Britain's Relationship With America

[Prophet Tenebrae]

I know there are millions of Americans frequenting the boards but... fellow Britains, what - if anything - do you think we have gained and will gain from our "special friendship" with the US?

It seems that New Labour often try to make much political capital of the fact that we're very close friends with the world's greatest economic and military power but really what have we got out of it? A war that we didn't want and a PM who spends a lot of his time just doing pretty much anything but paying attention to his own country?

[Scully]

I don't think we can confirm the special relationship, unless Tony Blair is elected again- it isn't over yet.

[David Bean]

Don't ask me about special relationships with the US!

[hr]"Fiat justicia ruat colelum (let justice be done though the heavens may fall)" - Judge James Horton (family motto)

[yank]

You will get that missile defense thing completely paid for by the american taxpayer. I think I read its being fully implemented over the next couple of years or so.

Besides, do you really want to align yourself with France? No matter how much you deny it, the US and the UK have a lot more in common than most other countries. Obviously, it's the UK's choice as to whether to continue the 'friendship,' but I do believe it's in your interest. You can be a leader in the EU and friends with the US at the sametime.

On the same note, I think it's in the US' interest to have the UK as an ally, but I'm sure both of us can move on...Australia could be our new best friend. You can have France or Germany or some other holdover from last century. You could always go with the China/Russia route...and get alienated by the rest of the world. Perhaps when the UK becomes majority hindu, you can ask to join India.

In all seriousness though, the UK and the US will remain friends whether you like it or not.

[hr]"I am responsible to only God and history." - Francisco Franco

[Marco Biagi]

Let's just go ahead and join the bloody USA. With the federal system, we'd be accorded the same amount of autonomy as one of their states, so most of our governance could continue the same way. We'd also have 91 electoral college votes, 2 Senators and 89 members of the House of Representatives that would almost certainly tilt the US political spectrum back towards the sane. Or we could join as each of the constituent nations, and thereby have 8 Senators. And Tony Blair would end up being President in 2008.

If you think this is a mad idea, you're right. But then I'm a Scot who thinks being part of the United Kingdom is a stupid idea, much less being part of the United States. It's funny how Scottish Tories always object to being ruled by Brussels but are always happy to be run by London. Anyway, if Scotland was a state of the USA, we'd have more autonomy than we do within the UK.

[amac]

[s]yank wrote on 22:46, 12th Nov 2004:
You will get that missile defense thing completely paid for by the american taxpayer. I think I read its being fully implemented over the next couple of years or so.
Oh good. I feel so secure knowing none of those danerous countries with inter-continental missiles can attack us. Oh wait... there aren't threatening countries that could do it!!! And it doesn't even work properly.

Which leads to the obvious question... who cares??!! (Apart from the American taxpayers who are paying silly amounts of money funding unbelievably amounts of crap).

[iohannes]

Besides which the missile defence system doesn't actually work. Has never worked and is almost impossible for it too work. But apart from that? The relationship is a joke, it's a mirage spouted by politicians that means nothing. Yes Americans and British people have a lot in common, but then we also have a lot in common with the rest of Europe despite what the Daily Mail would have us believe. Politically, socially, and economically, in fact, we have more in common with most continental Europeans than we do with a lot of people in the States, especiallly inhabitants of the red states.

91 electoral college votes sounds like fun though.

[LonelyPilgrim]

Hey, travel to a red state sometime. We're not that different. Political views aside, economically and socially, very little difference.

And even then, you commit a fallacy if you think that a red state is full of Bush supporters. He only needed 51% of the vote to win a given state, which means 49% could be 'blue' folks like you. Granted some states are more heavily 'red' than others, but I think you get the idea.

[yank]

[s]LonelyPilgrim wrote on 22:50, 13th Nov 2004:
Hey, travel to a red state sometime. We're not that different. Political views aside, economically and socially, very little difference.

And even then, you commit a fallacy if you think that a red state is full of Bush supporters. He only needed 51% of the vote to win a given state, which means 49% could be 'blue' folks like you. Granted some states are more heavily 'red' than others, but I think you get the idea.


That's definitely true. Florida, for example, was barely republican this time. Even the most republican states are only like 2/3 republican, which although a lot still means there's millions of liberals in each republican state. But yeah, I think you Brits do have a good point in that there really is not true friendship between any nations...self interest is always the most important thing. And the UK and US are not always going to have the same interests, even though they will a lot more often than most nations would.

[hr]
"I am responsible to only God and history." - Francisco Franco

[novium]

I think there are two relationships to consider- the political, which is what most people are focusing on, and the cultural. Perhaps even the former is a direct result of the latter.

I think I can say pretty confidently that america relates much better to Great Britain than any other country in europe. And short of Canada and Australia, maybe the world.

