>"Anglos raped and genocided millions!!!"

>"Anglos raped and genocided millions!!!"

Okay then name one genocide

>"muh Irish famine"
Famine
>"muh Bengal famine"
Famine
>"muh Boers"
Internment not extermination
>"muh Natives"
Disease
>"muh Tasmanians"
Was a genocide but there were only 1000 of them

  1. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >intentional famines aren't genocide
    Why do chuds cry crocodile tears over Soviet famines then?

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      soviets bad, anglos good
      simple as

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Irish famine
      >caused by potato blight

      Bengal famine
      >caused by the blockade of Britain and Japanese invading Burma

      Holodomor
      >Stalin just didn't want to feed the Ukies lol

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Irish famine was just blight bro
        >if I pretend you're ignorant I don't have to acknowledge British export of food from Ireland during said famine
        Shiggy diggy

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          its the same thing with the bengali famine or any other famine. There was obviously a shortage of food in the region, but there were obvious, blatant actions on the part of the british admin that resulted in millions of deaths.
          Same with Holodomor. Stalin probably used the preexisting famine as a way to cull Kulaks and Ukrainians, by keeping food away from anyone who needed it and being negligent.
          History is filled with these "famines" that were basically man made. The famines that were addressed aren't in history books

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >potato blight
          >world war 2

          >deliberately exporting food because you want to make money to inorganically industrialise your country
          delusional

          I like how you pretend the British weren’t feeding 3 million people a day in government sponsored soup kitchens and then some more by charity.
          Fucking lying dogs you two are.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            I like how you pretend that the british government literally didnt declare that the famine was just god enacting justice on the lazy irish and refused to help until the people and army got so fed up with the obvious genocide that they shamed the government into setting up said soup kitchens. Whos the lying dog? You are, you ugly mutt.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >Bengal famine
        There more, typhoon, crop disease and Raj officials corruption.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >potato blight
      >world war 2

      >deliberately exporting food because you want to make money to inorganically industrialise your country
      delusional

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >NOOOO YOU CAN'T JUST EXPORT FOOD WHEN PEOPLE ARE STARVING

        >Irish famine was just blight bro
        >if I pretend you're ignorant I don't have to acknowledge British export of food from Ireland during said famine
        Shiggy diggy

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >inorganically industrialise

        Uhhh, Britain wasn't some shithole third world country "industrialising", they invented industrialisation

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      They usually aren't the same people

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Soviets did it on purpose

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Unlike the English, who loved the Irish with all their heart.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      https://i.imgur.com/dW5rphD.jpg

      >"Anglos raped and genocided millions!!!"

      Okay then name one genocide

      >"muh Irish famine"
      Famine
      >"muh Bengal famine"
      Famine
      >"muh Boers"
      Internment not extermination
      >"muh Natives"
      Disease
      >"muh Tasmanians"
      Was a genocide but there were only 1000 of them

      The smallpox crap is fake.
      Libs genocided natives.
      The entire thread is spam. And all posters are retards.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Because chuds are hypocrites

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >intentional
      I don't think you understand the meaning of the word 'intentional'

      India and Ireland: has a famine because the monsoon failed, or because a cyclone wrecked shit, or because a blight destroyed all the crops

      Ukraine: has a famine because Soviet soldiers rolled up and literally took all the food at gunpoint.

  2. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    The bengali famine was basically man made. It was preventable and few people would even know about it today, had churchill and others actually cared to send surplus grain to the region. Its also well known that churchill was a massive racist and probably didn't care about the loss of human life in Bengal anyway

    >boers
    Similar thing. Brits basically crowded thousands of civilians into disgusting and crowded camps, and left them to die with no supplies or help.
    >The inadequate shelter, poor diet, bad hygiene and overcrowding led to malnutrition and endemic contagious diseases such as measles, typhoid and dysentery to which the children were particularly vulnerable.

    The common factor here is british rule and apathy towards the subjects. Anglos are rightfully seen as insect-like and barbaric because they consistently do egregious things to all sorts of people. Honestly we don't even know what happened with these """famines""" since most of history was rewritten after WW2

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      oops, someone's clearly been reading too much re*dit.

      >The bengali famine was basically man made
      Untrue, it was caused by a cyclone that hit the area.

