It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

What If The British Empire

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 10:56 AM
link   
Somthing I've been wondering latly is, if The British Empire still had power in Middle East would all this terroism,wars and martors be here today? I belive Hilter once said if Britian lost control of the middle east it would fall into constant war. (Pardon me if Iam wrong. Forget where I heard that).




posted on Jul, 27 2004 @ 11:05 AM
link   
Well, you could also say that a lot of the tensions in the area today are the U.K's fault. We made the current borders of Kuwait, Iraq and Saudi Arabia, splitting up land and peoples. And yes, it was all about oil...


www.sundayherald.com...

EDIT: The text in the link is a little messed up with age, but still readable.

[edit on 27-7-2004 by kegs]



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 08:16 AM
link   
Whether you agree with imperialism or not the fact of the matter is the world was much more stable when European countries held most of it as colonies. The drawback was that Europeans generally mistreated (sometimes severely) the natives.



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 09:20 AM
link   
I may a bit biased but I think the British Empire was much less guilty than others of mistreating the native populations. Generally we just showed up, politely explained we were in charge, and started building infrastructure and trade. It's hard to avoid the charge that we exploited them, but by and large we tried to treat people fairly. Local laws and customs were kept, and indeed the local rulers.

The funny thing is there was generally no official legal control of the colonies. It was mainly done with sheer audacity! The British ruling class was so confident at the time, they were often blissfully unaware that the locals might have reason to object, and for the most part, they didn't..

Two world wars pretty much cost us the Empire. Had things been different, would the ME have looked different today? Quite possibly. I think by now it would mostly have been independent, but that independence may have happened under different circumstances, when the political mood was more suited to such a change, as with India. It way therefore have been a much more stable place, or it may not...

Then again, there is of course the oil,literally lubricating the wheels of capitalism. hard to say really..


[edit on 9-8-2004 by muppet]



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 09:24 AM
link   
When the British left the middle east, especially Iraq, they left more problems that led to Saddam. The US should learn from the British and make sure that when they leave, the place isn't left in choas



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 09:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vowles
Somthing I've been wondering latly is, if The British Empire still had power in Middle East would all this terroism,wars and martors be here today? I belive Hilter once said if Britian lost control of the middle east it would fall into constant war. (Pardon me if Iam wrong. Forget where I heard that).


The fall of colonial Britan in the Middle East began in the second WW. In the book about Oil by Yeargin called "The Prize" Churchill completely blew it when he met with Ibib Saud. He simply refused to no smoke and drink in the leaders presence. Roosevelt did respect the Kings beliefs. (He actually pushed th stop button on the elevator so he could puff a smoke before he continued on of the meetings). Thats how the US gained controll of the Saudi Oil.

A few years later, due in part to CHurchills insistance following the Nationalization of the Anglo Persian Oil company, the CIA launched Operation AJAX (After the Brits could not depose him) that toppled the democratically elected goverenment of M. Mossadeq and replaced him with the Shah. The middle east has never been the same.

I doubt that the courses that were taken in the middle east in the 1900's could have been dramtically changed in anycase. I think the colonial system would have failed eventually.



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by infinite
When the British left the middle east, especially Iraq, they left more problems that led to Saddam. The US should learn from the British and make sure that when they leave, the place isn't left in choas

Very true, and and the US would do well to learn from our mistakes. We've made most them already.


An excellent history of British involvement in Iraq can be found here :-
www.britishempire.co.uk...

Withdrawal from Empire

Britain's withdrawal from Iraq was a swift one. It came with the overthrow of the Hashemite regime that Britain had so assidiously cultivated over the years.

The Hashemites had never fully gained legitimacy as rulers in the eyes of the Iraqis. They were regarded as little more than foreign rulers who followed every beck and call of their British masters. Constant tribal bickerings and uprisings weakened the government in outlying areas of Iraq, whereas in the main cities, political dissatisfaction was expressed in the ballot boxes and the free press that Britain had expressly created for the country.

