happy trafalgar day, /int/. 211 years since we the british once

>>66424816
>Trafalgar
>a regular ship battle
>with the British having better ships

This battle is not important at all. You're not relevant, Britain.

>>66424878
>trafalgar
>two world powers against one
>less ships
>still win

well it was kinda important my american friend because it pretty much stopped napoleon's planned invasion of britain

>>66424878
Spaniards had the biggest ship yet built and we still sank it

>>66425111
>>66425502
>replying to yanks

>>66425111
>less ships
Fewer
Why can't Bongs speak their own fucking language

>>66425618
i'm pissed, stannis. what's your excuse for not knowing history?

File: 1466208121698.jpg (5KB, 124x124px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 124x124px

>>66425712
You don't need to learn about inferior cultures when you're king of the world

File: be310df5e7a378d0297d9f8e45aab651[1].jpg (462KB, 1550x1046px) Image search: [Google]

462KB, 1550x1046px

Happy Trafalgar day!

>>66425712
What's your excuse for not holding onto your Empire?

Lol, what a cuck. You're just a weak-willed, pussy KEK that lost his whole Empire.

>>66425801
world wars are expensive. tyrone

Just posting to let you know we won't take your bait.

File: AdmiralNelson.png (855KB, 963x1159px) Image search: [Google]

855KB, 963x1159px

Happy Trafalgar Day, Britain! The second most important battle against the Napoleonic Empire after Waterloo.

Great job ridding Europe of the Corsican menace!

File: 1390250624304.png (84KB, 925x563px) Image search: [Google]

84KB, 925x563px

>>66425919

>>66425880
>world wars are expensive, tyrone
And you didn't have to join the last one, as Hitler offered a peace with the British Empire.

Hmm, but I guess Churchill thought it was in Britain's best interests to go to war with him.

But because of your country's participation against Hitler, you all lost everything that you had, and even worse, you all played Europe into the hands of Communist influence by allowing Stalin to have half of Europe.

So if there's any nation who should be frowned upon in modern World History, it should be Britain.

What you did in the past decades back was disgraceful and very retarded.

>>66426146

Why would Britain bow to tyranny? It's better that they honored their alliances and ousted Hitler than let France and Poland stand alone, even if it cost them their empire.

Besides, letting Hitler rule Europe would be about as bad as letting Stalin rule it. It's just a different flavor of fruitcake.

File: AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAH.gif (2MB, 481x360px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 481x360px

>>66426000

>>66426000
I like this yank.

>>66426146
except we did. hitler didnt offer peace until after we declared war. by then it was too late.

churchill wasn't even in power at the start of the war.

we lost everything we had because they were actively seeking independence. admittedly you may have started that trend but shit happens.

>>66426253
>>66426000
these anons get it

>>66425712
History started on July 4, 1776.

>England expects every man to do his duty

Is it the 21 or 22?

>11 years ago for the 200th anniversary the reenactment was between a red and blue fleet because the french are still upset

>>66426557

Fuck, is that true?

I don't think the Austrians or Russians get pissy about the battle of Austerlitz or reenactments about it, I don't see why the French should be upset about reenactments of British victories.

>>66426657
Hell, the South is as butthurt as Poland about the Civil War, and they still don't complain about the reenactments.

>>66426146
> This autistic /pol/tard

If you loved your precious fuhrer so much, then why do you only bash Britain when the US was fighting too.

> You played Europe into the hands of Communist influence

It was your President who cozied up to Stalin, not Churchill. Read a fucking book. I recommend The Second World War by Antony Beevor.

>>66426833
>Anthony Beevor

An Anglo-Zionist paid agent, as the Russians know.

https://themoscowtimes.com/news/russian-region-bans-british-historians-books-48754

>>66426657
Yes.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/4570301.stm

French are always upset at anglo domination.

We can't reenact the plains of Abraham (battle for Quebec city) on the actual plains because they'll get mad. Have to do it elsewhere.

>>66426887
You'll learn more from him than you ever did on your white supremacist echo chamber.

>>66424816
Remember Blas de Lezo,pirate

File: British Swag.jpg (431KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

431KB, 1920x1080px

>>66426950
JAJAJA LOS PIRATAS INGLATERRA

>>66427024
pirates indeed

>>66426898
oh wow. i've lived in canada my whole life but I never about this. that's one thing to add to the "wtf quebecois" list

>>66426898
What would happen if they got mad? Obviously most Southerners don't care enough to get that mad with Civil War reenactments, but what'd happen if Anglos just said "fuck you" and did it anyway?

File: 1467965675131.png (69KB, 1456x1108px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 1456x1108px

>>66426253
>why would Britain bow to tyranny?
It wouldn't, you idiot. Hitler wouldn't even get past Britain's naval force or even airforce even if he wanted to.

It was NOT better if they honored their alliances. Honestly, would you rather choose survival or "honor" if you were in a fight against significant others?

I don't know about you, but I would choose survival and run away.

And no, letting Hitler rule it would not be as bad as letting Stalin rule it. I mean yes, they'd be under authoritarian rule with not alot of freedom but atleast you wouldn't have young people of this century turning into lefty cucks.

But no, it is not a different flavor of fruitcake, it is in fact a dark dessert of another kind.

