In Defence (Sorry, Defense) of America

Discussion in 'Current Affairs, News and Analysis' started by RTFQ, Dec 21, 2005.

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:

  1. RTFQ


    This started as a reply to "Bush Says Surveillance Leak Shameful" thread, but I realised that not only was it tangential, it was also probably largely rubbish, so I've put it here for people's opinions.

    Bush Bashing has been by far the best past time of 2005, but I have been meditating on its impact and value, and its causes (apart from the man’s blatant buffoonery, obvious to all except those who think George Bush and Jerry Bruckheimer are the same person) and I’ve decided we should stop mocking the afflicted.

    You see, before we start blithely telling inhabitants of a foreign nation what they should and should not think of their 'fascist' governments, I think it may be worth considering exactly who is arguing for what in each case. To me, it often seems like it’s the spams arguing on behalf of their government, and europe arguing against. I don't believe in a great deal, but I do believe in the sanctity of the nation state and that the mandate for the government of those states comes from its population. Ultimately, the Bush Administration will continue to undertake activity that many, especially 'Old' Europe, will noisily disagree with, purely because they are giving the electoral majority of the American people exactly what they want. Who are we to tell them otherwise?

    I'm in no way saying I'm not dismayed by some of the happenings over the water, but if they want to set fire to their constitution, let Bill Frist treat their loved ones and teach their schoolkids that Darwin was a gay commie, so be it - it's their country and we don't have to be the lapdog following the twin coattails of their culture and politics if we don't want to be.

    I don't buy into the european idea that we're offering support to the sensible majority that have been hoodwinked into living under a republican executive either. The press have been pretty compliant up until now, and I'm not convinced that the NYT has suddenly grasped the torch of freedom and started to dabble in actual 'reporting' - who did Judith Miller Work for again? - they've got their own agenda, and it's not upholding the constitution. At some point we have to realise that for all the 'sensible' europhile yanks we meet at parties, for all the Simpsons episodes and smug parodies like the Daily Show that we chuckle along to, there is a huge nation of people over whom we fly when visiting Rodeo Drive or MGM Studios or the Grand Ole Opry, and most of them care more about safety than they do about nebulous ideas like freedom and democracy. Just like the Iraqis, and just like many of us after 7th July.

    Maybe a great deal of this scrutiny and dismay comes from the fact that the US has the might to do as it wants. When the British Empire was going strong, we didn't give a sh1t about what Sardinia thought about us either. I'm not saying that america is right to ignore us, I'm just trying to illustrate the mind set. We are shocked that the yanks could, if they really wanted to, really mess Iraq up, do syria, saudi arabia and Iran and we'd be unable to do anything but write angry blogs about it. That impotence is down to the gaggle of fuckwits that is Europe and the corrupt travesty that is the UN. The US is just doing what nations do, what we'd be doing if we were still Top Dog, it's down to our own failures that no check-and-balance exists for the US - the UN idea didn't exacty sneak up on us.

    The american people got what they voted for – they don’t want our opinion. The fact that some US decisions impact directly onto us is down to our failure to engage the political machinery and impose OUR will on OUR government. It was inevitable that such a weakly elected government (and similar ones across the world) would never be able to take our will to the international stage, nor would it be able to drive the thieves from the EU and the UN.

    I think that we should consign the yank bashing to 2005 – let them sort their own house out, if they want to. We have bigger fish to fry at home. Come the next Chinese Empire (with perhaps the management of Europe being franchised out to Russia on their behalf) we may be grateful for a strong government and semi-aware UK population.
  2. Good post. Europeans should realise that constant criticism of the US is eventually going to lead the US to simply ignore us and/or start having a go back at us.
  3. RTFQ


    Well, they ignore us anyway so I'm not advocating leaving off because we should be scared of them. I just think we should make an effort to be seen as more credible diplomatic force within and without europe, so the feckers can't afford to pooh pooh us.

    Never pooh pooh a pooh pooh.

    For that to work we need to stop chosing comedy leaders like Blair, Cameron and Br.., Brow..., Bro... That fat clown.
  4. I thought they didn't give a stuff already? :D

    RTFQ is largely right IMHO. Could also transpose some of those points to the multiculture debate on this forum (values and culture etc.).
  5. It must just be me that thought they started doing that a long time ago.

