I was just wondering why Tony Blair is so willing to take it up the shitter from bush, and why he is so keen on all this "special relationship" nonsense?

What has the UK gained from its alliance with the US since 2001 apart from worldwide contempt?

Does the US actually speak about this "special relationship" or is it only Tony Blair who's thinking that? As far as I can see the yanks are indifferent.

Blair has stated that America is the only superpower, and that it stands for ideals such as freedom and democracy. Blair has always stated that it was a moral choice to side with the USA.

Interesting question.

I've always wondered if it was just a history together as allies.

The people in the UK have different ideas:

Nearly three quarters of the public (73 per cent) believe that “the British Government’s foreign policy, especially its support for the invasion of Iraq and refusal to demand an immediate ceasefire by Israel in the recent war against Hezbollah in Lebanon, has significantly increased the risk of terrorist attacks on Britain”.

Moreover, three fifths (62 per cent) agree that “in order to reduce the risk of future terrorist attacks on Britain the Government should change its foreign policy, in particular by distancing itself from America, being more critical of Israel and declaring a timetable for withdrawing from Iraq”. Women (66 per cent) and Liberal Democrat voters (74 per cent) agree with this view particularly strongly.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2344755,00.html

Hi GF

thank you for your thread

we have aboslutely nothing to gain by siding with that Moran

Tony Blair has the same ideology as the Neo-Cons. Blair's career is suffering as a result. Of course even before that we shared a long history of cooperation, especially in WWII. I'm sure it will continue after this batch of bastards are gone.

Because the USA is the biggest kid in the playground, and the UK is the nerd who doesn't want to get beaten up. ;)

Seriously though, the closer we get to the US goverment, the higher the chance that we can help them to see sense. I'm probably being a bit optimistic in the case of the Bush administration, but you never know what will happen at the next election. Perhaps the US will have a government that cares more about the well being of the planet and it's various inhabitants than it does about money, power and religion?

Because the USA is the biggest kid in the playground, and the UK is the nerd who doesn't want to get beaten up. ;)

Seriously though, the closer we get to the US goverment, the higher the chance that we can help them to see sense. I'm probably being a bit optimistic in the case of the Bush administration, but you never know what will happen at the next election. Perhaps the US will have a government that cares more about the well being of the planet and it's various inhabitants than it does about money, power and religion?

This has never worked in the past (see the UN resolutions).

In fact having the UK as an ally provides an illusion of European support for the US actions.

What has the UK gained from its alliance with the US since 2001 apart from worldwide contempt?

2001? You must have meant 1901.

Alliance with the US kept Britain on the winning side of both World Wars and the Cold War, and the so-called "special relationship" has resulted in unequalled access and influence to the government of the most powerful nation in the world. This has included access to American nuclear weaponry and other military goodies, and has allowed Britain to maintain a political/security position independent of continental Europe.

Basically, it allows Britain to punch above its weight on the world/regional stage, which is important to the psyche of a former superpower.

Basically, it allows Britain to punch above its weight on the world/regional stage, which is important to the psyche of a former superpower.
In what way has the UK punched above it weight?

In what way has the UK punched above it weight?

For starters, the UK has a veto on the UNSC, whereas many other countries of comparable size and importance do not; this has everything to do with the alliance with America. The biggest example would be Britain's aloof position with respect to the EU. The populations and economies of France and Italy are comparable to that of the UK, and Germany is much bigger. So, without an external patron, Britain would quickly find itself demoted to junior partner in the European order.

What is perhaps most important about the alliance with America is how it affects Britain's relationship with the rest of the Anglophone world (Canada, Australia and New Zealand). Since the US is the ruler of the high seas, and so the guarantor of the security of Canada, Australia and New Zealand, Britain must remain close to America if it wants to retain its position as patriarch of the Anglophone world. Giving up the alliance with America would entail distancing itself from the core members of the Commonwealth. This would reduce Britain from its current status as the European vanguard of an English-speaking civilization that dominates much of the world to a small island off the coast of France.

