Britain: Europe's greatest warmonger

Status
Archived
Joined Sep 2010
3,538 Posts | 10+
Somewhere in the former First French Empire
Last edited:
This may be a shock to many of my fellow British historumites, but it is with reason. Let me start with showing you a bit of data:

1377798886657.jpg


As you can see it shows Britain's involvement in more wars then the other European powers.

There are of course reasons for this:

1. Britain's lust for colonial posessions across the globe. This lust goes hand in hand with gaining international prestige, the quest for resources and to widen Britain's global market.

2. Britain's constant involvement of continental affairs in Europe troughout history. Their obsession with keeping the balance of powers forced them into long wars with the Habsburgs, Louis XIV, Louis XV, Napoleon, Wilhelm II and eventually Hitler as well. Regarding the last person I named here we on the continent are extremely gratefull that Britain reached out his hand to rid Europe of this evil dictator, but for the rest is much to say. From British point of view this is reasonable of course because they don't want a singular strong power on the continent.

3. As a result of British need for a larger market, they did everything in their power to prevent other nations from threatening or crossing this goal. This resulted in wars such as the Crimean War and British involvement in the Seven Years War when it was threatened by France's rapid expansion in North America and India. More of such examples can be found.


Would you agree with this statement that Britain is indeed Europe's greatest warmonger or do you have a good counter argument?
 
Joined May 2011
15,791 Posts | 1,621+
Navan, Ireland
Are all wars equally weighted? in which case it simplistic in the extreme.
 
Joined Jun 2013
6 Posts | 0+
New York
Last edited:
I have to 100% agree with you. Britain has pretty much invaded or had conflicts with majority of the world. Coincidentally, i happened to have read this bathroom read a few days ago that pretty much addresses this exact subject.

[ame="http://www.amazon.com/All-Countries-Weve-Ever-Invaded-ebook/dp/B009UV5PT6"]Amazon.com: All the Countries We've Ever Invaded eBook: Stuart Laycock: Kindle Store@@AMEPARAM@@http://ecx.images-amazon.com/images/I/51L5mDjeSQL.@@AMEPARAM@@51L5mDjeSQL[/ame]

Although the literature aspect isn't too articulate, i'd say it's a pretty decent read if you're bored. Even though it doesn't go into much detail on each conflict...But then again, that's why i'd call it a "bathroom read."
 
Joined Aug 2013
4,572 Posts | 30+
Canada, originally Clwyd, N.Wales
I'm sure all these wars were fought 'in a fit of absent mindedness' :)
 
Joined Sep 2010
3,538 Posts | 10+
Somewhere in the former First French Empire
Well I think we can safely say that World War 2 was somewhat more relevant and important than, say, the Anglo-Zanzibar War (which lasted 40 minutes).

Do those 500 casualties on the African side mean nothing to you then. A war is a war, some are heavier, but that doesnt make the smaller ones lesser of an offense.
 
Joined Jan 2013
4,569 Posts | 16+
Brigadoon
Fancy being lectured by a Dutchman on the inherent evil of Empire building. :)

Oh, and if you dont like it you can save yourselves from Napoleon and Hitler next time.
 
Joined Aug 2013
623 Posts | 0+
Québec city
Participating in wars doesn't necessarily mean declaring them or doing so on an agenda of aggression...
 
Joined Jan 2010
4,338 Posts | 19+
North Georgia
i think a better question would be
what has the rest of the world done
that forced britain to attack them
 
Joined Sep 2013
7,435 Posts | 6+
Ireland
Last edited:
Obviously Britain would not have started all the wars they were involved in..Due to the fact that Britain is an Island has a lot to do with it i think. Britain could afford to strike where it pleased as long as it stayed on top in the navy stakes. The navy could protect Britain form any country. France would have to be more diplomatic i think although I was surprised that they were so close to Britain in the wars chart. All the major imperial powers cold be considered to be warmongers because they go to countries and take their resources and if there's any resistance they kill or imprison the people who resist..that's war in anyone's eyes. If Britain is at the top of the chart then I think it's fairly self-explanatory with France losing by a nose and Spain half a length back.
 
Joined May 2011
15,791 Posts | 1,621+
Navan, Ireland
Do those 500 casualties on the African side mean nothing to you then. A war is a war, some are heavier, but that doesnt make the smaller ones lesser of an offense.

But if they are simply using 'number of wars' and then making a percentage etc its pretty none sense statistics.

You can not compare WWI and WWII with some small colonial conflict that may in many ways be little more than a police action.

What if its a defensive war, the Netherland equally guilty as Germany in WWII because they were attacked?

According to your figure France was involved in 75 with a smaller Empire so does that make them more or less warlike?
 
Joined Jan 2013
4,569 Posts | 16+
Brigadoon
Do those 500 casualties on the African side mean nothing to you then. A war is a war, some are heavier, but that doesnt make the smaller ones lesser of an offense.

Sorry, but I have to disagree. My feeling of guilt over the Anglo-Zanzibar War is a drop in the ocean to a German's feeling of guilt over WW2, or at least it ought to be.
 
Joined Jan 2013
4,569 Posts | 16+
Brigadoon
But if they are simply using 'number of wars' and then making a percentage etc its pretty none sense statistics.

You can not compare WWI and WWII with some small colonial conflict that may in many ways be little more than a police action.

What if its a defensive war, the Netherland equally guilty as Germany in WWII because they were attacked?

According to your figure France was involved in 75 with a smaller Empire so does that make them more or less warlike?

And does France actually count as fighting in WWII? If I remember correctly they missed out a great deal of that war.
 
Joined Sep 2013
6,844 Posts | 688+
Wirral
Sorry, but I have to disagree. My feeling of guilt over the Anglo-Zanzibar War is a drop in the ocean to a German's feeling of guilt over WW2, or at least it ought to be.

Indeed. I assume that "Might as well be hung for a sheep as for a lamb" doesn't translate into foreign.
 
Joined Oct 2012
8,545 Posts | 24+
How can you weigh a war? You are in one or you aren't.

I'd start by asking how many wars each country fought with other European, or at least industrialized, countries? I know it's a bit out of fashion to say as much, but killing a few barbarians on the frontiers of the Empire is hardly in the same category as a war against civilized peoples.
 
Joined Jan 2010
4,338 Posts | 19+
North Georgia
I'd start by asking how many wars each country fought with other European, or at least industrialized, countries? I know it's a bit out of fashion to say as much, but killing a few barbarians on the frontiers of the Empire is hardly in the same category as a war against civilized peoples.

out of fashion???
as in to say there is no moral flaw in your reasoning
it is just "out of fashion"
like corduroy jeans....
 
Joined Sep 2010
3,538 Posts | 10+
Somewhere in the former First French Empire
Fancy being lectured by a Dutchman on the inherent evil of Empire building. :)

Oh, and if you dont like it you can save yourselves from Napoleon and Hitler next time.

Is this supposed to be offensive or can I as a Dutchman start threads just everyone else can?

I told you how grateful I am for Britain's involvement in WW2 read it back and don't throw it in my face.

As for Napoleon, I wish the British had stayed neutral and we would still be living in a French Empire.
 
Status
Archived

Trending History Discussions

Top