Political instability was a concern for the entire period of Hashemite rule, they regularly had to call upon the police and the military to maintain order in the country. The British and the Hashemites were so fully dependent upon one another that they both became even more alienated and distant from the Iraqi people; hatred for one institution translating into hatred for the other.

This situation sound familiar?

related links :
The British Empire

[edit on 9-8-2004 by muppet]



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by muppet
I may a bit biased but I think the British Empire was much less guilty than others of mistreating the native populations. Generally we just showed up, politely explained we were in charge,


In some areas, but read "All the Shah's Men" the conditions at the Anglo Persian Oil Laboror Camps would have made Himmler proud!



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 09:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by muppet
Very true, and and the US would do well to learn from our mistakes. We've made most them already.


Alas I don't think we did a good job paying attention to those lessions and we are not free of quilt in those days either. See my post on oepration Ajax above. We could have said no to Churchill but did not.



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 09:53 AM
link   
"I may a bit biased but I think the British Empire was much less guilty than others of mistreating the native populations"

You are absolutely correct. The Belgian were awful in Africa.



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 09:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
In some areas, but read "All the Shah's Men" the conditions at the Anglo Persian Oil Laboror Camps would have made Himmler proud!


Actually I can quite believe that. Iran wasn't part of the British Empire (I don't think?) , but APOC (now BP) was of course a British company. Labour camps weren't British government policy overall, though I can imagine them choosing to turn a blind eye to them. We certainly have supported some dubious regimes in the past.



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 09:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by muppet

Originally posted by FredT
In some areas, but read "All the Shah's Men" the conditions at the Anglo Persian Oil Laboror Camps would have made Himmler proud!


Actually I can quite believe that. Iran wasn't part of the British Empire (I don't think?) , but APOC (now BP) was of course a British company. Labour camps weren't British government policy overall, though I can imagine them choosing to turn a blind eye to them. We certainly have supported some dubious regimes in the past.


You are right. Perhaps I misspoke. Anglo Persian was a private company, but the British Governemnt did turn a blind eye to its corruption and treatment of its workers. One diplomat raised alot of questions about the corruption and treatment and was replaced by an ammbasador (the names escape me) with more "colonial" leanings.



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 10:14 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
[You are right. Perhaps I misspoke.


Not really, it was still our responsibility to ensure British companies acted ethically. Much the same way as we can't let the current US administration off the hook over firms like Halliburton.



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 10:36 AM
link   

Originally posted by FredT
See my post on oepration Ajax above. We could have said no to Churchill but did not.


He was a persistent old bugger wasn't he? Very hard to say no to! When it came to understanding intricacies of ME politics and opinion, he did have a very simplistic view, and one that really belonged at least 100 years further back in history. He did indeed see things very much in terms of black/white, making him handy in a war, but in need of taming in peacetime.

He did understand the US and the USSR though, and would have known that the US only needed a little persuading as to the political and financial benefits of his plan. As to his own motivations though, they were likely to have been a matter of honour and pride, rather than anything else.



posted on Aug, 9 2004 @ 10:38 AM
link   
"What If"

Well what if dear old blighty never gave up it's empire, then would the world be a better place?

Maybe it would, as we would never of had the problems of bush in the white house, there would be no USA for the middle east to bitch about, and the british would have kept a very close leash on it colonies, india,hong kong,The US,iraq,saudi, kuwait,etc, well not to sure if we ever had saudi as a colony, but am sure someone will correct me if im wrong.

Would india have ever got nukes? would israel been such an open wound on the middle east, as without the backing of the US, irsael would be up S*** creek without a paddle, but again these things may of happen on their own anyway.

If there was NO USA would we of ever won WW2, would there of ever been a WW2,as would germany wanted to fight the biggest nastiest dog in the yard

The beging of the end of the british emprie was losing the US and after that the rest of the colonies saw that the british army wasn't all powerful and could be beaten. Well we gave up on the war of indenpendence, as it lost politcal support from the british goverment and was seen as a waste of resource's and money.