      Although certainly, the Japanese invasion of Burma - which caused a massive influx of refugees and cut off rice imports from Burma to Bengal - didn't help. But clearly the Japanese aren't white enough to be held responsible.

      >It was preventable ... had churchill and others actually cared to send surplus grain to the region
      The Japanese were able to send naval patrols into the Indian ocean after the fall of Singapore. Britain simply didn't have the escorts left to send convoys to Bengal, and Roosevelt didn't want to divert ships badly needed in the Pacific. They simply couldn't afford to throw away huge amounts of grain and the ships that carried them. Incidentally, the grain passing by India wasn't "surplus". It was going to Greece, which was in the midst of a famine that killed hundreds of thousands, and would have killed millions had British relief supplies not arrived. Ironically the famine in Greece was a man-made famine, caused by the occupying Germans and Italians, and it was only thanks to Britain that it wasn't a lot worse. But because they made the decision to save who they could, they get accused of genocide.

      >Its also well known that churchill was a massive racist and probably didn't care about the loss of human life in Bengal anyway
      Churchill told the colonial authorities they should be doing more about it, and asked both his own cabinet and the Americans if they could be doing more about it. The consensus was that they couldn't.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        The bengali famine was basically man made. It was preventable and few people would even know about it today, had churchill and others actually cared to send surplus grain to the region. Its also well known that churchill was a massive racist and probably didn't care about the loss of human life in Bengal anyway

        >boers
        Similar thing. Brits basically crowded thousands of civilians into disgusting and crowded camps, and left them to die with no supplies or help.
        >The inadequate shelter, poor diet, bad hygiene and overcrowding led to malnutrition and endemic contagious diseases such as measles, typhoid and dysentery to which the children were particularly vulnerable.

        The common factor here is british rule and apathy towards the subjects. Anglos are rightfully seen as insect-like and barbaric because they consistently do egregious things to all sorts of people. Honestly we don't even know what happened with these """famines""" since most of history was rewritten after WW2

        >Brits basically crowded thousands of civilians into disgusting and crowded camps, and left them to die with no supplies or help.
        The civilians were aiding the guerrillas. You know how every other country in the world dealt with that kind of thing? They shot them, either en masse or taking hostages and executing some every time there was an attack.

        The British thought the concentration camps would be a more humane solution. The point of an actual concentration camp is to concentrate a civilian population in a secure area where it's easier to keep an eye on them, rather than spread out over the countryside where they're impossible to police. You know the Nazis used "concentration camp" as a euphemism, right? It was supposed to be a cover for slave labor and extermination.

        Anyway, the British plan was a great one except for one respect: the Boers kept attacking their supply lines.

        Again, the Brits tried to do the human thing and got accused of genocide for it. If they'd just shot everyone like normal no one would even have remembered.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Perhaps britain shouldn't have attacked the boers, did you consider that possibility?

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            the boers started both wars idiot.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              The anglo cries out in pain as he strikes you.
              They "started" them as in made a preemptive strike to come afore the anglo intent to occupy and annex them. Which obviously they did, rather than, as might have been justified, starting a punitive expedition and leaving.

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            1. The Boers attacked the British

            2. The reason the Boers attacked the British was because they didn't want to give voting rights to the non-Dutch whites in the Transvaal.

            Also, are we supposed to be sympathetic because the Brits stole the land that the Boers had stolen from the blacks like five minutes earlier?

            [...]
            When someone starts a wall of text complaining about reddit, you know it's gonna be cope.

            [...]
            wow I am glad anglos are being "genocided" in their own countries by Somalis and Pakis. Actual insectoids lmao

            Maybe if you can't provide a counter-argument and have to resort to memes, you just shouldn't post.

            • 2 weeks ago
              Anonymous

              [...]
              no response, just seethe

              >genocide people
              >call it a famine

              >starve people in camps including women and children
              >they deserved it

              >britain uses slave labor
              >whataboutism

              LOL
              Anglo apologists are the reason why zoomtards are so anti-white. You guys make it insanely easy to hate on white people and any remnant of colonialism.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                you've been BTFO on everything you've said and your response is just to seethe and cry

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                That's right, a few anglo apologists on the internet is why zoomers hate white people, not the flood of black music, zoomies mimicking everything from black culture and black twitter because it's "cool", schools that condemn white identity and history, entertainment that mocks whites, it's all a few anglo apologists.

