When everybody started talking about Versailles as a "peace conference" back in the days following WW1, it allowed for narratives to take shape. These "narratives" then floated to the top of discussions and debates, books and documentaries, and became the way people started thinking at the time, and...more importantly, still think*** today. Historians should stop talking about The Treaty of Versailles as a "peace conference" (name branding), but to start calling it out for what it was in terms of geopolitics and grand strategy: it was divide and rule/conquer *of and over* continental Europe, by the outside world powers, all imperialistic in nature, with a geographical advantage (Washington DC/London), using Paris as a continental foothold, or an "extension" of their own power. Such language abounds in the strategy papers of the true powers. These powers favorored Paris for this specific reason, regardless of what ideologues desired (Idealism is an '-ism' or ideology). Favoratism is a core technique used in a divide and rule strategy. The Fourteen Points were largely written by a "think tank", the New York based "Inquiry" group. As for Wilson, was he really that naive to think that the large and prominent forces of isolationism would not prevail, and lead to the USA/Washington DC not joining any collectivised system of security for the entire planet? Was there really no "Plan B" in Washington DC? Divide and rule as a strategy is elaborated in more detail in the comments thread under the Kaiser Wilhelm video of the "History Room" educational channel. Go to the other channel, select "latest comments" first (three little bars at the top of every comments section), and read as far back as desired. The "oh so fine" British Lordships thought they could play divide and rule/conquer games with the world, and in the end British citizens lost bigtime, as their own Lordships "...ran off with all the f%cking money..." (quote = George Carlin/ reality = tax havens). *Note that in an exchange based on observations (realism) and definitions, that these cannot be "countered" by an opinion or a personal standpoint.* The answer to any observed divide and rule strategy is eventually going to be brute force. On a micro level, it will be some form of uprising or revolution. On the macro level (states/empires) it will be crises and war. If words no longer achieve the desired effects to oppose the actions by the psychopaths who have infiltrated positions of power (incl. our so-called "western liberal democracies"), and become uncompromising and start using bully tactics, the answer will be brute force. No system is going to "turn the other cheek" indefinitely. No, this is not a "yet another conspiracy theory," but elaborated and provided with sufficient evidence, and inductive/deductive reasoning on the other channel/video. *Divide and rule/conquer is a strategy, not a conspiracy theory.*
No hope In the world repent of evil don't trust in mankind for salvation or help trust Jesus Christ today Romans 6:23 For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord. Come to Jesus Christ today Jesus Christ is only way to heaven Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today John 3:16-21 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. Mark 1.15 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Hebrews 11:6 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. Jesus
"We see, therefore, that War is not merely a political act, but also a real political instrument, a continuation of political commerce, a carrying out of the same by other means. All beyond this which is strictly peculiar to War relates merely to the peculiar nature of the means which it uses. That the tendencies and views of policy shall not be incompatible with these means, the Art of War in general and the Commander in each particular case may demand, and this claim is truly not a trifling one. But however powerfully this may react on political views in particular cases, still it must always be regarded as only a modification of them; for the political view is the object, War is the means, and the means must always include the object in our conception." - Carl von Clausewitz, "On War" (1832)
When everybody started talking about Versailles as a "peace conference" back in the days following WW1, it allowed for narratives to take shape. These "narratives" then floated to the top of discussions and debates, books and documentaries, and became the way people started thinking at the time, and...more importantly, still think*** today. Historians should stop talking about The Treaty of Versailles as a "peace conference" (name branding), but to start calling it out for what it was in terms of geopolitics and grand strategy: it was divide and rule/conquer *of and over* continental Europe, by the outside world powers, all imperialistic in nature, with a geographical advantage (Washington DC/London), using Paris as a continental foothold, or an "extension" of their own power. Such language abounds in the strategy papers of the true powers. These powers favorored Paris for this specific reason, regardless of what ideologues desired (Idealism is an '-ism' or ideology). Favoratism is a core technique used in a divide and rule strategy. The Fourteen Points were largely written by a "think tank", the New York based "Inquiry" group. As for Wilson, was he really that naive to think that the large and prominent forces of isolationism would not prevail, and lead to the USA/Washington DC not joining any collectivised system of security for the entire planet? Was there really no "Plan B" in Washington DC? Divide and rule as a strategy is elaborated in more detail in the comments thread under the Kaiser Wilhelm video of the "History Room" educational channel. Go to the other channel, select "latest comments" first (three little bars at the top of every comments section), and read as far back as desired. The "oh so fine" British Lordships thought they could play divide and rule/conquer games with the world, and in the end British citizens lost bigtime, as their own Lordships "...ran off with all the f%cking money..." (quote = George Carlin/ reality = tax havens). *Note that in an exchange based on observations (realism) and definitions, that these cannot be "countered" by an opinion or a personal standpoint.* The answer to any observed divide and rule strategy is eventually going to be brute force. On a micro level, it will be some form of uprising or revolution. On the macro level (states/empires) it will be crises and war. If words no longer achieve the desired effects to oppose the actions by the psychopaths who have infiltrated positions of power (incl. our so-called "western liberal democracies"), and become uncompromising and start using bully tactics, the answer will be brute force. No system is going to "turn the other cheek" indefinitely. No, this is not a "yet another conspiracy theory," but elaborated and provided with sufficient evidence, and inductive/deductive reasoning on the other channel/video. *Divide and rule/conquer is a strategy, not a conspiracy theory.*
I was under the impression that the original German delegation was so shocked by the terms, they did not sign. Another smaller delegation was later sent, and they made the Treaty official on june 28.
