The American Indepenence was net harmful

I will be arguing that your queen and commonwealth are a joke in modern day society. If the rebellion did not start, or failed to find enough popular support (both of which were very likely possibilities for failure). The U.S.A. would have been unable to gain independence, and thus would have become in essence, a richer, more populated, and less cold version of Canada.A. The reason the rebellion did receive support was due to the abuse by the British Monarch ( Not English, which is why the Scots want to leave you)B. The US is richer then Canada. C. The US is more populated then Canada. http://americanhistory.about.com...http://www.census.gov...http://data.worldbank.org...Canada today is a positive force on the world, and most importantly, is not a negative force on the world.Enlighten Me...I. Less imperialismA. Your arguing about imperialism. The whole commonwealth was built on imperialism. America did exercise control over a couple of nations that were either too small at the time, or had to radical governments to be put in power. We invested massive amounts of money into other nations infrastructure, and most of them have stuck with us to this day. Despite opportunities for independence.Less unnecessary violence leads to less net harmsA. America was a isolationist country for most of its history. Despite some conflicts in the cold war, we have a smaller track record then other nations.Manifest DestinyA. Spain sold us our lands after they started to lose theirs to white colonists. These colonists were not living within jurisdiction to the US. For example, The Republic of West Florida.B. The Mexican-American war occurred because of a border dispute between the US and Mexico. Even though Texans had rightfully won their independence, and agreed to join the US, Mexico still claimed the state. Mexico sent a army to fight after we started patrolling the borders. Not really the Usa's fault on this one.http://militaryhistory.about.com...British dominions rarely took aggressive expansionist actions towards fellow western countries, Certainly not on a large scale when they did.No, they just bullied the countries they deemed beatable. Pacific colonial empireTo blame Japans imperialistic invasions on the US is silly. When the war started, we only controlled the Philippines and the American Samoa. Japan started the invasions in order to fuel their economy while not relying on foreign imports. http://militaryhistory.about.com...British dominions were democratic countries that did not forcefully exert their influence on neighboring countries. If the USA had not had its own hegemony, Latin America would not have spend a century and half being bullied by the “Northern Giant”. Not true. Britain and France participated in the same economic colonialism as the US did. Britain and its dominions were not democratic at the time, because the monarch exercised a lot more power. While the US may of had some contribution in Central America. Most of the conflict stemmed from clashes of fascist,Marxist, and democratic forces.http://www.lse.ac.uk...Cold War interventions in Asia/AfricaVietnam War: French asked us to aid them, and bailed out shortly after our arrival.Korean War: Soviets, Koreans, and Chinese troops invaded the UN democratic country of South Korea. We just defended them.Bay of Pigs: They aimed missiles at us, so we infiltrated their country.Eritrean War of Independence: Supported oppressed Eritrean against the socialist Derg. As you can see, our aid in these wars were not really intentional. Keeping the world from nuclear war was the main goal in the cold war.The USA as a dominion of Britain would not pursue imperialism, would not pursue an aggressive approach to the Cold War, would not support dictators all over the world and would not ferment violence and conflict for the sake of profit.You keep pretending like the rest of the world did not engage in colonialism. America practiced a little thing called capitalism, and it is not the same thing.