>>66426380
>by then it was too late
What do you mean it was too late? You could've backed out if you wanted to and left the fate of Europe to Russia and you STILL would've held onto your Empire. But no, that didn't happen because of "muh honor".

Britons used to be something great, until that very moment when you became fools and decided to fight a war you didn't have to fight.

>>66426833
>implying I'm a natsoc
I don't love Hitler, I never did. Hitler was an idiot who thought he could conquer all of Europe. And the USA didn't have to join it either. Literally all the nations who weren't in Europe (which includes Britain, since Britain is an island) didn't have to join that war.

>It was your President who cozied up to Stalin
Wrong again, FDR would care less about Europe. I mean sure, he may have been friendly acquaintances with Stalin but that doesn't mean he had anything to do with Stalin's plans for Europe.

I mean, there was the partitioning of Germany but that had nothing to do with Stalin's Eastern bloc states.

>>66427214
Right, so all of America's failings can be ignored on the hypothetical basis that you never actually entered the war. Do you think Japan was going to leave Asia alone even if Hitler wasn't around? They invaded China before the war and were going to expand regardless of Hitler joining or not. So the "Pacific War" would have happened regardless.

> Hitler offered a peace with the British Empire
No, he did not. Like in WW1 Britain had defensive treaties they had to keep. He offered peace after the war had begun.

Again, you ignoroing of all America's failings especially how Eastern Europe was treated reside on the hypothetical nature of America never entering the war, which is just bullshit.

>>66427399
>do you think Japan was going to leave Asia alone even if Hitler wasn't around?

Ofc not, but again, we didn't have to join the Allies. We could've stayed neutral and killed them and they would've yielded once we nuked them.

Everything else in WW2 was moot point, we had no business in Europe, yet FDR wanted to push us in there.

>No he did not
>He offered peace after the war had begun
Make up your mind, because of course Hitler did offer peace to Britain after he realized the might of their Empire.

And Britain didn't accept. All they had to do was accept and they would still have their Empire, even today!

But no, no, that didn't happen.

>Again, you ignoroing of all America's failings especially how Eastern Europe was treated reside on the hypothetical nature of America never entering the war, which is just bullshit.

How did America "fail", please tell me Kiwi, how did we fail with our own goals? America would survive even if we never joined the war on the side of the Allies. If you're telling me our failure laid with the result of Eastern Europe, that wasn't our fault at all.

Again we had no business in Europe.

But that was actually Churchill's fault for negotiating with Stalin to give the Eastern portion to him.

>>66424816
US should have sided with France and liberated Canada.

>>66426000
Stop embarrassing us. Brits were abducting and enslaving US citizens for their navy during the Napoleonic wars.

File: Thucydides.jpg (39KB, 1085x673px) Image search: [Google]

39KB, 1085x673px

>>66427645
The strong do what they can, the weak suffer what they must.

File: 1476585278667.png (18KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

18KB, 420x420px

>>66427978
And that's exactly my point.

>Britain had "defensive treaties they had to keep"
>"had to keep"
Any nation strong enough doesn't have to do shit for any other nation. Literally, Britain could've smugly left Europe to its ashes and focus on building its Empire even more.

I mean who the fuck honors defensive alliances if it's not in your favor? I totally would never do that.

I mean Britain didn't honor Poland's alliance, they could've done it again with the rest of Europe!

I don't see why not!

File: 984654684y1684.png (14KB, 239x311px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 239x311px

>>66428102
>Spend the last few hundred years making sure Europe doesn't unite
>"Just let Germany take over the whole of Europe. It's not like the continent is important or anything"

>>66427978
Stop sucking brit dick and making weird quotes like a fedora virgin.

File: 1467879078095.png (22KB, 804x743px) Image search: [Google]

22KB, 804x743px

>>66428331
What does it matter if Europe unites under some crazy dictator, seriously what the fuck does it matter?

You would've had your Empire, and Hitler would've had his. I mean really, what the fuck is wrong with that?

>>66426000
>n-notice me britbong senpai

Check out this cuck

File: Disraeli.jpg (59KB, 400x540px) Image search: [Google]

59KB, 400x540px

>>66428460
>>66428594
“How much easier it is to be critical than to be correct.”

>>66428331
>>66428521
Oh, but wait a minute, Hitler wouldn't have had a united Europe under his fist because if he used all of his resources to attack Russia, he still would've lost and Russia would've won a Pyrrhic victory at a huge cost themselves.

And then maybe Britain could've gone in and subjugated both Nazi Germany and Russia at the time when they were weak.

You all could've had this in the bag, but you didn't forsee it.

>>66428643
Be a man for once in your life and speak for yourself you cuck.

File: let me slip into something more comfortable.gif (849KB, 509x318px) Image search: [Google]

849KB, 509x318px

>>66428521
>what does it matter if a great big landmass essentially spitting distance away from your country formed one great state that would certainly passes us in all measurements of strength
>Now what if the entire ruling body were from counties that not 30 years lost a war to us
>nothing bad can certainly happen and this won't effect us in any way.

>>66428661
I don't think either of us could make the call to say if Germany could take Russia if they could swing everything at them to begin with. No UK might also mean no USA support. The second bit though could just not happen. British army would be too small and underdeveloped.