Is being proud of an Empire similar to cuckoldry?

Why would anyone be proud of the fact that young British went to war to die for some fucking India? Or Frenchies for Africa? Or when regular german Dieters died for the pointless quest for conquering Russia and controlling the world with Japan and Italy? You think ordinary people today in Germany really weep for the past? They would have been sent to death because the Kaiser or Fuhrer had an insane idea

>Is being proud of an Empire similar to cuckoldry?

we should have just genocide poles like britbongs did to potato niggers.

No, it's just good-old tribalism and brainwash.

Instead of the Bolsheviks genociding your own people!

Kek

t. No empire, BTFO by Krauts and Ivan throughout history

BTFO by bolshevik jews, human wave military tactics.

t.No empire. Completely and utterly destroyed by Turks after the Battle of Mohacs

Austro-Hungary, ya cheeky sheepshagger.

Heritage m8. Citizen's of British, French, Germans, Dutch, empires and their former white colonies can be proud that their ancestors struck out onto unknown shores and did battle with Indians, abbos, maori, Zulus, Pajeets, and Chinks all for their kings and countrys.
Empires made Europe Europe and it's not about being sad for their loss but being inspired by their lust for adventure and challenge.
Ask any decent frenchman and he will tell you that he would love to have fought in the grand army
Ask any Loyal Anglo and they will tell you they would love to have fought from the Cape to Cairo

>British went to war to die for some fucking India?
India supplied the most troops in world war 2 you blithering Idiot.

And British India caused the largest Japanese defeat of ww2 at kohima and impala

Lol
>German empire

Yup.

It was a geopolitical game between the European powers. Obtain the resources first, become more powerful and rich at home as a result.

The average Tommy didn't die in India for the sake of Indians, he died to keep Britain rich and prosperous and a world player.

It's no wonder after Britain was forced to give up colonial rule that it faded into irrelevance. It hasn't had an independent foreign policy thought since 1956.

And no, the Falklands don't matter.

You can do shit Ivan. Russians are bretty good at genociding themselves to. Look at 1917 or Pootin killing his own citizens to justify an attack in Chechnya or Stalin killing his own ruskie village to justify the attack on Finland

We used to have not that small of a union but it was a republican state, not imperial cuckdom

And they were the biggest traitors to the Empire too after Singapore.

Being allied to Indians is more of a hindrance than an advantage.

Gladstone and Tolkien disliked the Empire. And how dare you say that Frenchies would like to make sacrifices for France after Vichy?

I know, just had to try.

Lol, we're all still owned doesn't matter to the kikes fampai

So what? They knew they were under the British occupation and soon after they got their independence. I meant that an ordinary chap had to give his life just so that the british elites could control Africa

>Gladstone and Tolkien disliked the Empire.

Take that back you Pollack cunt. He did everything possibile to ensure the Empire survived and thrived. It was that kike faggot Disraeli that sowed the seeds of the Empire's destruction.

>You should avoid needless and entangling engagements. You may boast about them, you may brag about them, you may say you are procuring consideration of the country. You may say that an Englishman may now hold up his head among the nations. But what does all this come to, gentlemen? It comes to this, that you are increasing your engagements without increasing your strength; and if you increase your engagements without increasing strength, you diminish strength, you abolish strength; you really reduce the empire and do not increase it. You render it less capable of performing its duties; you render it an inheritance less precious to hand on to future generations.

Americans should take note. Military power should only be used when the reward outweighs the cost of achieving said award. I don't see 1 Trillion dollars in oil rights being afforded to the USA from Iraq.

Idk how fighting along a country who lost a war to a bird is better than that.

Yeah. And they didn't protect us for nothing, India provided more wealth to Britain alone than most of its colonies combined.
There was a reason India was the crown jewel of British Empire.

With that quote you have just effectively proven what I've written. What Gladstone meant - this is a dumb imperial overreach and in the end it will all have to collapse. Not only that happened - ordinary chaps also don't want to be taken away from their families in order to fight blacks in Africa, who pose no threat whatsoever to his homeland

Oh, for fuck sake. The empire was built by a bunch of chancers, trying to make a few bob. You get a ship, some trade goods, go out and find a market.
The government had fuck all to do with it before the they started making money. There wasn't a British army in India in the early years. It was a company army.

>There was a reason India was the crown jewel of British Empire.

Sure as shit wasn't the god forsaken races that inhabit the subcontinent.

>India provided more wealth to Britain
Fine, but at the cost of british lives

Imperial outreach isn't a problem. You protect trade, make shekels, colonize parts of the world for your excess population. All good things.

Overreach on the other hand is what was the problem. Britain boundless treaties to protect this and that after WW1 were a noose around their neck if two powers ever challenged her at once.

Even before WW1, the treaty with France was a mistake. We could have let the continent go up in flames and we would have played the role that America played during the war.