              • 2 weeks ago
                Anonymous

                literally zero answer to any of the points he made

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        [...]

        >Brits basically crowded thousands of civilians into disgusting and crowded camps, and left them to die with no supplies or help.
        The civilians were aiding the guerrillas. You know how every other country in the world dealt with that kind of thing? They shot them, either en masse or taking hostages and executing some every time there was an attack.

        The British thought the concentration camps would be a more humane solution. The point of an actual concentration camp is to concentrate a civilian population in a secure area where it's easier to keep an eye on them, rather than spread out over the countryside where they're impossible to police. You know the Nazis used "concentration camp" as a euphemism, right? It was supposed to be a cover for slave labor and extermination.

        Anyway, the British plan was a great one except for one respect: the Boers kept attacking their supply lines.

        Again, the Brits tried to do the human thing and got accused of genocide for it. If they'd just shot everyone like normal no one would even have remembered.

        When someone starts a wall of text complaining about reddit, you know it's gonna be cope.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          [...]
          wow I am glad anglos are being "genocided" in their own countries by Somalis and Pakis. Actual insectoids lmao

          no response, just seethe

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        [...]

        >Brits basically crowded thousands of civilians into disgusting and crowded camps, and left them to die with no supplies or help.
        The civilians were aiding the guerrillas. You know how every other country in the world dealt with that kind of thing? They shot them, either en masse or taking hostages and executing some every time there was an attack.

        The British thought the concentration camps would be a more humane solution. The point of an actual concentration camp is to concentrate a civilian population in a secure area where it's easier to keep an eye on them, rather than spread out over the countryside where they're impossible to police. You know the Nazis used "concentration camp" as a euphemism, right? It was supposed to be a cover for slave labor and extermination.

        Anyway, the British plan was a great one except for one respect: the Boers kept attacking their supply lines.

        Again, the Brits tried to do the human thing and got accused of genocide for it. If they'd just shot everyone like normal no one would even have remembered.

        wow I am glad anglos are being "genocided" in their own countries by Somalis and Pakis. Actual insectoids lmao

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >The British are obligated to keep trashbindians alive
      try this, the world would be objectively cleaner, healthier, safer, and have a brighter future if all indians died tomorrow.
      The same could not be said for a people like the Japanese or the Anglo-Saxons.

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        Face with proof that the anglo did indeed commit genocide, he comes around and JUSTIFIES it. In the current year, in 2022. Germans are deeply sorry for their genocides. Turks and Japs at least pretend it didn't happen. Anglos are sorry they didn't do more of it. Can a more vile race exist on this earth?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          ??
          I said Anglos arent responsible, its not their job to keep a bunch of people too dumb to live alive.
          I only pointed out that Indians, objectively speaking, make the world a worse place.
          They are among a handful of races that if 90% of them died off, the world would improve.

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Face with proof that the anglo did indeed commit genocide, he comes around and JUSTIFIES it. In the current year, in 2022. Germans are deeply sorry for their genocides. Turks and Japs at least pretend it didn't happen. Anglos are sorry they didn't do more of it. Can a more vile race exist on this earth?
          Sounds like Anglos are based

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          >Anglos are sorry they didn't do more of it.
          You are a pedophile.

  3. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Internment not extermination
    Anglos are cowards

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >one-fifth of Boers fought for the British

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        >>one-fifth of Boers fought for the British
        Is this true?

        • 2 weeks ago
          Anonymous

          Yes

          • 2 weeks ago
            Anonymous

            Never knew that.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      shows picture of kid with typhoid in a hospital bed.

      people who critisis the boer interment camps often lack any knowledge of child mortality in the 19th century. cramped conditions with limited medical knowledge was always going to be a breeding ground for tropical disease but the death rate in the camps was only slightly higher than that in the east end of London.

  4. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Colonialism is genocide and a lot of the famines started because britishers thought that farms with opium or any of that shit was more profitable than farms with food

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      Fag

  5. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    this is what living in new-pakistan does to a mf, sad

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      """british""" muslims aren't anglophiles

  6. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Ireland is surrounded by fish on all four sides
    >Starve anyways
    lol, lmao even

  7. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >>"Anglos raped and genocided millions!!!"
    we didn't but i wish we did
    if only we were the people leftists and blacks think we are, the world would be a better place

  8. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Wahhhh the evil British did X
    Meanwhile, pic related modern day Belgians, Dutch, Spanish, French, Portugese, Chinese and practically every other nation including african naitons.

