Should the British Empire break-up ?
412168
Only if Scotland gets to keep the kids on the weekend.
581909
I think it is stupid for any country to eliminate their standing military forces. There will always be some country out there wanting what some other country has. England of all countries should know that, with the number of wars they have been direct participants in (as either attacker or attackee).
223556
The height of the British Empire was around 1921.\n\nThe end of Britain's Empire in Africa came with exceptional rapidity, often leaving the newly-independent states ill-equipped to deal with the challenges of sovereignty: Ghana's independence (1957) after a ten-year nationalist political campaign was followed by that of Nigeria (1960), Sierra Leone and Tanganyika (1961), Uganda (1962), Kenya and Zanzibar (1963), The Gambia (1965), Botswana (formerly Bechuanaland) and Lesotho (formerly Basutoland) (1966) and Swaziland (1968).\n\nBritish withdrawal from the southern and eastern parts of Africa was complicated by the region's white settler populations: Kenya had already provided an example in the Mau Mau Uprising of violent conflict exacerbated by white landownership and reluctance to concede majority rule. White minority rule in South Africa remained a source of bitterness within the Commonwealth until the ending of apartheid policy in 1994.\n\nAlthough the white-dominated Federation of Rhodesia and Nyasaland ended in the independence of Malawi (formerly Nyasaland) and Zambia (the former Northern Rhodesia) in 1964, Southern Rhodesia's white minority (a self-governing colony since 1923) declared independence with their UDI rather than submit to equality with black Africans. The support of South Africa's apartheid government kept the Rhodesian regime in place until 1979, when agreement was reached on majority rule in an independent Zimbabwe.\n\nMost of Britain's Caribbean territories opted for eventual separate independence after the failure of the West Indies Federation (1958–62): Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago (1962) were followed into statehood by Barbados (1966) and the smaller islands of the eastern Caribbean (1970s and 1980s). Britain's Pacific dependencies underwent a similar process of decolonisation in the latter decades. At the end of Britain's 99-year lease of the mainland New Territories, Hong Kong became a Special Administrative Region of the People's Republic of China in 1997.
168970
It is one of those questions where books could be written.  That said, a case could be made that the British started it by going against their (and America’s) Common Law, by not applying all of those rights to those living in the Americas.  It was only a matter of time before there would be a response to such a policy.  Since the British Crown reject peaceful petitions to redress grievances, violence would follow.
543066
they should practically handover their entire GDP of a decade, the rest will be forgiven. japan was compensated and germany is still paying for their 2nd world war attrocities....queen elizabeth still wears stolen african gold she inherited!! american indians should be allowed to hold a referendum on whether to allow the uninvited to go or stay........so on
330681
The world would be a much better place. The US would no longer have those selfcentred presidents, they would speak correctly and we may even get them to write correctly. In fact the US should probably be allowed to vote to rejoin the United Kingdom. They just love the royal family and they all want to come and see the UK.\nBut we need to sort out the taxes before we allowed them back.
731621
Hopefully at that point some US states will break away.  If not, i would suggest a less socialist country.  Maybe one with very few people.  The more people there are, the more government becomes oppressive and paternalistic.  New Zealand might be a good option.  But they may take immigration seriously.  And then we're screwed.
697217
I agree with you. But polls show that 2 out of 3 English people want England and the UK in a politically united Europe a European Union. It may be worth your while to consider supporting a withdrawal from the worst aspects of the treaty of Rome and consider closer links with the English speaking world, a English Speaking Union
968724
Cool. Seeing as the UK is an elective autocracy, maybe we should both have spread a bit of democracy at home before liberating the rest of the world?
798340
Not that I'm against the idea of a Federation of sorts, per se, but here's some of the problems with it.\n\n#1 - Any partitioning would have to include an agreement on how to split oil revenues.  This would obviously be problematic to get them to agree.\n\n#2 - While regions are predominantly one group or another, there's significant mixing of groups, overall, particularly in cities.  To not be the downtrodden minority, many would have to pack up and leave their homes, jobs, belongings and move to an uncertain future with no guarantees.  If someone is willing to stay and be the voiceless minority, they'd probably get "ethnically cleansed" out - I think my assumption here is also that if someone has something worth staying for, someone else will want to take it and will take advantage of the situation to do so.\n\nIt would be ugly and nasty.  Moreso than the road being travelled now?  I don't know.  That's part of the frustration with the mess we're in.  We're in so deep there are no "good" choices.
956271
The U.S. is absolutely a declining empire.  It's a hard fact for most of us Americans to admit.  Most can't admit it at all.  But do a detailed comparison between decline of the Roman empire and the U.S. today (bread and circus, anyone?).  Or even the British empire and the U.S. today.\n\nAll countries and/or empires decline and fall.  It is a fact (and just a matter of time), although we may never live to see the end.
708976
Absolutely not.  The powerful elite, who don't want change to occur in society, will always find new ways to try to divide people.  Whether it be based on skin color, sex, religion, national origin or sexual preference - "divide and conquer" is the oldest and most effective military strategy in the world.  As long as the disenfranchised can be kept at each others throats instead of working together for equality and fairness, we will continue to fail in our struggles.
606197
if german can uudo her own, why not? Just let the u.s and  britain and the interested power leave them alone. Otherwise the partition will go sooner than expected with a nuclear test. Can u picture that? So assist in pleading with the policemen of the world to let be these nations and that wall[s] will go down.
600620
You must be joking. Take over England? England already took everyone over. I'm Irish, I should know. I think you should write your President a letter and ask him to take over England.
291714
Scotland is, 400 years after "unification" still solidly independent.  Federalizing the British state strengthens it by making it a voluntary union, rather than a remnant of empire (my ancestors were organizers of the '45 rebellion.  *I* haven't forgotten how the UK was formed, which means that others haven't also).
145730
After overthrowing an evil regime, would you think it smart to leave a country in ruins? The world learned a lesson after leaving Germany to rot after WWI, and look at what type of tyranical government came along after that.\n\nIn most cases of war, especially lately, it is not the case that a whole country is entirely against another. In the cases of war in Iraq and Afghanistan, it was more or less regime toppling and terror hunting. It is important for the people in those countries to experience the benefits of a free form of government and give them the chance of a peaceful future. This could help ensure more stability and good relations.
936302
Yes.  America, UK, and Australia need to get out of there and deal with their own domestic issues instead.