Brexit and Future of UK : Discussions
- Thread starter Vergennes
- Start date
It was against expanding imperialism at a time when there was a feeling colonialism and empires should probably come to a close anyway. Britain peacefully gave up its overseas territories after WWII where there was a wish for independence without a single shot being fired, at least by the British.
The problem is you think your India's history would have been better and invasion free without Britain. It wouldn't, that's a certainty. Even assuming the Mughals or the Ottoman Empire didn't get you, France would have (see Puducherry), and if not France another European country (see Goa), maybe even Russia. There was simply no way India was getting through the 18th and 19th century without being invaded by someone, just as there was no way Britain was getting through the first millennium AD without being invaded.
Last edited:
Marathas had already defeated the Mughals and consolidated central and northern india, Sikhs after crushing the afghans had consolidated their empire, portugese were being screwed by marathas . Had sikhs, mughals and marathas joined hands they would've easily crushed britishers. But unfortunately they were'nt visionary enough.
Too tribal. As I've mentioned before, most of the British Army soldiers invading India were Indians desperate for a regular wage. India had a population of 300 million and there were never more than 100 thousand British troops there at any time. Even if the Mughals or Ottoman Empire hadn't made a comeback, there is no way India could have withstood an assault by Portugal, Spain, France, Germany or Russia. It wasn't even the British military who took over India, it was a damn trading company. They were actually under instructions not to do so, but it was so easy that they'd pretty much done it before they knew it had happened. And BTW, not only did the British East India Company defeat the Mughals for you in The Battles of Plassey and Buxar, they also defeated the French East India Company and the Mughals in the Carnatic Wars. So there is pretty much no chance India wouldn't have been invaded by somebody. If you envisage India as a dead rabbit that's just had a run in with a truck, there were many crows fighting over your remains, the British East India Company was just one of those crows.
East India Company - Wikipedia
Battle of Plassey - Wikipedia
Battle of Buxar - Wikipedia
Carnatic Wars - Wikipedia
Imperial entities of India
Dutch India 1605–1825Danish India 1620–1869French India 1668–1954
Portuguese India
(1505–1961)
Casa da Índia 1434–1833Portuguese East India Company 1628–1633
British India
(1612–1947)
East India Company 1612–1757Company rule in India 1757–1858British Raj 1858–1947British rule in Burma 1824–1948Princely states 1721–1949Partition of India
1947
Last edited:
Mughals were Indians and if you thinks otherwise, then you need to relearn the history.
British never defeated the mughals , siraj ud daulah was only a vassal of mughals.
Mughals defeated british in childs war and allowed them to remain on the condition that they will behave well.
Marathas defeated british in 1st anglo maratha war.
Marathas defeated portugese and ended their hegemony in goa at battle of vasai.
British never defeated the mughals , siraj ud daulah was only a vassal of mughals.
Mughals defeated british in childs war and allowed them to remain on the condition that they will behave well.
Marathas defeated british in 1st anglo maratha war.
Marathas defeated portugese and ended their hegemony in goa at battle of vasai.
Anyone who came into India and reproduced in not Indian. A person is defined by culture. A rat born in a cowshed is not a cow.
British defeated Mughals in Battle of Buxar in 1764 where Shah Alam-2 (Mughal emperor), Mir Qasim (nawab of Bengal) and Shuja-Ud-Daulah (Nawab of Awadh) combined forces against British but lost against British. British gained the support of Hindus of Bengal to repulse these three rulers combined. So, I would call the the battle between British and Bengal or British and Mughals as battle between foreign rulers only.
Shal alam was incompetent ruler. When british tried to strong arm Aurangzeb , he screwed them so badly that they had to beg for pardon and paid a large indemnity to him.
Only first two mughal emperors were foreigners but the rest of them were Indian.
Well we're now going down the route of not only no deal but zero trade. The EU is to invalid UK driving licenses within the EU, which means the UK will have no choice but to reciprocate that, so no lorry drivers will be able to deliver goods either side of the channel. This is now becoming ridiculous stupid. I can actually see all immigrants being forced to return home at the end of this as a result of EU stupidity. They know that no deal will not benefit them so they're trying to think of ways to get even through NTBs, which of course we will reciprocate. Idealism over pragmatism, the story of the EU.
which is why I'm tracking all the companies that are completely overreacting to Brexit. I have decided not to touch any funds that invest in them.
Brexit: Tracking Corporate Fleeing from Britain
In appeal to EU, British PM Theresa May calls for goodwill to avoid disorderly Brexit
Prime Minister Theresa May will call on the European Union to show “goodwill and determination” to avoid a disorderly Brexit, urging them to get behind Britain’s offer of a “fair arrangement”, a senior source said on Tuesday.
On the eve of an informal EU summit in Austria, May showed no sign of backing away from her Brexit plan, shrugging off criticism at home and in Brussels over her proposals for future trade after Britain quits the bloc, the biggest foreign policy shift for the country in almost half a century.
The EU has called her Chequers plan, named after May’s country residence where a deal was hashed out with ministers earlier this year, a good starting point but has baulked at her proposals for a future customs arrangement and Northern Ireland.
With just over six months before Britain leaves the EU, time is pressing and May is keen to secure some kind of deal before the end of the year and ease concerns over a disorderly exit, which could plunge the economy into a recession.
