/siberia/ - Off-topic

It's so based that Britain could no longer enforce the 1763 settlement line.

George Washington is a pedophile who had boys in his tents, the OG liberal Epstein tax avoider

You forgot about the Great Sneed War and Goon War 5

>>728456
> It's so based that Britain could no longer enforce the 1763 settlement line.
Do you really think that the British would have continued to enforce that?!?! You should know what promises are worth to them, look at the shit they did in India at the same time as all of this.

>>728450
Revolutionary War was bad in practical terms because it led to a worse outcome for the indigenous population and for the slaves. British Empire obviously did a lot of evil but they didn't have the expansionist drive that white Americans had (which is saying something). They were actually making treaties with native Americans. You wouldn't have had Manifest Destiny. More than likely the size of the United States would have stayed close to the 13 colonies while the native Americans would have formed several independent nations. British Empire was objectively better on slavery given that they outlawed it completely in 1833 with minimal bloodshed whereas it took America until 1863 after hundreds of thousands dead. Australia, New Zealand, and Canada have a shitton of problems and did plenty of terrible things to their native populations themselves, but you can't seriously tell me they're not in a better place than the US.
Civil War was obviously good in terms of end-result but it only happened after a century of a horrific system of government that led to that point. Reconstruction also ended far too prematurely. Ultimately it was a victory for capitalists who turned around and moved those freed slaves back into the same backbreaking labor but paid a pittance - progress for sure, but it would take another century for another attempt to break out of that system.
WW2 has a skewed perception in the US. Everyone focuses on the European theater instead of the Pacific Theater, even though the US had far more presence and impact in the Pacific. Obviously that's because in the Pacific Theater it was simply two imperialist powers who were nakedly expansionist and resource-hungry and had both committed terrible atrocities. It can't be framed as a noble battle against evil genocidal invaders like in Europe. They were just fighting over ill-gotten territory. One interesting fact that's often overlooked is that Pearl Harbor was just one of a group of attacks Japan committed against US territories (others being Guam, the Philippines, and Wake Island) - the reason FDR focused on Hawaii is because it had a higher white population.

>>728463
Except for the first part I largely agree, the British were not expansionist at the time but they probably would have became more expansionist as the population of the 13 colonies grew. And even though they technically abolished slavery it was only in the same way that America did. And I still believe that although liberal democracy sucks it is better than monarchy. Are you British by chance?

The barbary war seems good to me. Another slave state defeated

The revolutionary war is good, even though it led to atrocities fact is the American independence war was the domino which kickstarted bourgeois republicanism and swept feudalism to the dustbin of history. Ofc this doesn't mean i condone the genocidal drive Americans had against Natives, but when we are evaluating historical events we cant judge it in hindsight but from the perspective of the people participating in it. Otherwise you'd end up with things like 'well national self determination is bad because it led to the dissolution of the USSR" which is only a judgement you can make in hindsight