Relations between USA and the UK

Realtions with USA should be...

  • closer than now

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • on the current level (agreed with the PM)

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • as mr.Hague sees them

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • as with any country

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • as with an enemy

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    1
#1
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/06/nblair206.xml

Tony Blair yesterday conceded that he had paid a "political penalty" for his close links with America, including taking part in the invasion of Iraq nearly four years ago.

But Mr Blair warned his successor not to give up the transatlantic relationship, saying that Britain would carry less influence in the world if it was no longer seen as close to the US
...
Mr Blair was highly critical of a recent speech given by William Hague, the Conservative foreign affairs spokesman, suggesting that the UK should adopt a more distant relationship with Washington in favour of developing links with countries such as China and India.

He said it was a "false choice", as Britain’s influence with the emerging Asian giants and in other parts of the world depended crucially on its close relations with Washington, he said.
Whom do you support in this question: learned mr.Hague or highly esteemed mr.Blair?

The last option has been added only to make the list complete.
 
#2
I think the problem is that we are only 'Perfidiious Albion' [cosy up to any barsteward as long as it's in our interests] these days for the benefit of Bliar and Co and not the United Kingdoms.
 
#3
Its only natural that Hague and his mob would capitalise on Bliar's misfortune, I've no doubt they'd be in the same boat if the positions were reversed.
I get very hacked off by Washington's view of the outside world, its horrible foreign policy, and frankly very embarrassed by the fact that no matter who is power in the UK, they'll bend over and give the US whatever it needs.
Off the track, I can't say I'm a huge fan of Mr Putin's world view, his foreign policy, or his (allegedly) radioactive glow in the dark assassins at the FSB
 

Biped

LE
Book Reviewer
#4
We should maintain whatever influence we have with the US (which is a lot less since Bliar came to power) whilst improving our links as fast and as comprehensively as we possibly can with EVERYONE else.

We are not a puppy 52nd state to kow-tow to US hedgemony. We are an independent nation state, and as such we should be cultivating all those who will provide benefits to the UK, its economy and its people.

Our relationship with the US cannot be allowed to interfere with our own global interests.

There is no reason why we cannot work very hard to cultivate both India and China, especially as most US manufacturing is done in Chinese factories. The US cannot have an issue with us doing the same.
 
#5
inbredyokel666 said:
... frankly very embarrassed by the fact that no matter who is power in the UK, they'll bend over and give the US whatever it needs.
Likely.
 
#6
<Cynical mode on>

Ah yes. The Special Relationship. But only special when a Certain Well Known Western Superpower decides.........

<Cynical mode stays on>
 
#7
We're poor cousins, a shoulder to lean on. UK thinks and behaves 1940s big and cannot come to terms that there is only so much an island can do in the 21st century.

We do have a great tourist industry though.
 
#8
Random_Task said:
Do you think the following applies?

“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests"
So what are 'permanent interests' of the UK?
 
#9
KGB_resident said:
Random_Task said:
Do you think the following applies?

“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests"
So what are 'permanent interests' of the UK?[/quote]

Porn, football, sex and fish and chips!

In no particular order!
 
#11
eveyuk said:
meiktilaman said:
KGB_resident said:
Random_Task said:
Do you think the following applies?

“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests"
So what are 'permanent interests' of the UK?[/quote]

Porn, football, sex and fish and chips!

In no particular order!
You missed out curry and stella artois

And smashing Graham Taylor's face in! Fecking five live! :pissedoff:
 
#12
Random_Task said:
Do you think the following applies?

“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests"
To an extent, but the view exists here in the US that is overwhelmingly positive of the UK and its citizens--that's among our citizens and politicians. In the US Army you'll generally hear nothing but good things about Brits in general. You'll rarely hear anything negative about the UK from either the left or the right in this country. It doesn't seem to be reciprocated if this or other sites are anything to go on, a realization that would surprise most Americans I think.
 
#13
Virgil said:
Random_Task said:
Do you think the following applies?

“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests"
To an extent, but the view exists here in the US that is overwhelmingly positive of the UK and its citizens--that's among our citizens and politicians. In the US Army you'll generally hear nothing but good things about Brits in general. You'll rarely hear anything negative about the UK from either the left or the right in this country. It doesn't seem to be reciprocated if this or other sites are anything to go on, a realization that would surprise most Americans I think.
I think you'll find most people are fond of the US , you just don't understand our humour and the way we like to whinge every now and then.

There are rabidly anti-american people in the UK, but those people are probably also rabidly anti-British, the rest of us are just taking the p*ss.
 
#14
Virgil said:
To an extent, but the view exists here in the US that is overwhelmingly positive of the UK and its citizens--that's among our citizens and politicians. In the US Army you'll generally hear nothing but good things about Brits in general. You'll rarely hear anything negative about the UK from either the left or the right in this country. It doesn't seem to be reciprocated if this or other sites are anything to go on, a realization that would surprise most Americans I think.
I think part of that is the result of very differing attitudes about the military between the UK and US. Without meaning to denigrate all US troops, the sheer size of the US military means there's always a much larger contingent numpties.

Contrast that with the relatively small military of the UK where poor performance is much more highly visible and thus quickly weeded out.

Again, I think 99.999% of the US armed forces are highly professional and very good at their jobs- who I'm happy to work alongside, but the fact is the 00.001% of incompetence would probably make up a force about 1/4 the size of the British army.

