General statistics
List of Youtube channels
Youtube commenter search
Distinguished comments
About

HaJo Os.
Drachinifel
comments

Comments by "HaJo Os." (@hajoos.8360) on "Anti-Slavery Patrols - The West Africa Squadron" video.

me hee we should notice that the Brits wiped the Tasmanians out between 1803 and 1865. And it was John Company who motivated the Brits to attack China in 2 Opium wars, the first from 1839 to 1842 and the 2nd from 1856 to 1860, a measure which made half of the chinese population to junkies with around 20 Mio. victims. Insofar the Opium wars were a consequense of the prevention of the slave trade, when Bristish merchants were searching for a new business model. Here is the picture of the last 4 Tasmanians https://natgeo.imgix.net/factsheets/thumbnails/Indigenous.jpg?auto=compress,format&w=1024&h=560&fit=crop
10
@benwilson6145 they replaced, using the Royal Navy, the slave trade with the opium trade. And China was enforced by military action (opium wars) to accept it. The Imperium Britannicum was the biggest fascist empire the planet has ever seen.
6
@HootOwl513 Amputated people were common in these days, but more by accidents than by action or died by illness. I give you an example. During the 7-years-war, around 1.500 RN-members died in action, more than 100.000 by accidents and illness.
5
The Brits took the slave trade over from the Dutch, when the Bank of England was founded in 1694. Those slave-traders, friends of King William of Orange, left Amsterdam and settled in London. We should notice that serfdom in Europe established during the crusades was forbidden at first on the Prussian King's properties (Frederik the Great) after the 7-years war around 1765. Between slavery and serfdom is not a relevant difference. And we should notice, too, that till our days there is no material liberty for humans. Interesting would be a vid about the Arabian slave raids against Europe, including British coasts. In total about 1 Mio. Europeans were made to slaves. For example, the children's crusade in 1212 ended up on North-African slave-markets.
5
@gregzeigler3850 I beg pardon, i meant the US took profit from WWI and WWII. But the US was after the end of WWII too weak to influence the political situation in China. The Chinese civil war between Mao and Chiang Kai-shek, beginning 1927, ended 1949 and the result of the Korean war ended with a stalemate. Here we see the start of the US decline as the leading world power from it's beginning. In 1978 Deng Xiaoping took over and created the current China (& the entire far east), which dislodges the US and the entire West, as you decribed it. The imperialistic thinking of US policies, inherited from the Brits, led to the expensive expansion of the military complex. 800 US overseas bases against one of China in Djibouti, (Britain still 16), charges the taxpayers a lot, and the US charges the entire planet with indirect taxes, enforcing the planet to buy the worthless Petrol-$. Your president Donald Trump is the first one in Oval Office who understands, that the US policy of military threats (for centuries) is over, already a long time. And he tries to counter China in the right way to support the own economy outside the military complex.
4
Nelson was not worthy to clean the boots of Sidney-Smith and Cochrane.
3
@willswenson3169 So, do you think, the Empress of India was elected? The Opium wars a chess-game? The Imperial - and the Nazi-Germans fought the liberation of the colonial victims through and died for the free planet. Or why, do you think, the clever lawyer Gandhi started his protests against the Brits in India in 1941? The Persians found it funny, when the Brits invaded, together with the Sovjets, Iran in 1941? Do not fool yourself.
2
@gregzeigler3850 No Sir, Donald Trump had to recognize, an US president is not the CEO of a major corp and he needs friends. So he still pumps a lot of money into the military complex. But he was the first guy in White House, who blamed the Army and the Navy for "not winning wars" since WWII. The only profit the US took in Iraq are the kurdish occupied oil wells around Kirkuk. And the support for Brits and Frenchies in Libya again let the Russians win, as happened in Syria, and the refugees weaken Europe, mainly all countries there are US vasalls. As you see in Vietnam the US has again a military overseas base, interesting isn't it? Indochine countries save the money for defense against China, and the US taxpayer pays it.
