Just noticed something during repetition of history:

Union of all states into a singular and very centralised state (like the EU want to be) is bad, but that doesnt mean that european arent brothers, or that the only kind of nationalism avaliable is petty nationalism.

Europe have the meta-culture, values, and blood, and of course many european conquerors wanted to create a Greater Europe.; But they wanted more an imperium, or at least something similar to the Rome empire (But more diverse and etnhonationalism, mostly because Europe is to diverse and nationalist than during classical times)

And if not, at least many nationalists wanted a european confederation or league of europe. A more fearsible idea, IMO.

neweuropeanconservative.wordpress.com/2015/06/25/practices-of-ethnic-separatism-tudor/

England has always used a type of foreign policy called "balance of power" supporting weaker powers to keep all opponents in check. They did it so no power (in Europe) would come to rival their own empire.

You realise that unions between European nations existed long ago, right? That their existence does not mean they need to be centralised; as they would have been under the conquering armies of Napoleon, Hitler or Merkel.

Read a freaking book. The Eighty Years War had the English, French and Dutch forming an alliance. The Thirty Years War had the Protestant nations unified against the Catholic nations. Hell even WW1 and 2 had many different nations working together (even if they were being manipulated in some instances). The crusades obviously show that all Europeans can work together for a common goal.

Alliances and Unions between Europeans need not be accompanied by a super-state and loss of individual sovereignty. Britain has, willingly or otherwise, supported true Nationalism throughout Europe for the longest time and you anti-Brit posters will not paint that as a bad thing.

The French deserve to be free. The English deserve to be free. And Germany needs to be abolished and the individual provinces deserve to be re-created along ethnic lines, and they too deserve to be free. The US states need to be fully autonomous.

Take your centralised super-state back to Persia or China, scum.

The doctrine of 'balance of power' existed long before England was a major world power. It was defensive in origin, based off of the knowledge that if Europe fell to a single power; Britain would be next. Be it through economic starvation where Europe refuses to trade with the Brits until they surrender, or due to overwhelming numbers; Britain would not be able to stand.

Thus the British did their utmost to stop any nation from gaining too much power, for their own survival, and as a bonus this kept the individual nations of people alive and largely unconquered.

Until it came time to defend against outside powers.

Now Europe is divided and being conquered form within and without. Great job, Brits.

Such desperation on hating the Brits.

If you want to blame ANY European populace; blame the Germans. More than that however you can blame almost every nation in the EU besides the Brits, seeing as it was more or less ONLY the Brits who ever opposed the EU on any of their diabolical globalist schemes (for instance just look at how the majority of the nations in the EU now want to create a 'pan-european army'; SERIOUSLY LADS?!).

The British have made mistakes in the past, although again the accusations of them being owned by the kikes are somewhat foolish when one realises that both the French and the Prussians became owned by the kikes on the VERY SAME DAY. The Russians became a slave faster and to more extreme extents than anyone else; and the US are currently the kike's number one nation. … So yeah, let's blame the Brits!!

Of course to blame the French or the Americans, or the Russians, OR THE BRITS; is foolish. It was jews pulling most the strings, with a few traitors from each nation allowing them to go undetected. Every nation has had such traitors, blaming just the Brits for theirs is hypocritical.

The solution is simple. Remove the parasite and promote nationalism. Britain's devotion to balance of power which preserved the myriad nations of Europe should be something that is praised, not hated on.

get the fuck out of my board

They're the only ones who could. Everywhere else is too shitskin-infested or raped into submission. Good job, you played everyone against each other and well all die for it. You don't even get to keep your shitty little island, you'll be Sharia just as much as the rest of Europe.

Do you consider letting USA and the Soviets control europe? And making UK loose its empire, giving it to the USA oligarchs? And all because you didnt let Germany reclaim Danzig!

Stop being retarded. The strategy of keeping europe divided was a good strategy for everybody, not just england, indeed. You are right in that part.

But in 20th century, only a retard or a traitor would have thought of still keeping the strategy, having colossal giant of the east (Russia), and the Atlantic sea power, in direct competition with the UK (the USA).

But as said many times, "Sometimes, reality surpass fiction" And the UK went full retard, and so everyone is paying the price…

You seem to have no idea what you are talking about. Are you saying that Britain forced the rest of Europe to accept muds? Because its more like Germany forced the rest of Europe to accept muds. Though as we all know; its actually kikes.

British reasoning for participating in WW2 has sound logic behind it, as well as diabolical kikes. You must remember that Germany was doing a lot of things that are incredibly dangerous to surrounding powers; the building of huge armies and the creation of a massive economy for a start.

