I agree with the article's title but much less with its content, which seems to claim that returning imperial soldiers will always cause some sort of trouble for the (soon to be former) empire.
I think it's quite telling the author had to go back to the 15th century to find a historical precedent for his claim. Especially since the Hundred Years War could be described as many things (succession war, civil war...) but certainly not an imperial or colonial war. Why not take an example from the end of the British Empire, the French Empire or the Japanese Empire - all great colonial powers in the 20th century? Or Spain, Portugal and Netherlands before that? Because they are very few. I can only think of the loss of Algeria and the coup attempt by the French military in that context - but in the end that hardly destabilized the country.
I think it's quite telling the author had to go back to the 15th century to find a historical precedent for his claim. Especially since the Hundred Years War could be described as many things (succession war, civil war...) but certainly not an imperial or colonial war. Why not take an example from the end of the British Empire, the French Empire or the Japanese Empire - all great colonial powers in the 20th century? Or Spain, Portugal and Netherlands before that? Because they are very few. I can only think of the loss of Algeria and the coup attempt by the French military in that context - but in the end that hardly destabilized the country.