    I think the leftists etc only single out Britain because English is the global language and the individual nations sure as shit aren't gonna admit their flaws

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      English being the global language is because the bongs were the strongest of the euro empires tbh.
      Leftists do criticize the others, everyone knows the Belgian Congo was an atrocity because of left scholars, left-wing revolution brought down the Portuguese, etc. But bongs get more criticism 'cause they were stronger and fucked up more places as a result.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >I think the leftists
      Of course you do you obsessed queer.

  9. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >someone mentions the boers
    who the fuck cares

  10. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >>"muh Natives"
    >Disease

    it wasn't just disease, though obviously that helped push things along

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      it was 99% disease

  11. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Damn it feels good to be an Anglo
    A real anglo ass nigga plays his cards right
    A real anglo ass nigga never runs his fucking mouth because real anglo ass niggas don't start fights

  12. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >When a Communist country has a famine it's communisms fault.
    >When a Capitalist country causes a famine intentionally it's an act of God. The system cannot be failed! It can only be failed!

    Britain is purposely responsible for more deaths that Stalin or Mao's Sparrow retardation ever did.

  13. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    >Okay then name one genocide
    >"muh Tasmanians"
    >Was a genocide
    retard

  14. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Not only was the Irish Famine a genocide but I will call other things that aren't genocides genocide purely because it's funny to belittle and undermine the common anglo

  15. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    Didn't the Anglo-Saxons delete the Picts? I mean, they even recorded in their own history having warred with them regularly, and the Pictish people and culture did go extinct, if I am remembering correctly:
    >Anno 449. Her Martianus and Valentinus onfengon rice, and ricsodon seofon winter. And on hiera dagum Hengest and Horsa, fram Wyrtgeorne gelaþode, Bretta cyninge, gesohton Bretene on þæm stede þe is genemned Ypwines-fleot, ærest Brettum to fultume, ac hie eft on hie fuhton. Se cyning het hie feohtan ongean Peohtas; and hie swa dydon, and sige hæfdon swa hwær swa hie comon. Hie þa sendon to Angle, and heton him sendan maran fultum. Þa sendon hie him maran fultum. þa comon þa menn of þrim mægþum Germanie: of Ealdseaxum, of Englum, of Iotum.
    Specifically:
    >Se cyning het hie feohtan ongean Peohtas; and hie swa dydon, and sige hæfdon swa hwær swa hie comon.
    >The king commanded them to fight against the Picts, and so they did, and had victory wherever they went.
    This in itself isn't evidence of "genociding" the Picts, but they did wage war on them often, and usually were victorious. The side effect of that being that in time they won and the Picts went extinct.
    Didn't they also enslave the Brittons already living there, making standard practice of castrating the men?
    I'm not super well versed on this topic, but it seems that, whether intentional or not, they did have major hand in the great reduction of Celtic culture and people during that time period.

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Didn't they also enslave the Brittons
      it's quite difficult to say what exactly the anglo-saxons did or did not do, it's not clearly or neatly sourced, considering their political fragmentation it's probable that they did a lot of different things in different places under different authorities depending on local conditions, from extermination and replacement to fairly peaceful acquisition of local influence
      some britons probably were enslaved or whatever, castration sounds dubious
      neither would be close to standard practice, there were probably areas with only a few anglo-saxons as rulers and upper class and most of the rest of the population were britons or assimilating/ed britons
      >the Picts went extinct
      wasn't just anglo-saxons though, they also got taken over in what was probably their homeland in the highlands by gaels from ireland

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        I see, thanks for the perspective

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      >Picts
      >Anglo-Saxons

      • 2 weeks ago
        Anonymous

        What is the name of this tablet? Also, I'm not getting what you're trying to imply about my comment, please explain. Has it to do with the Angles occupying the north and the Saxons being in the south? Sorry for being ignorant/retarded.

  16. 2 weeks ago
    Anonymous

    israelites

    • 2 weeks ago
      Anonymous

      ITZ
      DA
      JOOOOOOOOOOOZ

Your email address will not be published.