The question comes from the perception that Algeria is something distinct from mainland France. This is not the view that the French had; they saw Algeria as being an intrinsic part of France across the waves, in much the same way that Americans see Hawaii or Spaniards see the Canary Islands. We can compare Algeria, which had 7 départments and full integration with France, to Morocco or Tunisia which were French Protectorates and were not integrated into the French State. As a result, controlling Algeria was for the purpose of maintaining the unity of the French Republic. At the time of the Algerian War, there were over 1 million Pied-Noirs (Non-Muslim French citizens in Algeria), one of the largest French populations outside of Europe.
It hasn't. They are two different places.
None. no i'm just kidding Algeria was taken over in 1830. Morocco early 20th century. Tunisia 1881.In 1879, France established control over Algeria.
Morocco had a strategic location on the Atlantic seaboard and also gave the French additional protection for Algeria.
The account holder
Both the French and British colonist wanted control over the fur trade. The result of the fight was the French and Indian War.
The account holder
European Imperialism qualifies as such.
Both the French and British colonist wanted control over the fur trade. The result of the fight was the French and Indian War.
moooooooooooooooo
There wasn't such thing as getting "more" control over the french colonies. The basic idea was that these new territory would be France from now on.For instance, french Algeria was considered part of France as any other département of France.That is why the breaking up with french colonies was so violent.The UK fought for its colonies too, but not so long.
Britain and Italy are the biggest ones, I beleive.