Why is the British Empire considered a good thing?
Q. How many people were murdered in the process? I can't understand how British people condemn others as evil for terrorist attacks on them , then go to school or university and read up on the Empire and think it was the best thing ever.. I'm sure the the Germans when they were conquering all before them before it all went belly up didn't think what they were doing was evil , why do the British excuse their history? The Germans acknowledge they were wrong why are the British proud of an Empire that murdered countless people?
Asked by Wise Guy - Mon Mar 29 09:07:20 2010 - - 10 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Exactly. Where do you live? England? That might explain why you are astounded by so many people who considered it a good thing, because the only people on planet Earth who believed that the British Empire was good are 60 million Brits. I can guarantee you that most, if not all, of the answerers above me who said anything positive about the British Empire are British. It's probably arrogance combined with a bit of ignorance and pride. Britain invented the concentration camps yet they slam the Germans for using them in WWII. That is hypocrisy at it's best. Britain smuggled drugs into China, and when the Chinese government told them to stop, Britain decided to occupy Hong Kong for 100 years. When Thatcher suggested that Britain keep Hong… [cont.]
Answered by fuztec - Wed Mar 31 03:17:05 2010
Q. How many people were murdered in the process? I can't understand how British people condemn others as evil for terrorist attacks on them , then go to school or university and read up on the Empire and think it was the best thing ever.. I'm sure the the Germans when they were conquering all before them before it all went belly up didn't think what they were doing was evil , why do the British excuse their history? The Germans acknowledge they were wrong why are the British proud of an Empire that murdered countless people?
Asked by Wise Guy - Mon Mar 29 09:07:20 2010 - - 10 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Exactly. Where do you live? England? That might explain why you are astounded by so many people who considered it a good thing, because the only people on planet Earth who believed that the British Empire was good are 60 million Brits. I can guarantee you that most, if not all, of the answerers above me who said anything positive about the British Empire are British. It's probably arrogance combined with a bit of ignorance and pride. Britain invented the concentration camps yet they slam the Germans for using them in WWII. That is hypocrisy at it's best. Britain smuggled drugs into China, and when the Chinese government told them to stop, Britain decided to occupy Hong Kong for 100 years. When Thatcher suggested that Britain keep Hong… [cont.]
Answered by fuztec - Wed Mar 31 03:17:05 2010
If the British Empire had been a contiguous empire, which countries or continents would it be equivalent to?
Q. Basically what land area in the world is equivalent to the british empire, if the the empire had been all adjacent.
Asked by Alfred:P - Sat Apr 24 06:09:47 2010 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. At it's height, the British Empire contained 1/4 of all the land on earth. That would make it roughly the size of Asia.
Answered by Will - Sat Apr 24 06:23:05 2010
Q. Basically what land area in the world is equivalent to the british empire, if the the empire had been all adjacent.
Asked by Alfred:P - Sat Apr 24 06:09:47 2010 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. At it's height, the British Empire contained 1/4 of all the land on earth. That would make it roughly the size of Asia.
Answered by Will - Sat Apr 24 06:23:05 2010
How did the British empire grow due to the tobacco they impoted?
Q. Why was tobacco important in the British empire's growth? jus need a bit of help! thnkx
Asked by !Krayzee! - Mon Aug 31 13:11:13 2009 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The Empire did not grow as a result of trade in, or cultivation of tobacco. It grew for several reasons, not all of them consistent - trade being only one, and the tobacco trade was never important except locally (e.g. in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe). First of course was general trade. The gradual takeover of India was trade-led. By contrast, the British presence in S. Africa was strategically motivated; whoever controlled the Cape controlled the only maritime trade route to the E. Indies. The presence in Australia was simple acquisitiveness: the land was undefended, thinly inhabited and there for the taking. Kenya and other African areas were settled by people who wanted to farm. The W. Indian islands were "filched" (a Whig politician's term) as… [cont.]
Answered by Michael B - Mon Aug 31 14:11:45 2009
Q. Why was tobacco important in the British empire's growth? jus need a bit of help! thnkx
Asked by !Krayzee! - Mon Aug 31 13:11:13 2009 - - 3 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The Empire did not grow as a result of trade in, or cultivation of tobacco. It grew for several reasons, not all of them consistent - trade being only one, and the tobacco trade was never important except locally (e.g. in Rhodesia/Zimbabwe). First of course was general trade. The gradual takeover of India was trade-led. By contrast, the British presence in S. Africa was strategically motivated; whoever controlled the Cape controlled the only maritime trade route to the E. Indies. The presence in Australia was simple acquisitiveness: the land was undefended, thinly inhabited and there for the taking. Kenya and other African areas were settled by people who wanted to farm. The W. Indian islands were "filched" (a Whig politician's term) as… [cont.]
