>>4163835Falklands was always ours, that wasn't giving away an imperial possession that was a direct attack on native British soil.
Ireland was a matter of personal pride, we had been trying to take it since 1169 so it could be argued that it was British soil also.
Hong Kong was a contractual obligation, we legally could only hold it until 1998.
Singapore was lost due to the Japanese in WW2, and at that time, Singapore wasn't seen as important to hold onto as India due to Singapore's general lack of natural resources, maritime trade is still important but the world was changing.
The suez was lost due to American intervention in wanting to maintain relations with Arabs (this was pre-Johnson era America so they didn't just want to serve Israeli interests). And I'm sorry but the British wouldn't have been able to go to war with the most powerful country on earth at the time.
In addition to this much of the Empire was lost due to WW2, because we won WW2, there was no American effort to really help rebuild Britain unlike the defeated or occupied nations, in the end, a crippled economy and exhausted army can't hold onto the largest empire in the world, it was just not feasible.
Overall, you show a lack of understanding of historical context, betraying your own level of retardation.
Ghost replies have been enabled on all boards. /meta/ has been added for meta discussion.