What military goodies?

Last I checked the US is using British planes and we aren't using shit of theirs.

For starters, the UK has a veto on the UNSC, whereas many other countries of comparable size and importance do not; this has everything to do with the alliance with America. The biggest example would be Britain's aloof position with respect to the EU. The populations and economies of France and Italy are comparable to that of the UK, and Germany is much bigger. So, without an external patron, Britain would quickly find itself demoted to junior partner in the European order.

What is perhaps most important about the alliance with America is how it affects Britain's relationship with the rest of the Anglophone world (Canada, Australia and New Zealand). Since the US is the ruler of the high seas, and so the guarantor of the security of Canada, Australia and New Zealand, Britain must remain close to America if it wants to retain its position as patriarch of the Anglophone world. Giving up the alliance with America would entail distancing itself from the core members of the Commonwealth. This would reduce Britain from its current status as the European vanguard of an English-speaking civilization that dominates much of the world to a small island off the coast of France.

Uhhh....spot the american?

For starters, the UK has a veto on the UNSC, whereas many other countries of comparable size and importance do not; this has everything to do with the alliance with America.

This has got nothing to do with America. Britain's colonial past (right up to the 1960's) accounts for its influence in the World, not because they are "pals" with the US.

Blair has stated that America is the only superpower, and that it stands for ideals such as freedom and democracy. Blair has always stated that it was a moral choice to side with the USA.

The USA has all the military might in the world. No other country compares.

Now that I have stated the obvious, the US dollar is also worth a lot and this has to do more with the worth of the dollar and the power of the US economy, because US military might while strong, is not so strong that the EU could not side with Russia and China and have an opposing force.

I think it's simple, if you were Britain wouldn't you side with America? Think of it this way, wouldnt you side with the man with the big gun?

I think it's simple, if you were Britain wouldn't you side with America? Think of it this way, wouldnt you side with the man with the big gun?
So it has nothing to do with morals? Just power?

I was just wondering why Tony Blair is so willing to take it up the shitter from bush, and why he is so keen on all this "special relationship" nonsense?

What has the UK gained from its alliance with the US since 2001 apart from worldwide contempt?

Does the US actually speak about this "special relationship" or is it only Tony Blair who's thinking that? As far as I can see the yanks are indifferent.


It's simple, America has the gun. I don't know what you hope to learn by surveying American citizens and British citizens, why don't you ask President Bush and Tony Blair?

samcdkey, with out the American way you wouldn't be here getting your education from us, Just a small question? are you receiving any Grants from the American Government, or American Scholarships? or are you paying for your education all by yourself?

This has got nothing to do with America. Britain's colonial past (right up to the 1960's) accounts for its influence in the World, not because they are "pals" with the US.

"Influence in the world" is not the same thing as permanent membership on the UNSC.

What military goodies?.

Nuclear weapons and missiles would be the big ones.


Last I checked the US is using British planes and we aren't using shit of theirs.

There are many types of military equipment besides planes, although I'd add that Britain will be replacing the Harrier with the Joint Strike Fighter in the coming years.

"Influence in the world" is not the same thing as permanent membership on the UNSC.
So how did France get there?

There are many types of military equipment besides planes, although I'd add that Britain will be replacing the Harrier with the Joint Strike Fighter in the coming years.
Whoops, so all the money thrown at the Eurofighter was a waste of billions....

It would seem that except for Spain, the UK has the most negative image of the US as a threat to global security.

Worryingly, anti-American views are now more prevalent in the U.K. than in some continental European countries with a far deeper tradition of public skepticism toward the U.S. In the latest Financial Times/Harris poll of opinion in five of the EU’s largest member states, a staggering 36 percent of Britons surveyed described the United States as “the greatest threat to global security.” (Just 19 percent of British respondents cited Iran as the world’s greatest threat). In contrast, 28 percent of Frenchmen, 21 percent of Italians, and 24 percent of Germans shared this view. Only in Spain was the negative perception of U.S. foreign policy greater than in Britain.

