Comments by "SCINTILLAM DEI" (@scintillam_dei) on "Why Thailand Escaped Colonialism" video.

The Brits and French could have just divided it between themselves in a deal. No need for a buffer zone when they had other places without a buffer zone, such as Nigeria surrounded by French lands. The truth is that Britain and France were too occupied around the world to bother, especially since the Siamese gave chunks of territory if the Europeans demanded it.
5
@santusanturohit4832 False reason. France and Britain needed no buffer zone at Nigeria's borders.
3
@sebciobebcio34 Nah. Brits and the French had no buffer at Nigeria's borders. That's a myth. The real reason they didn't fully colonize Thailand was that it was their slave, and did what they wante, so there was no need to go further, especially when they were busy with more important things.
2
@sun_s9067 Siamese women are very beautiful. In Cambodia, I see a lot of them, but they call themselves "Cambodians" even though they are not Khmer. The only true Cambodians are the dark Khmer.
2
@thatsmando098 I never said dark skin is bad.
2
Their culture isn't theirs. They took it from the Khmer who got it from Indians. And I don't like their culture. :-)
2
@paralelsuniverse9345 Vietnam was brave? When? It uses Latin script because Europeans dominated it. It enforced communism which is a European thing. The vest thing Vietnam did was to be a mosquito-filled swampland unfit for horsemen, which is why the Mongols lost three times in Dai Viet.
2
@santusanturohit4832 Obviously that Europe conquered both, and in Nigeria's case, it was British land surrounded by French lands, with no buffer zone, proving that the myth of Thailand serving as a buffer zone doesn't hold water.
2
What a credibly scared minion of the French and Brits every Thai guy was.
2
Brits and the French were too busy to pay much attention to your swampland. Siam was a place that would give what would be demanded of it. It was barely on the radar since it wasn't a threat, and was submissive. So Europeans conquered the entire world, even if in some cases less directly, through intimidation. Afghanistan, Ethiopia, China, Japan and Iran were all controlled by Europeans at some point.
1
@Boo Dayne Europe was never Christian. Jesus said most people go to hell. So no nation can have a going-to-heaven majority.
1
IQ is racist fiction.
1
@alexanderbuchler4048 Not saying you are racist, but that that thing is. I plan to do a video on IQ being what it is.
1
I did a video proving Hinduism wrong. I also did a video about the world, and I proved Hitler liberated India. Gandhi was a worthless racist.
1
No need to colonize a nation formally, to control it. Europeans conquered the world; no exception. And they installed masonry in all countries, so there is a shadow government at work, but most people believe only what they can see, and they are blind in the third eye.
1
@NovajaPravda Projection. And I don't call them illuminated (ILLVMINATI). That would be saying what they would want me to say.
1
@kentuckyfriededgar Yes. Europeans conquered the world with no exception. Letting a slave have some privileges doesn't mean he isn't a slave.
1
@imrankh68 "just a 5 year occupation" Japan owned Burma for 3 years. Would you tell the women raped, that it didn't matter that Japan owned their country, 'cause it was only for 5 years? How many years and days exactly does a foreign power have to own you, for you to be their property?
1
@M3K1E Overrated guy with atheist propaganda shit.
1
@imrankh68 "For a long period of time" is equivocation. You're extremely vague.
1
'Cause it was the bitch of Britain and France, so no need to make it an official concubine.
1
@fbyi2940 China was proud and thought it could beat the British with their outdated technology. It's not brave when you believe you are stronger, and then fail. That's just conceit.
1
To be popular, you have to be superficial. No one goes deep into real history, and they stick only to mainstream PG Disneyesque stories.
1