2
The entire British history is a shame.
2
@morgan3688 Have a look on the Battle "The Glorious First of June" when Admiral Howe defeated Admiral Villaret-Joyeuse tactically. By the fact that Villaret-Joyeuse was only a post-captain before the war, the Frenchies fought relatively in a good shape. But the only reason for the sortie of the French fleet was to protect around 100 merchantmen who transported wheat from the US to France. France suffered under a bad harvest, so the revolutionary government bought the corn in the US. At war i have no problem that the Brits start a hand-strike against the French Man'o'wars in Brest. But British plans to let suffer the French Civilians was a character-sphincter-action.
2
we should notice that the Brits wiped the Tasmanians out between 1803 and 1865. And it was John Company who motivated the Brits to attack China in 2 Opium wars, the first from 1839 to 1842 and the 2nd from 1856 to 1860, a measure which made half of the chinese population to junkies with around 20 Mio. victims. Insofar the Opium wars were a consequense of the prevention of the slave trade, when Bristish merchants were searching for a new business model.
2
@ScienceChap Slavery is the minor crime simply form the numbers. The enforced opium trade to China caused a lot of more victims than slavery, which meant not necessarily death. In in Europe we had still serfdom. There is not so a big difference between slavery and serfdom.
2
@rhedges9631 Nelson was obviously a good seaman & self-promoter. But be realistic. When he won something, St.Vincent, Nile & Trafalgar, he won against idiots. Most of his actions failed.
2
@deankruse2891 This we do not know. The US intervened, as usual, in 2 WWs on a foreign continent. And do not forget, the USSR was built and kept with US support. The main aspect you mentioned was a down-gradiant of wealth from west to east. Since the breakdown of the warsaw-treaty-states there is no political reason anymore to keep this gradiant upright, which is documented by the decline of the western middle-classes. In contrary to China with growing wealth, no hunger anymore, an increasing middle-class and freedom to travel, what's new for the Chinese.
1
@mbr5742 please, Sir, do not talk bullshit. Opiate are legalized in any countries to buy it in markets? But history repeats itself, https://www.drugabuse.gov/drugs-abuse/opioids/opioid-overdose-crisis
1
@willswenson3169 do you really think the genocided-wiped out Tasmanians would judge as you?
1
@willswenson3169 No, Will, there is no justification for murder. One is as bad as another.
1
@willswenson3169 The major mistake of your definition is, that you assume a different motivation. There is a different motivation. Mussolini dreamt of a Retro-Roman-Empire, Hitler of Great-Germany and the Brits of the biggest empire the planet has ever seen. Those dreams and their reality mark the level of fascism.
1
@willswenson3169 Dear Will, this is wrong from the historical point of view. We have only 20 years Fascism in Italy and 12 years Nationalsocialism in Germany. Mussolini founded his Blackshirts (Squadristi) and Hitler the SA. Both got the idea from the Bolsheviks and their Red Front (Red Front Fighters' League). There is no real difference to Company-Red-Coats, even in behaviour. And in our days, the time of asymmetric warfare, the renaissance of Landsknecht-armies is established. And your second point, the planning and building of the British Empire was not established by coincidence. On Drachs chanal everyone should be more or less informed about british maritime history, anyway we talk about Drake, Monk or Blake. You know the quote of the famous insight of Sir Walter Raleigh, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Walter_Raleigh. This early insight obviously demands concrete planning.
1
@willswenson3169 again wrong. Whether in Germany nor in Italy we saw a nationalisation. Of course, the Bank of England was private from 1694 and nationialised in 1948, when the bank became useless and was replaced by the FED. Hitler bought/bribed the churches with a nationalised status in Germany. Still, after 75 years the german politicians do it with Hitler's mechanics. Here we find a point of cristicism. Germany is still a Nazi-Church-tax-state. But to come back to the point. The Royal Navy guaranteed the success of private enterprises on the planet. And the RN was no NGO. Back to Drach's channel, there were some actions between some East-Indiamen and french frigates, but this was an exception. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Pulo_Aura
1
Andrew Sully I am a Kraut. Good crews, miserable flag-officers, which is caused by a lack of tradition and no death sentence by a court-marshall against an admiral. The court -marshall against John Byng in 1756, after the lost battle of Menorca, manipulated the entire British officer-corps till 1942. In Germany failing admirals were most times promoted. There is no HMS Byng, but a destroyer Lütjens.
