If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Telegraph)   This is how to be a superpower: Britain invaded 90% of the world   (telegraph.co.uk) divider line 132
    More: Interesting, Luxembourg, Britain, United Nations member states, British rule, British Overseas Territories, other nations, Marshall Islands, incursions  
•       •       •

13468 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Nov 2012 at 5:55 PM (2 years ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



132 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all
 
2012-11-04 06:50:03 PM  
I thought the article was about the new breed of hipsters, those with the keep calm signs and only discovered dr who 3 months ago
 
2012-11-04 06:50:04 PM  

rockforever: xynix: The old Brits were awesome at nation building. If you look at the countries or places they sat on for awhile they're all successful. Though South Africa is still not comparable to India or the US it's at least a shining beacon of what the African continent -could- one day become.

You know, most of those places were doing pretty well on their own before the Brits got there.

Plus most of the places are far worse off due to British or other western intervention.


I think he was making a comparison to the French. Look at all the former French territories...some of the most distraught places on earth.
/haiti, madagascar, algeria (well the civil war), mali, congo, syria (i think it was during the early 1900's), etc...
 
2012-11-04 06:55:55 PM  
And they accomplished 55% of that by using Fawlty Towers.
 
2012-11-04 06:59:37 PM  

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: xynix: The old Brits were awesome at nation building. If you look at the countries or places they sat on for awhile they're all successful. Though South Africa is still not comparable to India or the US it's at least a shining beacon of what the African continent -could- one day become.

Well, it's a lot easier when you eradicate the natives.


When it is stone age vs. high tech, high tech wins 9 times out of 10. Just the way things are.
 
2012-11-04 07:01:42 PM  

xynix: The old Brits were awesome at nation building. If you look at the countries or places they sat on for awhile they're all successful. Though South Africa is still not comparable to India or the US it's at least a shining beacon of what the African continent -could- one day become.


LOL

notsureifserious.jpg
 
2012-11-04 07:06:41 PM  

GORDON: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: xynix: The old Brits were awesome at nation building. If you look at the countries or places they sat on for awhile they're all successful. Though South Africa is still not comparable to India or the US it's at least a shining beacon of what the African continent -could- one day become.

Well, it's a lot easier when you eradicate the natives.

When it is stone age vs. high tech, high tech wins 9 times out of 10. Just the way things are.


Yeah, that 10th time it's always some asshole with a spear, knocking out my tanks.

/F*cking spearmen
 
2012-11-04 07:07:46 PM  
If you want to see America beat that record vote for Romney on Tuesday.
 
2012-11-04 07:13:48 PM  

colimar: I thought the article was about the new breed of hipsters, those with the keep calm signs and only discovered dr who 3 months ago


3 months ago did what? Why is he the only one that's been discovered?
 
2012-11-04 07:15:43 PM  
This makes me wanna play Civ5, yeah!
 
2012-11-04 07:16:42 PM  

JasonOfOrillia: How the hell did Sweden avoid invasion? They were a major European power at one point, the Brits should have wanted to give them a spanking at some point.


And this despite the Anglo-Swedish war of 1810-12.

(Neither side took any hostile action.)
 
2012-11-04 07:19:45 PM  
xynix: The old Brits were awesome at nation building. If you look at the countries or places they sat on for awhile they're all successful. Though South Africa is still not comparable to India or the US it's at least a shining beacon of what the African continent -could- one day become.
I dunno... Australia, Canada, NZ are pretty good testimonies to our ancestor's skills and maybe Sith Efrica might have been but for the Boers and their fkd up ideas. But India was pre existing when they got there, it was just a case of pushing a dilapidated but magnificent old money making machine out of the barn and giving it a quick service. Imperialists loved India.
But much of Africa's messed up borders bears witness to the French and the Brits cack handed cluelessness.

ThatGuyFromTheInternet Well, it's a lot easier when you eradicate the natives.
i think you're confusing the British Empire with the German attempts at empire.
Who the hell is going to sell you next year's crop or harvest that sweet, sweet sugar tea, coffee and spices you've got customers queuing up for? Zombies?
Murdering people is (usually) bad for business and the British empire was about business.
 
2012-11-04 07:21:56 PM  

xynix: The old Brits were awesome at nation building.


dl.dropbox.com

If Britain was good at nation building then she would still have a few more nations under her belt.
What they were good at was spreading influence with the power of their Navy. But even with that they left a trail of chaos around the globe.

/Israel alone should be proof that the Queen knew fark all bout making nations.
/Africa never did recover from colonization, and probably won't within our lifetimes.
 
2012-11-04 07:24:04 PM  
And what has it gained them?
 
2012-11-04 07:25:30 PM  
How to Avoid Being Invaded by the British

1. Be land locked. (They don't like to have to walk very far.)
2. Be not worth the trouble (lousy climate, no resources).
3. Be neutral but heavily armed. You mind your business, they'll mind your guns. Hell, they'll even sell them to you.
4. Be too small to find on a map.

