Also too, the British were more interested in devoloping the train.
For 150 years they had small operations, trading posts.
The Dutch were pre-eminent, even in Europe
But after the Anglo-Dutch wars, the Brits knocked out the Dutch.
Then they had the wars with the French, the 7 years war which was across western Europe, North America and India.
At the same time, India's centralized Mughal Empire had collapsed (note of course that India is a continent with many nations in it - 300+ languages, different ethnicities, in fact 4 different races etc.), so kind of like the aftermath of the collapse of the Roman Empire in the West
The Brits were initially in the 1700s just about importing tea, silk, textiles and selling them at a profit
But in the late 1700s the industrial revolution meant that the Brits could make textile cheaper than India, so imported cotton, but the best way for them was to have a monopoly on buying cotton -- so they took over the chief cotton growing and then tea growing areas
The train was a by-product and it was very good for transporting goods across the vast distances of the indian continent
As things progressed and the Brits slowly co-opted or conquered various Indian nations, they kept up the monopoly, this time not only on buying but also on selling -- no other European or Indian state could sell textiles in British areas. This then extended to other goods
So the Brits had a marvellous system for their own enrichment -- the Indians could only sell their raw products at a substantial discount to the English and then could only buy the finished products from the English
Hence the massive drain of wealth from the Indian continent to England.
Did not the British increase their efforts when it had an empire towards India once we Americans fought and won our independence from the British? - not really connected as the American colonies were colonies of the Crown, the British "govt" so so speak, while the Indian colonies were Company areas, the British East indian company
only in 1858 did this get taken over by the British government, and only in 1858 did the British Empire start.
Also the methods used were different as in America the natives were at least a few 1000 years behind in development and the land was mostly uninhabited, while in India the level of civilisation was the same, actually in 1600 it could be argued that parts of India were ahead. And of course India was inhabited....
Actually the Brits didn't do this. Jews continued living in Tiberias, etc. from the middle ages under the Ottomans
The Ottomans in 1874 set up a separate district of Jerusalem and Jews escaping from Russian pogroms (note that the Russians in the years from 1772 to 1793 had participated in the partitions of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth. Prior to this, in the years from 1500 to 1772 the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth,encompassing what is now Poland, lithuania, belarus, western ukraine, large parts of western Russia was home to nearly 60% of the world's Jews -- the Russians didn't have Jews before the partitions and suddenly got this big bunch of non-Russians, so they restricted them to the Pale of Settlement (essentially the parts of the Polish-Lithuanian commonwealth that Russia took)) -- anyway, the pogroms pushed Jews to America and Israel
The Jews (in Alyah I think it's called) moved in to this Ottoman province
The Jews in WWI supported Germany against Russia -- the Brits tried to get them over to their side to get American Jews to be pro-Brit
The British after WWI got this entire region plonk in their laps