1
@tarn1135 still in the 60s black people had not any chance to become an officer in the US Army. In the evil Waffen SS everyone, anyway which heritage, could become an officer. Drach offered the info in the vid and we debated already. The Royal Navy started anti-slavery action in 1803 and it ended in the 1860s. In this time John Company replaced the slavery business with the opium trade and enforced China to accept it. The Royal Navy waged 2 opium wars,1838-42 and 1856-60. The enforced opium consumption produced around 20 Mio. dead victims, China suffered eminently. The Brits took over Burma, the US under Perry enforced Japan for trade-opportunities, and the French captured Indochine from the Chinese by war. A French commodore or rear-admiral did it, if i remember correctly. Would be an interesting vid on Drach's channel, the late conquer of Asia and the concerning maritime actions. To spend the Royal Navy a free ticket for being the good guys is nonsense. Royal Navy officers and other European partners as Germany during those opium wars and other conflicts, were war-criminals, although German colonial policy invested more money than to receive it. But war is war. In such a debate people like us often forget the European situation. Frederik II of Prussia was the first national leader who abandoned serfdom on the King's properties after the 7-years-war. France did it 1789, Britain 1849, Russia did officially late in the 1861s and Brasil in the 1880s.
1
@justinboyan573 This is a history channel for people who are interested in maritime historical events. About slavery is to say that the difference to non-enslaved or free people must be a permanent choice of the last ones. Is there a permanent choice or do we have still a non-formal slavery?
1
@justinboyan573 what's your explicit question?
1
@justinboyan573 ask Drach for historical China - Vids. There is enough stuff for 10 vids.
1
@deankruse2891 Britain was liberal in Britain for the upper - and small middle-class, of course, but not the empire. Do you think the Empress of India was elected? I make not a real difference between feudalism and fascism. Drach is teaching us about RN action against slavery between around 1803 and 1863. But in Europe the first guy who forbade serfdom was Frederik the Great after the 7-years-war on Prussian royal properties. In Britain we had remains of serfdom till 1850. Prussia started in 1717 the project of compuslory education, with the success in 1816 of 60% registered students. Britain, at least, started compulsory education in 1914. About the US is to say, they are/were structured as the Republican Roman Empire. For US citizens (comparable to Roman citizens) it was a democracy till corps were allowed to refinance election campaigns, what means the US are in the process to become an oligarchy as their western partners, too. For non-US-citizens, as the West-Indians till 1903, the US are a fascist state with the business model of permanent war of aggression. With the exception of the British-US-war of 1812, the US soil was never attacked by foreign invaders, but the US were permanently attacking others. From the historical point of view, Trump was an exception, he was one of the most peaceful presidents of the US ever, except small gifts to the hardliners as the execution of the Iranian general Soleimani and 80 Tomahawks targeting the Syrian desert. But Trump is over, the fascist warmongers are back.
1
@deankruse2891 Do you think really there is any difference, who is waging a war? The usual export of US-understanding of democracy failed very early, when the invasion of British-Canada failed. The expectation that the British-Canadians would share the viewpoint of the US-invaders failed instead totally. In the following history we find more than a hundred other examples. The war with the imperial Japan or Nazi-Germany were only 2 of those hundreds.