My theory about Sweden is that it was just a matter of luck. Sweden was a considerable power for a while but with the constant shifting alliances in Europe, the UK and Sweden simply never ended up on opposite sides long enough to fight each other seriously. Both countries have played a similar game of constitutional monarchy, partial socialism, liberal-conservatism and avoidance of entangling alliances that didn't have something it for them.

It's like those house fires which burn everything except one small corner or pocket where the fire didn't reach. Sweden was in an air pocket at any time when the UK was flaming European powers in order to maintain the famous "Balance of Power".

Switzerland has the advance of being d) all of the above. It is rich because it's population is industrious and educated, not because it has resources. In fact, it has to import almost everything but food (only 50% imports) and water. If anybody decided to kick Swiss butt they could either put up one Hell of a fight or simply leave. Either way, you're stuck with a bunch of mountains and valleys worth little or nothing without the Swiss themselves. But then who will hold your coat while you fight? You can't count on Canadians doing it every time.
 
2012-11-04 07:25:55 PM  
Thereal problem is...how do we blame England's imperialism, colonization, and basically, war on religion. This is a dilly of a pickle because it really is nationalism and commerce and not religion. Hmmm. Where's an atheist. We need some revisionist history here.
 
2012-11-04 07:29:14 PM  

Spiralmonkey: MaudlinMutantMollusk: And what have they got to show for it?

We don't have to learn as many new languages when we go on holiday.


That's actually due more to the exportation of US media over the last century.
 
2012-11-04 07:32:28 PM  
Proteios1: Thereal problem is...how do we blame England's imperialism, colonization, and basically, war on religion. This is a dilly of a pickle because it really is nationalism and commerce and not religion.

The Protestant Ethic and the Spirit of Capitalism?
 
2012-11-04 07:36:06 PM  

Lsherm: Difference of degrees. The Roman Empire invaded almost the whole of the known world at the time. Britain just branched out into new territories, and they only had the means because of leftovers from the RE.


Known to them. There were civilizations all over the world that the Romans never came close to visiting, much less conquering.
 
2012-11-04 07:40:30 PM  
Britain invaded 90% of the world

We can't be far behind
 
2012-11-04 07:44:22 PM  

GORDON: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: xynix: The old Brits were awesome at nation building. If you look at the countries or places they sat on for awhile they're all successful. Though South Africa is still not comparable to India or the US it's at least a shining beacon of what the African continent -could- one day become.

Well, it's a lot easier when you eradicate the natives.

When it is stone age vs. high tech, high tech wins 9 times out of 10. Just the way things are.


Guns, germs and steel, baby!
 
2012-11-04 07:48:15 PM  
But was it legitimate invasion?
 
2012-11-04 07:52:52 PM  

ethics-gradient: xynix: The old Brits were awesome at nation building. If you look at the countries or places they sat on for awhile they're all successful. Though South Africa is still not comparable to India or the US it's at least a shining beacon of what the African continent -could- one day become.
I dunno... Australia, Canada, NZ are pretty good testimonies to our ancestor's skills and maybe Sith Efrica might have been but for the Boers and their fkd up ideas. But India was pre existing when they got there, it was just a case of pushing a dilapidated but magnificent old money making machine out of the barn and giving it a quick service. Imperialists loved India.
But much of Africa's messed up borders bears witness to the French and the Brits cack handed cluelessness.

ThatGuyFromTheInternet Well, it's a lot easier when you eradicate the natives.
i think you're confusing the British Empire with the German attempts at empire.
Who the hell is going to sell you next year's crop or harvest that sweet, sweet sugar tea, coffee and spices you've got customers queuing up for? Zombies?
Murdering people is (usually) bad for business and the British empire was about business.


The British attempted to wipe out every single native in Tasmania (Australian state).

And they have in a way wiped them out from mainland Australia as well - their culture and identity has been almost completely destroyed with the possible exception of some who live their traditional lives in the hot, dusty desert known as the outback. Living in Sydney it is rare for me to ever see anyone who looks like they may have aboriginal heritage. We (British and Australians) have effectively destroyed them.

Tasmanian Genocide

The British are very good people these days, but back in the time of empire they were unrivaled assholes - with dingle-berries matted in the ass hair.
 
2012-11-04 07:56:42 PM  

Proteios1: Thereal problem is...how do we blame England's imperialism, colonization, and basically, war on religion. This is a dilly of a pickle because it really is nationalism and commerce and not religion. Hmmm. Where's an atheist. We need some revisionist history here.


You sound upset.

Considering the book covers everything from the year 197 onwards, trying to attribute one or even 10 reasons to all of the "invasions" listed over 1,815 years of history would be the kind of idiotic reductionism one would expect from a religious loony.
 
