Britain at the end of WWII?

Question

I know Britain was hurting at the end of WWII. But at the same time, she had the opportunity to be bigger than ever. ALL of her competitors were either defeated or in much worse shape than she was. Britain could have had all of Germany's holdings, all of italy's holdings, most of africa, the middle east, large parts of assia, and many many other places where either the former colonial powers went away or where the local governments were much to weak to prevent a British takeover from happening. Also could have vastly derailed other European countries who could have posed a challenge from recovering from the war. Do you agree with me, or am I flat out wrong!!!

Answer 1

??? Britian, by the end of WW2, was financially crippled, with rationing neccessary in order to keep us afloat. While our military was not entirely spent, the americans believed in National Self Determination, and Russia also looked badly on empires due to their communist viewpoint, that all should be equal and none should rule, so if we tried to take these places, America and Russia would quickly quell these. Also, Britian was looking to establish a new world order, allied with everyone else, not planning on rebuilding her empire...

Answer 2

England could not have had all of Germany; that was an impossibility. The United States and Russia were its power brokers. Italy? Italy had a strong resistance movement and even tossed Mussolini out a window. IF England did what you state, then England would have been equated to a barbaric expansionist state. A capitalist society thrives on competition, however, an autocratic state faces no competition- hence, the recovery would have been more difficult, not easier.

The Second War was fought, in part, to rid the world of tyranny (its dictators that initiated the war), not to promote it.

I do, to a degree, see your points:
During the Second War, England had about 900 ships, however, in the Falkland's War, England had about a 170 ship navy? In 2006, moreover, England boasts 92 ships in its navy. How the mighty has fallen. The United States Coast Guard is larger than England's entire Navy:
http://www.uscg.mil/hq/g-cp/history/cutterlist.html

~~

Answer 3

Britain was broke by 1940, when lend lease started. Part of the agreement for lend lease was greater democracy in the Empire, meaning antonym for the British colonies.
The ending of the empire although noble was not financially well thought. When Britain excepted the loans there was an empire, but england would pay the price of the Empires loans.
Because of the bombing Britian had sent most of it's industry outside of England where it could produce war materials without being bombed. This can back to haunt them because not the best and most modern factories in the world were in the US and Canada, in fact the US production was just hitting full pace by wars end. This left the US as industrial mater of the free world. It could produce huge quanities of quaility products at a very cost effective price to a world ravaged in destruction.
Most of Englands industry was set to supply the Empire not the world.
And England had had enough of war, so did the rest of the world.

Answer 4

The only countries who could have taken on such a campaign after the end of WW II were the USA and USSR..
USA was the least affected by the war but had lost out on a lot of supplies, arms and ammunitions which she had supplied to the other Allied powers. Also, USA had to support and in the rehab of it's ailing allies, specifically britain, france and western europe.
USSR had been badly hit by the war and had suffered huge war damages, but the communism and socialism that had been started had started spreading to the neighbouring countries and they had started aligning themselves with russia. With the development of Nuclear warheads in a few years, USSR became just as strong as USA and much stronger than Britain or any other western european country.
This lead to a starting of the cold war between these two superpowers.. a war which prevented either nation to go on conquests for fear of retaliation. Hence no country could afford to go on a world conquest after WWII... definitely not britain with its army being devastated and lands flattened.

Answer 5

You are flat out wrong.
Britain owed a massive amount of money to the USA in war loans which was only finally paid off this year.
Their armed forces were exhausted after fighting since 1939 and they had neither the manpower or equipment to take over large amounts of territory.
Britain struggled to feed its own citizens and rationing lasted until 1953, and much of the country was in ruins from the german bombing.
Apart from all that there were the agreements with the USSR and USA over where the division of political interests and control would be post war.
The USA would not have allowed any imperial adventures by Britain as they showed in 1956 over Suez

Answer 6

Conquest and the idea of empire appealed to some "great" leaders: Hitler, Napoleon, Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan.
In this age of globalization it may not be so popular any more.
More and more people throughout the world view colonialism and the subjugation of weaker nations as a thing of the past, like feudalism or cannibalism.
The time for another British empire has long passed.

Answer 7

Britain spend a fortune on the war and was in no position to finance what you are suggesting. Britain had to rebuild much damage and had problems with supplies of very common items. They won the war, but suffered great economic losses.

Answer 8

I believe you're flat out wrong.

Britain was unable to hold what it had left after the war, so it released what it previously held piece by piece over the next couple of decades.