Comments by "Neodym" (@neodym5809) on "" video.

@Umbra_TuSlayer Well, the aborigines might disagree with this statement.
8
@bernardsulman1506 The Australian economy is exporting raw material and foodstuff. Both are of interest for the UK and EU. But what has the UK to sell in return to Australia that it can not get cheaper from China/Japan? EU at least has its native car companies, are huge manufacturing base and a well developed high tech sector as well as specialized food stuff to send in return. But I doubt Australia will buy UK build Nissan/Toyota if they can get theirs directly from Japan.
5
@norrinradd3549 What about the Bengal famine? Churchill was warned that this would happen if the UK would not stop exporting rice from India, but they did it anyway, with no regard for Indian life.Direct order from London, 1943. Or going back a little further, taking a look at the Penal Laws in Ireland, specifically designed to discriminate against catholic Irish. Opiate wars come to mind, too. Last but not least, the Boer concentration camps.
2
@norrinradd3549 Excuses excuses, and millions dead. When the concentration camps were so great, why did tens of thousand died?
2
@norrinradd3549 every country which had colonies committed crimes. That is my standpoint. Yours is that the UK is the glorious exception. The UK government treated natives badly. It introduced policies to treat natives badly. So don’t start with whataboutisms.
2
@norrinradd3549 millions was referring to the famine, ten thousands to the camps.
2
@norrinradd3549 As my previous post disappeared (I suspect links are not allowed here) I will try it again differently. But if you want proof, fair enough, I would just kindly ask you to google: How Churchill 'starved' India written by Soutik Biswas published by the BBC, 28 October 2010 I will present some quotes: "Apparently it is more important to save the Greeks and liberated countries than the Indians and there is reluctance either to provide shipping or to reduce stocks in this country," writes Sir Wavell in his account of the meetings. Mr Amery is more direct. "Winston may be right in saying that the starvation of anyhow under-fed Bengalis is less serious than sturdy Greeks, but he makes no sufficient allowance for the sense of Empire responsibility in this country," he writes. Amery, secretary of the state for India, and Wavevell, Field Marshal, two officials of the UK government. Another one: Mr Churchill turned down fervent pleas to export food to India citing a shortage of ships - this when shiploads of Australian wheat, for example, would pass by India to be stored for future consumption in Europe. As imports dropped, prices shot up and hoarders made a killing. Mr Churchill also pushed a scorched earth policy - which went by the sinister name of Denial Policy - in coastal Bengal where the colonisers feared the Japanese would land. So authorities removed boats (the lifeline of the region) and the police destroyed and seized rice stocks. Direct order from Winston Churchill to starve Indians. Is this enough prove for you that the UK government was directly involved and responsible in making natives suffer and die?
2
@norrinradd3549 it is getting late, I therefor hope you understand I will not dive into archives today. May I request a source of your claims, similar as I did for mine? As it stands, it is your word against the BBCs and the historians cited in the article. What is your position on the denial policy? The army confiscated rice and boats, destroying the local economy. How wasn’t that cruel to the natives?
2
@norrinradd3549 I asked for a source. You did not provide one. And i repeat myself, but what about the denial policy, where the army destroyed the boats and confiscated the rice from locals, completely destroying them? Again, not one word from you.
2
@norrinradd3549 did you name one historian? Did you cite a paper or manuscript? No. So you did not provide a source, insofar that you told me to go to a library. My opinion , as I mentioned before, is: the British Empire is just as bad, as Cruel, as inhuman as any other empire. Not better, not worse, just the same. So when you start with your whataboutisms or your personal insults, it only shows that you are emotional, Not rational, about this topic. Which is rather interesting because I doubt either of us participated in this actions, therefor have no personal stakes here. Did I claim Gandhi to be perfect? I did not even mention his name once before.
2
@norrinradd3549 i Never wrote that the UK itself ate the rice. It shipped it to Europe and other places.
1
@benwilson6145 BMWs/Mercs for the US market are build in Mexico/USA, for the Chinese market in China. Transport costs are still costs, and not having those costs are less costs. Australia will not buy cars from the UK (with maybe the exception of RR and similar brands, but this is a small market), as they can buy them cheaper from China/Japan/Vietnam/USA/Mexico, same brands even.
1