Answered by Michael B - Mon Aug 31 14:11:45 2009
What mistakes did we make during the Great British Empire that caused it to finally collapse?
Q. Just i'm writing a series of sci-fi books about a 2nd Great British empire but this time in order to keep the Empire mighty we avoid making our previous mistakes but it's hard to show that if I don't know the mistakes we made and by mistakes I mean mistakes in leadership, not mistakes like handing over the USA's independence, it was a mistake but not a mistake that caused the Empire to fail. RayIsBack, I am aware of how Britain treated the USA back then and the reasons the USA fought for Independence, I'm just saying in my opinion giving the USA its Independence was a mistake and not just for Britain, the USA's 13 original States wrote in their constitutions an act that forbids the USA joining a treaty, an allaince or a confederation, the… [cont.]
Asked by Lily R - Wed Feb 18 00:51:35 2009 - - 7 Answers - 1 Comments
A. 1. Overextended themselves; not knowing when to stop. 2. Misunderstanding and/or not accepting the culture and social norms of the colonized and subjugated. 3. Empires are unfeasible over the long term, regardless of what you do. There is only so long that you can subjugate a multitude of people who don't want you there before they undermine your efforts, start working together, and break you down. This definitely happened to Britain. Maintaining a large empire permanently is impossible. 4. There is also an X-factor here: you can't stop other powerful nations from imperializing, too. You have to find a way to eliminate rivalry, and conquering everyone doesn't work (see problem #1). Political factors destroyed the British Empire more than… [cont.]
Answered by Mr. Taco - Wed Feb 18 01:00:42 2009
Q. Just i'm writing a series of sci-fi books about a 2nd Great British empire but this time in order to keep the Empire mighty we avoid making our previous mistakes but it's hard to show that if I don't know the mistakes we made and by mistakes I mean mistakes in leadership, not mistakes like handing over the USA's independence, it was a mistake but not a mistake that caused the Empire to fail. RayIsBack, I am aware of how Britain treated the USA back then and the reasons the USA fought for Independence, I'm just saying in my opinion giving the USA its Independence was a mistake and not just for Britain, the USA's 13 original States wrote in their constitutions an act that forbids the USA joining a treaty, an allaince or a confederation, the… [cont.]
Asked by Lily R - Wed Feb 18 00:51:35 2009 - - 7 Answers - 1 Comments
A. 1. Overextended themselves; not knowing when to stop. 2. Misunderstanding and/or not accepting the culture and social norms of the colonized and subjugated. 3. Empires are unfeasible over the long term, regardless of what you do. There is only so long that you can subjugate a multitude of people who don't want you there before they undermine your efforts, start working together, and break you down. This definitely happened to Britain. Maintaining a large empire permanently is impossible. 4. There is also an X-factor here: you can't stop other powerful nations from imperializing, too. You have to find a way to eliminate rivalry, and conquering everyone doesn't work (see problem #1). Political factors destroyed the British Empire more than… [cont.]
Answered by Mr. Taco - Wed Feb 18 01:00:42 2009
How are the british empire building and controlling their empire?
Q. I'm doing a project about the british empire and would like to know some facts about how the british control and build their empire. If you know some good useful websites that might help. let me know. thnx
Asked by $CORP!O - Sun Dec 14 10:50:43 2008 - - 3 Answers - 1 Comments
A. Ha, good for you, I'm a brit and know how we still dominate and exploit the primative world ie usa, russia,china, etc. We govern with a fist of steel. We also harness the sub humans to do our dirty work, and finally, we economically devalue all world currencies through the sterling power.we is the bestest of the best. Forget that at your peril.
Answered by advocate172000 - Sun Dec 14 11:05:35 2008
Q. I'm doing a project about the british empire and would like to know some facts about how the british control and build their empire. If you know some good useful websites that might help. let me know. thnx
Asked by $CORP!O - Sun Dec 14 10:50:43 2008 - - 3 Answers - 1 Comments
A. Ha, good for you, I'm a brit and know how we still dominate and exploit the primative world ie usa, russia,china, etc. We govern with a fist of steel. We also harness the sub humans to do our dirty work, and finally, we economically devalue all world currencies through the sterling power.we is the bestest of the best. Forget that at your peril.
