Comments
snakesoup88 t1_iquro29 wrote
Yeah, heads in hands maybe worth a nsfw tag?
Bongo1020 t1_iquz41p wrote
It was called an "emergency" by London because Insurance policies don't cover damaged incured as a reuslt of wars or civilwars.
BakkenMan t1_iqva47g wrote
Very interesting, do you have source material for this?
Bongo1020 t1_iqvcpcz wrote
I'm on the move so I can't provide the best source.
The Wikipedia article mentions this and cites:
Burleigh, Michael (2013). Small Wars, Faraway Places: Global Insurrection and the Making of the Modern World 1945–1965.
Knowledgeable_Owl t1_iqvdx7d wrote
The British used it in Malaya to destroy crops grown by the communist guerillas deep in the jungle. The whole British strategy revolved around starving the guerillas out instead of relying on costly and ineffective sweeps through the jungle.
The problem America forces in Vietnam had was that they weren't really facing an insurgency. Although some of the Viet Cong were South Vietnamese, they were controlled and supplied by the North Vietnamese government. It was an invasion of the South by the North, dressed up to look like a local uprising. So even when the Viet Cong couldn't grow their own food or raid local villages, they could get supplies from the North down the Ho Chi Minh trail and other routes.
So the US used Agent Orange as a general defoliant, to thin out the jungle and remove cover, which the British had tried but found to be ineffective. The US also continued to rely on large and costly sweeps through the jungle.
[deleted] t1_iqujhry wrote
[deleted]
Major_Lennox t1_iquky0u wrote
Yeah it does - the section entitled "Comparisons with Vietnam"
> Both Britain in Malaya and America in Vietnam used Agent Orange. Britain pioneered the use of Agent Orange as a weapon of war during the Malayan Emergency. This fact was used by the United States as a justification to use Agent Orange in Vietnam.
xboxgamer2122 t1_iqvlb99 wrote
And now Putin is using that same logic concerning nukes...
dr3adlock t1_iqvri4z wrote
Whats the context behind the image?
shogunsft OP t1_irby2so wrote
From Wikipedia:
​
During the war British and Commonwealth forces hired Iban (Dyak) headhunters from Borneo to decapitate suspected MNLA members, arguing that this was done so for identification purposes.[85] Iban headhunters were also permitted by British military leaders to take the scalps of corpses to be kept as trophies.[86] However in practice this led to British troops taking the decapitated heads of Malayan people as trophies.[85] After the practice of headhunting in Malaya by Ibans had been exposed to the public, the Foreign Office first tried to deny that the practice existed, before then trying to justify Iban headhunting and conduct damage control in the press.[87] Privately, the Colonial Office noted that "there is no doubt that under international law a similar case in wartime would be a war crime".[55][88][87] One of the trophy heads was later found to have been displayed in a British regimental museum
listyraesder t1_iqxagct wrote
What’s Britan
shogunsft OP t1_irby5rh wrote
a mythical and fabled land
how-puhqueliar t1_iqv3us3 wrote
well, if people in the general region are already used to being killed and poisoned with defoliant, then that's obviously kosher
Megasdoux t1_iqv7vfs wrote
The British also implemented the first modern usage of concentration camps during the Boer war, which Nazi Germany emulated four decades later.
Kung_Flu_Master t1_iqvytiv wrote
not true, and is a very common internet myth, the inspiration for Hitler was the US genocide of native Americans and the Armenian genocide.
the boer camps were internment camps similar to the ones in America for Japanese Americans during ww2, the reason the death toll was so high was because there was an epidemic at the time, and food convoys were being destroyed by boer terrorists, it got so bad that merchants refused to deliver food without basically a small army to help them.
ArmanDoesStuff t1_iqxi9p1 wrote
> US genocide of native Americans and the Armenian genocide.
Did they use concentration camps?
Kung_Flu_Master t1_iqzzsit wrote
it wasn't the use of concentration camps, it was the fact that American basically managed to wipe them out from such a large amount of land, and displaced them onto a few reserves.
Megasdoux t1_iqw26rs wrote
Every implementation of concentration camps is a terrible act, and it is not a competition of which one is worse. People suffered and died regardless.
You are referring to the Holocaust, which was indeed a genocide undertaken by the Nazis in Germany and Nazi-affiliated governments. The genocides of Indigenous Peoples in North America and of the Armenian peoples were precursors to the Holocaust. I did not say that the Holocaust was inspired by British Internment camps during the Boer war. I was inferring how the use of concentration camps during the Boer war were instituted as policy by the British under Kitchener, just as the Nazi camps were also established as policy.
While the actions of the British in South Africa is not labelled as genocide, the actions through the use of internment/concentration camps were still echoed in various degrees afterwards in the Internment of Japanese-Americans and Jewish(as well as Romani and other people's) in Nazi Germany. Nonetheless, these were all instances of concentration camps. I don't see how this is an "internet myth" when there are several historical connections and scholars have stated as much.
Concentration and Internment are synonyms and are often used interchangeably to describe the same thing.
Pay08 t1_iqw5s5w wrote
Both of you are incorrect. Hitler was "inspired" by Stalin's gulags.
ArmanDoesStuff t1_iqxilhg wrote
iirc we were also the first ones to prioritize civilian targets in bombing runs because Churchill knew Hitler would respond in kind, and our military was more valuable.
And so the Blitz was born!
Ah Churchill. What a cunt.
dnyjordan t1_iqv93f7 wrote
Britan? Where is that country? Only know Britain 😂
onometre t1_iqung7r wrote
Did not expect to see a beheading