A senior Downing Street source said she would repeat her message at a meeting of EU leaders in Salzburg on Wednesday and Thursday that Britain was proposing “a fair arrangement that will work for the EU’s economy as well as the UK’s”.
“To come to a successful conclusion, just as the UK has evolved its position, the EU will need to do the same,” the source said. “With goodwill and determination on both sides we can avoid a disorderly exit and reach a deal that is in the best interests of both sides.”
While both sides have been making positive noises about the Brexit talks, there has been no deal yet over one of the biggest obstacles – how to meet their aim of keeping an open border between the British province of Northern Ireland and EU member Ireland.
HELPING MAY
But EU officials are also minded not to paint May into a corner, aware that she faces increasing opposition to her plans in her Conservative Party and needs a victory of sorts to try to persuade a reluctant British parliament to back a deal.
Earlier on Tuesday, EU negotiator Michel Barnier said the bloc was ready to improve its proposal for an “insurance policy” backstop arrangement on how to manage its Irish border.
May rejected a previous plan, saying it would effectively slice Northern Ireland away from mainland Britain.
The Downing Street source said she would again underline to EU leaders that “neither side can demand the ‘unacceptable’ of the other, such as an external customs border between different parts of the United Kingdom”.
Reiterating that Britain is committed to a “legally operative protocol on Northern Ireland”, the source said May would again underline that such an agreement must respect her country’s integrity, “which the Commission’s proposal does not”.
May would again try to reassure the EU that she is not trying to undermine its founding principles by opening a backdoor to its lucrative single market.
“Similarly, the UK understands that to the EU it would be unacceptable for us to seek the rights of EU membership without the obligations. That is not what we are doing,” the source said she would say.
“What we are proposing is a fair arrangement that will work for the EU’s economy as well as the UK’s, without undermining the single market.”
In appeal to EU, British PM Theresa May calls for goodwill to avoid disorderly Brexit
Prime Minister Theresa May will call on the European Union to show “goodwill and determination” to avoid a disorderly Brexit, urging them to get behind Britain’s offer of a “fair arrangement”, a senior source said on Tuesday.
On the eve of an informal EU summit in Austria, May showed no sign of backing away from her Brexit plan, shrugging off criticism at home and in Brussels over her proposals for future trade after Britain quits the bloc, the biggest foreign policy shift for the country in almost half a century.
The EU has called her Chequers plan, named after May’s country residence where a deal was hashed out with ministers earlier this year, a good starting point but has baulked at her proposals for a future customs arrangement and Northern Ireland.
With just over six months before Britain leaves the EU, time is pressing and May is keen to secure some kind of deal before the end of the year and ease concerns over a disorderly exit, which could plunge the economy into a recession.
A senior Downing Street source said she would repeat her message at a meeting of EU leaders in Salzburg on Wednesday and Thursday that Britain was proposing “a fair arrangement that will work for the EU’s economy as well as the UK’s”.
“To come to a successful conclusion, just as the UK has evolved its position, the EU will need to do the same,” the source said. “With goodwill and determination on both sides we can avoid a disorderly exit and reach a deal that is in the best interests of both sides.”
While both sides have been making positive noises about the Brexit talks, there has been no deal yet over one of the biggest obstacles – how to meet their aim of keeping an open border between the British province of Northern Ireland and EU member Ireland.
HELPING MAY
But EU officials are also minded not to paint May into a corner, aware that she faces increasing opposition to her plans in her Conservative Party and needs a victory of sorts to try to persuade a reluctant British parliament to back a deal.
Earlier on Tuesday, EU negotiator Michel Barnier said the bloc was ready to improve its proposal for an “insurance policy” backstop arrangement on how to manage its Irish border.
May rejected a previous plan, saying it would effectively slice Northern Ireland away from mainland Britain.
The Downing Street source said she would again underline to EU leaders that “neither side can demand the ‘unacceptable’ of the other, such as an external customs border between different parts of the United Kingdom”.
Reiterating that Britain is committed to a “legally operative protocol on Northern Ireland”, the source said May would again underline that such an agreement must respect her country’s integrity, “which the Commission’s proposal does not”.
May would again try to reassure the EU that she is not trying to undermine its founding principles by opening a backdoor to its lucrative single market.
“Similarly, the UK understands that to the EU it would be unacceptable for us to seek the rights of EU membership without the obligations. That is not what we are doing,” the source said she would say.
“What we are proposing is a fair arrangement that will work for the EU’s economy as well as the UK’s, without undermining the single market.”
In appeal to EU, British PM Theresa May calls for goodwill to avoid disorderly Brexit
We will get to replace three times as much trade locally as they will if all trade stops.
Last edited:
The irony here is that the EU is too dumb to realise that the Chequer's deal is actually a great deal for them and a bad one for us. Because it doesn't fit into one of their little boxes and they might have to change something minor, they've rejected it out of hand. It's a bit like handing someone a bar of gold and them complaining that it doesn't fit in their wallet. The unfortunate thing is that nobody in a position of power in the EU will be held accountable for this idiocy because it isn't a democracy.
There literally isn't a plan worse than the Chequer's plan for the UK. It would be a toss-up between that and an FTA for the worst plan ever. A no deal is better than either for the UK but not for a few businesses, and their lobbies are the obstacle here.
