Posted on 11/29/2006 10:32:28 PM PST by fragrant abuse
Britain's special relationship 'just a myth' Toby Harnden in Washington
A senior American official has spoken of "the myth of the special relationship" between the United States and Britain, arguing that Tony Blair got "nothing, no payback" for supporting President George W Bush in Iraq.
Kendall Myers, a leading State Department adviser, suggested that Mr Blair should have been ditched by Labour but the party had lacked the "courage or audacity" to remove him.
David Cameron, the Conservative leader, was "shrewd, astute" to have distanced himself from America.
In candid comments that will embarrass Mr Bush and Mr Blair, the veteran official said America "ignored" Britain, and he urged Britain to decouple itself from the US.
He asserted that the "special relationship", a term coined by Sir Winston Churchill in 1946, gave Britain little or nothing.
"It has been, from the very beginning, very one-sided. There never really has been a special relationship, or at least not one we've noticed."
The result of the Iraq war would be that any future British premier would be much less cosy with Washington than Mr Blair had been, and the Prime Minister's much vaunted view that Britain was "a transatlantic bridge" was now redundant.
(Excerpt) Read more at telegraph.co.uk ...
WTH was he supposed to get? Friendship and alliance isn't enough?
Chiefly, World War 2 was practically forced on the British. The Nazis were at your figurative doorstep. You (if you are British; considering your spelling, that seems the case) had to enter the war; you had little choice.
In contrast, the United States was helping out the Allies at the expense of the Axis powers long before Pearl Harbor.
Furthermore, the UK was in more of a position to stop Germany before Hitler went on the offensive. Mr. Chamberlain has been castigated by history for that.
The United States fought heavily in both the European and Pacific theaters (there's American spelling for you), even though the European one was neither a direct threat at the time, nor the power that attacked the country in the first place.
The UK focused primarily on Europe and defending their country.... at the expense of their colonies. Many countries in the Asia-Pacific region appreciate how after the British pulled their troops (many of colonial origin) to defend the UK, the Americans sent troops to liberate them from the Japanese.
Then there is the fact that Wikipedia, while extremely useful, is not exactly the most accurate website, especially when it comes to the United States. However, off hand, the casualty figures for the United States, at least, seem accurate.
Finally, while Americans should be more appreciative of British efforts in World War 2, and in conflicts such as the current one in Iraq, you should note that many of your (again, if you are British) countrymen are decidedly anti-American, including some of your politicians. Many more British (at least in percentage) seem to be anti-Ameri-can than Americans seem to be anti-British. So who are you (the tone is harsh, but it isn't supposed to be) to criticize the token American who unfairly gets angry at the UK?
anti-American
The most-often raised criticism of Blair is that his own foreign policy priorities, particularly a push on an Israel-Palestine settlement, dealing with global warming and third world debt, etc, were effectively ignored by the Bush administration.
So what, you may ask. But during the run-up to the Iraq invasion, Blair's supporters tried to sell the war to a sceptical public in part on the notion that Britain's closeness to the US would enable Blair to get US support on his own foreign policy objectives. That was a false promise - hence the backlash.
By the Royal Navy. Hitler gave up on Operation SeaLion well before the Americans entered the war.
It was - and still is - the right thing to the UK to go into Iraq, and part of our NATO treaty obligations. Let's not go wobbly, and let's not let inconsequential gits like Myers mess with our heads.
"So who are you (the tone is harsh, but it isn't supposed to be) to criticize the token American who unfairly gets angry at the UK?"
You made fair points - I don't see any disagreement with you, FRiend.
Yes I am a Brit and just as I will defend the United States against British critics I will defend my homeland against American critics. I make no apologies for either.
Although you seem to have a clear grasp of history, there are all too many (yes, even here on FR) who are prepared to denigrate or dismiss the sacrifices that my country made alongside yours in WWII.
Ah, Joe McCarthy, where are you now that we need you?
The State Department is a cancerous den of vipers.
I agree too many people forge that Blair is a Socialist
Thanks for that Ivan it is something that always grates when that old chestnut is quoted.
Absolutely and that is what I believe Cameron's position is important relationship but sometimes we can disagree but that does not mean we are no longer friends - good friends often disagree without loosing the friendship.
Had Germany won, the British Empire would probably been dealt a blow, furthering the cause of self-determination the United States espoused. The Soviet Union, without much of their population and prime real estate on account of the treaty of Brest-Livotsk, would have been more probable to collapse. And in any case, World War 1 was a European squabble rather than an international affair.
As for World War 2, the United States aided the Allies long before Pearl Harbor (Americans preserve British spellings when part of proper nouns; Britons should do the same). Furthermore, the United States was not as responsible for war breaking out. France in particular was too harsh to Germany after World War 1. And then there was Neville Chamberlain.
The UK declared war solely because they were bound by treaty to do just that. Furthermore, they were in the path of the blitzkrieg. The United States had an ocean separating them from the Third Reich. Germany was not as much a threat for Americans as it was for Britons.
Our relationship with Britain seems to me to be built on the fact that we are relatives, cousins. We are like family.
Everytime I go to the UK I feel that in my bones. Lately there are lots of screwball family on both limbs of the tree, not to mention the strange outsiders who seem to have wandered into the den while we are happily watching TV. Some dress funny. Some talk in slogans.
I idon't think we ought to be insulting Britain here. And these two unknowns are just spouting off.
That stated, Cameron seems to be a shifty fellow (from readers comments on the BBC) who goes with the flow, figuratively.
Hellthere are more anti-AMericans in the US than anyplace in Britain. We have our very own Muslim elected to Congress and about 40Per Cent of the public HATE THIS COUNTRY.. Not to forget a good number of Freepers who hate this country.
I do.
But it remains that it was Neville Chamberlain who precipitated the war.
Basically, for such rude Americans: you do not deserve any special respect which you did not earn.
The same goes, of course, for any people.
There are a lot of American anti-Americans, though. No argument there.
There are some freepers who clearly just disagree.
But haven't you noticed the ones who come around periodically to cause dissension and to provoke freepers into arguments for the sake of sowing distrust.
They are easy to spot,,
What I mostly sense is a great strain in our country, people who just love to deconstruct whatever they can. They truly hate this country, they shelter our enemies, they defend our enemies, they use our system against us. They are not homogeneous but I suspect at the core a ruthless group, determined to bring us down. ANd I think they are Americans who hate America.
There are old-timers in both that still deny that Alger Hiss and Donald MacLean ever met...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.