    British Government: We have some ideas and suggestions on how to run post-war Iraq, based on experience and historical precedent.

    US Government: la-la-la we're not listening. The composition of Iraq is all your fault anyway , so this is all your fault.


    French Government: We have some doubts on your claims of WMD's (Cos we're so thick with Soddim) we believe you are wrong, and we're not willing to play this time around.

    US Government: la-la-la we're not listening , and you're all cheese eating surrender monkeys.
  6. Between a semi-religious culture of political brand-loyalty, and the two-horse closed-shop political system what voting choice would the average Joe Spam have that would make a difference to this even if they wanted to?
  7. Goatman

    Goatman LE Book Reviewer

    Good post RTFQ - concur.

    There was a programme by Dan Snow a while back examining the almost reflex Anti-Americanism in this country. For all their probs I'm damn glad they're on OUR side even though I have fewer illusions about any misty-eyed Special Relationship than some folk do ! here's good quote to bear in mind:

    If they want to elect a shaved anthropoid with the lowest measured IQ of any President since Coolidge , well ,Blimey that's their prerogative.......makes me die how people nowadays seem to refer to Ronnie Raygun as a forward-thinking Conservative who largely vanquished the Soviet the time, there was no shortage of Guardianista chatterati slagging the old buffer off as I recall.

    I think all this Anti-Yank sentiment is a hangover from the Flower-Power generation ( exemplified by Blair,Beckett, Peter Hain and his like) who s-o-o-o- missed the anti-Vietnam protests that they were delighted to re-enact that whole scene FORTY years if we can only get them to stop shooting up our vehicles....... :lol:


    Vive les colons!

    Le Chevre
  8. Goatman

    Goatman LE Book Reviewer

    Hmmm.....this is the MAIN gripe about Telic - where was the plan for post-Saddam ( aka ' garlands of flowers' era ) ?

    PTP, I guess you missed this in another thread:

    This bloke,BTW, is not some tree-huggin' Libber but a Dixie 'second generation Veteran' who's main gripe is Republican govt reality rather than pre-election hype.

    Paraphrase - US Army planners put fwd an outline for what was to happen post-Saddam......Sec Def kicked it into touch because it kept headcount higher than budgeted for ?

    hmmmmm.......I would very much like to see this post Ops plan that was rejected....'cos the perspective herabouts is that it never existed.......

    ( " as few as FIVE Divisions" ! ......doncha just love 'em ! :) )

    Le Chevre
  9. Soldier_Why

    Soldier_Why LE Moderator

    That is a very good question RTFQ, unfortunately, IMHO, there is no simple answer. I suppose it boils down to your take on Globalisation. Perhaps the following article may open up the discussion somewhat? (Yes, it is my own work, but as I have finished this particular course, you are welcome to 'critique' it to your heart's content)

    (c) Soldier_Why, 2005.
  10. As a Spam, I read these posts with interest. RTFQ, your assessments are absolutely correct. Most Americans don't have a clue about UK/Coalition support for Iraq, Afghanistan, and other places. The only thing I would beg to differ with is your view of Americans as caring more about security than freedom or democracy. In spite of our collective ignorance, we realize the security is the prerequiste for freedom and democracy.

    Unfortunately, the perception has been created over here that "everybody hates us". The natural reaction, is of course, to tell everyone to feck off. The administration has begun a "public diplomacy" effort to change this, but I'm afraid that this is another example of the US Gov't throwing money at a problem.

    I would agree that the right answer for the UK is to build an military capability independent of the US, UN, or EU.
  11. US is adopting the Millwall FC attitude - no one likes us, we don't care.
  12. RTFQ


    The only time that will ever happen is if we survive losing the next Big One. By then we'll be bankrupt and bereft of a national identity to rally around. Won't be in our lifetime though, fortunately.
  13. Yeah, the United Kindom of Pakistan won't require/need an army in 100+ years time.

    Let's face it, that's what Britain is turning into - a state of pakistan.
  14. While I agree, let’s not forget that us meddling comes the other way, NorAid for example.

    The other problem is if America sees itself as a guy who can do what he likes, this could be dangerous to us as well, and therefore it is our concern.
  15. i am a conservative, i hate bush. there are two types of conservatives the "paleoconservative" and the neoconservative. the two schools of thought are very very different. bush is rapidly losing what little support he had amongst the paleoconservative.