« A walk in the park | Main | Tory resigns »

Monday, 17 March 2003

Comments

Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

Paul the Postman

Not only did they follow a pathof "isolationism" , for which they condemn many nations for now. But hey also wanted the British West Indies in payment for the "Lend-Lease" programme.
People should be reminded that while Britain stood alone against the might of the Nazi war machine (before Russia was invaded in June 1941), America pursued a policy of " a European war". They only got involved once they were attacked.
Don't let these bastards off the hook when they start bleating about an international community....They were the first to not get involved.
As I said.....Fuck your War....Mr President!

cari

About time it was said - and so well done. Not only should you not be fighting Bush's war, we (us yanks, that is) shouldn't.

Michael

um... *lend*-lease.... but otherwise I agree :)

Gert

Thanks, Michael, now corrected. Many a slip between brain and keyboard! Spellcheck doesn't pick up ones like that!

Shelagh

The only nation the US declared war on in WW2 was Japan. Hitler declared war on the US a few days later. I saw in the a paper the other day that an American diplomat had said that the US was "bled white" to liberate France. Who do they think they're kidding. One wonders that if the most convenient way to Berlin hadn't been through France whether they'd have bothered liberating France at all!

The main thing that concerns me is that the US obviously feels that France owes them "obedience", even almost 60 years later. How long will Iraq be expected to toe the US line in return for their "freedom".

DogsDon'tPurr

I live in the US, but please, do not think for a minute that I support the war. Most of the people I know also do not support it. The president is insane. But what can we do to stop him?! There have been tons and tons of protests.
I am at a loss....the thought of war really scares me....I think it is pointless, wrong....very wrong....but I have no idea what to do about it. I'm afraid it is out of our hands.

Gert

I think I speak for other readers in saying that negative feelings towards the US Government and its cheerleaders is in no way a blanket negativity to all US citizens. I for one know too many Americans in Real Life and Online to feel anti-American per se (any more than I feel anti-British because of the wrong-headedness of the British Government, formed from the party of which I am a member!)

Scaryduck

1956 was a bit of a cracker. Britain was up to its eyes in postwar debt, and joined France in the Suez expedition to protect UK trade routes to India. America got a strop on and called in the British debts. Result: end of empire, birth of a new one.

Nick

I've had similar coversations with lots of people over the last few weeks. It's amazing how the conventional wisdom over the Falklands is 'the US helped us, France opposed us' when the reality is almost the exact opposite.

Sometimes I think that if the US announced it had to bomb part of Britain for some reason there'd be lots of people queuing up to support them because we 'can't damage the special relationship'.

kc

yes, the americans only entered the war after japan bombed pearl harbor. and neville chamberlain did everything possible to stop the invasion of poland. yes, our guys are fighting with your guys once again. does that make it george bush's war? a country is only defined by its current government. let it be known that i didn't vote for bush, but now that the hand is being played, i'm not going to badmouth any british or american soldier soldier who is currently in the fight for his life. as far as the average american citizen is concerned, britian stands far above the other "allies" when the game is on, whether it be "soccer" or war.

Gert

For your info, kc, Britain doesn't have a soccer team. The UK has four national football teams, of which three are total rubbish, and one is nowhere near as good as France, Germany, Italy, let alone Brazil, or, to be honest, despite one lucky result, Argentina.

A country is not only defined by its current government. Oh, sacrcasm. Neville Chamberlain's appeasing betrayal of Poland was a shameful period in British history. However, it's a false analogy to equate the two.

jdt

You have it reversed, you Eurotwats have screwed and screwed and used America over the last 90 years, you selfish whiners.

We were dragged into WW1, a war we didn't cause and wasn't ours to fight, and after Europe was through using us, spit in our face.

Then, you Brits etc. complain because America didn't just drop everything and go help clean up your mess yet again. Some f*cking nerve you people have. Western Europe/UK knew Hitler was a madman and should have removed him before he built up his war machine, but they didn't. You(Europe/UK) created the situation that led to the war in Europe through your failed policies of appeasement ie. Chamberlain and your inaction and we Americans had every right to be isolationist. If the situation had been reversed, you wouldn't have lifted a finger to help America, so f*ck off.

Korea--It was the Cold War and the UK was acting in her own interests to stop Communism, not doing it to " help" America.

Falklands--Wrong. America supported the UK even though you had no business in the Falklands, the days of the colonies were over.

France--If France didn't want to get involved in Iraq, that was their rightful choice and they should have stayed out, but they didn't. They sided with the enemy against us so they can f*ck off. It's a shame any American died in France in WW2.

Iraq-The UK along with the US, recieved intelligence reports from different nations stating that Saddam had WMDs. This combined with his past aggression and the UK felt he was a possible threat that needed to be removed. The UK again entered Iraq for its' own interests, not to help us. If you disagree with your nation's entance into Iraq, fine, take it up with YOUR government, as it was the one who made the decision to enter the war.

In other words you Brits, everything your nation has done has been for its' own interests, which is what it should do. However, it's hypocritical for you to criticize the US for doing the same.

Gert

JDT, your facts are wrong. You say you were dragged into WW1 - but a nation can't be dragged into a war unless it is invaded, which the US wasn't. It may be more accurate to say that President Wilson entered the US into WW1 against the wishes of the public and of Congress.

Korea, fighting 'alongside' - who said help? Like the US in WW1, Britain was not dragged into Korea.

Falklands - in which way is leaking the secrets of one combatant nation to a second combatant nature in any way 'helping' the first combatant nation? In principle, I agree that the age of colonisation is past. Try telling that to the neo-colonists in the White House. Also try telling that to the residents of the Falklands which was and remains British territory, regardless of the abstract rights and wrongs, and was invaded by another power. If the people of the Falklands had believed the Argentinian invasion to be an enlightened army from an enlightened power coming to free them from the yokes of oppression they would have damn sure made those views known. Instead, they requested help from the British government, and got it - at the cost of very many British lives, and, indeed very many Argentinian - conscript - lives.

As it happens, I did take the issue of Iraq up with my own government. This post, and the conversation that prompted it, were part of that whole process. One of my bones of contention was the view in part sof the British Government and the British media that we have a 'special relationship' with the US. We don't. So whilst your facts are technically correct, your interpretation, analysis, argument and conclusion are irrelevant.

And it's never hypocritical to criticise the foreign policy of a foreign government. I didn't support the wars in Iraq, nor the Falklands, and I criticised the British government roundly. This post is primarily a criticism of the British government; secondarily it is a criticism of the US government.

Context is everything. Not least the context that this post is twenty months old.

jdt

My interpretation, analysis, argument, conclusion etc. is no more irrelevent than yours.

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Working...
Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been saved. Comments are moderated and will not appear until approved by the author. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.

Working...

Post a comment

Comments are moderated, and will not appear until the author has approved them.

Kos

  • Bow of boat

Goa

  • Bulls head

Comments

  • Comments welcomed in all languages - probably best in Latin script, I think!

Translator

Powered by...

  • Influence

Twitter Updates

    follow me on Twitter

    bookmarks

    Blog powered by Typepad
    Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivs 3.0 Unported

    September 2014

    Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat Sun
    1 2 3 4 5 6 7
    8 9 10 11 12 13 14
    15 16 17 18 19 20 21
    22 23 24 25 26 27 28
    29 30