Answered by advocate172000 - Sun Dec 14 11:05:35 2008
What does the modern British Empire consist of today?
Q. Just a few questions: What does the Modern British Empire consist of today? (what countries today are still part of the British Empire) Whats with the English flag found in the top left of many other flags?
Asked by kobrakai7 - Mon Jun 18 04:56:10 2007 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Britain had lost most of its empire after WWII as it could not sustain the cost of supporting such nations and also those nations were seeking independence and britain could not enforce thier authority anymore after such a tiring war. Today, the remains of british empire consists mostly small islands around the world. Turks and Caicos Islands Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands Saint Helena (including Ascension, Tristan da Cunha) Pitcairn Islands Montserrat Gibraltar Falkland Islands Cayman Islands British Virgin Islands British Indian Ocean Territory British Antarctic Territory Bermuda Anguilla Some of these have thier own flags but have a union jack in the upper left corner to… [cont.]
Answered by Jin S - Tue Jun 19 04:47:32 2007
Q. Just a few questions: What does the Modern British Empire consist of today? (what countries today are still part of the British Empire) Whats with the English flag found in the top left of many other flags?
Asked by kobrakai7 - Mon Jun 18 04:56:10 2007 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Britain had lost most of its empire after WWII as it could not sustain the cost of supporting such nations and also those nations were seeking independence and britain could not enforce thier authority anymore after such a tiring war. Today, the remains of british empire consists mostly small islands around the world. Turks and Caicos Islands Sovereign Base Areas of Akrotiri and Dhekelia South Georgia and the South Sandwich Islands Saint Helena (including Ascension, Tristan da Cunha) Pitcairn Islands Montserrat Gibraltar Falkland Islands Cayman Islands British Virgin Islands British Indian Ocean Territory British Antarctic Territory Bermuda Anguilla Some of these have thier own flags but have a union jack in the upper left corner to… [cont.]
Answered by Jin S - Tue Jun 19 04:47:32 2007
How should we protray the the British Empire in our education today and in the future?
Q. I was reading book about the British Empire I while back I came upon page where it showed a page with some British cavalrymen fight with some Sudanese tribesmen. {A 400 strong regiment attacked what they thought to be a few hundred dervishes, but in fact were 2,500 infantry hidden behind these dervishes in a depression. After a fierce clash, the Lancers drove them back at some cost (three Victoria Crosses were awarded, for the loss of five officers, 65 men, and 120 horses), roughly one-fourth of their total manpower.} (I cut that from wikipedia) the author of the book I was reading called it "a perfect display of the idiotic bravery of the time" and continued on to rather subtlety suggest the overall stupidity of the empire in general.… [cont.]
Asked by Matt - Thu Jul 12 03:48:15 2007 - - 8 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I think we should be amazed by the logistics and efficiency of running such a vast empire in the days before telecommunication. If only we could recover that sort of efficiency and drive we'd be a force to be reckoned with today. Also, if you compare the British empire with a lot of other empires (eg french, spanish) we were very fair. Obviously there were downsides, but name me a civilisation that doesn't have bad points. The empire was something to be proud of - not from the point of view of subjugating weaker nations, but from the point of view of being strong, fair, diplomatic (with a few exceptions) and because of the motivation, drive, efficiency, talent and determination that created it. Nelson Mandela said: "Our deepest fear… [cont.]
Answered by Tallula Belle - Thu Jul 12 04:42:40 2007
Q. I was reading book about the British Empire I while back I came upon page where it showed a page with some British cavalrymen fight with some Sudanese tribesmen. {A 400 strong regiment attacked what they thought to be a few hundred dervishes, but in fact were 2,500 infantry hidden behind these dervishes in a depression. After a fierce clash, the Lancers drove them back at some cost (three Victoria Crosses were awarded, for the loss of five officers, 65 men, and 120 horses), roughly one-fourth of their total manpower.} (I cut that from wikipedia) the author of the book I was reading called it "a perfect display of the idiotic bravery of the time" and continued on to rather subtlety suggest the overall stupidity of the empire in general.… [cont.]