1
@deankruse2891 British-Canada denied the early US-way of life. And check more than 90 regime changes the US started after WWII. A tale of misery. 2 famous examples. When Allende, elected by the Chilean people was putsched away by Henry Kissinger and replaced by Pinochet, happened this, because Allende solcialised SEL. Mossadegh, the elected PM of Iran, was putsched away by the MI6 and the CIA because Mossadegh wanted more Oil-money for his country. This is symptomathic for what you called "live for in the better". When Mossadegh was replaced by the Shah for 27 years, the result is now in the following more than 40 years Islamic Republic. The Thinktanks in the US are staffed with boneheads, let us say fascist warmongers. You should not always believe what your government is telling you, my friend.
1
@danf9721 This point of view will not be honoured on this channel. The Ex-Allied or Entente writers love to write in glory and white-washing. The Germans got those colonies nobody wanted. Needless to say that Bismarck was against it, because the German investment was much bigger than any returns. Hongkong traded Opium, Xingdao is still producing German beer. German missioners gave Black-Africa the only existing cursive language, Kishuaheli. Former German southsea islands are still living from German plantations. It is a logical conequence. If there are no commodities in former colonies a built of infrastructure is necessary. The major failure of the Brits is, that they destroyed Europe & their Empire in the 20th century in favour of the US.
1
@deankruse2891 this is your deceit. The Entente-powers supported at the beginning of the Russian civil war the white guardists, but later on they hesitated and drew all support back after the US supported the Red Army. Mainly the Jakob Schiff Syndicate refinanced Trotztki.
1
@deankruse2891 you mean the rule of the US embassies in those countries? Why there is no terror in the US? There is no US embassy.
1
@deankruse2891 Yes, you are right. The Chinese suffered under their 3.000 years old Mandarin-System, which did not allowed any reforms. But what the the good west done to China? 2 Opium wars, with more than 20 Mio. victims. The overtake of Indochine by the Frenchies. And what had the US admin lost on the Phillippnes, my friend? Exactly, nothing. The West is only bigoted, scum.
1
@scottygdaman Yes, of course, but in the so called West (Europe & the white Americas), the majority lived in a not so different status as slavery.
1
@bandenere7774 The National Socialists had whether colonies nor were against it. Mussolini decided by his own to establish a new Roman Empire. Hitler was anglophil. He offered to the Brits in case of problems the support of German soldiers. He never wanted to compete with Britain. WWII shows directly that the argument of a big Kasierliche Kriegsmarine as a reason for WWI is useless. Hitler had no big fleet. Britain unleashed both WWs, breaking the Berlin Treaty of 1878. Both wars exhausted Britain and Europe in favour of the US. And of course an exhausted Britain was not anymore in the position to keep the status as a colonial power. Churchill himself destroyed the biggest empire the planet has ever seen in one lifetime. And of course those WWs were an agent war in favour of colonies, even the Vietnamese had to fight for freedom another 30 years.
1
@Brecconable Why don't You do Your own research? I did not take 20 Mio. victims the Opium Wars & the Bristish Opium policy into account. Modern studies come to the consclusion that You Islands-apes murdererd or caused the death of 100 up to 165 Mio. Indians in 40 years. The holodomors were most times a result of longer bottle ups by the Royal Pirate Navy. The major problem is that most of You murderers on your pirate island are proud of their pirate-fascist empire instead to start to pay reparations. So there is no doubt where the real Na.zis live..... on a foggy island northeast of Ushant.
1
@bloodrave9578 Hi Bloodrave, this not the reality. The Brits bequested their empire to the cowboys, because they decided to destroy Europe, which costs all European nations so much losses, that the remains are more or less ridiculous. What You describe was & is only a formal act. Colonialism now is an informal, a non-tariff one. Order for so many vasall governments are steered by the US embassies. Do not You know this old joke? Why there is no terror in the US? There is no US embassy.... Or the Chinese do not conquer, they buy & lease agricultural areas worldwide as a private investor. But the results are the same.
1
@felixdatche9278 i welcome any information at all, if somebody could name the sources or give us any plausebility in his point of view. After the German cashbox is nearly empty, not only the Germans are the bad guys, now the former colonial powers, where Germany does not really belong to, are in charge to pay. The most funny movement is BLM. Do you think the Blacks in the US want really to exchange their living conditions with african ones? I cannot believe it.
