An End to the U.S.-U.K. 'Special Relationship'

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by alib, Oct 31, 2010.

Welcome to the Army Rumour Service, ARRSE

The UK's largest and busiest UNofficial military website.

The heart of the site is the forum area, including:

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. On the NJ experts blog An End to the U.S.-U.K. 'Special Relationship' some fragments as we enter Dave's decade of the jetless carrier:
    The last I thought the most interesting position. It's probably the most realistic, folks within the beltway may be miffed that an old ally is shirking on its already slight commitments.

    However if whatever poodle is kenneled in No 10 will obediently yap along with Uncle Sam's latest escapade regardless of its wisdom the impact may be slight. The leader of an ill defended island on the edge of the world's historically most violent continent may even be more compliant than Mr Tony was with its powerful protector. Though being the enabling toady in DC's strategic prattfalls may finally win No 10 more contempt than respect, more jail house bitch than "girlfriend of convenience".
  2. Dont think the yanks ever really held us in very high regard, just someone else to share the rest of the worlds, i.e middle eastern, anger .Now we have virtually nothing left to offer they will drop us like a hot turd.
  3. Thats a tad inconvenient.
    We've just had an SDSR that has declared we have to leave key capabilities to our allies. Just at the point those same allies decide to have fook all to do with us.
  4. Sod them, if they don't want us to help them out with anything then bring the troops back from AFG immediately. We have always been a very junior partner and told to jump when they want us to do anything for them.
  5. how many are left or will be left in the Army after all the cuts are applied, if its below 100,000 we are a defence force. Then the yanks will have to do without us whether they like it or not. the clue's in the name.
  6. A return to Splendid Isolation may be in order, at least as far as our relations with the US. Without being tied to the US we would have more influence in Europe.
  7. Command_doh

    Command_doh LE Book Reviewer

    Screw them. It's a one way 'special relationship' anyway.
  8. seaweed

    seaweed LE Book Reviewer

    Some factors that don't seem to have made it into this thread so far:

    1. The incumbent President appears (to me) to be virulently anti-British

    2. We shall soon not have a foreign policy anyway, it will be a European foreign policy as at Lisbon we gave that bit of independence away. Ultimately we shall only be able to commit forces to a US (or any other) adventure as part of an EU force.

    3. In the Bliar years the 'Special Relationship' was just a bribe by Bliar so he could go grandstanding and get photo-ops with Bush. Personally I think toppling Saddam was necessary, but staying in Iraq when the US was making a total hash of the Peace was not, and certainly not worth the cost in blood, let alone money. As to Afghanistan I still don't know what our AIM is and I was taught that selection and maintenance of the AIM is the first principle of war.
  9. Because Uncle Sam shouted jump and we jumped and sent our troops where they weren't wanted, again
  10. A Canadian coined that term about two decades before the Somme. Lord Sailsbury, like most British policy wonks at the time, thought isolationism was reckless and short sighted, the world and Europe especially is a dangerous place. I think a considerably poorer US, still mighty and safe between two shining seas, is both able and liable to return to return to its traditional isolationism than the UK.

    This is the alliance that the UK's neglected defense rests upon, the brassic Septics have really rather little practical need to expensively maintain it from their side. Jetless carrier's and scrapped MBTs don't look to be the last straw. The vacillating role that comes with the deal probably sometimes does diminish London in the eyes of the rest of the world but I doubt its collapse would improve London's already low standing in Europe.
  11. Have to echo points 2 & 3 here,

    It's the Politicans (UK) that milked the media in this 'Special Relationship' statement, Bliar & Brown that kept this trait up to suck up to Prat Bush, the US will always have an arrogance element irrespective who supports them & to be fair good luck to them as already stated the EU has more powers anyway....
  12. Totally agree-nothing remotely special about being a total subordinate.
  13. First up, the Yanks do indeed have a 'special relationship' which is alive and well, but it with Israel, not us.

    Secondly, the relationship we do have seems to involve doing exactly what we are told, hitching us inexorably to their crass way of engaging with the rest of the World and we would be well off out of it.

    Yemen seems to be the latest target to hove into view for their 'attention'.

    Poor bastards.
  14. Anyone who seriously believes a 'special relationship' currently exists, or ever existed, is dilluding themselves. Its just a phrase spinelss British politicians have used to try to justify being the USA's bitch to the public (Who have bought it) while US politicians look on bemused.
  15. You could add to that "specialness" harem Riyadh, Dublin and since much the the US industrial base and deficit moved to Red China, Beijing. London in the pecking order of dogs that Uncle Sam throws bones too is below Tokyo and getting its arse nipped by Seoul.

    However that's not the point, the "Special Relationship" is Churchilian delusion that the London clings to. The idea is: Uncle Sam will come rushing to Blighties defense provide its antis up a token alliance commitment now and then. Looking at the sad state of Barry's DC this is as about as wise as Warsaw putting any faith in the Entente in the 30s but this alliance remains the basis of the UK's defense.

    This myth has some utility for the Treasury, it provides a false sense of security, especially in these times of negligible threats like AQ. Team Dave is continuing the post-Cold War trend towards a nation that has a very limited capacity to defend itself independently of the US let alone project power. You could call this the realism of enforced austerity or shortsighted folly. Depends if another major European dust up is round the corner. I'd bet against it but I'm sure I would have in 1910 as well.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.