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=16749
This is from a pro-US article.

Now that I have stated the obvious, the US dollar is also worth a lot and this has to do more with the worth of the dollar and the power of the US economy, because US military might while strong, is not so strong that the EU could not side with Russia and China and have an opposing force.



The US Dollar is literally worthless.

A united EU alone could easily crush the US.

G. F. Schleebenhorst,

Lockheed Hercules C1, C3, C4, C5 - US - Lockheed - Four engine, turbine, transport
Boeing-Vertol Chinook HC1, HC2, HC2A, HC3 - twin rotor heavy lift helicopter
Boeing C-17 Globemaster III
Beechcraft King Air - United States built twin-engined turboprop multi-engine trainer
Lockheed Tristar C1, KC1, C2, C2A - USA - Three engine, jet, transport/refueling

So the R.A.F. doesn't use american aircraft? The only British aircraft design that we use is the AV-8B Harrier.

It's true that the recent Bush/Blair relationship has not been beneficial to anyone, but alliances are always advantageous to have.

G. F. Schleebenhorst,

Lockheed Hercules C1, C3, C4, C5 - US - Lockheed - Four engine, turbine, transport
Boeing-Vertol Chinook HC1, HC2, HC2A, HC3 - twin rotor heavy lift helicopter
Boeing C-17 Globemaster III
Beechcraft King Air - United States built twin-engined turboprop multi-engine trainer
Lockheed Tristar C1, KC1, C2, C2A - USA - Three engine, jet, transport/refueling

So the R.A.F. doesn't use american aircraft? The only British aircraft design that we use is the AV-8B Harrier.

Hehe, well the last time I checked was a while ago....

G. F. Schleebenhorst,

Lockheed Hercules C1, C3, C4, C5 - US - Lockheed - Four engine, turbine, transport
Boeing-Vertol Chinook HC1, HC2, HC2A, HC3 - twin rotor heavy lift helicopter
Boeing C-17 Globemaster III
Beechcraft King Air - United States built twin-engined turboprop multi-engine trainer
Lockheed Tristar C1, KC1, C2, C2A - USA - Three engine, jet, transport/refueling

So the R.A.F. doesn't use american aircraft? The only British aircraft design that we use is the AV-8B Harrier.

The UK would not have these if it were not for the "special relationship"? Who else does the US sell its military aircraft to?

Does the US actually speak about this "special relationship" or is it only Tony Blair who's thinking that? As far as I can see the yanks are indifferent.Americans have a special love for England. (I really mean just England, not the U.K. Sorry.) You'd have thought we were still part of the Empire when Charles and Diana got married, and her death caused the biggest outpouring of grief since John Kennedy was assassinated.

I don't know about Tony Blair, but if the Queen came out in public and scolded our Redneck in Chief for his stupid, arrogant, ruinous, dangerous, dishonorable, counterproductive policies, I think a lot of Americans would stop and think about it. Even Bono and the Pope don't get that kind of respect.

And just like you expect us to know that you're not all Englishmen we expect you to know that we're not all Yankees.

Well, I will stop calling you lot yanks the day you guys stop calling me english.

Well, I will stop calling you lot yanks the day you guys stop calling me english.
I always mistaken for Austrailian. :confused:

Whoops, so all the money thrown at the Eurofighter was a waste of billions....

Nah, the UK has purchased over 200 of them to replace the Tornados and Jaguars. The Typhoon is a sweet plane, no doubt, but the F35 does vertical takeoff/landing (as did the Harrier it's replacing), which is an important feature considering the size of British aircraft carriers. Even the larger next-generation British carriers are only intended for STOVL use.

