>sees her empire collapse. >does nothing

>sees her empire collapse
>does nothing
yeah, I'm thinking based

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

Rise, Grind, Banana Find Shirt $21.68

Beware Cat Shirt $21.68

  1. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    What was she supposed to do? Keep some cash sink shithole full of billions of poojeets for the sake of le prestige?
    British leaders at the time knew the balance of power tilted towards America in the future and made the smart choice.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      Declare them crown dependencies and let them rot? i don't fricking know

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        and how exactly are they going to enforce it

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          How are todays often completly moronic borders and state systems enforced? Well, they aren't exactly enforced by anyone, everyone just agrees that the way it is right now, is the way it is supposed to be and if some maniac dares to make a change to the holy borders or if some opressed minority dares to declare independece from their host country, the whole world just doesn't recognize it and then we label them terrorists and if they still won't shut up we send an UN "peacekeeping" mission and in no time everything is just as it was supposed to be again. Simple!

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            they are enforced by the local armies and the international community, both of which will apply to Britain if they try to keep India in some way
            >have to deal with increasingly agitated local populace
            >have to deal with an increasingly agitated US who wants them to stop fueling commie sympathy
            >have to deal with an agitated local populace that will soon be getting a frick load of Soviet support
            >all while Britain is also dirt poor now so now you have to deal with an agitated home population that is wondering why the frick you're trying to keep the empire alive when nobody really gave a shit anymore

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Why would they be agitated if they could rule themselves?

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            Also why are you talking about India, India got independence under George VI

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            What a moronic statement. The French and Portuguese tried to hold onto overseas territories they considered to be non negotiable parts of their nation, and what happened? You can't just force people to stay in your empire if they're willing to fight for their freedom. It was not a fight Britain could have won.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >British leaders knew they were becoming irrelevant
      >Suez crisis in '56
      sounds like a coping strategy to me

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Their industrial centres were flattened into rubble and they had to take massive loans out from the US on top of the Marshall Plan. There is no way anyone at the very top was deluded enough to believe their empire would ever return to its 19th century peak. The bongs had hoped America would stay out of the Suez because they knew they didn't have the muscle to contest them.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          This, imagine the UK begging for French help to put down a revolt in Egypt in the 1920s

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            not only the French, but even have to rely on a country they recently granted independence, and still having to back down when it pissed off both powers at the same time

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >What was she supposed to do

      Fire prime ministers of any realm who fell out of line.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      she should have nuked india and the other south asian countries and solved human overpopulation

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Nukes are pretty expensive

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        True. If Churchill could've starved millions to death without even trying, then she could've wiped the slate clean with a concentrated effort.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >invite nassar to a state dinner.
      >drug him
      >film herself and phillip spit-roasting him (her wearing a strap-on).
      >threaten to release it.
      >rinse and repeat with every other arab and african leader.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        frick
        >nasser

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >threaten to release it
        >he calls their bluff
        >either they don't release it since it would also damage them horrifically and just end up with an even futher Soviet aligned Nassar
        >or
        >release it and face immidiate outrage from everybody on the planet, Nassar gets turned into a matyr, and the royal family is forced to give up all titles and claims effectively killing the monarchy
        >all paths just lead to still losing the empire only with the potential for it to get even worse

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          nah everyone would call nasser a gay.
          kruschev would invite him over and invite him to shake his hand and then pull away and make nasser trip then point and laugh at him in front of the entire UN general assembly.

          • 2 years ago
            Anonymous

            as opposed to Prince Charles who did it willingly, seems like this would just back fire for the royals even harder

  2. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    maybe she's sick of your fricking bullshit

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      the frick

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        what is this shit

        far-right schizo made a youtube channel

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      what is this shit

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      most coherent IQfy post

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      That actually disturbed me for some reason. Nice one m8

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      schizokino

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous
  3. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >he thinks the British Empire stopped
    Extremely bluepilled.
    Also she did publicly intervene to stop scotland from seceding and it caused a huge stir

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >what was lost: all of africa, the middle east, india, everything else that mattered
      >what was kept: some irrelevant shithole full of opioid and crack addicts
      bravo elizabeth

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        The colonies weren't lost all of them trade with Britain.
        What was kept was a multibillion financial empire which gets fed by every corrupt politician worldwide.
        Putin and his cronies, Xi, all pay to get in on it.

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          yeah, the israelites never lose

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >black and brown people superior to scots, confirmed.

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        >the middle east
        this was unstable as frick and there was barely any real presence. The only one that matters was india but we still BTFO'd Pajeets with the partition

        • 2 years ago
          Anonymous

          >>the middle east
          >this was unstable as frick and there was barely any real presence. The only one that matters was india but we still BTFO'd Pajeets with the partition

          The MidEast has oil, India has nothing but bazillions of dirt poor Indians.

  4. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    India was the lynchpin of the British Empire. Without it most colonies became pointless.

  5. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    She heads a different empire

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      What empire is that?

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        the one which she heads, the british empire stopped existing long ago, but this notion that the royal family has no power in the world anymore is just a naive illusion.

        Obviously at her age, she probably is just a figure head at this point, still the figure head of an empire though.

  6. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    it's over briton bros...she was always saxon goth

  7. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    She pushed for the commonwealth. She still larps as thougbh she's queen of India by calling herself queen of the commonwealth and putting commonwealth ensignia all over the shit she does (eg why did Meghan Markle's wedding dress have the flowers of republics like india, south africa, rwanda stitched into it, why did the queen ask CHOGM to allow charles to inherit head of the CW?)

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >Meghan Markle

  8. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    Windsors are neither british, nor royal nor even a real family.
    Last true English king was murdered by pretenders in 1649.

  9. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    So how much influence does the Queen have? Pretty much everyone insists she’s just a powerless figurehead but in the last ~5 years some stories have come out about how she’s vetoed and edited laws behind the scenes.

  10. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >femal ruler
    >empire crumbles
    why is this trope so common?

  11. 2 years ago
    Anonymous

    >muh empire collapse
    Empires belong in the 19th century, britain is still one of the most powerful countries on the planet and of the best ones to live in.

    • 2 years ago
      Anonymous

      >Empires belong in the 19th century
      Shut up

      • 2 years ago
        Anonymous

        Do people still think America isn't an empire?

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *