What has been one nation with the least suffering?

File: succturk.jpg (36KB, 443x380px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 443x380px

Mongolia

Pretty much evidence that there is no so called "karmatic justice".

>>1964258
Switzerland I guess

>>1964301
>Getting destroyed, genocided, and more than half of your population absorbed by Russian and Chinese states throughout 1400s-1900s.
>Not Karmic Justice.

>>1964301
No. Austria is proof that there's no karmic justice.

>>1964258
Portugal

The Vatican.

File: seccturk.jpg (38KB, 443x380px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 443x380px

>>1964328
That's just the Oirats that abandoned Tengri in favour of Buddhism.

Of course they would be weak shits like the Tibetians.

>>1964331
you kidding right? have you seen how tiny it is now?

Canada and Switzerland have had pretty comfy histories, the Quebec thing was a bit rough but that didn't really cause much suffering aside from the few deaths due to the FLQ.

>>1964258
Poland

>>1964399
Losing the privilege to lord over other ethnic groups isn't a punishment.

File: 20dd23ca8d2409263cf13c1cb5aae44e41bf6615c96a8a66af2d145129ccb713_1.jpg (125KB, 800x596px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 800x596px

Australia, not even a question mate.

>>1964258
The Czechs. The Hussites period was the harshest on the population probably and it was still quite okay. Other than that, nobody really wanted anything from us nor did anything to us.

>>1964428
Most of the anglo colonies really, Canada, Australia, NZ, and the US (to a lesser degree with that whole civil war thing) all have done very well for themselves.

>>1964439
>Most of the anglo colonies

By that you mean the only four ones in which whites were sent en masse to replace natives, right?
Because the overwhelming majority of British colonies are utter shitholes (Sudan, Iraq, Zimbabwe, Burma, Bengladesh, Guyana, India, Afghanistan...etc)

>>1964463
Yes, that's what I meant, sorry, I meant to mean "anglo colonies" as the colonies which are part of the anglosphere, my bad for not being clear.

>>1964428
>>1964439
Wouldn't the suffering of the native inhabitants of those colonies kinda counteract that claim?

>>1964504
The question is about nation which either means only post-Napoleon history or disregards all the colonies since they have so short history anyways.

>>1964516
Well, I mean like, the suffering of the native inhabitants under colonial rule happened after those places became colonies. I know both Canada and Australia have pretty checkered histories in regards to the aboriginal peoples.

Sweden probably, since the last war they were in was over wo hundred years ago, and there has never been any unrest or upheaval since the protestant reformation I'll bet. They just sit there in the north of europe, enjoying their position and choosing not to take any stance on anything or taking any risk.

>>1964258
Iceland