[yank]

lets create the USHM....united states of her majesty....works for me...hopefully it'll appeal to the brits

[hr]"I am responsible to only God and history." - Francisco Franco

[garage red]

I think that the "special relationship" is only really between our respective leaders. Few things seem more self-evident to emphasise this than the result of the US election and the British reaction to it. Culturally it is difficult to see what joins an increasingly liberal and atheistic Britain to an increasily righteous and conservative US

[novium]

[s]garage red wrote on 11:50, 14th Nov 2004:
I think that the "special relationship" is only really between our respective leaders. Few things seem more self-evident to emphasise this than the result of the US election and the British reaction to it. Culturally it is difficult to see what joins an increasingly liberal and atheistic Britain to an increasily righteous and conservative US




surely you meant "religious"?
And I wouldn't say it is increasingly that or conservative. I would say that it has remained fairly constant.

and on personal levels, the relationship is fairly strong- look at all the american students wandering around here. And when I was working last summer, most of the foreign tourists (and I suppose, residents as well in some cases) that came into the store were british.

[Guest]

[s]yank wrote on 22:46, 12th Nov 2004:
Besides, do you really want to align yourself with France?


What exactly is wrong with France? Considering the US elect the leader on the basis of how good he is at going to church on a sunday or the fact that he wears jeans instead of a suit, the UK has far more in common with other European countries than it does with the US.

The UK gets nothing out of the "special relationship" as far as I can see, certainly nothing that the general public want.

[Guest]

Well heart disease and obesity is on the increase, that's not very positive, or is it?

[Haunted]

http://www.universalmotown.com/mediapla ... player.htm

Sums up my view

[Spaceman Spiff]

What do you all think of France? I may be mistaken but there appears to be a lot of distain directed toward the French as proven buy the clear distaste shown in the (moronic) statement made by YANK. I may be biased as my dad is French but all that aside I dont feel the French are all that bad. So they didnt agree with the Iraq war but then neither did many European conutries and the only country which got stick about it was France for instance at the time many American businesses changing the name of french fries to freedom fries in a stupid form of insult and protest.

[hr]"Veni, Vidi, Dormivi"
(I came, I saw, I slept)

[novium]

[s]Spaceman Spiff wrote on 14:47, 15th Nov 2004:
many American businesses changing the name of french fries to freedom fries in a stupid form of insult and protest.

[hr]"Veni, Vidi, Dormivi"
(I came, I saw, I slept)



That whole freedom fry thing was a joke gone bad. Or rather, it was an idiotic suggestion by two idiot politians who couldn't think of anything better to do with the taxpayers' money. But it was so ridiculous, so funny it was turned into such a large joke that people started copying it.


The US and the French have had a love-hate relationship since the very beginning. But I don't feel too sorry for the french. While I will scold fellow americans for making really lame and stupid anti-french jokes, I am quite aware that the french say equally mean things about us, and sometimes they seem much more serious about it. nahnahnhahnahnah:)

[Preacher's Kid]

Arrgh-- it's all so very silly.

There are something like 300 million people in the US, and something along the lines of 60+ million in the UK. Of these 360 million people, roughly seven are affected by the 'special relationship' the BBC always mentions. For god's sake, let us try to fix actual problems--like massive poverty on our streets, massive drug abuse, and massive middle sections-- rather than argue to hell and back about the ethics of International Relations and whether France is wussardly. It gets the human species nowhere.

John

ps- in defense of France, it's always healthy to hear dissent. especially when superpowers seem to get the final say. But in response to the well meaning lefties who support Jacques Chirac and his fellow Parisians as a knee-jerk reaction to Donald "old europe" Rumsfeld, I encourage you to examine civilian casualties in the Ivory Coast, as well as France's role in the Rwandan Genocide. [it's pretty terrifying]
For what it's worth, governments generally fuck up. All we can do is try to deal with it.

[novium]

[s]Preacher's Kid wrote on 15:45, 15th Nov 2004:

For what it's worth, governments generally fuck up. All we can do is try to deal with it.


true.
Saw this on another forum:
" major research institution has recently announced the discovery of the heaviest chemical element yet known to science.

The new element has been tentatively named 'Governmentium.' Governmentium has 1 neutron, 12 assistant neutrons, 75 deputy
neutrons, and 11 assistant deputy neutrons, giving it an atomic mass of 312.

These 312 particles are held together by forces called morons, which are surrounded by vast quantities of lepton-like particles
called peons.

Since governmentium has no electrons, it is inert.

However, it can be detected as it impedes every reaction with which it comes into contact. A minute amount of governmentium causes one reaction to take over 4 days to complete when it would normally take less than a second. Governmentium has a normal half-life of 3 years; it does not decay, but instead undergoes a reorganization in which a portion of the assistant neutrons and deputy neutrons exchange places.

In fact, governmentium's mass will actually increase over time, since each reorganization will cause some morons to become
neutrons, forming isodopes.

This characteristic of moron-promotion leads some scientists to speculate that governmentium is formed whenever morons reach a certain quantity in concentration. This hypothetical quantity is referred to as 'Critical Morass.' You will know it when you see it. "