Posted on 02/04/2008 5:02:14 PM PST by Aristotelian
LONDON: While Prince Andrew declares himself a fan of the United States - and his cellphone ring tone comes from the American TV drama "24" - the man who is fourth in line to the British throne has some critical words for America's Iraq policy and thinks that Washington should have listened to advice from London.
In a rare Buckingham Palace interview ahead of his departure Tuesday for a 10-day U.S. trip to support British business, the prince described the United States as Britain's No. 1 ally but conceded that relations were in a trough. There are, he added, "occasions when people in the U.K. would wish that those in responsible positions in the U.S. might listen and learn from our experiences."
The prince has a full-time role as a trade envoy for Britain but for 22 years he was in the Royal Navy, serving as a helicopter pilot during the Falklands conflict, and Iraq is a preoccupation.
Because of its imperial history, Britain has experienced much of what the United States is going through, Prince Andrew said.
"If you are looking at colonialism, if you are looking at operations on an international scale, if you are looking at understanding each other's culture, understanding how to operate in a military insurgency campaign - we have been through them all," he said. "We've won some, lost some, drawn some. The fact is there is quite a lot of experience over here which is valid and should be listened to."
Prince Andrew's view that post-invasion chaos in Iraq could have been avoided if President George W. Bush's administration had listened more is widely shared in Britain.
(Excerpt) Read more at iht.com ...
F*ck ‘em. We’re not trying to colonize anyone, Andy.
Prince Andrew doesn’t dare to say why thousands of Britons are leaving the island to relocate in New York City.
You need to acquaint yourself more closely with your own nation’s history. Pay particular attention to the Spanish American war, and the subsequent colonisation of Puerto Rico and the Phillipines.
And if the earlier westward expansion wasn’t imperialism then I don’t know what is....
See above....
It's not Imperialism if you call it Manifest Destiny instead.
Inbreeding has its downsides.
The House of Windsor is a prime example.
“Blow it out your ear limey!”
Perhaps we should leave the Americans to fight their own wars in future instead of expending British lives and money fighting their wars?
Britain was fighting successful counter-insurgency campaigns in Yemen and Malaya whilst the US was losing in Vietnam. Maybe the British do know what they’re talking about when it comes to this sort of thing hmm?
Go breed with a close relative. Oh wait, that’s been done before, and before, and before, and...
British imperialism was a good thing.
There is no need to feel guilty about it.
Without it, there would be no United States of America, and places like Hong Kong would still be a deserted island.
Dear Prince Andrew,
You are cautioned to reserve your energy in dealing with the Islamification of Great Britain and welcome to STFU about matters that do not concern you.
Warmly,
A. Grizzled Bear
Speaking of ‘Manifest Destiny’, the chap who stated that Britain was ‘rebuked’ in 1812 may want to consider that that war was an attempt to Conquer British North America and drive us out of the Continent, using the Sailor Impressment issue as a casus beli.
In this, the Americans failed UTTERLY, and ended what started as a war of conquest fighting a defensive war on their own soil. I fail to see how this can in any way be interpreted as an overall American victory...
Raise your hand everyone whose country’s flag is on the moon.
British Imperialism was a mixed bag. I distrust anyone who comes down on either side of the equation as an ideologue, because whilst it wasn’t the evil proto-nazi reich that those on the left would have us believe, it existed primarily to benefit Britain economically and strategically. The interests of it’s subjects were a secondary concern at best....
Perhaps, and perhaps British remapping of the middle east gave us 80 years of unrest in the modern middle east.
Perhaps
Yeah, it was just like Britain and Spain and France and the Dutch.
Spare me.
It ought to be the Swastika given the fact it was Werhner Von Braun and various other Nazi Rocket Scientists who got them there....
Or perhaps it was the shafting that the US gave us over the Suez Conflict in 1956, which encouraged anti-western movements such as the Ba’ath party by making the west look impotent.
It’s all part of a rich tapestry of error....
By old trade routes San Francisco is farther from London than is New York, our ancestors were merely looking for fresh air.
As to empire, you will note that Canadastan and messico have remained quite safe sharing a border with American 'imperialism'.
Might also ask the Welch to give you a comparison regarding 'western expansion'.
Puerto Rico is a Puerto Rican decision, go, join, stay as they are; most of us would like to see them get off the fence.
PS: Andrew is an ass.
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.