1
@ScienceChap I will not defend any murder at all. I am German, so I am responsable, what happens and happened in my country. In colonial aspects the Germans guilt is relatively limited. Bismarck was against colonies at all, because the rest the Germans could occupy was more cost-intensive than any yield available to get out of it. About the Nationsalsocialists is to say, that the decided end of January 42 the "Endlösung" (final solution), when it became clear that this war was lost. Churchill did not care about the political leadership in Germany at all. He fought the Germans, check his quotes. The most famous is .. " we slaugthered the wrong pig". About China is to say that since Deng Xiaoping took over at the end of the 70s, the communist party of China is only called communist party formally. In reality the Chinese are since Deng Nationalsocialists and unfortunately they win against the degenerated West.
1
@ScienceChap Approximatly around 60 Mio. Mao-victims are quoted in the first edition of "Le livre noir du communisme" by Stéphane Curtois & colleagues. Following editions reduce the large amounts of communist-victims, probably the political pressure on those historians was too eminent. Whether Hitler, nor Stalin nor Mao could beat the US Americans and the Brits in numbers. Those bad guys knew that they will have not so much time to do it.
1
@rhedges9631 When Vanguard was dismasted in a storm, which brought Brueys out of Toulon-harbour, he was already vice-admiral an not responsable for the accident. Nelson got as the same good education as any other officer in the RN. That he was a good leader might be correct, but most times he led into desasters. That the French forces were competent is a thesis without any evidence. The idiot Brueys, anchoring at Aboukir with his battle-fleet, sent half of his crews to land to fetch water, knowing, that Nelson was searching for him. So during the battle, the Frenchie man'o'wars fought with half crews, lucky Nelson. The next thing, the Frenchies anchored only at the bow-anchors, too lazy to set a spring. And even the bonehead Villeneuve did not ordered springs during the battle, to bring the broadsides of 2 ships to bear, crossing the T of the Brits. If this "competent" idiot would have done it, Neslon's fleet would had been sunk in 2 hours. Before Trafalger Villeneuve sailed to the Carribean and back without training battle-formations? The franco-spanish "line" at Trafalgar was a pharce. After Calder stopped Villeneuve at Finesterre, why he did not sailed to Brest? An admiral who is not willing to destroy the enemy should give his commission away.
1
@rhedges9631 In his naval youth as a young captain he died nearly in Latin-America, the action on Tenerife was a desaster and the attack on Boulogne-sur-mer brought nothing. In Copenhagen was no other possebility to fulfil the orders of Whitehall, Hyde Parker was an idiot. He was lucky that Denmark surrendered. And the punishment of Admiral Carraciolo showed a negative side of his character, he was not really a gentleman. And his Frenchie opponents were not even amateurs. So, we can state he was several times brave and lucky, but no genius as Cochrane or Sidney-Smith. Even Pellew was the better frigate-captain. What i want to say is, one of his best friends, Collingwood and many others would have done his successful actions in the same manner or better. About Trafalgar check a battle-sketch. Villneuve did nothing to form line of battle or to order any counter actions. The Brits had more 3-deckers, but the Frenchies and the Spaniards had more ships to counter the break-throughs.
1
@ScienceChap Of course not, Sir. Deng Xiaoping transformed China into an authoritarian national state with private ownership. This is exactly Nationalsocialism. And China wil become Worldpower No. 1 in around 25 years.
1
@kryts27 your analysis is totally correct. But who brought China into this position? The western greed. After Britain decided to weaken Europe a second time with a world war, the US took profit. But after the WWII the US was not strong enough to support Chiang Kai-shek. Mao kicked the western profit-takers of the last 3 centuries out of the country. Deng Xiaoping changed the communist party of China into a national-socialist party of China, very effective. Now we see the revenge for 300 years british holodomors and the opium-wars. The Brits should pay the bill. Check the numbers of dying people. There is no virus-crisis. It is made by politicians.