Nah, the UK has purchased over 200 of them to replace the Tornados and Jaguars. The Typhoon is a sweet plane, no doubt, but the F35 does vertical takeoff/landing (as did the Harrier it's replacing), which is an important feature considering the size of British aircraft carriers. Even the larger next-generation British carriers are only intended for STOVL use.
I wonder if the UK gets more out of it then the US....

http://www.thebusinessonline.com/Stories.aspx?Bush%20rejects%20Blair%E2%80%99s%20pl eas%20to%20save%20F-35%20contract%20for%20Rolls-Royce&StoryID=FA93D8B4-76B7-40E9-8EF6-1B63D487518E&SectionID=F3B76EF0-7991-4389-B72E-D07EB5AA1CEE

The US Dollar is literally worthless.

A united EU alone could easily crush the US.

The USA has the gun. Like I said. The USA is perhaps the only country with the gun, maybe Russia too.

Aren't you the same guy who said, that bullys should rule the world? If these countries were people, wouldn't you side with whoever had the gun?

I would have thought any country with Nukes "has the gun".

The UK would not have these if it were not for the "special relationship"? Who else does the US sell its military aircraft to?

Isreal?

Saudi Arabia?

Pakistan

I would have thought any country with Nukes "has the gun".

Nukes are the slingshot, the gun are the next generation of weapons beyond the Nuke. Like the missle defense systems and secret weaponry.

Who are you protecting yourself from with missle defense systems? China? Iran?

What secret weaponry? (Let me guess, its a secret...)

The USA has the gun. Like I said. The USA is perhaps the only country with the gun, maybe Russia too.

Aren't you the same guy who said, that bullys should rule the world? If these countries were people, wouldn't you side with whoever had the gun?

Don't think I said that....however bullies DO rule the world, and they always have done.

Pay attention:


MISSILE.

A united EU alone could easily crush the US.

Funny, doesn't the U in EU stand for "Union?" :)

Seriously, though, you guys all seem to think Americans believe they're invincible. You should know that the foundation of America's foreign policy is the certainty that, should either Europe or Asia come to be dominated by a single power, America will soon be in deep shit. The basic goal of the foreign policy, then, is to prevent such an outcome by guaranteeing the current orders in both regions (which each feature a multitude of smaller, independent states).

This is basically a globalized version of what used to be Britain's policy towards continental Europe (i.e., if any single power dominates the continent, Britian will soon be fucked, and so should intervene to preserve the independence of the low countries). Note that both policies are appropriate for islands situated near larger land masses. Geopolitically, the USA is as much an island off of Eurasia as the UK is an island off of Europe. Such a policy tends to make the "island" nation popular with small/weak countries, who would be dominated without their intervention (the low countries, Eastern Europe, South Korea, Taiwan, the Gulf States) and unpopular with big/strong countries, who stand to expand their influence without the island's interference (France, Germany, Iran, Russia, China).

This special relationship sounds gay. Bush and Blairs public displays of affection are effing digusting, they're tooooo embarassing to watch.

‘I fucking love you.’

‘You’re my greatest friend, ever!’

‘I’ll always be here for you’

‘I wish you were PM forever’

‘You want to see the massive boners I get everytime you say the words ‘Friend’ and ‘Great Britain’ in the same sentence?’

This has to be the most publicly broadcasted homosexual affair in the history of mankind and it’s fucking disgusting. I could imagine these two guys shooting an adult movie, they could call it….. ‘the special relationship!’ Fucking hell! How sick is that?!?!

Well, I will stop calling you lot yanks the day you guys stop calling me english.I'm not calling you English. My point is that we specifically love the English people. We've got nothing against the Scotch, as we call them--they make fine whiskey and tape--and we'll probably never quite understand the whole Northern Ireland thing. But as anglophones and a former colony, we feel that King Arthur, Shakespeare, Robin Hood and the Beatles are figures in our own history and culture.

Saudi Arabia?
AND THE LIST GOES ON.................

AND THE LIST GOES ON.................

