Post your favorite former sovereign states

Hard mode: From a different continent than yours

Orange Free State probably had the most American values of any non-American country. The Boers were magnificent people and their culture nearly perfect.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=PXzvMF7Dx6g
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Boer_War
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Empire
youtube.com/watch?v=xH8OAXc6Dx4
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Rhodesia

De Zuid-Afrikaanse Republiek

If those were so great why did they dissapear?

Orange Free State was destroyed by the eternal Anglo putting all the women and children in concentration camps.
No, really.

(((they))) don't like it

>Orange Free State probably had the most American values
I unironically agree, it's laughable that you think this is a good thing tho

>it's laughable that you think this is a good thing tho
?
>Independent, self reliant, free people
>Hold their own against the biggest Empire in the world
>Not good

Austrian Empire/Austria-Hungary
>last european power to be centred around crown and tradition rather than meme nationalism
>catholic
>habsburgs
>one of europe's largest economies and militaries
>glorious history going back into the middle ages
>successor of the holy roman empire

pls come back ;_;
youtube.com/watch?v=PXzvMF7Dx6g

...

>Slavers who stole land from the original inhabitants and scoffed at separation of church and state
>Sought independence from the more civilized British Empire
Like I said I agree with you

The first one isn't bad and the second one is untrue as the Boers didn't put women and children in death camps while the British Empire did.

>Hold their own against the biggest Empire in the world
neither America nor the boer republics did this

What a meme.

>scoffed at separation of church and state
America's founders were secularists whereas Boers believed that God had given them their land because they killed a lot of Zulus.

>le death camps
The camps were poorly maintained at first, within a short period of time they were much better supplied and the death rate drastically dropped. Don't pretend that the British were actively trying to exterminate Boers when they promised them (and later gave them in 1911) an independent country after the Second Boer War (which the Boers started in the first place) was over.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Boer_War
Hmm, really makes me think.
Breaker Morant had it coming by the way.

for me en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Serbian_Empire

>They concentration camps were actually refugee champs where they happened to hold refugees against their will with an over 70% mortality rate! We dindu nuffin!
Ah yes, pic related is a 7 year old girl treated well by these forced, peaceful refugee camps!

How is this different about what nazis did?

It really isn't. The Nazis stole Britain's thunder.

That was early on when the camps weren't properly supplied. It's not like the British were the first to put their enemies in camps that weren't properly supplied, look at your own civil war. Poor logistics is not the same as deliberately trying to kill people.

>1,200 Natal Field Force (1,700 in Transvaal)
ah yes the full strength of the British Empire

British weren't trying to kill people in their camps whereas the Germans were?

There's no argument in this post, so you concede?

>Early on
>Photo in 1901
>War ends started in 1899 and ended in 1902
The difference between Andersonville and the Boer camps is we put POWs in Andersonville, ones who had surrendered or been captured.
The British forced non-combatant women and children into death camps. Over 50% of the female Boer population was wiped out at the end of the war

War started in 1899*

>Oh shit women and children need food and water to survive woopsie lol well it was an accident so it doesn't count

>Hold their own against the biggest Empire in the world
this is factually incorrect. They fought a fringe force on the border of British territory, that does not constitute the empire

>A British fringe force isn't a British force
Hmmmm, really gets my noggin a joggin!

don't remember saying that

BACK IN THE USSR

Then you're literally not arguing and just posting pointless bullshit.

They weren't death camps since the British were not trying to exterminate Boers. They was incompetently administered at first (later on the death rate for Boers was ~2 percent anually) but that isn't the same as deliberately trying to kill people.

>Over 50% of the female Boer population was wiped out at the end of the war
That's bullshit

I've made it quite clear

>The first one isn't bad
Fair enough, you don't get to complain about Mexicans in the US then, might makes right

Americans believe government should be neutral regarding denominations, not the same as separation of church and state, countries with laicité don't put "In God we trust" on their money.

>The British weren't deliberately trying to kill people because they said so!
Gee why would they lie about starving women and children to death to decrease enemy morale! Hmm! I'm sure if the purpose of these camps where over 70% of the prisoners died was to kill them then the British government would be transparent with us, as there would be no negative repercussions!
>at first
7 year old children were living skeletons in the second to last year of a 4 year war you fucking idiot. More like the entire fucking conflict bar the very very end after most of the female Boer population had been successfully exterminated.

Secularism isn't the same as laicité, there are different forms. Most Western countries are secular without implementing laicité. Québec is probably the most secular province and they still have a crucifix in their provincial legislature.

>Americans believe government should be neutral regarding denominations, not the same as separation of church and state, countries with laicité don't put "In God we trust" on their money.
America IS a culturally secular government though. The state of idea of God via "In God we Trust" is more of a freemasonic deistic notion of God that'd you'd expect from Jefferson or Franklin than a Christian conception of God.