Why was there such a strong class consience in Britain and social conflict like chartists, if colonies brought Britain money? Was it because colonialism served only the London bankers?

>Sure as shit wasn't the god forsaken races that inhabit the subcontinent.
I am saying that the Britain didn't protected us for nothing.

>Fine, but at the cost of british lives
In a time of war. War needs money and resources. Losing India at that time would have cost more British lives.

>We could have let the continent go up in flames and we would have played the role that America played during the war
No you couldn't. America = 50 common identity states organized in one country with a gigantic inner market that brings enormous profits. British Empire was much more diverse and thus much more prone to collapse, so Britain couldn't play the role the USA had

If Britain was so stronk then why it was rekt so hard by Germany in the end?

Heavy is the head that wears the crown
You wouldn't know because you've never been great at any point in history.

Also we've spilled our blood for the brits too, our soldiers fought for them in WW2

>Losing India at that time would have cost more British lives

I'm talking in general m8. Why should ordinary Pierres give their lives to fight blacks in distant Africa? This is just treating your people as cattle. The same occured in WW1

>our soldiers fought for them
good point :^)

>you've never been great at any point in history
there were times of glory, not in the 19 century certainly, but earlier sure

>Was it because colonialism served only the London bankers?

Clearly not since the immigrants to the colonies lived better than they otherwise would have in the UK slaving away in some shit-tier coal mine.

It is a good point,it illustrates that the empire was mutually beneficial,benefit being tipped on the British side but mutually beneficial nonetheless

In general m8, nobody do shit for anybody.
Capitalists try to donate money for Africa to look good and hide their shady deals
EU, Russia and US send their troops to Middle East to show each other how better their military are etc. etc.
Grow up.

>If Britain was so stronk then why it was rekt so hard by Germany in the end?

Because it maintained an excellent naval force at the expense of the army and airforce. They made the wrong bet in the inter-war years for a European war. They were probably better equipped for a Pacific war against Japan or a showdown in the Atlantic against the Americans.

Britain wiped Germany from the seas during the phoney war.

The only thing you have spilled is your guys, Pajeet. Indians are natural cowards.

>British
That includes Irish, many Irish fought for the Empire, but also many Irish joined enemies of the Empire too.

If you genuinely love the Empire after the result, you are indeed a cuck.

The chartists, wanted a vote, a voice, in Britain.
You know how the Irish and the Scots are always banging on about how bad the rich English treated them. Well the rich click, treated the English workers just as bad. It was a caste system defined by wealth and influence.
At one time the rich wouldn't touch trade, then Clive, a company clerk. Sent to India as an embarrassment. Became richer than the king, then they got interested.

Sorry Aussie,you'll never be dad's favorite kid,
Jewel of the Commonwealth

And how was being rekt by Germany beneficial to ordinary Pajeets? It was the USA in the end that destroyed Germany not Anglos and their colonies

Your scenario may be possible, but Britain acted reasonably. Watching France getting overrun by Germans was surely scary

The toppling of muslim rule before the war was a benefit
Unified country was a benefit
Infrastructure the brits built was a benefit
They developed our Army,Navy
They settled new cities , Mumbai of which is the best one in the country right now.

We had some benefit from the empire,maybe you'd have been better off too if you'd let Aryan Germans administer your country and we could have avoided the whole world war

Germans were obsessed with polish conspiracies and were persecuting Poles because they were afraid they would take away the lands that contributed to the strength of Prussia, so sorry but Germans had not even had neutral intentions towards Poles. Russians as well

Funny that you avoid my question about Germany. So tell me why is it that helping Britain was so fine but shortly after India gets independence

>Is being proud of an Empire similar to cuckoldry

no.

The rothschilds own everything, london is the home of those fucking kikes, they owned the BE and now they own the USA, the USA is basically a impoverished shit hole now because of how much money those kikes are making off of them, slaves to the banks.

I'm neither proud nor ashamed of what my country has done. I'm ex British Army - Royal Engineers.
My country has achieved a lot: largest Empire in history, industrial revolution, a worldwide language, ( your question was written in English), loads of inventions. Like television and and the world wide web.
I love my country, and I swore an oath to protect Her Majesty with my life. She IS the country. My oath has no expiry date. I have complete loyalty.
But we're a group of cold islands.
Our national character has been described as arrogant, and it's true. We simply don't care what other countries think about us.
I'm loyal to my country, but not a flag waving patriot. We are four countries. I'm English, my wife is Scottish. There are also Wales and Northern Ireland.
Tl;dr I love my country and we're leaving the EU.

You should have spared me your spam which is not on topic

Think about it m8 - why should you be loyal to a state that treats you like cattle?

That was a dark chapter in British history. I love Ireland. But I won't take blame. 'Sins of the fathers' etc. Not that my dad had a go at Ireland. It's an expression. My distant ancestors probably wrecked stuff. Fuck all to do with me.
I'm a good lad. I'm kind to my wife, kids, family and friends. And people I don't know.