Asked by Matt - Thu Jul 12 03:48:15 2007 - - 8 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I think we should be amazed by the logistics and efficiency of running such a vast empire in the days before telecommunication. If only we could recover that sort of efficiency and drive we'd be a force to be reckoned with today. Also, if you compare the British empire with a lot of other empires (eg french, spanish) we were very fair. Obviously there were downsides, but name me a civilisation that doesn't have bad points. The empire was something to be proud of - not from the point of view of subjugating weaker nations, but from the point of view of being strong, fair, diplomatic (with a few exceptions) and because of the motivation, drive, efficiency, talent and determination that created it. Nelson Mandela said: "Our deepest fear… [cont.]
Answered by Tallula Belle - Thu Jul 12 04:42:40 2007
What do you guys think happened to the British Empire?
Q. The British Empire was the largest empire by GDP, landmass, and population the world has ever seen. It also had one of the strongest navies the world has ever seen. By 1913 it held 458 million people (one fourth of the world's pop), and 14.2 square miles of land (one fourth of the land on Earth). I believe that Gandhi had a role in liberating India, inturn dissolving the British East India company (the main revenue source for the empire), King George III also dealt the empire a blow when he lost the thirteen colonies. Major fires in London hurted the economy. The two World Wars drained Great Britain. And the sheer distance the empire's land was spreaded out made it easy for foreign power attacks and revolutions to start in one certain area. [cont.]
Asked by Billy N - Sun Dec 24 15:35:48 2006 - - 7 Answers - 0 Comments
A. it became the commonwealth, india was returned to its rightful people, ghandi played an infleuential role in getting his country liberated,however the history of the british empire will show that given the historical data at the time of Englands rise to the mechanical age, that was built upon the exploitatian of other countries, once that was realised Britain did the correct thing in re evaluating its foriegn policy starting with the abolishment of slavery. There are many countries around this world that are friends of Britain,every nation has its empire this was ours, perhaps America decided that economic empire has all the benifits with none of the retrobution, you dont have to educate ,build schools hospitals,infrastructure, if you… [cont.]
Answered by lefang - Sun Dec 24 16:31:43 2006
Q. The British Empire was the largest empire by GDP, landmass, and population the world has ever seen. It also had one of the strongest navies the world has ever seen. By 1913 it held 458 million people (one fourth of the world's pop), and 14.2 square miles of land (one fourth of the land on Earth). I believe that Gandhi had a role in liberating India, inturn dissolving the British East India company (the main revenue source for the empire), King George III also dealt the empire a blow when he lost the thirteen colonies. Major fires in London hurted the economy. The two World Wars drained Great Britain. And the sheer distance the empire's land was spreaded out made it easy for foreign power attacks and revolutions to start in one certain area. [cont.]
Asked by Billy N - Sun Dec 24 15:35:48 2006 - - 7 Answers - 0 Comments
A. it became the commonwealth, india was returned to its rightful people, ghandi played an infleuential role in getting his country liberated,however the history of the british empire will show that given the historical data at the time of Englands rise to the mechanical age, that was built upon the exploitatian of other countries, once that was realised Britain did the correct thing in re evaluating its foriegn policy starting with the abolishment of slavery. There are many countries around this world that are friends of Britain,every nation has its empire this was ours, perhaps America decided that economic empire has all the benifits with none of the retrobution, you dont have to educate ,build schools hospitals,infrastructure, if you… [cont.]
Answered by lefang - Sun Dec 24 16:31:43 2006
What is the Difference between the British Empire and the British Realm?
Q. My teacher said " Good. This is called Virtual Representation. The key difference is that America was in the British Empire but not the British Realm". thankies in advancies :]
Asked by *Luna* - Sun Feb 22 20:41:16 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the "realm" is a sphere of influence and "empire" refers to specific colonies and possessions.
Answered by Stan - Sun Feb 22 20:47:19 2009
Q. My teacher said " Good. This is called Virtual Representation. The key difference is that America was in the British Empire but not the British Realm". thankies in advancies :]
Asked by *Luna* - Sun Feb 22 20:41:16 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the "realm" is a sphere of influence and "empire" refers to specific colonies and possessions.
Answered by Stan - Sun Feb 22 20:47:19 2009
What would happen if the British Empire still existed?
Q. What if the British Empire still existed at the height of its power? Would it be the leading superpower? Would it have conquered the rest of the world?