Jesus Christ is the only hope in this world no other gods will lead you to heaven There is no security or hope with out Jesus Christ in this world come and repent of all sins today Today is the day of salvation come to the loving savior Today repent and do not go to hell Come to Jesus Christ today Jesus Christ is only way to heaven Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today John 3:16-21 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God. Mark 1.15 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel. 2 Peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. Hebrews 11:6 6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him. Jesus
I’m a grade 12 student in Nimibia and according to our specified content for theme one is to identify the results of Germany,Italy and Japan dissatisfactions with the Paris Peace Treaty. I’m satisfied with the Germany content on your video and I’m hoping that can you please help me with the other two 🥺
Look at how Germany treated Russia in 1917. Look at how Germany treated France after the 1871 war. Germany was not destroyed like large parts of France and Belgium. If the US senate had joined the League of Nations things may have been different. The great lie was the Germans not accepting that their army had been defeated. The stab in the back excuse helped to develop into WW2. Remember Germany invaded its neighbors and it’s the neighbors fault?
I had to watch this video because it was given to me to watch for one of my assignments on Canvas but was blocked on the school iPad so I had to watch it here on this device instead off from this TH-cam account which is my official Tails Z TH-cam Channel.
@@sebe2255 no they just finished paying in like 2010. They bounced back bc they decided to disregard their reparations. It destroyed their economy and caused so much inflation which caused the sentiment needed to start ww2. The Allie’s admitted they were too harsh in the aftermath.
alot of this could have been solved if the allies pressed into germany and then agree to peace....that way they would know they lost.....that mistake wasn't made in ww2 even roosevelt said this time there will be no mistaking they lost badly.
France played itself on this treaty. Germany rose to power rather quick and took Europe by storm. Germany wasnt even the ones they initiated the war. The death of Fernandin of Hungary caused all of it.
Tbf many French people were aware if this. This is why the famous 20 year armistice quote from Foch is often usen incorrectly now. He wanted a harsher treaty because he knew Germany would not be crippled
The tipicaly neighbors who talk to much because they feel win and look down on others,and have friend or older brother who have power to protect them if they make a trouble. In this case is crossing the line...
Treaty of Versailles may seem harsh, but imsgine you were French or Belgian? Not Americans who only fought for a few months right at end of war. . But for FOUR YEARS. Germany occupied much of Belgium, which had been neutral country in 1914. Occupied much of northern France. They were cruel masters.. with victory they felt justified imposjng the terms of treaty.. which Germany signed. The Germans were defeated, militarily and economically.. that was reality. After the war many argued against this, but it was an error. In due course the germans were not harshly treated, the terms were negated with later treaties that effectively let them off the hook. Consider the terns Germany imposed on Russia in March 1918 - extremely harsh and meant germany occupied large parts of western Russia and Ukraine. Germany should never have been allowed to rebuild their military..
Good reading: The Sleepwalkers by Christoper Clark. Things were a bit more complex than "Germany should never have been allowed to rebuild their military.."
@@henryluebberstedt7819 its also more complex then france caused ww2 which many like to say...without context of the devastation....or understanding of previous treaties or what germany intended on doing if there was a german victory(it was very harsh)
@@AbdirahmanIdris-ku9xm Not to mention that the power vacuums that occurred after various independence movements won out, and the colonial powers withdrew, just kind of devolved into endless factional civil wars, only for a variety of native African kleptocrats to take hold of power, who ironically drained all the wealth to themselves to as great an extent as any colonial regime. It's to the point that many countries actually want foreign investment, but aren't stable enough to be an attractive prospect for it, while attempts at foreign aid often get funneled to line the pockets of corrupt officials.
