Comments by "The french are harlequins" (@thefrenchareharlequins2743) on "Why Britain wouldn’t just let Hitler go East" video.

  1. You know a YouTuber is good when he can get you to watch 10 minutes of him pointing at maps
    485
  2.  @sjsupa  "Alright Mr - ahem - Comrade Xi, I said it, please give me back my family"
    28
  3.  @TheImperatorKnight  It is support for the Scottish Libertarian Party candidate for the constituency of Motherwell and Wishaw and (because of the very complex Scottish voting system where everybody gets two votes) the electoral region of Central Scotland, Mark Meechan. Scottish elections are in three days, their ambition is to beat the Greens.
    26
  4.  @sjsupa  Still doesn't make the side that does things like the social credit system and the thing with the Uighurs right.
    13
  5. 1:12 Don't worry, the EU is a "peaceful empire"
    4
  6.  @dragosstanciu9866  Not until that EU army becomes a thing and then they will be fighting in all the places France is rights now.
    4
  7.  @iconsumedmt1350  And Uncle Angus isn't a real Scotsman.
    3
  8. Cope more lmao
    2
  9. He is higher than a geostationary satellite.
    2
  10.  @dragosstanciu9866  Aside from that massive river in the center that could be used for defensive purposes like on 1941 with the Soviets and 1943 with the Germans.
    2
  11. I hate the danish
    2
  12. Winston Churchill was in no finacial issues.
    2
  13. Churchill, the planner of Operation Unthinkable was buddies with Stalin?
    2
  14.  @jussim.konttinen4981  Not an inch of Mainland UK.
    2
  15. We all know the Holodomor happened.
    1
  16. This isn't a justification, this is just basic geopolitics.
    1
  17. In other words, git good scrub
    1
  18. Answer this Brexit means Brexit Simple as.
    1
  19. Like the EU would last for any time significant enough to pose a threat.
    1
  20. Churchill didn't cause the Begal Famine. On the 14th of October 1943, one of the dealiest cyclones struck Bengal, killing 61,000, and destroying much of the harvest. Demand was increased by the Japanese invading Burma, while also capturing Indonesia and the Phillipines, areas traditionally called upon in times of famine. Churchill, however, expressed his support for "the best possible standard of living for the largest number of people." and shipped upwards of 700,000 tonnes of grain.
    1
  21.  @videogames3607  "You! Yes, you there. I shall establish institutions of learning and build infrastructure within you. I will also develop a process of spinning jute into pliable bags making tea trading easier and I will finance your jute manufactories. God it feels so good being evil."
    1
  22.  @videogames3607  Indians are still coping that they got conquered by an island 1/15th it's size? No doubt.
    1
  23.  @jussim.konttinen4981  Is that the one done by Pakistan?
    1
  24.  @jussim.konttinen4981  So what has this got to do with Bengalis?
    1
  25.  @jussim.konttinen4981  Thought it was written by historians with sources.
    1
  26. We still have our sovereignty intact, so yes.
    1
  27.  Wulf  At least we fisted Gaddafi
    1
  28. It doesn't matter if Britain loses Tanganyika. It does not threaten our sovereignty. What does is if a nearby industrial power suddenly merges itself with the farmland of the east.
    1
  29. Nigel Askey style?
    1
  30.  @dragosstanciu9866  Tanks can't exactly float
    1
  31.  @dragosstanciu9866  Pretty hard to set them up when you have an angry Russian shooting you.
    1
  32. Listen, if I wanted to listen to someone rant about mortgages for half an hour, I would have a walk with my father.
    1
  33. We are still sovereign. Losing African colonies that barely generated anything is one thing, losing India is another, but as a country we are still sovereign.
    1
  34. All countries have a sex.
    1
  35.  @Gerry_Burleson  >how about
    1
  36. The United States was a whole Atlantic Ocean away. Germany was a mere North Sea away. It should be noted that East Asia and Europe are very different civilisations.
    1
  37.  @egeerdil5550  Distance changes the situation since in order to really utterly anschluss the UK would be to land a successful naval invasion there. Assuming the US doesn't want to violate Denmark's neutrality, a naval invasion would take around 5,000 km from Bermuda, or in other words, further than it is for Wilhelmshaven. The United States Navy would only certainly overtake the UK's in 1944. If I were an admiral in the US Navy fighting a war with Britain, I would probably try to use submarines instead of conventional ships, however, I see no reason why the UK couldn't deal with them since they were the first to develop the RADAR, and they had the Ultra decryption program and used depth charges extensively. Perhaps later, the US could mass produce a submarine similar to the Type XXI, however this misses the main issue: The only way at that time that those Anglo democracies could get drawn into a war was if Britain got into a war that the US was trading with, and Britain tried to defend her "belligerent rights". The United States is naturally isolationist and would have no reason to start a war. Germany on the other hand was much closer to the UK. Germany had made her plans to conquer the east public and in order to maintain a balance of power in Europe, the UK had guaranteed Poland in order to dissuade a much more immediate threat from taking over all the resources it needed to try to conquer any country it wished.
    1
  38. ​ @egeerdil5550  I am speaking about in our timeline when the US Navy certainly overtook our navy. Must be the posh upper class dialect kicking in again. Not even I made the claim that we thought that Germany could do Sealion by 1944. All I am saying is that Germany becoming more powerful is a threat to our sovereignty, and is far more immediate and threatening than the United States. And what do you mean by "successfully blockaded"? Germany successfully blockaded us for part of the war but we didn't surrender. I assure you, wars do not start without a reason. They are too terrible to start without reasons. Germany started WW2 to acquire more resources so his citizens wouldn't have to put up with worse living standards, we helped Poland to stop Germany from becoming too powerful. We also have to remember we are speaking about the naturally isolationist United States here, where leaders are chosen by the citizens. I do not think that the congress members that would vote for war in this hypothetical scenario would get re-elected by the isolationist populace if they started it just for the meme. You can say that Germany's plan to conquer the east was just rambling speculations by Hitler. This would be believable, however, Hitler's speculations do corroborate with what Germany had actually done up to that point: annex Austria, Czechoslovakia, and preparing to invade Poland.
    1
  39.  @LarsAgerbk  Because they are a load of herring eating pedophiles
    1
  40.  @Cyricist001  "You there! Yes. I shall build infrastructure within you and take away your slaves! God it feels so good being evil."
    1
  41.  @steamstrategy7670  Like Jute? We send that back to India.
    1
  42. Beating the French does not count as a victory against Britain, boxhead.
    1
  43.  @koczisek  And it defended that successfully. It was the French that allowed the huns to strike into the rear. It cost 200,000 British lifes to defeat the Germans. We were secired from becoming Reichkommisariat Großbritainegh or whatever it is. We won.
    1
  44.  @koczisek  >I-it's just an opinion man!
    1
  45. You have essentially replaced communism with national socialism. Neither are exactly good, and besides, there were more space between Britain and Russia.
    1
  46.  @yingyang1008  There is more space between the Eastern Bloc and Britain than Germany and Britain.
    1
  47. Are you a Nazi, just out of interest?
    1
  48. How awful, completely terrible
    1
  49.  @williamchamberlain2263  Seems to be working fine.
    1
  50. The boy formed an alliance with the Liberals just to keep the moderately socialist Labour out.
    1
  51. The EU as it currently stands couldn't threaten a paper bag's expansion plans.
    1
  52.  @VasileIuga  Might be, but the 2 most populous countries in the EU do not believe it is ethically justified to have a massive army in order to wage a war of aggression.
    1