I'm sorry I don't understand. Who did she genocide?
Miscellaneous News
- Thread starter bd popeye
- Start date
I think the logic is that United Kingdom did a lot of sordid stuff (not sure if it was actually genocide, because it is one hell of a bar to cross, at least per the Genocide Convention definition) while she was technically the head of state, therefore she was responsible.
I neither endorse nor denounce this line of logic.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Did Hitler actually kill people who were Jewish by his own hands? Probably not. If he did it was most likely not many but he's going to be blamed for it all anyway because it was his idea. Look at how Republicans are telling minorities in the US all their problems in their lives is because of Asians taking money that would've went to them and not because of their racism. You better believe a part of why there's anti-Asian violence that Republicans love pointing out it's black people committing the crime is because of it. Look at the reparations debate during the last election. You hear none it now because Biden won office but you better believe if this issue is pushed forward, the US will figure out a way to force Asian countries to have to pay reparations also. How when Asians countries didn't get involved in the slave trade? The logic of African-Americans is that the US was built on the backs of African slaves. Asian countries made money from the US so therefore they're also responsible. What about the other way around? Opium was once the biggest money making industry in the entire world. It was a one way industry then. The West produced and forced addiction on the Chinese to pay them for it. See the lengths they go to to link anyone else responsible? You can throw out Westerners defense that they shouldn't be held accountable for the crimes of their ancestors if they think Asians have to pay up reparations because the West enslaved Africans... and Queen Elizabeth is responsible for the crimes of Great Britain which were the worst for any single country in the entire history of the world.
supercat
Colonel
Kim learned his lessons from Gaddafi and Saddam Hussein.
Atrocities did occur during the life time of Queen Elizabeth II. One thing we are sure is that there won't be another Queen or King who will preside over the breakup of the British Empire again.
I'm not sure that this is an entirely appropriate comparison, considering that unlike Hitler, the British monarchies do not have real power.
Choose your Health Minister:
The Colombia president is inviting the fox to guard the hen house:
Chinese popularity in Russia:
Last edited:
So what would have been the effect if she took a public stance to decry all those actions and publicly state that the British Empire shouldn’t commit such atrocities, and that she “urges her majesty’s prime minister, parliament and army to refrain from such practices and respect all human life”
Haven't they come out and spoken/warned of the dangers of climate change? Did they then force it upon the government or oust PMs?
No one is suggesting she should’ve just said “stop the genocide (crimes against humanity at very least) or off with your head!”, we know it’s not 1366 AD.
Btw, the list of atrocities (since 1952) can be easily found. One of the worst has definitely got to be the Mau Mau uprising.
AssassinsMace
Lieutenant General
Yet all the romanticizing over her because she died is about what she did for the world... Can't have it both ways.
The royal family is a fucking joke, they just virtue signal a whole bunch of PC stuff. For example, Prince Williams goes to China (and around the world) to promote animal conservation, but they don't even apologize for their sins. They care about animals more than actual human lives.
Time to holiday in Russia. My Chinese face will be welcomed instead of being a target for racist attacks.
Barbarians are gone... the Great Wall remains.