@@JET7C0 I agree. Such a shame that warlords deprived Africans of their freedom after living under colonialism for so long. Africa was set up well with the infrastructure left by the colonials and the natural resources that were plentiful. My country, Somalia, did quite well after the Italians and British left. We had a good country. My parents grew up in those times. And then it was all wasted in a pointless civil war.
Mie mi place Pepsi cu Lămâie mai cumpăr câteodată, fiind sportiv nu prea beau sucuri și pe copiii mei la fel i am obișnuit, când erau mici ceaiul fara zahar, aveau tatza din plin,sucuri numai cu fructoza naturala la blander sau storcător, având gradina cu toate fructele și cerealele..
War, where soldiers do all the work and politicians interfere and claim credit to winning
A sad truth.
Literally
When everybody started talking about Versailles as a "peace conference" back in the days following WW1, it allowed for narratives to take shape. These "narratives" then floated to the top of discussions and debates, books and documentaries, and became the way people started thinking at the time, and...more importantly, still think*** today.
Historians should stop talking about The Treaty of Versailles as a "peace conference" (name branding), but to start calling it out for what it was in terms of geopolitics and grand strategy: it was divide and rule/conquer *of and over* continental Europe, by the outside world powers, all imperialistic in nature, with a geographical advantage (Washington DC/London), using Paris as a continental foothold, or an "extension" of their own power. Such language abounds in the strategy papers of the true powers.
These powers favorored Paris for this specific reason, regardless of what ideologues desired (Idealism is an '-ism' or ideology). Favoratism is a core technique used in a divide and rule strategy.
The Fourteen Points were largely written by a "think tank", the New York based "Inquiry" group. As for Wilson, was he really that naive to think that the large and prominent forces of isolationism would not prevail, and lead to the USA/Washington DC not joining any collectivised system of security for the entire planet?
Was there really no "Plan B" in Washington DC?
Divide and rule as a strategy is elaborated in more detail in the comments thread under the Kaiser Wilhelm video of the "History Room" educational channel. Go to the other channel, select "latest comments" first (three little bars at the top of every comments section), and read as far back as desired. The "oh so fine" British Lordships thought they could play divide and rule/conquer games with the world, and in the end British citizens lost bigtime, as their own Lordships "...ran off with all the f%cking money..." (quote = George Carlin/ reality = tax havens). *Note that in an exchange based on observations (realism) and definitions, that these cannot be "countered" by an opinion or a personal standpoint.*
The answer to any observed divide and rule strategy is eventually going to be brute force. On a micro level, it will be some form of uprising or revolution. On the macro level (states/empires) it will be crises and war. If words no longer achieve the desired effects to oppose the actions by the psychopaths who have infiltrated positions of power (incl. our so-called "western liberal democracies"), and become uncompromising and start using bully tactics, the answer will be brute force. No system is going to "turn the other cheek" indefinitely.
No, this is not a "yet another conspiracy theory," but elaborated and provided with sufficient evidence, and inductive/deductive reasoning on the other channel/video.
*Divide and rule/conquer is a strategy, not a conspiracy theory.*
No hope In the world repent of evil don't trust in mankind for salvation or help trust Jesus Christ today
Romans 6:23
For the wages of sin is death, but the free gift of God is eternal life in Christ Jesus our Lord.
Come to Jesus Christ today
Jesus Christ is only way to heaven
Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void
Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today
Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today
John 3:16-21
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Mark 1.15
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Hebrews 11:6
6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Jesus
"We see, therefore, that War is not merely a political act, but also a real political instrument, a continuation of political commerce, a carrying out of the same by other means. All beyond this which is strictly peculiar to War relates merely to the peculiar nature of the means which it uses. That the tendencies and views of policy shall not be incompatible with these means, the Art of War in general and the Commander in each particular case may demand, and this claim is truly not a trifling one. But however powerfully this may react on political views in particular cases, still it must always be regarded as only a modification of them; for the political view is the object, War is the means, and the means must always include the object in our conception." - Carl von Clausewitz, "On War" (1832)
Hitler always looks like hes just walked out the shower
LMFAOOOO NAHHHHH
It's ironic that the treaty of Versailles indirectly caused the exact thing the allies feared
When everybody started talking about Versailles as a "peace conference" back in the days following WW1, it allowed for narratives to take shape. These "narratives" then floated to the top of discussions and debates, books and documentaries, and became the way people started thinking at the time, and...more importantly, still think*** today.
