Ever feel used , dirty and cheap? :D


President George W Bush has ruled out US backing for any Kyoto-style deal on climate change at the G8 summit.
Speaking to British broadcaster ITV, he said he would instead be talking to fellow leaders about new technologies as a way of tackling global warming.

But he conceded that the issue was one "we've got to deal with" and said human activity was "to some extent" to blame.

Tony Blair is hoping for deals on climate change and Africa when he hosts the summit in Scotland this week.


But he rejected the idea he should support British Prime Minister Tony Blair's G8 plan in return for his support during the war in Iraq.
"Tony Blair made decisions on what he thought was best for keeping the peace and winning the war on terror, as I did," he told the programme.

"So I go to the G8 not really trying to make him look bad or good, but I go to the G8 with an agenda that I think is best for our country."
So much for your 'Special relationship' eh Prime Minister? :D

Oh , and the cab fare is on the table.
Oh wow. Whomever would have thought Dubbya would do that to his bestest lil buddie TFCB? I know I certainly never saw it coming. My heavens what a curveball, worthy of that oh so aptly named American baseball match thingy "The World Series". Goodness me whatever will Tony do now? Throw himself to the floor and have a heel drumming tanty?

Wa nker.

If anyone in their right mind actually thinks that Dubbya does anything other than selfish acts to benefit himself and those whom fill his coffers then I will direct them to this article. Classic example of the thuggery/MEMEMEMEMEMEMEMEME attitude that pervades all official interactions and policy coming from spamland.
On the other hand, it makes Tony look like more of his own decision maker, instead of simply hiding up the rear of "spamland"
Yes true, but BLiar has climbed so high with Dubya - all you can see now is his arrse in the Co-op window!
what bliar should have known as i did , i that the US govt will have their own agenda which is what will benefit them most, as long you know that when dealing with them then you can act as forewarned.

most American i have met in so far don't rate their own Govt much.


War Hero

Wot a chopper. 'Ah, well, no, you see, the fact of the matter is, I mean, when you look closer....'

Tw@t. Here, have a nice big mug of shut the f^ck up. And you TCH. Now get the f^ck out of Westminster before I come and give you a proper political shoeing.
The only special thing about Bliar is the fact he is practically special needs
Well Prime Minister , that all turned out nicely didn't it?

British Companies shafted on re-building contracts ,and in other ways


Allan Waller testified to specific examples of how KBR officials had conspired in blocking Lloyd-Owen fuel transports, and using other coersive means against its competitor. The British Lloyd-Owen has a direct contract with the Iraq government to provide fuel to various parts of the country.

Lloyd-Owen has a direct contract with the Government of Iraq, and supplies fuel at 0.18c . Halliburton supplies at $1.30.

Mr. Bush has forgotten all about the 'Special relationship' and our contribution in Iraq seems no more important to the US than the Hondurans.

Well that's another fine mess you got us into Tony. I see El Shrub is even more forthright in his comments regarding ' Use and abuse' today.

Don't say we didn't tell you so. We have been since you signed up to this Iraq caper.

Who knows, maybe one day the other shoe will drop. Or maybe not



Book Reviewer
Had to bite on this one....being in the middle of a course entitled
' The United States in the Twentieth Century ' and all.....this story from the Guardian is of the 'Dog bites Man ' variety.....does anyone alive since Suez REALLY think the US owes us any favours ? we currently have 8,000 people in Iraq compared to 130,000 US forces. Much the same proportion applies in Afghanistan.

Part of the course I'm struggling through is an interview with some Yank perfessor and innerletchewal called Noam Chomsky ( well known to ARRSE readers from That Side, Transpondia) . His views on the so-called Special Relationship are instructive:

<< The term Anglo-American is extremely misleading. It is an elephant and a fly, you know. I mean, England has lived with the illusion of having a special relationship with the United States, but if you look at what American leaders say privately, it is quite different. So, if you look at the declassified internal record you find that advisers to President Kennedy were privately describing England as ' our lieutenant ; the fashionable word is partner '

When you read the European Press, increasingly, it is like reading yesterday's New York Times and Washington Post. In fact, in England in particular, you get a kind of subordination to American power that is sometimes just mind boggling. >>

Interview recorded in 1993, so a bit dated now.

I happen to agree with most Americans that Chomsky is an opinionated horse's ass with an over developed sense of his own significance, like most innerletchewals

( He also cheerfully uses England to mean Britain - the hallmark of a sloppy arrogant ignorant dumbass Ivy League tool)

But anyone who has looked at Anglo - US relations since 1945 will appreciate that MacMillan's Special Relationship was just a nice piece of wishful thinking, which Supermac waved at the cameras when it suited him.

ArTone has clung religiously to Dubya's coattails on Iraq because, as he saw it, there was no realistic other option available......Harold Wilson on the other hand had the balls to tell the US that not one British serviceman would stand shoulder to shoulder with Australian,Kiwi and US grunts ankle deep in a Vietnamese paddy field ( and all they wanted was that famous symbolic battalion of the Black Watch) ...... who was right ?

" Nations don't have friends, only interests " ...... a dark old view from the 19th Century!

The Krauts called it Realpolitik....we might not like to examine the reality but let's not kid ourselves too much eh ?

Le Chevre
Aftwer WW2 the British and French establishments (not the people), realised the game was up for their countries as independent world powers. However, the elites in both countries had got used to lording it over Johnny Foriegner/Jean Etranger and wanted to continue so doing. Realising they didn't have the power to do this on their own, the elites of each country developed a way of co-opting the strength of much more powerful countries to their own ends. The French did this through 'building Europe' and the British by clinging ever tighter to the coat-tails of the mighty USA. The British discovered the folly of their plan in 1956, but have been sticking to it, in the absence of any other plan, ever since. The French have only recently discovered that their plan was bollix too.

Similar threads