Asked by Connor R - Sun Mar 1 09:59:47 2009 - - 2 Answers - 1 Comments
A. If the British Empire still existed, Great Britain would still be a world power because it could draw on the resources of an empire. After the British Empire receded there were immediate wars in India between the Hindus and Moslems, in Palestine between the Arabs and Jews and in Cyprus between the Greeks and Turks. Later in Singapore between the Chinese and Malays. When the Soviet Union collapsed small ethnic wars occurred. The genocide in Rawanda is an example of what can happen when the colonial power goes away. The British found out that overseas empire impoverishes a nation in the long run. But in time of war it can draw on the manpower and resources of its empire; Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc. If the British Empire still… [cont.]
Answered by harveymac1336 - Tue Mar 3 14:09:27 2009
Q. What if the British Empire still existed at the height of its power? Would it be the leading superpower? Would it have conquered the rest of the world?
Asked by Connor R - Sun Mar 1 09:59:47 2009 - - 2 Answers - 1 Comments
A. If the British Empire still existed, Great Britain would still be a world power because it could draw on the resources of an empire. After the British Empire receded there were immediate wars in India between the Hindus and Moslems, in Palestine between the Arabs and Jews and in Cyprus between the Greeks and Turks. Later in Singapore between the Chinese and Malays. When the Soviet Union collapsed small ethnic wars occurred. The genocide in Rawanda is an example of what can happen when the colonial power goes away. The British found out that overseas empire impoverishes a nation in the long run. But in time of war it can draw on the manpower and resources of its empire; Canada, Australia, New Zealand, etc. If the British Empire still… [cont.]
Answered by harveymac1336 - Tue Mar 3 14:09:27 2009
Why does Britain complain about immigration when the British Empire did much worse to countries?
Q. In the past the British Empire exploited resources in other countries and treated people as slaves. Now in Britain they complain about immigration, how the heck do they have any right when they immigrated our countries in the first place for over 200 years. Britain is extremely selfish. It works both ways you know??
Asked by Jrem - Sun May 24 06:52:09 2009 - - 22 Answers - 0 Comments
A. No, we're not. While the last proper remnant of the empire went in 1997 with Hong Kong, we haven't been an active colonial power since much longer. I wasn't alive during the Scramble for Africa or the rule of India, so why should I grow up in a society swarmed with unsustainable immigration? As a sort of pennance? Pennance for what? Unsustainable immigration IS a problem and it WILL continue to destroy Britain. Whatever our past (although I think the empire was justified, I'm willing to say it wasn't for the sake of this question) we have a right to seek to avoid our country slipping further into decline. Pratt.
Answered by cactusx - Sun May 24 07:37:55 2009
Q. In the past the British Empire exploited resources in other countries and treated people as slaves. Now in Britain they complain about immigration, how the heck do they have any right when they immigrated our countries in the first place for over 200 years. Britain is extremely selfish. It works both ways you know??
Asked by Jrem - Sun May 24 06:52:09 2009 - - 22 Answers - 0 Comments
A. No, we're not. While the last proper remnant of the empire went in 1997 with Hong Kong, we haven't been an active colonial power since much longer. I wasn't alive during the Scramble for Africa or the rule of India, so why should I grow up in a society swarmed with unsustainable immigration? As a sort of pennance? Pennance for what? Unsustainable immigration IS a problem and it WILL continue to destroy Britain. Whatever our past (although I think the empire was justified, I'm willing to say it wasn't for the sake of this question) we have a right to seek to avoid our country slipping further into decline. Pratt.
Answered by cactusx - Sun May 24 07:37:55 2009
Why was the ruler of British Empire, called a king or queen, instead of emperor or empress?
Q. Why was the ruler of British Empire, called a king or queen, instead of emperor or empress? I don't think there is a question on the size of the empire in the last two century. If the ruler of China in the past was called a emperor then why the ruler of the once greatest empire, called a queen or a king?
Asked by www - Sun Oct 11 07:58:08 2009 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Basically because there are no formal rules and a leader declares his titles for political reasons. An English king could not declare himself an emperor because the english nobles would not stand for it. Napoleon declared himself an Emperor, but his empire was much smaller than what the English king had at the time and he did not have any legitimate claim to royalty. The previous french kings were not emperors. The German king was an emperor of the Holy Roman Empire because catholic electors declared him to be the heir of Charlemagne. He had less territory than most other kings, so it was just the continuation of a title. "Emperor" is just a title that does not really have any specific agreed upon significance.
