> Britain lost the war, and the US forced its hands out of these colonies. > the decline has more to do with the US taking "their" place than the British faili

> Britain lost the war, and the US forced its hands out of these colonies. > the decline has more to do with the US taking "their" place than the British failing to modernize. Rather than the US replacing the UK as colonial power, the US pushed for the colonies to become independent - at which point many of them moved out of US control - such as by trying to play the Americans and Soviets off against each other through the Non-Aligned Movement > I think, if the British were say Chinese or Japanese, the US would have probably cut it directly out of existence. I wonder if the US really would have forced China to give up its control over Tibetans, Uyghurs, Mongols (in Inner Mongolia), Manchus, among others. Even though you can argue that China didn’t “lose” as such, I’m not sure the US would have treated them much differently if they had “lost” in the way the UK did (as an ally which had won a Pyrrhic victory)