Britain's New Clout

Andrewsullivan.com: Britain's New Clout: The fruits of anti-anti-Americanism, January 19, 2003

[ 30. May 2004, 07:29 PM: Message edited by: Deep Web Diver ]

 

I cant really agree on this article. I know several fine British citizens and several more British soldiers--and not one has ever said anything to me that can be disparaging to the USA in any way shape or form.

Personally--I think Britain is behind us--maybe a bit apprehensive with a few people but--they are our strongest ally and best of friends in Europe. I think The Netherlands and Denmark are the next closest we have.

Anyway--my two cents worth is that they arent disliking us at all--maybe a few radicals of some sort--but for the most part--as in Germany's case--I think we are appreciated--and especially by older generations.

I know that if England ever gets into a bad spot--I do and will suppore them as much as I do our efforts.

In the British--I have found many true friends and people I personally care alot for. I do thank GOD--for them being the rightous people they are and I have much respect for them and their position on things.

Yep--I do like the British people alot--like the Germans and most Western-Europeans as well.

Im definately not leaving out the rest of the UK or other countries either--but talking about them as they were the subject of this fine article.

Thanks for the article Crapgame.

 

Normally, i avoid these discussion here. Criticisim of US poilcy is often seen as being Anti-American. Just as condemning Israel is seen as being Anti-semetic.

But, there is alot of Anti-US feeling here. Alot of it is simply jumping on the bandwagon, which is happening alot. Its a case of everyone else is bashing the Yanks, so i'll have a go.

But, it does seem to many that this special relationship is a one way thing. We back the US, but when it comes to other things like he enviroment, the ICC and so on, the US does not want to know.

Now, it should be oted hat this is not the American people we talk about, but their govement. For all i know, most Americans may support the ICC or improvments in the enviroment.

Many may be jealous of US power. But it does not help when that power is used to get your own way and ignre the wishes of others.

Of course, if this had been 100 years ago, it would be us Brits who were getting it in the neck. But, the avalibility of info was not as widespread as it is now.

And as long as the US either has to or wants to be the worlds policeman, and to use its pwer t its own ends, it has to expect that people will condemn it.

 

Well said my friend and thank you. I also fully agree with you.

 

Well I am often occused of being anti-American, pro-Arab and a raving lefty (by my best mate no less) and I suppose to a degree I am. There is a lot of anti-Americanism in Britain I think but I would like to repeat what Martin said, most of it is anti-Bush, not anti US. I have numerous good friends in the states despite never having visited the US itself and if I had the opportunity I would come over ASAP. The thing is that Bush seems to believe that just because the USA is the biggest most powerful nation in the world that he has the right to do what he wants. It is this apparent attitude (however untrue it may be) that leads to hostility.

Even so I must add that the whole issue with the Arabs and so on seems to me to be very much a historical issue, the arabs have little or no history of democracy, they base their laws on moral standards rather than for the protection of the individual (whilst this gets extreme in some places it is perhapse best exemplified in nations such as Oman where most laws are moral but not extreme). It is hardly surprising that they percieve the western democratic ideal (as we see it) as a threat. Unfortunatly (once again probably due to a history of responding to threats with violent confrontation) the response of many Arabs is to attack what they see as the source of the problem, the USA. Had the British Empire not fallen the target would have been us.

Basically now most anti-Americanism is focused on the invasion of Iraq, the view that America has no right to invade Iraq without the support of the UN and that it is just trying to find an exscuse to invade is often percieved as 'anti-Americanism'. Frankly it isnt, I am not anti-American, I am anti-imperialsit, anti-globalisation and anti-opression but I have found many fine people amongst the US population and am honoured to count some amongst my best friends.

On the other hand, 'yank bashing' is something of a hobby of mine and I think thats fine as long as it is all in fun (and I must say I get as good as I give).

Here is to the 'special relationship' between the US and UK.

 

You're welcome Carl.

[ 30. May 2004, 07:31 PM: Message edited by: Deep Web Diver ]

 

One thing to be aware of here, is that Andrew Sullivan is a well known article wrtier in the UK, for the Times and others, as well as in the States. He is firmly entrenched on one side of the debate on present matters, and could therefor be presenting a biased view. Thats not a critisism just a flag popping up as a warning signal, there are other journalists with the same rich background who would oppose his view. Two sides to every story I suppose. Just be aware he does not, as with others on the opposing side have an independant view of matters.

If you were to take his writings as a feel for the way things are going in the UK, then I suppose I could imagine the same from Buchannan in the States, not that I do, just aware of where each man is camped.

But cheers for that Crapgrame I had not seen that article.

 

Time for some light hearted relief though..requires Flash...

http//:www.idleworm.com/nws/2002/11/iraq2.shtml

 

Appeasement seems to be a basic tool in British politics as long as it is to their national benefit. (nothing wrong with that). Actually you can take those "analyses" change some key words (Vichy iso Blair etc.) and I#ll buy it as an June 1940 newspaper.

Fact is that the balance of power is out of control and I can't remember any good times when one world hegemonist had all the power. Somebody has to fill the vacuum, if they like it or not.

Cheers,

 

Appeasement , Vichy and Blair, all in one comparison Andy?

Im no fan of Blair, hes mrs. Thatcher in disguise...But to Blair an appeaser, Tony Blair is gunning for war.

