you had no natural resources to rely on

Everyone remembers what Sweden did during WW2, fuck all, you were so piss-scared of Nazi iron you bent over and stood back while they moved their armies through your land to put the boots to your fellow scandis in Norway. To this day your flag is stained by the yellow streaks you left behind to remind the world of swedish cowardice in times of adversity.

>it would have made more sense to go to Sweden
Must be hard to think straight with fifty miles of somalian cock passing through your anus every hour.
Please, show me the spices, tobaccos, jewels, teas, and other valuable resources that can be found on swedish soil. I'll wait.
Oil doesn't count.

>AND WHY DO YOU WANT US TO INVADE YOU SO MUCH
it's pretty hilarious now that you mention it. he's butt hurt that you didn't rape his women. i think rape in sweden is the highest form of admiration

>WHY THE FUCK WOULD WE NEED SWEDEN
You really can't be this retarded, can you? Iron, copper, lead, zinc, gold, silver, tungsten, uranium, arsenic. Also, it would be more productive to go to Sweden for lumber than to sail across the entire atlantic ocean.
>WHY DO YOU WANT US TO INVADE YOU SO MUCH
I'm saying that you didn't because you were fucking pussies lmao. You were scared because you knew you were inferior (and still are) to us scandinavians.

Hi, Cajun here. My ancestors were French settlers in Acadia. The British government dispossessed my ancestors. I would like to sign up for reparations (plus interest).

>sweden doesn't have any natural resources besides trees and fish. what the fuck?
Nah we just have like the highest deposits of Iron, copper, lead, zinc, gold, silver, tungsten, uranium and arsenic in Europe.