Historians should stop talking about The Treaty of Versailles as a "peace conference" (name branding), but to start calling it out for what it was in terms of geopolitics and grand strategy: it was divide and rule/conquer *of and over* continental Europe, by the outside world powers, all imperialistic in nature, with a geographical advantage (Washington DC/London), using Paris as a continental foothold, or an "extension" of their own power. Such language abounds in the strategy papers of the true powers.
These powers favorored Paris for this specific reason, regardless of what ideologues desired (Idealism is an '-ism' or ideology). Favoratism is a core technique used in a divide and rule strategy.
The Fourteen Points were largely written by a "think tank", the New York based "Inquiry" group. As for Wilson, was he really that naive to think that the large and prominent forces of isolationism would not prevail, and lead to the USA/Washington DC not joining any collectivised system of security for the entire planet?
Was there really no "Plan B" in Washington DC?
Divide and rule as a strategy is elaborated in more detail in the comments thread under the Kaiser Wilhelm video of the "History Room" educational channel. Go to the other channel, select "latest comments" first (three little bars at the top of every comments section), and read as far back as desired. The "oh so fine" British Lordships thought they could play divide and rule/conquer games with the world, and in the end British citizens lost bigtime, as their own Lordships "...ran off with all the f%cking money..." (quote = George Carlin/ reality = tax havens). *Note that in an exchange based on observations (realism) and definitions, that these cannot be "countered" by an opinion or a personal standpoint.*
The answer to any observed divide and rule strategy is eventually going to be brute force. On a micro level, it will be some form of uprising or revolution. On the macro level (states/empires) it will be crises and war. If words no longer achieve the desired effects to oppose the actions by the psychopaths who have infiltrated positions of power (incl. our so-called "western liberal democracies"), and become uncompromising and start using bully tactics, the answer will be brute force. No system is going to "turn the other cheek" indefinitely.
No, this is not a "yet another conspiracy theory," but elaborated and provided with sufficient evidence, and inductive/deductive reasoning on the other channel/video.
*Divide and rule/conquer is a strategy, not a conspiracy theory.*
This is how action reaction principle works 😅
No it didn’t. Hitler did. Also, allies failed to enforce the de-militarization of Germany over time.
I was under the impression that the original German delegation was so shocked by the terms, they did not sign. Another smaller delegation was later sent, and they made the Treaty official on june 28.
Jesus Christ is the only hope in this world no other gods will lead you to heaven
There is no security or hope with out Jesus Christ in this world come and repent of all sins today
Today is the day of salvation come to the loving savior Today repent and do not go to hell
Come to Jesus Christ today
Jesus Christ is only way to heaven
Repent and follow him today seek his heart Jesus Christ can fill the emptiness he can fill the void
Heaven and hell is real cone to the loving savior today
Today is the day of salvation tomorrow might be to late come to the loving savior today
John 3:16-21
16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. 19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil. 20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved. 21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.
Mark 1.15
15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel.
2 Peter 3:9
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
Hebrews 11:6
6 But without faith it is impossible to please him: for he that cometh to God must believe that he is, and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him.
Jesus
History has so much to teach us !!
I’m a grade 12 student in Nimibia and according to our specified content for theme one is to identify the results of Germany,Italy and Japan dissatisfactions with the Paris Peace Treaty.
I’m satisfied with the Germany content on your video and I’m hoping that can you please help me with the other two 🥺
What an excellent summary.......big thanks!
Ironic how a document designed to end *one* war ended up being the cause of *another* war due to the terms of said document.
This is a very special and spiritual document
Look at how Germany treated Russia in 1917. Look at how Germany treated France after the 1871 war. Germany was not destroyed like large parts of France and Belgium. If the US senate had joined the League of Nations things may have been different. The great lie was the Germans not accepting that their army had been defeated. The stab in the back excuse helped to develop into WW2.
Remember Germany invaded its neighbors and it’s the neighbors fault?
Tomorrow is my history board exam (class 10 icse) and I'm watching this
You used quite a lot of political cartoons, is there anywhere I can find them? Would greatly appreciate it if you could share the sources!
thanks four making my homework man
My pleasure!
@@History.Simplified thanks for making my class activity 😊
I had to watch this video because it was given to me to watch for one of my assignments on Canvas but was blocked on the school iPad so I had to watch it here on this device instead off from this TH-cam account which is my official Tails Z TH-cam Channel.
both sides had the opportunity to prevent another war
at the same time, these murderous background power forces kidnapped a large part of Hungary's territory.
Shame on the Allies for giving Germany a harsh treaty. That was so harsh and I felt so bad for Germany. 😡😥🇩🇪
It wasn’t harsh enough. Germany bounced back very quickly, and that was with a global economic crash in between as well
@@sebe2255 no they just finished paying in like 2010. They bounced back bc they decided to disregard their reparations. It destroyed their economy and caused so much inflation which caused the sentiment needed to start ww2. The Allie’s admitted they were too harsh in the aftermath.
