| ▲ | skeezyboy 3 days ago | |
the british armed forces are atrocious. i simply cannot fathom how britain controlled so much of the planet at one point | ||
| ▲ | lenkite 3 days ago | parent | next [-] | |
Because they had a good officer corps producing some ridiculous military geniuses in their age of empire. As an example, the Duke of Wellington (Arthur Wellesley) was a monster who was unstoppable in the military conquest of India. Many other British commanders failed battling Indian states, but he seemed to win just about every battle, at times being both outnumbered and outarmed. I would go on to say that it wasn't for that man, it is likely the British conquest of India would have been confined to only a limited territory. Indian states were modernizing and militarizing rapidly (relatively for that era), so any delays in conquest would have made India a hard nut to crack. | ||
| ▲ | bee_rider 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
This was 2002. They are friendly countries, seems like everyone responded appropriately. | ||
| ▲ | oaththrowaway 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |
Because the food was so bad and the women were so ugly that they had no choice to but leave | ||
| ▲ | bigyabai 3 days ago | parent | prev [-] | |
> i simply cannot fathom how britain controlled so much of the planet at one point Boats, optionally guns. When you reflect on how easily America became an imperialist crybaby, it can't have been hard for Britain either. | ||