Answered by Rex T - Mon Oct 12 18:06:40 2009
Q. Why was the ruler of British Empire, called a king or queen, instead of emperor or empress? I don't think there is a question on the size of the empire in the last two century. If the ruler of China in the past was called a emperor then why the ruler of the once greatest empire, called a queen or a king?
Asked by www - Sun Oct 11 07:58:08 2009 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Basically because there are no formal rules and a leader declares his titles for political reasons. An English king could not declare himself an emperor because the english nobles would not stand for it. Napoleon declared himself an Emperor, but his empire was much smaller than what the English king had at the time and he did not have any legitimate claim to royalty. The previous french kings were not emperors. The German king was an emperor of the Holy Roman Empire because catholic electors declared him to be the heir of Charlemagne. He had less territory than most other kings, so it was just the continuation of a title. "Emperor" is just a title that does not really have any specific agreed upon significance.
Answered by Rex T - Mon Oct 12 18:06:40 2009
A good book about the British Empire written 100 years ago?
Q. I'm looking for a good book about the British Empire, including any defenses of imperialism and why it was needed or necessary. However, I'm not looking for a modern 'looking back with hindsight' book but rather something was written about 100 years ago and stands out as a major work in this field. Something guys like Cecil Rhodes would have read that provided intellectual arguments for colonialism and the British Empire. I want to get a feel for why they felt that way by reading the books they read back then. Any suggestions? Anything of such note that it is still required reading today?
Asked by apleyden - Mon Aug 13 10:48:39 2007 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I'm not going to give a 100 year old answer...but pick up a read any of the Flashman series by George McDonald Frasier and you'll have your answers...particularly Flashman and the Dragon, or Flashman at The Charge, Flashman in the Great Game... politically incorrect, shocking, bawdy and dead on accurate history...and especially Frasier's footnotes...he's read all the first sources...the books you are looking for...and cite them in the footnotes..not only the obvious, like Kipling, but the journals of soldiers and missionaries and politicians..
Answered by yankee_sailor - Mon Aug 13 16:04:53 2007
Q. I'm looking for a good book about the British Empire, including any defenses of imperialism and why it was needed or necessary. However, I'm not looking for a modern 'looking back with hindsight' book but rather something was written about 100 years ago and stands out as a major work in this field. Something guys like Cecil Rhodes would have read that provided intellectual arguments for colonialism and the British Empire. I want to get a feel for why they felt that way by reading the books they read back then. Any suggestions? Anything of such note that it is still required reading today?
Asked by apleyden - Mon Aug 13 10:48:39 2007 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I'm not going to give a 100 year old answer...but pick up a read any of the Flashman series by George McDonald Frasier and you'll have your answers...particularly Flashman and the Dragon, or Flashman at The Charge, Flashman in the Great Game... politically incorrect, shocking, bawdy and dead on accurate history...and especially Frasier's footnotes...he's read all the first sources...the books you are looking for...and cite them in the footnotes..not only the obvious, like Kipling, but the journals of soldiers and missionaries and politicians..
Answered by yankee_sailor - Mon Aug 13 16:04:53 2007
anybody know the answers to these questions about africa becoming part of the british empire?
Q. Why did we become interested in Africa? What impact did the British have on the Africans? Did it benefit our Empire?
Asked by bubba_boo - Tue Nov 3 11:11:43 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. 1. There were a lot of minerals. Gold, diamonds, everything was er. Besides, they believed they had to convert the people to Christianity. 2. Well, not a good one. English were dictators. 3. It became bigger and more powerful.
Answered by Lisa G - Tue Nov 3 11:19:57 2009
Q. Why did we become interested in Africa? What impact did the British have on the Africans? Did it benefit our Empire?
Asked by bubba_boo - Tue Nov 3 11:11:43 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. 1. There were a lot of minerals. Gold, diamonds, everything was er. Besides, they believed they had to convert the people to Christianity. 2. Well, not a good one. English were dictators. 3. It became bigger and more powerful.
Answered by Lisa G - Tue Nov 3 11:19:57 2009
how did the british empire dominate the world?