2012-11-04 08:02:48 PM  

McManus_brothers: GORDON: ThatGuyFromTheInternet: xynix: The old Brits were awesome at nation building. If you look at the countries or places they sat on for awhile they're all successful. Though South Africa is still not comparable to India or the US it's at least a shining beacon of what the African continent -could- one day become.

Well, it's a lot easier when you eradicate the natives.

When it is stone age vs. high tech, high tech wins 9 times out of 10. Just the way things are.

Yeah, that 10th time it's always some asshole with a spear, knocking out my tanks.

/F*cking spearmen


that's what happened to the Italians first time they invaded Ethiopia - they had their asses handed to them
 
2012-11-04 08:10:02 PM  

ParallelUniverseParking: But was it legitimate invasion?


I know this sounds counter-intuitive, but if it's a legitimate invasion, that doesn't mean that it resulted in colonization and British rule. The defending nation has ways of shutting that whole thing down.
 
2012-11-04 08:10:22 PM  

way south: xynix: The old Brits were awesome at nation building.

[dl.dropbox.com image 400x353]

If Britain was good at nation building then she would still have a few more nations under her belt.
What they were good at was spreading influence with the power of their Navy. But even with that they left a trail of chaos around the globe.

/Israel alone should be proof that the Queen knew fark all bout making nations.
/Africa never did recover from colonization, and probably won't within our lifetimes.


...The Commonwealth? And Israel is a very nice place, on par with any Western nation.
 
2012-11-04 08:13:31 PM  

Blairr:
/Israel alone should be proof that the Queen knew fark all bout making nations.
/Africa never did recover from colonization, and probably won't within our lifetimes.

...The Commonwealth? And Israel is a very nice place, on par with any Western nation.


I agree. I really like Israel. It's like a Western oasis in the Mid East.
 
2012-11-04 08:17:15 PM  
And today no one cares what they do.
 
2012-11-04 08:20:49 PM  
They've gone from ruling 90% of the world to handing out ASBOs to pre-teens for climbing trees in the park. Pretty sad to see really.

/i blame the queen
//and i don't mean elton
 
2012-11-04 08:21:24 PM  
McManus_brothers:

/F*cking spearmen

andjo.free.fr
 
2012-11-04 08:21:59 PM  

freewill: ParallelUniverseParking: But was it legitimate invasion?

I know this sounds counter-intuitive, but if it's a legitimate invasion, that doesn't mean that it resulted in colonization and British rule. The defending nation has ways of shutting that whole thing down.


And India doesn't count anyway - that subcontinent was practically asking for it.
 
2012-11-04 08:35:33 PM  

Proteios1: Thereal problem is...how do we blame England's imperialism, colonization, and basically, war on religion. This is a dilly of a pickle because it really is nationalism and commerce and not religion. Hmmm. Where's an atheist. We need some revisionist history here.


Haha! Very troll.
 
2012-11-04 08:37:58 PM  

Marcintosh: Britain invaded 90% of the world

We can't be far behind


See my list above. I think we're getting pretty close.
 
2012-11-04 08:39:24 PM  

Spiralmonkey: "This video is private" - what was the gist?


orly...

well...snap. yes i looked. it functioned before and I'm sure it's available elsewhere... but yes its history of the power struggle to own nations by controlling their money supplies...

Remember jesus throwing the money changers out of the temple, yes, yes...

your moneh is worthless, you are pawns in a game of kings
 
2012-11-04 08:46:11 PM  
 
2012-11-04 08:51:12 PM  
it was the federal reserve act of 1913, feel free to google the sh*t out of that; meetings in secret on 'Jekyll Island down south -- alternate staff -- no name usage -- faked the reporters out by giving them bogus train station schedule for departure -- evil knows no bounds. These are the people that meet at builderburg groups every year, international bankers cuz how many currencies do we have, really: USD, Euro (toilet), Yen, ... stock markets would collapse overnight if illegal drugs were legalized because it all fuels inflation -- hello we just dumped an additional 887 BILLION (taht you know of) into the economy -- that certainly shouldn't have been needed but all the CEOs threw in their ties and shut down their companies because they wanted bonuses from their pal Dubya who stole not one but two elections under the guise of SCOTUS because -- well, the US needed Iraq's oil, goddamnit -- 2003 invasion, 2008 oil contracts signed. 5 years.
 
2012-11-04 08:53:35 PM  

notmtwain: I think a lot depends on your definition of invasion. I mean there's invasion and then there's invasion invasion.


British pirates land on your shore and it is considered an invasion, I don't think so.
 
2012-11-04 09:04:08 PM  

way south: If Britain was good at nation building then she would still have a few more nations under her belt.
What they were good at was spreading influence with the power of their Navy. But even with that they left a trail of chaos around the globe.