>America IS a culturally secular government though.
Don't make me laugh.

>Hmm! I'm sure if the purpose of these camps where over 70% of the prisoners died
That's bullshit, the annual death rate was always less than 10% and the British worked to improve conditions within the camps. Overall roughly 1/4 of prisoners died during a time where logistics were often poor and disease was widespread. During the war 8,000 British Empire soldiers died from combat while nearly twice as many died of disease. If the British were trying to exterminate the Boers they wouldn't have enacted policies to mitigate deaths in the camps and they wouldn't have given their Boers their own independent dominion only a few years after the war.

...

Also 26,000 Boer women and children died. This is easily round half of all Boer women and children. The Orange Free State had an estimated population of 100,000 people in 1875, 26,000 is half of 51,000, which is more than half of the total Boer population.

Half of 52,000*

Shame because South Africa needed all the whites it could get.

>31 January, The officially reported White camp population is 97,986 and the deaths for January are 1,805.
>Nearly 2,000 women and children were starved to death in just a single month, but statistics! Intention!
You're honestly a sick individual

Children died at a greater rate than women, and most male POWs were sent overseas. It's bullshit.

Oh that was in 1902 by the way, last year of the war. Shit sure got better huh you fucking Cannuck?

>Look your claim about half the female population being exterminated is wrong because ACTUALLY more CHILDREN were exterminated
Listen to yourself

Not an argument, fuck off. The British Empire was the most benevolent world power to ever exist.

Mao will be pleased to know he did nothing wrong.

mong

There was no policy of extermination, I've made that quite clear. It's awful that so many people died, but it was not British policy to ensure Boer deaths.

kinda rude

The difference is that when the British fucked up they tried to right it whereas Mao doubled-down in his fuckups.

>Directly killing 2,000 children in a month with the only purpose being to demoralize the enemy who are fucking horse riding farmers, after having already sorted supply issues, is the most benevolent act in world power history
You're delusional.

>they only wanted their land, not dead.
What the fuck are you smoking? Can i have some?

Oh sorry they just accidentally did a holocaust woopsie, big mistake, their bad.
>Germans need to organize and plan the horrific exterminations of women and children in death camps
>British just do it accidentally as second nature
So benevolent! Amazing! Rule the waves!

...

>Directly killing
As I've already explained, they didn't do that. There was no policy of deliberately killing Boer civilians.

The Transvaal Republic started the war, talk shit get hit. Not to mention that they gave the Boers control of the entirety of South Africa within a decade of the War ending.

Except that unlike with the holocaust the British had no policy of extermination and enacted policies to mitigate the amount of people dying. Stop being retarded.

>Mister please, I have no flesh on my bones. It would have had to have taken months of no food for me to achieve such a state. Could you please spare a single slice of bread, of which you clearly have if you are of running this death camp while not in my condition?
>FECK OFF YE GIT
Seems pretty direct to me

The boeren started the war?
This is the part where i close the tab.

Yeah, it was the Transvaal Republic who declared war on the British.

Americans allow churches to promote and endorse candidates for office, hell Trump just made it easier by allowing them to retain their tax exempt status while doing so, I'd certainly agree there's a number of Western democracies that give allow religion some symbolic role in public life, or that even allow them some form of political participation (eg Christian democrats in Europe) but for Americans this is only a cover for what is really a standard of church involevement in government that would be unacceptable in any other Western nation.

Google Jim Inhofe to see the kind of nuts they have in government making bible based arguments while they discharge their office. That would be against the law over here.

Americans don't elect atheists for public office.

>a freemasonic deistic notion of God
youtube.com/watch?v=xH8OAXc6Dx4

>If you lock people in a cage without food and don't feed them you didn't mean for them to die
A
FUCKING
LEAF

>Americans allow churches to promote and endorse candidates for office
So what? Almost anybody can do that in any country.

>Americans don't elect atheists for public office.
Not true, although it wouldn't happen in the South. Irreligious people (though not necessarily atheists) get elected all the time. Trump himself clearly doesn't give a shit about Christianity or social conservatism, but for some reason retarded evangelicals will support him. You do have religious nuts in almost every government, there are just more of them in America (and Evangelical Protestants having a relatively large amount of political power is unique to America)

>incompetence is the same as malice
There was no policy of deliberately killing Boer civilians, if you don't have an actual argument stop posting

>Trump himself clearly doesn't give a shit about Christianity
He pretends to, see there's never been an openly atheist POTUS

>Almost anybody can do that in any country.
The Queen is formally head of the Anglican church, it's not like Anglos in general are glowing examples of secularism.

They hoarded them into a camp without food and wouldn't let them leave. That's a policy that deliberately kills anything.

sikh empire

Sikhs are disgusting

yeah but empires are nice