Welcome the Middle East. We have three versions of history. Yours, ours and theirs!Originally Posted by Bob's World
Welcome to Middle East...... etc etc.It does not surprise me then, that one with a background in Great Britain would have a similarly biased view of their own history.
WW1 Bankrupted the Empire. There was simply no chance of holding onto it, especially as the UK had been left with policing what was left of the Ottoman Empire _ Palestine, the Trans-Jordan and Iraq. While economically of some benefit between the Wars, the Empire became "A-Strategic" after WW2. It was simply unsustainable - politically and economically.If 5 SWJ members, not of the empire, come up on the net and say "yeah, Bob, the Brits really rolled up the carpet as part of a master economic plan, and not due to the populaces of places like the US, India, or Iran throwing them out; then fine, I will hit the books and drill deeper. To say you have a strategy of reducing the empire because your strategy to hold the empire failed in the face of popular revolt, does not count.
Now you do not have to read a lot of books to see that the vast majority of Colonial possessions were transferred peacefully, and voluntarily.
Now it may be a fine line between the UK dissolving the Empire because both Political and economic circumstances made it impossible, and the issue that the UK probably could not maintain the Empire in the face of any serious opposition, even if it wanted too.
Fact is the UK policy underlying all the major post 1945 insurgencies (except Ulster) was to set the conditions for a peaceful transfer of power - and even the IRA has given up the "Armed Struggle" - in line with the UK's stated policy.
There were failures. In Aden, the UK announced a departure date, which actually made the existing insurgency worse, and the Palestine mandate was vacated with no agreement in place. Rhodesia declared UDI! - and War followed.
Bookmarks