> If you're citing divide-and-rule don't quote Iraq. It has 5 races in it, 2 very dominant religions and several suppressed ones. This is precisely the legacy

> If you're citing divide-and-rule don't quote Iraq. It has 5 races in it, 2 very dominant religions and several suppressed ones. This is precisely the legacy of divide-and-conquer British policy! The way the borders where set during the expansion of the British Empire was to put 2 or 3 different neighboring nations under the rule of a single governor. More over, if a nation was specially strong, it would be split into 2 different neighboring states. This way, it was possible for the Empire to play the natives against each other. Favoring one of such groups above the rest provided the rank and file for the local law enforcement, public service, business administration and all other institutions needed to keep Empire dominion over the territory. England is simply too small a country to provide enough soldiers to populate garrisons around the world. When the Empire imploded, the infrastructure for dictatorships was already set in place, but the checks and balances dissappeared overnight.