@@livstarr4500 Just no
Stop talking!
@@sebe2255 because of austrian painter they bounced back
alot of this could have been solved if the allies pressed into germany and then agree to peace....that way they would know they lost.....that mistake wasn't made in ww2 even roosevelt said this time there will be no mistaking they lost badly.
Good vid😁
Wht r those key provisions for?
France played itself on this treaty. Germany rose to power rather quick and took Europe by storm. Germany wasnt even the ones they initiated the war. The death of Fernandin of Hungary caused all of it.
Tbf many French people were aware if this. This is why the famous 20 year armistice quote from Foch is often usen incorrectly now. He wanted a harsher treaty because he knew Germany would not be crippled
And the 2nd time Germany was defeated even more humiliated way that they became gay 😂
the ottoman map is wrong if we are talking about ww1
The tipicaly neighbors who talk to much because they feel win and look down on others,and have friend or older brother who have power to protect them if they make a trouble. In this case is crossing the line...
EMILY
wasnt it on November 1919 im sorry my history text is confusing me
November 1918 was the armistice where they agreed to stop fighting. The Treaty of Versailles was signed in June 1919
2:13 wr9ng map pal that's inaccurate that's the Russian federation not the Russian empire
Treaty of Versailles may seem harsh, but imsgine you were French or Belgian? Not Americans who only fought for a few months right at end of war. . But for FOUR YEARS.
Germany occupied much of Belgium, which had been neutral country in 1914. Occupied much of northern France. They were cruel masters.. with victory they felt justified imposjng the terms of treaty.. which Germany signed.
The Germans were defeated, militarily and economically.. that was reality. After the war many argued against this, but it was an error. In due course the germans were not harshly treated, the terms were negated with later treaties that effectively let them off the hook. Consider the terns Germany imposed on Russia in March 1918 - extremely harsh and meant germany occupied large parts of western Russia and Ukraine.
Germany should never have been allowed to rebuild their military..
Good reading: The Sleepwalkers by Christoper Clark. Things were a bit more complex than "Germany should never have been allowed to rebuild their military.."
@@henryluebberstedt7819 its also more complex then france caused ww2 which many like to say...without context of the devastation....or understanding of previous treaties or what germany intended on doing if there was a german victory(it was very harsh)
pov: you’re watching this for I&S or History
Once you understand the effects of this treaty on thr German economy and its people, you won't blame the Germans for WWII!
3:13 🧐
5:30
Treaty? Germany wasn't even invited.. typical soldiery bs
it was good
Wilson had no place making such demands. He is the worst president.
One day in history as African we need to do this back to England, France, Portigal and Spain. 400,000,000 black people L:ETS RISE!!
Nah. Colonialism was a long time ago. The colonialists are dead now
@@AbdirahmanIdris-ku9xm Not to mention that the power vacuums that occurred after various independence movements won out, and the colonial powers withdrew, just kind of devolved into endless factional civil wars, only for a variety of native African kleptocrats to take hold of power, who ironically drained all the wealth to themselves to as great an extent as any colonial regime.
It's to the point that many countries actually want foreign investment, but aren't stable enough to be an attractive prospect for it, while attempts at foreign aid often get funneled to line the pockets of corrupt officials.
@@JET7C0 I agree. Such a shame that warlords deprived Africans of their freedom after living under colonialism for so long. Africa was set up well with the infrastructure left by the colonials and the natural resources that were plentiful. My country, Somalia, did quite well after the Italians and British left. We had a good country. My parents grew up in those times. And then it was all wasted in a pointless civil war.
Iaahcoottrlkfadozm
Guess what i was saying, it was the first letter of some words
Mono aek
Wish Germany had won
No.
@@adonis6766 Why not?
If Germany had won WW1, the rise of fascism would mostly likely never happen in Germany
@@josephpostma1787they are selfish and aggressive towards other people
still coping🥺
😺❤️💖💰😺
This treaty gave us Pearl harbour and the Nazis.
this is horrible
Mie mi place Pepsi cu Lămâie mai cumpăr câteodată, fiind sportiv nu prea beau sucuri și pe copiii mei la fel i am obișnuit, când erau mici ceaiul fara zahar, aveau tatza din plin,sucuri numai cu fructoza naturala la blander sau storcător, având gradina cu toate fructele și cerealele..
BOO!
BOO!
BOO!
BOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
E
Nikolai gay af