Q. how did the british empire build up their power and maintain it?why did they do it?
Asked by ominezzar - Fri Jan 30 19:37:33 2009 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The British Empire was maintained by their top notch Navy and trading companies that would hire native levies to wage war for them. Trade soon followed the Crown and the UK would annex these territories after their companies made a considerable profit from other lands
Answered by Roderick F - Sat Jan 31 00:49:57 2009
Q. how did the british empire build up their power and maintain it?why did they do it?
Asked by ominezzar - Fri Jan 30 19:37:33 2009 - - 5 Answers - 0 Comments
A. The British Empire was maintained by their top notch Navy and trading companies that would hire native levies to wage war for them. Trade soon followed the Crown and the UK would annex these territories after their companies made a considerable profit from other lands
Answered by Roderick F - Sat Jan 31 00:49:57 2009
Did the british empire help the colonies?
Q. Did the british empire help/give anything back to the colonies it once ruled?
Asked by Taylor B - Sun Oct 5 13:22:12 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Let's not pretend that bad things did not happen in the Empire but some things did arise out of it to benefit the colonies: 1) Railways 2) the spread of the English language (enabling such successes as the call centre trade in India etc) 3) Democracy, under the Westminster system. 4) A legal system based upon the British legal system. 5) Military forces, police systems and civil services 6) Financial benefits to places such as Hong Kong whose performance far outpaces mainland China
Answered by Moonlight I - Sun Oct 5 13:32:25 2008
Q. Did the british empire help/give anything back to the colonies it once ruled?
Asked by Taylor B - Sun Oct 5 13:22:12 2008 - - 2 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Let's not pretend that bad things did not happen in the Empire but some things did arise out of it to benefit the colonies: 1) Railways 2) the spread of the English language (enabling such successes as the call centre trade in India etc) 3) Democracy, under the Westminster system. 4) A legal system based upon the British legal system. 5) Military forces, police systems and civil services 6) Financial benefits to places such as Hong Kong whose performance far outpaces mainland China
Answered by Moonlight I - Sun Oct 5 13:32:25 2008
Was the British empire good for the world?
Q. I am writing a speech on it, i am saying that it was yet i am trying to find reasons why people would not think it was good. Without the British empire we would not have had the manpower to defeat germany in ww1 let alone ww2. We abolished slavery, we technichalised the world. I am struggling to think of why some people disagree with it. Please help!!! Please give reasons for both sides of the argument. I would like to get as many peoples views as possible.
Asked by Steven - Tue May 26 11:22:09 2009 - - 11 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I think that the Empire was both a good and a bad thing The empire bought certain cultural influences that are still in use today. It made us brits feel big and did alot for the moral of the country. It helped worldwide trade. I think the most lasting damage the British empire left behind was leaving advanced technology (for the time) in the hands of cultures that were and still are a long way behind in tech and social development. Look at all the wars that have happened in the african nations. Would they be so devastating if they were still using bows, arrows and spears?
Answered by Garry - Tue May 26 20:01:05 2009
Q. I am writing a speech on it, i am saying that it was yet i am trying to find reasons why people would not think it was good. Without the British empire we would not have had the manpower to defeat germany in ww1 let alone ww2. We abolished slavery, we technichalised the world. I am struggling to think of why some people disagree with it. Please help!!! Please give reasons for both sides of the argument. I would like to get as many peoples views as possible.
Asked by Steven - Tue May 26 11:22:09 2009 - - 11 Answers - 0 Comments
A. I think that the Empire was both a good and a bad thing The empire bought certain cultural influences that are still in use today. It made us brits feel big and did alot for the moral of the country. It helped worldwide trade. I think the most lasting damage the British empire left behind was leaving advanced technology (for the time) in the hands of cultures that were and still are a long way behind in tech and social development. Look at all the wars that have happened in the african nations. Would they be so devastating if they were still using bows, arrows and spears?
Answered by Garry - Tue May 26 20:01:05 2009
When was the 'last breath' of the British Empire?
Q. I know it still exists (sort of, in a very minor way), but when was the defining last moment, if at all, of the British Colonial Empire? Thanks.
Asked by Rover - Fri Oct 19 16:19:27 2007 - - 18 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Probably the last gasp of the Empire was the Suez Crisis of 1956 when President Nassar of Egypt nationalised the Suez canal. Fearing that he was a middle eastern Hitler, Prime Minister Anthony Eden (Churchill's foreign secretary in WWII) sent a large force of British warships to the area. However, the US (like the good allies they are) disagreed with us and threatened to flood the money markets with British currency and thus devalue the Pound. This forced Eden into an embarrassing climbdown and he turned the ships around. It forced him from office. This remained in the minds of many in the British government, so when LBJ demanded help from Britain in Vietnam he was politely refused.