Your either having a laugh Andy or your in serious need of a reality check mate.

Cheers.

 

Now that is insulting.

How can you compare that snivaling slimy worm to magie.

Would she have just rolled over to the Spanish on the Gibaralter issue.

He is fine at talking tough when hes stood behind Bush. But the rest of the time, his backbone goes completly.

He caved into Sinn Fein.
He will hand over Gib to Spain.
He allows us to be used as part of the Son of Star Wars, even though we gain nothing.
He gives into any immagrant who wants an easy life. While our own people lose out.

The sooner this toss pot is booted, the better.

 

Would she have just rolled over to the Spanish on the Gibaralter issue.

Rolling over? Your kidding Bish, hes the one offering it to the Spanish.

What was the vote in Gib end of last year, 99.somehting no to shared sovereignty or handover.

Havent you heared his u turn today on asaylum?
Tellng court of human rights we wont go along with em.

But appeaser?

Mind you he does make u turns whenever he sees a poll. So maybe hes for turning here.

Talking of Maggie, I was in Woolwich once on one of her visits, got spoken to about sign I had on bed...Nil by mouth.. and one on toes, Nil by Maggie. I was joking wasnt I...These pongos, no sense of humour. Forces hospitals, dont know about now, but the only place you get Guinness on prescription..

 

Keep us informe don more if you can find it Crapgame

"Q" Why is Blair getting rid of Gibralter? Is this going to be like giving away Hong Kong--like has been done? And I couldnt see any reason for giving away Hong Kong either. I know someone who lived there and loved it.

 

The Americans are too easily led.
This whole "War on Terrorism" is much like a giant intelligence test, and most people here seem to be failing. People accept as-fact nearly everything which is printed in the newspapers--very often, too, spy novels and Hollywood movies are used as "source material" for a very narrow political understanding. Political "philosophy" often takes the shape of various catch-phrases and one-liners picked off of radio talk shows.
People will incessantly repeat inanities such as, "Oh, Britain... we saved their butts during Dub-Dub 2; what are they criticizing us for?" and use that as the basis of their argument.
Concerning the Middle East, many Americans now believe that we have some divine right to all their oil "because we can kick their ass."
I remember on the morning of 911, running into a restaurant and asking that they turn on the TV because two planes crashed into the WTC. The restaurant people said they "heard something like that on the radio," and then, basically, threw me out because they were in the middle of making their potato salad or something.

 

carl, i don't think he has ofered to get rid of Gib. Just that the Spanish have said they a least want a say in running it, and Blair just can't say no.

I think if he Argies asked for the Falklands back, he would actually consider it. Though i think there would be more of an uproar here about it. But, as he does not seem to have any interest in the views ofthe people he would do it anway.

Can you imagine what would happen if Bush said he was giving Texas over to Mexico. And damn to hell what the people thought about it.

 

I see your point Bish, and thanks for teaching me something new. Im going too make it a point to do some research on this as well.

 

Bish

Maggie caved in on other issues, like Zimbabwe. It is no mean reflection on her Premiership that she now stands as one of the most reviled Prime Ministers we have had. Nevertheless she was very good at caving into the US : deployment of Cruise and Pershing which made us far greater targets than BMD ever could - which of course she wholeheartedly supports.

In fact I doubt Thatcher would have been able to carry Kosovo as Blair did - she was a poor alliance builder whereas Blair is far more adept at that role.

As for anti-Americanism in the UK it has always existed. It just expands or contracts depending on the status of the current US Administration. What makes it so marked at the moment is that we have gone from a highly popular President in the UK (Clinton) to one widely seen as a barely literate moron. In the UK nobody cared whether Clinton kept it in his pants or not but they do worry if the last remaining Superpower is controlled by a man who seems to lack the power of logical thought. Americans remain popular in the UK, although the camera-clanking loudmouth tourist is taken on sufferance because of his Dollars, but it is the Administration - in particular this highly arrogant one - than reinforces already held perceptions.

There is also the wider problem. A hegemonic state like the US is going to attract hostility, envy and distrust purely for that reason. Being the last Superpower is not a ticket to happiness or popularity.

Jumbo

 

A question, then, Jumbo- how do the British feel about their own government fully supporting Bush in the "War on Terror"?
Sounds like the British certainly dislike the current administration (who dosen't!), but it also seems they are conveniently ignoring their own government...

Or do the British blame Bush for the fact that Blair follows him on everything??

 

And maggie would never have caved into those animals from Sinn Fein and would definatly not have allowed them into Parliment.

For this alone Blair should be shot.

As for the Alliance in Kosovo, ye sure. An Alliance where the Brits were expected to go infirst and take the brunt of it.

 

and he hasn't said yes either.

nonsense .
But Maggie( the wicked witch of the south) did consider it.
After all, she did try her best to do a deal with the Argies on this issue.It was just the fact that the Falklanders wouldn't accept the deal that stopped her.
So she did the next best thing. She ran down the defenses, and planned to withdraw HMS Endurance the last RN ship based there. This caused the Argies to think we wouldn't defend the islands.

If you want to read how Maggie misshandeled the situation you should read "The Battle for the Falklands" by Max Hastings and Simon Jenkins.

[ 28. January 2003, 03:40 PM: Message edited by: redcoat ]