It’s usually pretty dire if your aircraft carrier is firing shots

The addition of more people doesn’t reduce the amount of money made though does it?

For sure, they intended to maintain control, but how can you argue the british losing control during WW2 would be good for anyone?

Who benefits from a vastly larger Jewish populations fighting Arab rebels with the British unable to intercede due to the Germans and Italians moving west from Libya?

Sometimes there’s a bit more to things than the British being a super villain. They were wrong to take that area in the first place, but the actions they took there aren’t turbo evil 24/7.

For your edit, Because you were factual, until your last remark.

What “money” did the British gain from not allowing Jews to enter Palestine?

That area was quickly turning into a hotbed, it’s why the British would pull out in the next decade. But at the time, WW2 was ongoing. If the Arabs revolted mid war the British would not have the capacity to answer it. Ignoring even the strategic reasons, the Arabs would likely end up killing a lot of the Jewish refugees.

Whilst I don’t mind the monarchy, France also generates loads in tourism, without the expenditure for a royal family.

They rank so highly, because they are legal as well. How much something kills is massively warped by how many people take it.

this is in comparison to two shots. a chain shot can only spread itself out about 2 feet wide. dont get me wrong, it was nasty, but there's a reason it was primarily used for naval combat, and never was consistently used on land.

Increasing the weight of the payload without extra force reduces the range. Also the chain doesn’t really help against infantry.

She was found, and wasn’t burned

That’s not entirely true, Jews saw pretty good treatment in Poland during much of the medieval and renaissance eras.