The Special Relationship

We all know this dates back to WW2 but is it still there or is all bull now?

On this side of the pond politians still say it is, I don't think it is. Over to you guys on the far side of the pond.

 

Richard,

Morning from the States... Why don't you think it is?? Curious to hear your thoughts first...

 

Evening from me... Not me but our politicians, on the odd occasion I have heard Tony Blair when he was Prime Minister and if I'm not wrong are current PM Gordon Brown. I can see this relationship ended years ago and just can not understand while are politicians still think it's still going strong.

Do your politicians think the same or they know it ended.

 

I think it depends on who you ask. Both of our societies ebb and flow politically. Americans will "sense" the changes and like your changes and be more supportive .. or not.
This goes for other countries in Europe too. Look at France. Since Sarkozy and a more conservative government was elected they are much more supportive of us. Prior to that it was "cold".

Interesting how mainland Europe is moving away from socialism and we are moving toward it.
Both societies are changing but yours is doing it faster than ours and some sense it portends changes in our relationship.

I think when push comes to shove you can count on us and we like to think it goes both ways.
Ted

 

Personally, I believe that the Obama administration is incredible naive and inexperienced in international relationships; it has literally put us on the side of tyrants in Latin American and snubbed our real Allies. Obama has decided not to decide about a troop surge in Afghanistan and only met with his commander there ONE time.

I agree with the French President. He finds Obama's ideas about nuclear disarmament "rather naive". And that's an understatement!

I believe thought the special US-UK bond still remains strong in the intel, military, and some areas of the State Dept (not many) despite the current WH administration.

Please bear with us for the next 3+ years!

 

I can assure you it is alive and well and practiced on a daily basis in most higher millitary commands. With physical hot seating on a daily basis at both planning and intelligence levels. At lower levels who do you think has quietly stepped in to to support our afghan helo lift. Our casualties are as likely to arrive at fd hosp in a usa chopper as a brit. Menworth hill..henlow..many more.. Its never slept.. Politicians come and go.. Others just get on with it on a daily basis.

 

Well said, Urqh.

At the highest levels, I have to say I felt rather embarrassed when the British PM asked to talk with Obama fives times or more at the G-20 (?) meeting and was told the O was just too busy. Sad really.

 

Whew...I was beginning to think Glen Beck had you locked in his cellar, texson!

 

OK, so it's still there on the Military Front but the question was is it still there on the political halls of power.

 

Of course, the current WH is almost totally focused on "domestic" issues like forcing government healthcare on everyone whether we want or need it, printing money hand over fist to make a debt payments "good", and supporting community organizers to advise how to set up small businesses like pimping and imports (underage girls).

Maybe after those little issues are cleared up, the O can think more clearly about foreign issues (but dont caount on it)

 

No, I 've locked him in MY basement!

 

I'll not doubt the relationship,like laurel and hardy or crosby and hope,we do work well together,and I wouldn't want it any other way,and hope we remain the same for many years to come..:hug2:

 

I get the impression the UK is stuck in the past while America has moved on...so maybe it is still there but not at the level it was during WW2.

 

Richard, It is my belief that the US-UK relations has changed over the years, but still remains strong. You mentioned it from the political perspective, urqh from the miltary/intellegence perspective. As for the Politicians, I'm torn both ways. Part of me wants them to worry about their own country than worry about how they will be percieved in other countries (this applies to ALL politicians from any country). The other half says that these same men and women are the ones responsable for the foriegn policies that set-up and maintain these alliances. Militarily we share information, co-ordinate, and work together in a way unmatched throughout the rest of the world.

 

does it ever stay the same! as long as the respect remains! so shall the bond,the lockerbie release has not helped richard,ray..

 

Too true.

Well then...it is still there and more up to date.

Thanks everyone for your input.

 

I strongly feel that we need to reassess the special relationship if that is what you call the way certain politicians pander to us whims and desires. It is all very well to support one another but to ignore the opinions of your own people to preserve some etherial connection is just plain wrong. That said at levels below that, from strategic planning to supporting each other on ops to the average joe on the street i think there is definately a strong link that is worth maintaining. We get on well and help each other. I just don't see that preserving international friendships needs to mean sacrificing national self determination.

 

I care not a tinkers cuss for any 'special relationship'.
There's an old political maxim that I firmly agree with. It should apply to all states, but Palmerston said it well for my own:

"England has no eternal friends, England has no perpetual enemies, England has only eternal and perpetual interests"

Any nation should make it's own choices by it's own interests. To allow some nebulous concept of political friendship (now there's a hollow phrase) to override serious policy based firmly on national interests, is idiocy. There may be alliances and similar viewpoints in politics, even obvious common ground, but national interests should always remain key.

~A

 

von poop shoots he scores.... fdr and winnie..the relationship meant different things and different intentions to both of them. more things mutually beneficial than not. that probably wont ever change but even their oft quoted relationship needs the rose tinted glasses removed. albion and the usa would never dream of anything but putting themselves first even at the expense of the other. that doesnt mean we cant be best of mates..the needs of both are still strong. the link would need a shattering blow to sever it. cant see that ever happening. but the brits now in the past and in the future are no ones patsy. thats not me the patriot talking thats history and civil service policy. though it is probably time for usafe to head home now. we dont want to lose you and we know its hard to go..for our queen and our country..both love you so..though we ll miss you and grieve you..

 

I couldn't agree more Sir, the fact that our own nation's interests intersected to defeat Nazism and Japanese militarism was the most obvious of the "special" relationship. As the two largest and oldest English speaking democracies, we have our interests overlap more often than not however.

I don't see that really changing in major ways in the future, minor "brew-ups" over things on the edges perhaps, but not much else.

As an aside, I have heard that a tinker, as an itinerant worker of no standing in society was prone to drunkeness and cursing, but since he had no worth himself, his "damn" was also of little worth.

However, I have also read that in Knight's Dictionary of Mechanics (1877) the interesting explanation exists that a tinker, having a hole or the like to solder in pewter-ware, would erect a small barrier or dam of clay about the area so that his molten solder will not flow off. The clay (dam), once its usefulness is past, in thrown aside.