Answered by Artimorty - Fri Oct 19 16:32:39 2007
Q. I know it still exists (sort of, in a very minor way), but when was the defining last moment, if at all, of the British Colonial Empire? Thanks.
Asked by Rover - Fri Oct 19 16:19:27 2007 - - 18 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Probably the last gasp of the Empire was the Suez Crisis of 1956 when President Nassar of Egypt nationalised the Suez canal. Fearing that he was a middle eastern Hitler, Prime Minister Anthony Eden (Churchill's foreign secretary in WWII) sent a large force of British warships to the area. However, the US (like the good allies they are) disagreed with us and threatened to flood the money markets with British currency and thus devalue the Pound. This forced Eden into an embarrassing climbdown and he turned the ships around. It forced him from office. This remained in the minds of many in the British government, so when LBJ demanded help from Britain in Vietnam he was politely refused.
Answered by Artimorty - Fri Oct 19 16:32:39 2007
What was the reason behind the fall of the British Empire?
Q. What are your thoughts on the main reasons for why the British Empire fell so quickly?
Asked by Imperial Brit - Thu Jan 1 20:49:18 2009 - - 9 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Democracy. You can't do the nasty things you need to do to maintain an empire in a democratic country -- the public becomes disenchanted. And the two world wars, which left the empire exhausted and forced it to make deals, e.g.., with India, and gave power to the Russians. And, perhaps, change in the world. All the discontiguous European empires disintegrated at the same time. Countries like France that fought to keep their empires were defeated in combat, e.g., in Vietnam and Algeria. The British were wise enough to see the writing on the wall.
Answered by Joshua H - Thu Jan 1 20:56:03 2009
Q. What are your thoughts on the main reasons for why the British Empire fell so quickly?
Asked by Imperial Brit - Thu Jan 1 20:49:18 2009 - - 9 Answers - 0 Comments
A. Democracy. You can't do the nasty things you need to do to maintain an empire in a democratic country -- the public becomes disenchanted. And the two world wars, which left the empire exhausted and forced it to make deals, e.g.., with India, and gave power to the Russians. And, perhaps, change in the world. All the discontiguous European empires disintegrated at the same time. Countries like France that fought to keep their empires were defeated in combat, e.g., in Vietnam and Algeria. The British were wise enough to see the writing on the wall.
Answered by Joshua H - Thu Jan 1 20:56:03 2009
What were the disadvantages of the British empire for the BRITISH?
Q. What were the disadvantages of the British empire for the BRITISH? -Sam
Asked by o0samotech0o - Sat May 30 10:06:35 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. 1) MASSIVE defence expenditure to mantain the biggest empire in the world, sucking money out of public services 2) Governments generally focused on imperial affairs over domestic affairs 3) Wars which killed millions of British Men over land thousands of miles away 4) Increased demand on British workers 5) Increased immigration from colonies following 1948 british nationality act
Answered by WBoy92 - Sat May 30 10:30:43 2009
Q. What were the disadvantages of the British empire for the BRITISH? -Sam
Asked by o0samotech0o - Sat May 30 10:06:35 2009 - - 1 Answers - 0 Comments
A. 1) MASSIVE defence expenditure to mantain the biggest empire in the world, sucking money out of public services 2) Governments generally focused on imperial affairs over domestic affairs 3) Wars which killed millions of British Men over land thousands of miles away 4) Increased demand on British workers 5) Increased immigration from colonies following 1948 british nationality act
Answered by WBoy92 - Sat May 30 10:30:43 2009
From Yahoo Answer Search: 'British Empire'
Sat Jul 31 16:29:12 2010 [ refresh local cache ]
[Hide]▼
hindustantimes.com
Sat, 03 Jul 2010 20:47:38 GMT+00:00
Hindustan Times The COC Games, under the name of the British Empire Games, were first held in 1930 in Hamilton, Canada, with the great British colonies of Australia, ...
bullfax.com
marketmaker
hu, 29 Jul 2010 17:08:51 GM
Does booming India need UK? British prime minister David Cameron has called for a new special relationship with India. It was once once part of the . British empire. , but is now one of the world's fastest growing economies. ...
[Hide]▲