If you look at the remaining countries which were under British rule you at least find a semi-functional government compared to what existed before.

Compare that with the countries which were colonized by the French, Dutch, and Spanish and look at the resultant governments.

At least the British left behind a legacy of organized government and the aspirations for functional infrastructure.
 
2012-11-04 09:12:06 PM  
I still occasionally find Queen Elizabeth II's head resting comfortably next to my balls. It is quite comforting. Quite.

i.ebayimg.com
 
2012-11-04 09:14:54 PM  

Lsherm: Pales in comparison to Rome. The British are the sweat on the balls of the Roman Empire.


Rome paled in comparison to the Monguls.
 
2012-11-04 09:20:41 PM  
sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net


That video's available elsewhere online, just google money masters documentary, it's about 428mb. Download it, burn it to CD. put it on a shelf. forget about it cuz it's not happenin'.
 
2012-11-04 09:26:49 PM  

urban.derelict: it was the federal reserve act of 1913, feel free to google the sh*t out of that; meetings in secret on 'Jekyll Island down south -- alternate staff -- no name usage -- faked the reporters out by giving them bogus train station schedule for departure -- evil knows no bounds. These are the people that meet at builderburg groups every year, international bankers cuz how many currencies do we have, really: USD, Euro (toilet), Yen, ... stock markets would collapse overnight if illegal drugs were legalized because it all fuels inflation -- hello we just dumped an additional 887 BILLION (taht you know of) into the economy -- that certainly shouldn't have been needed but all the CEOs threw in their ties and shut down their companies because they wanted bonuses from their pal Dubya who stole not one but two elections under the guise of SCOTUS because -- well, the US needed Iraq's oil, goddamnit -- 2003 invasion, 2008 oil contracts signed. 5 years.


I think I discovered meow said the dog's alt.
 
2012-11-04 09:29:09 PM  

ThatGuyFromTheInternet: Well, it's a lot easier when you eradicate the natives.


1.bp.blogspot.com

I guess they missed some?

Their withdrawal from India was atrocious. Read "The Great Partition" by Yasmin Khan if you get a few spare days. Also, deliberately drawing borders inconsistant with ancient tribal territories caused much, much, bloodshed in the Middle East.
 
2012-11-04 09:39:11 PM  
Others will fill our places,
Dressed in the old light blue,
We'll recollect our races,
We'll to the flag be true,
And youth will be still in our faces
When we cheer for an Eton crew,
And youth will be still in our faces
When we cheer for an Eton crew.


/empire ain't over until the scullers start singing... 
//`spot of tea on the verandah, say what?'
 
2012-11-04 09:42:15 PM  

rocky_howard: If you look at the map, you'll notice that most of the countries they didn't invade are landlocked, which means, no navy advantage.

Truly a testament of the British naval power through the ages.

[i.telegraph.co.uk image 620x307]

Navy : British Empire :: Air Force : United States


True, but not just that. Landlocked countries aren't usually worth colonizing because it's more difficult to transport raw materials out with no ports.
 
2012-11-04 09:44:05 PM  
Invade does not equal conquer or rule.
 
2012-11-04 10:01:57 PM  

FizixJunkee: Blairr:
/Israel alone should be proof that the Queen knew fark all bout making nations.
/Africa never did recover from colonization, and probably won't within our lifetimes.

...The Commonwealth? And Israel is a very nice place, on par with any Western nation.

I agree. I really like Israel. It's like a Western oasis in the Mid East.

\

Unless you're Palestinian, in which case.....
 
2012-11-04 10:27:40 PM  

puckrock2000: urban.derelict: it was the federal reserve act of 1913, feel free to google the sh*t out of that; meetings in secret on 'Jekyll Island down south -- alternate staff -- no name usage -- faked the reporters out by giving them bogus train station schedule for departure -- evil knows no bounds. These are the people that meet at builderburg groups every year, international bankers cuz how many currencies do we have, really: USD, Euro (toilet), Yen, ... stock markets would collapse overnight if illegal drugs were legalized because it all fuels inflation -- hello we just dumped an additional 887 BILLION (taht you know of) into the economy -- that certainly shouldn't have been needed but all the CEOs threw in their ties and shut down their companies because they wanted bonuses from their pal Dubya who stole not one but two elections under the guise of SCOTUS because -- well, the US needed Iraq's oil, goddamnit -- 2003 invasion, 2008 oil contracts signed. 5 years.

I think I discovered meow said the dog's alt.



Then perhaps I should favorite both.
 
2012-11-04 10:47:27 PM  
Great Britain has been a plague on this planet for several hundred years. In WW1 we should have attacked them instead of the Germans. Again in WW2.
 
2012-11-04 11:06:34 PM  
This is wat super pow ... uh, democracy, protest, should look like?

resources0.news.com.au
 
Displayed 50 of 132 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter





In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report