1
@otterspocket2826 The Royal Navy caused 22 holodomors with around 80 Mio. victims.
1
@philipfreyaborn8288 major trading-players were jewish trading houses, mainly the Sephardic in North-Africa, after Isabella of Castile threw them out of Spain, and the Ashkenazi in Amsterdam, later in London... something my jewish friends often like to ignore.
1
@gregzeigler3850 of course, Trumpi is right. But he is the first in 240 years, who sense it, away from the war-businnes-model. In Korea the air force suffered under the MiG alley. And you are right again, the US have 3 foreign departments, the foreign office, the CIA and the military and all 3 wage war against each other, so funny our US friends. To nuke Hanoi it is a bit of a problem. You had nothing lost there, whether in Germany, nor in Cuba, nor in Mexico, nor in Canada, nor on the Philippines, nor elsewhere. Go home.
1
@kelleysauer1693 do you think so? More than 20 holodomors in 300 years, mainly executed by the Royal Navy with around 80 Mio. victims over the entire planet. Thanks God, i am not a Brit, who wears this uncomparable guilt on his shoulders.
1
@ScienceChap This is the point, i pay taxes for reparations for WWII. I paid taxes for WWI till 2010. You see not so funny. And pls be honest, a formal abolition of slavery means nothing. A non-tariff slavery exists on the entire planet.
1
It happens with blockades, or a seaman would say bottle-up. The most famous failure of a British caused holodomor the revolutionary Frenchies paid it with the loss of 7 ships of the line at the battle of the glorious 1st of June. But the Frenchies could feed their hungry people (the hunger was caused by a bad harvest). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glorious_First_of_June The wheat-convoi of more than a hundred ships broke through the French coast.
1
@certaintngs2000 What are you a US idiot, already dead?
1
@MrLinkkid we have reports from German generals (most famous Liman von Sanders, who organized the defense of Galipoli) about the Turkish genocide against Armenians. You mean Tutsies and Hutus. Historically Africa is full of tribal conflicts, check Kongo (the civil war about cobalt). More than 1 Mio. Europeans were enslaved by Arabs & Turks. The point is, most Europeans lived in serfdom, not a big difference to slavery. Frederik the Great of Prussia was the first european leader (King), who abondoned serfdom after the 7-years-war (1756-63). In Britain were regions using serfdom till 1850. So, what i have to admit, is, that most of the european nobles, who led or lead a state or empire, were Germans. British Queen Elisabeth II is german, too.
1
@MrLinkkid It might be a question of intensity.
1
@MrLinkkid I will not argue against it. Still in the West work mio's. of people to their death. In the US the misuse of drugs (to wake up or to sleep in) is unbelievable. What my anglo- or american friends, as Drach, too, not understand is, that the defeat of Germany is the start (let's say 8th of May, 1945) of the decline of white cultures. In comparison the defeat of Japan caused the rise of China.
1
@doncooper6801 This was the common fate of seamen in this era. During the 7-years war the Royal navy lost around 1.500 members in action, but around 100.000 by illness and accidents.
1
The Brits, mainly the RN, caused about 21 or 22 Holodomors in their history with around 80 Mio. people dead of hunger around the planet. Slavery business was replaced by the Brits with opium business with around 20 Mio. victims. Better as to be a slave than as to be dead.
1
@willswenson3169 what do you tell us, counts only on a foggy little island, somewhere northeast of Ushant. As a Brit and a follower of (maritime) history (we all are fascinated from it), you should not stay in your own oasis. Ideological aspects, as the profits of John Company and the concerning role of the Royal Navy, which guarantees those profits, are acceptable? This is a propaganda-fairy-tale. Your liberal Brit-democracy never achieved the target to open the files of the founding members of the Bank of England in 1694 under William Orange or WWII war-files. British history counts more than 20 Holodomors, most times executed by the Royal Navy, with more than 80 Mio. victims in 300 years. Do you think, those victims share your ideological objections?
1