Yeah, you don't have to be a terribly tight ally of the US in order to buy aircraft. Probably half of the countries in the world have some US planes. But there are aircraft, and then there are aircraft. America will sell F-16s to just about anybody, but you have to be pretty tight with us if you want the latest stuff. Especially if you want enough technology transfers to actually repair and modify the things independently. In those terms, the UK has more access to America's military aviation industry than anyone else.

This has never worked in the past (see the UN resolutions).

In fact having the UK as an ally provides an illusion of European support for the US actions.

Like I said, I'm being optimistic.
That's true to a point, but not if you consider the backlash against the French for them not supporting the 'war on terror' (I feel stupid even writing those words).
Perhaps the question should be what does the US have to gain from it's relationship with the UK? Couldn't they just do what they please without our support?

--and we'll probably never quite understand the whole Northern Ireland thing.

I don't think any English or Irish people in general fully got the jist. Personally I thought it was just a clever way for the Military to continue getting funding for a "Threat", afterall if there was peace we wouldn't need them.

It goes back further than that, doesn't it? A couple of centuries, to when there was migration between Scotland and Ireland and the concept arose of "Scots-Irish" as an ethnic subgroup?

I only recently decided to read up on the Picts. And learned that the Scoti, the tribe after whom Scotland is named, were an Irish people who came over and settled there. That there is much evidence suggesting that the Picts, the people who inhabited what is now Scotland when the Romans first arrived, were not even Celtic but members of a pre-Indo-European wave of settlers. That Gaelic, which is now considered to be the "native tongue" of Scotland, was brought over from Ireland.

European history is complicated.

Americans have a special love for England. (I really mean just England, not the U.K. Sorry.) You'd have thought we were still part of the Empire when Charles and Diana got married, and her death caused the biggest outpouring of grief since John Kennedy was assassinated.

America is England's prodigal son who went out and made it big. Sure we had some spats early on, that whole revolution deal, the war of 1812. But it's only natural for a father and son to clash as the son asserts his independence. But when it comes down to it, America will always stand by England. We're practically family. And we expect the same from England. Tony Blair didn't let us down.

Tony Blair didn't let us down.
No, he just let Britain down.

Tony Blair can fuck off and take all his immigrants with him.

Yeah but he has such a lovely grin...

Seems all we've gained from our "special relationship" with the US is having to take 5 times longer at the airport security desk.

You guys are not very good at current news, are you? Hint:

Last year was the first for the UK when they imported more oil then exported....

Blair simply just wanted to get a piece from the Iraqi loot...

The UK is still having to pay for that oil, so how is that an advantage? Iraqs oil output is actually lower than pre-war. UK PLC didnt get much of a look-in regrading oil contracts. But then again, what did China (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20060928.IBIRAQ28/TPStory/Business) do to get in?

Iraq's oil output is actually lower than pre-war.

Obviously, things are not going there according to plan... Several times it is not the price of a product, but the access to it that counts...

Sun Tsu' wrote in his war diary about "Plundering Resources". In essence using the resources in your "enemies" territory lowers the resources they have available and lowering the necessity of your forces having a supply line. (since you are using their resources)

You could suggest that perhaps when they identified that the Oil reserves in the US were lower than previously calculated that perhaps they should eat up someone elses resources that was deserving.

As for China and it's increase in Oil Consumption, that is a concern afterall they have deals with Argentina in place for Oil, I know its down to their economic boom thanks too all the cheap imports that everyone buys. A whole nation of people that originally couldn't afford to buy what they produced (i.e. Cars) now catching up with the markets they've been fullfilling all these years.

This is the main reason why hybrid/Eco car's need more development and plastics recycled, as our resources are being plundered faster than ever.

The US is a spawn of the UK. You think the Brits would rather hang out with the French?? American history, language, law, culture, goverment, music etc..etc.. either comes directly from the Brits or has/is strongly influenced by the Brits.