Now yes, I agree that the German economy is far superior to the one controlled by the international banks. Britain would have done well to side with the Krauts. However, the Krauts were supporting national socialism around the world. Dangerous to Britain? Yes, it would mean the end of their Empire; you'd have Ghandis and Mandellas all over the place 'liberating' British countries. With hindsight we can say this would happen anyway, but the logic behind keeping Britain as the 'invincible Empire', and that being enough to dissuade attempts at revolution; is sound. Turns out that kikes would still fund such revolutions anyway though.

Best course of action for Britain to retain her power and wealth is try to bring in the Germans quickly. Added bonus of being promised by the kikes (who were causing massive problems in London since the 20s) that they would piss off to Palestine, as well as legitimate concern about Kraut attempts at taking over the world due to WW1 happening recently. Taking out the Germans quickly whilst there was a technically justifiable reason made a lot of sense.

What went wrong? The Germans were too bloody good. They wrecked the frogs in a matter of days and then forced the rest of us into a death struggle. Millions and millions of good Europeans were killed because of Hitler thinking he was in a position that he was not.

Yes Hitler was right on the jews. Hitler was right on the economy. Hitler was right on nationalism. But Hitler failed to realise the consequence of his actions in regard to British and French psyche; and the Polish were arseholes, which made Hitler act (justifiably) with violence; which prompted the British and French to act (again justifiably from their perspectives).

WW2 was a shit show, and Britain made bad decisions. So did Germany. So did France. The Americans perhaps mad the worst decisions of all; they essentially handed the world to the jew in this conflict and the cold war that would follow. Blaming it all on the British is ridiculous; they acted exactly as one would expect. Did you really expect them to just sign their Empire away?

Anyway; the point is that the doctrine of 'balance of power' serves to help distinct nations survive. Trump and Putin are promoting doctrines which will have similar results (isolationism and nationalism). This thread is obvious anti-Brit D&C.

No, England caused the rest of Europe to become divided enough to get subverted by Jews and communism. And it wasn't Germany that forced Europe to turn brown, it was the (((interests))) occupying Germany's corpse.

Then you know nothing about Europe. Jews had significantly populations in Germany, France, Italy, Venice, Poland, etc.

After the war started the fled to nations like the UK, Canada and the USA not because 'anglos are our greatest ally' but because there was a bloody ocean between them and the war. Its pretty simple.

Europe had already fallen to communism in varying forms without England. The Puritan movements actually continued the good work the Inquisition had started in regards to stopping proto-communist heresies and kike intervention.

England didn't 'divide' Europe. Europe was always divided by blood, loosely connected through a shared heritage (Rome) and a similar faith (Christianity). Stopping the French or the Spanish or the Holy Roman Empire from taking over the entire continent is not the same as 'diving Europe'. Europe was always divided, we were never a centralised super-state; and it is not in the blood of Europeans to ever exist within one. Just as the Greek Poleis would fight together in times of need, yet never unify; so it is with us all. We are not Persians or Chinese.

Freedom lad. To be Frank means to be free. The English declare that no man who breathes the air of England can be a slave. The USA wrote freedom into their very constitution. Take your centralised superstate and shove it up your arse.

You sound like an Englishman that knows what his people have done and is bargaining very hard to not be considered a traitor to mainland Europe when the day comes. Nice reddit spacing, by the way.

As an Englishman I see my people as having done no worse, and in many instances far better than the rest of the Europeans. There have been some amazing actions performed also by the French and I rightly admire much of what they have done. There have been a few Germans and a few Swedes who have done good, a lot Dutch; very impressive people. Spanish and Portuguese have done a little, though with Spain it was mostly long ago; and Greece and Italy have done essentially nothing since their ancients. Hungarians and Poles too have had a few epic moments, though not many. I see the English as the greatest people since the Romans fell, with the French a little behind, and then some rather large gaps between the rest of the Europeans (all of whom are of course superior to non-Europeans).

Also this reddit spacing crap needs to stop. People on Holla Forums know how to use paragraphs. You cancerous 4/cuck/ failures with double-digit IQs are bringing this place down.

Make all the excuses you want, it's solely the fault of the British and French that Europe is in its current state. You can argue all the good things you've done from ancient history to the present, but that doesn't change the fact that your leaders made the wrong decisions that they did back when it mattered. Also, a paragraph is more than one sentence you fucking retard. I've been here since Oct 2013. Calling me a newfag doesn't make your point any more valid.

Go die in a fire kike.

I didn't say you needed to be killed, I'm just saying that the entire crisis in Europe is directly because of your short-sightedness and selfishness. Let come what may when reckoning comes.

...

And the entire byzantine civilization of the mediterranean, hundreds of different cultures, just disappeared into thin air blissfully enjoying their conversion.