Combine that with the much less 'c'est la guerre' culture of the UK and it becomes clearer why some incidents leave us with a bad and lasting impression out of all proportion.
 
#15
Virgil said:
To an extent, but the view exists here in the US that is overwhelmingly positive of the UK and its citizens--that's among our citizens and politicians. In the US Army you'll generally hear nothing but good things about Brits in general. You'll rarely hear anything negative about the UK from either the left or the right in this country. It doesn't seem to be reciprocated if this or other sites are anything to go on, a realization that would surprise most Americans I think.
I would tend to disagree with your assessment, Virgil. I think you'll find that the majority of ARRSErs (and the majority of Brits) have a lot of time for Septics in general, but hate the foreign policy and all the sleazy gobshites in the Septic gobment machine pushing it.

Brits are very vociferous in their criticism of their gobment, but this doesn't translate (for them) into not supporting their troops of being unpatriotic. They also support the Septic troops in principle, but not always the methods they use.

MsG
 
#16
Virgil said:
Random_Task said:
Do you think the following applies?

“Nations have no permanent friends or allies, they only have permanent interests"
To an extent, but the view exists here in the US that is overwhelmingly positive of the UK and its citizens--that's among our citizens and politicians. In the US Army you'll generally hear nothing but good things about Brits in general. You'll rarely hear anything negative about the UK from either the left or the right in this country. It doesn't seem to be reciprocated if this or other sites are anything to go on, a realization that would surprise most Americans I think.
What you say may be true but you are looking at it from a US perspective. The UK has to have its own view on international affairs and these do not coinside with that of the US all the time. Sadly the poodle Blair is perfectly prepared not to cross US sensibilities over anything and that is not healthy foreign policy for the UK.

The view of most people on this side of the pond is that we are too close, are not regarded in enough esteem by the current administration and not listened too. To that end, we need to step away.

There is also the little matter of the need for us to stay in with and develop relationships with the next two Superpowers.

After all, that definately is in our nations interest.
 
#17
OK I know I'm off on a tangent a little here, but thinking more about my earlier comment I think I can provide an example, that might prove a bit enlightening for people on both sides of the pond.

Now this is an arbitary figure, purely for example purposes, but let's say one in a thousand soldiers in both the US and UK militaries in an idiot and through incompetence generates an 'incident' every five years.

With 2 million in uniform that's 2000 incidents for the US.

With 150,000 in uniform that's 150 incidents for the UK.

To the US this is a tiny percentage- one in a thousand and 'no biggie'. The same is true for the UK and its no biggie there either. But there'd be 13 times the number of incidents invoving the US military for the British military to witness or hear of over the same period.


It's arbitary of course but it gives an idea of the sometimes very real faliure on our part to comprehend the sheer volume of the US and perhaps also why, bearing that huge volume in mind, the US sometimes fails to comprehend an ally might have a very different perspective.
 
#18
The view of most people on this side of the pond is that we are too close, are not regarded in enough esteem by the current administration and not listened too. To that end, we need to step away.

My impression from the Yankee side of the pond is that there is some truth to your statement, q.v. Rumsfeld's comments regarding British participation just before the start of the invasion of Iraq.

However, what Virgil said is also true. There is a close military to military relationship (the British Defence Staff Washington do an outstanding job).
There are also a lot of Americans who are interested in sending CARE packages etc. to British troops in Iraq.

Unfortunately, the public face of the UK side of the relationship here is Blair, and so everyone believes he is a latter day Churchill.
 
#19
The view of most people on this side of the pond is that we are too close, are not regarded in enough esteem by the current administration and not listened too. To that end, we need to step away.

My impression from the Yankee side of the pond is that there is some truth to your statement, q.v. Rumsfeld's comments regarding British participation just before the start of the invasion of Iraq.

However, what Virgil said is also true. There is a close military to military relationship (the British Defence Staff Washington do an outstanding job).
There are also a lot of Americans who are interested in sending CARE packages etc. to British troops in Iraq.

Unfortunately, the public face of the UK side of the relationship here is Blair, and so everyone believes he is a latter day Churchill.
 
#20
Bugsy said:
Virgil said:
To an extent, but the view exists here in the US that is overwhelmingly positive of the UK and its citizens--that's among our citizens and politicians. In the US Army you'll generally hear nothing but good things about Brits in general. You'll rarely hear anything negative about the UK from either the left or the right in this country. It doesn't seem to be reciprocated if this or other sites are anything to go on, a realization that would surprise most Americans I think.
I would tend to disagree with your assessment, Virgil. I think you'll find that the majority of ARRSErs (and the majority of Brits) have a lot of time for Septics in general, but hate the foreign policy and all the sleazy gobshites in the Septic gobment machine pushing it.

Brits are very vociferous in their criticism of their gobment, but this doesn't translate (for them) into not supporting their troops of being unpatriotic. They also support the Septic troops in principle, but not always the methods they use.

MsG
I agree with Bugsy, here. Generally speaking, you're a great bunch of guys and girls*- (especially the girls) but your country is being led by fcuking morons- on both sides of the aisle.

But then, in the sage words of Obi Wan Kenobi "Who's more foolish? The fool or the fool who follows him?" :thumleft: (Yes, Tony. I mean you- cnut.)
 

New Posts

Latest Threads

Top