The end of the day what's done is done, if the empire still exsited we would be the tryannt to the world, can you imagine the eu, russia, china, letting the UK remain the only true superpower, would the cold war of ever started? would we of even landed on the moon(well the jury is still out on whether we actually managed that one) the world as we know it would be a different place


Of all the great achivements that have happened in the past 100 years, may of happen anyway, but who can really say, in the past any colony is always less well off than the Homeland.

There would of been no vietnam, no gulf war 1 or 2. no assination of JFK, no 9/11, no nuke dropped on japan. and we wouldn't be living under the contast fear of a terror attack, whether you belive in the Info and intel released to justify these alerts.

Well these are just some radom thoughts of mine, if u wsnt to rip them to shreds or just disagree feel free.



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 04:43 AM
link   
Sorry I have not replied I've been busy but some very good points here. I know the UK had a big part in putting Sadam into power!Hmmm, I belive its only a matter of time before Britain lose Gibraltar. It was a sad moment watching Hong Kong go back to China. With every one waving British flags and such
I know we only "rented" it but still! At least we can fix the problems in our country now....right? I can only feel the millions of soilders who fought in WW/2 fought in vain. Britain is failing. Our leaders do nothing. Everyday I see more news of murders and other events that lead me to feel unsafe in my own country.Also the facist views that the soilders gave there lifes to stop are still going strong to-day in THERE own country! Only the other day two teenagers where giving racist comments while I got on the bus to an Indian man and his five yr old son.They left as I got on.



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 05:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by Vowles
I belive its only a matter of time before Britain lose Gibraltar.


I agree with many of your sentiments. I don't think we'll lose Gibraltar though. There would be an uproar. If we joined the Euro then maybe it would be a different story, but I doubt that will ever happen. Gibraltar is too strategically important to give away for no reason, and 98 % of the Gibraltan's agree!!



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 05:59 AM
link   
I miss the Empire
I don't think we will lose Gibraltar to be honest, there would be a huge rebellion if we gave it up to the spanish. The government will probably do a U turn on Gibraltar.

Now for a little British Patriotic sing along



Rule Britannia, Britannia rule the waves!
Britons never, ever, ever shall be slaves.
Rule Britannia, Britannia rule the waves!
Britons never, ever, ever shall be slaves.



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 06:21 AM
link   
Would it have been different? the answer is no. The chaos in the middle east, though stoked by western involvement, was there long before America, Britian, or any other power came into play. Its a matter of a system of corruption, domination, abuse, degredation, and religous insanity that has been the hallmark of the region for thousands of years.

yeah, the british and French #ed up when they partitioned various countries without really examining who was going to fall in those borders (Like Iraq, putting three tradtionally antagonoistic entities under one flag, see Yugoslavia for results). had the british Empire remained, the chaos would still be there, it would simply be a different foreign power to battle with. Whether youre French, British, German, American, or Martian, youre still a Kafir to them.

So, the mother country made some serious # ups there. So, what do we do? The same #ing thing.

I remeber how many times on this board I have stressed that while the European colonial Empires created the original mess, they figured out thier mistakes, and we could see it, yet all we did was continue where they left of and compound the problem.

britain says, Look, we really screwed the pooch on this one. See what mess we got into? And America is like, huh? Whats wrong with it? And do the same stupid mistakes that are gonna cost us dearly.

A Glaring example is Vietnam. Did not the French and the Brits both give us serious warning against going there? Like, stay the hell out of that, you dont wanna touch it, and were like, yeah, whatever, go in, stay ten years, slaughter millions of Vietnamese, butcher thousands of our young men and women, maim countless others, and not a damn thing did we gain from that except a national scar on our soul. We simply refused to listen or take a strong look at #.

So, while our parents, colonial Europe, were pretty much bad parental examples on how to be a benevolent Empire, were the # up kids who, instead of learning NOT to follow in our parents footsteps, charge right on in thier legacy.

This suicidal mentality in Washington of ignoring obvious history is disturbing.



posted on Aug, 10 2004 @ 07:06 AM
link   
Theres one difference...

You don't have it in you to commit cold hearted brutality. Come on guys, we practically invented genocide.



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join