> The west was able to control most of the globe due to their advances in weapons, and their brutal tactics, which many indigenous people decried as "too furiou

> The west was able to control most of the globe due to their advances in weapons, and their brutal tactics, which many indigenous people decried as "too furious". Okay, but why did those developments happen in Europe in the first place? China had gun power and printing way before the Europeans. The Europeans were supplicants to the courts of Mughal Indian and Imperial China in the 1600s. By the late 1700s and 1800s the Europeans were stomping on everyone "due to their advances in weapons". The question that is being asked is: what caused the change in those 150-200 years? > and their brutal tactics Genuine curiosity: are the tactics "brutal" merely from a contemporary stand point, or where they viewed as "brutal" at the time when they were employed, or where they viewed as 'normal' at the time? Were tactics of the other side any "better" or "worse" than those employed by the Europeans?