Position:Home>History> How come when the British took over India, Pakistan, Australia, Canada, America,

Colonisation comes after invasion!.
Hitler's dream was of an empire to match the British!.
He intended to colonise the lands to the east of Germany with German settlers and the local people would be the underclass!.
Governments call any violent opposition to them ,terrorism even though they often use far worse violence themselves!.
Basically it comes down to hypocrisyWww@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

What a confused question!. When the British 'took over' India, Pakistan it was a collection of principalities under the description 'Indian sub-Continent'!.
The British did not 'take over' America!. They didn't even take over the part of America which is now called the USA!. British settlers fought against native American Indians and then against the 'mother country' in the War of Independence!.
When the British arrived in Australia, it was, for the most part, sparsely populated!. What the British did to the native people was Unforgivable, especially in Tasmania, but they did not take over Australia!.
A small part of Canada had been colonised by the French!. They were defeated by the British but Quebec and Montreal remain French speaking, and Canada as it is now did not exist at the time!.
The British may not have been justified in fighting the Boers in South Africa, but the Boers were also colonialists!. Hence the language Afrikaans which is, to all intents and purposes a Dutch dialect!.
My personal opinion, as a Brit, concerning Ireland, is that the Irish had the right to fight the British to keep the whole Ireland!. They became terrorists when they started the bombings which targeted innocent people!.
Germany never colonised Poland, or Czechoslovakia for that matter!. However, the Anschluss with Austria was annexation and smacks of colonialism!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

It was actually Imperialism
http://members!.aol!.com/teachernet/World!.!.!.!.

I am afraid you confuse several political acts that are not similar!. The Germans invaded Poland by false pretense, the Germans invaded not only Poland but all of Europe!. This was a forceful, violent act - an act of war!. Neither the Brits, the French or the Dutch, when they started with their imperialist moves, did that (at first) as a violent act!. It usually started with economic interests, the imperialist countries wanted the goods of the "backward" nations!. In return they gave them merchandise and ammunition etc!. Slowly slowly did those imperialist forces send troops when they thought they had to guard their investments in those countries!. No one, in Europe, (300 years ago approximately) thought that protecting the interests were acts of war and any mutiny was squashed harshly and justified, the Whites were supreme!. A total different story is the story of England and Ireland (whites against whites just a different religion) or even the War of Independence in the US!. Those stories are told in details everywhere and I really am not going to teach you history, but you always need to look who are the powers who are the opponents, what are the issues at stake!. Britain has no more colonies neither has France or the Netherlands, the old imperialism is dead, we have a new one now called globalism!. Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

Because in the 17th, 18th and 19th centuries imperialism was considered acceptable- noone questioned the legitimacy of the ottoman empire or the moguls rule in India - , but by the 1920s there was an international consensus - the league of nations - in favour of self determination!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

I would think you need to go to the start of the spice race to answer that one!. You will find it is a bit different to saying we took over in the way you relate it to other issues!. also the time lines and how other countries came about or were affected is a bit different!.Www@QuestionHome@Com

---

---

semanticsWww@QuestionHome@Com

---

---