Time to stop being America's lap-dog; on Britain and the USA

[The Andy-Man]

a very good article imo. and that american dude that rote that massive thing discrediting everything in the article, well, he watches to much US propaganda. USA has never been liberal (prohibition, war on marijuana). and USA isnt at war, its just got another excuse to bomb ppl, used to be communism, now its terrorism.



ppl havnt realised that Englands last hold as an international power is through the US. without the US support the UK just becoes as importan as france on international terms.

the US also needs the UK so it has an ally in Europe, withut UK the US no longer has a reason to be there - if the UK sided with europe instead of the US then all american campaghnes and forces in europe would be kindly asked to leave, europe would put is own carrier fleets in the mediterrainian and protect its own shipping, thus they are no longer dependant in ANYWAY of the US, for europe is capable of finding its own trading partners.

I also beleive that the USA would be willing to goto war with europe because of this, for once europe starts building or merging its own military, then the US is no longer in a postition to do what it wants.

[ThePantaloonDog]

Whoever wrote this is an idiot who knows nothing of US politics. Yes, right now the Conservatives are in power. With another election a liberal could take power. The political parties alternate, just as in the UK. Liberalism has far from collapsed-- a liberal nearly won the presidency and a liberal is the majority leader of the Senate.

The Democrats are no where near liberal. If anything they are a centrists party.

Right. We are good, those who support terrorism are bad.

Wrong. We are far from right and those who we say support terrorism can simply labeled "bad". Because of Bush's incompetent comment about Iran the conservative religous fanatics now have more power and just made life harder for people fighting for democratic reforms.

First off, we are not going to unilaterally declare war on anyone. We can't topple Saddam without the support of some of Iraq's neighbors, so any decision we make will not be unilateral. Afghanistan was not unilateral either-- we had support of nearly all the international community. Most complaints about US unilateralism have to do with internal US affairs- such as environmental policy.

I agree with you and with Bush's ever friendly foreign policy it will be nearly impossible to do anything in Iraq.

That defense spending is because we were attacked and we are at war. Nations increase their defense budget when they go to war.

People like to throw that word around a lot. War on drugs, War on terroism, War on the enviroment... But who are we at war with, terroists? Well terroists can be defined in all sorts of ways. The distinction between terroism and freedom fighting is based on perspective.

We aid countries by helping them to remove their opressive governments, as we did recently in Afghanistan and Kosovo.

Or help clean up the messes when we try to get rid of the oppressive governments we propped up.

How does getting rid of the Anti-Missle Defense system hurt Britain's interest? Notice how even Putin's complaints were minimal.

I really doubt a missile defense system will ever be put into place but does lead to more nukes. Generally not a good thing.

Influenital? I have never heard of him. Sounds like someone is using a strawman.

I've never heard of him either...

Is this person trying to be funny?

No, the author is just being ignorant.

The west and east coasts are still strong. But saying the west is reactionary is absurd-- Gore won every state that borders the Great Lakes except Ohio and Indiana.

I don't understand the author's comment either. The east is more progressive (I wouldn't say liberal) and almost got Gore elected.

A campaign finance law is about to soon be passed, and even still the Democrats have plenty rich donors.

True. If anyone believes the Democrats don't have their hands in the cookie jar is just ignorant.

Clinton was very concerned with pushing an international liberal agenda-- he built up relations with Russia and China and did humanitarian interventions such as Kosovo and Somalia.

The author is talking about welfare reform and the fumbling of a national health care system. Clinton signing on welfare reform stopped any dreams of having a real liberal AMerican president.

Future recounts showed that even if the recount had gone forward, Bush still would have won.

Still having the judicial branch decide who should run the executive branch stinks of judges playing politicians.

Britain is not the US's lapdog, rather Blair has a lot of influence in US foreign policy because he is our strong ally. And whether the author realizes it or not, the US is still allied with most EU nations.

I do think the European press is trying make the division between the American government and the European governments more than it is, most Europe criticism has been on the mark. Tony Blair really does seem to be America's lap dog since he has for the majority of the time not said anything about Bush's obvious flaws in his foreign policy.

They aren't? The democratic candidate for President's slogan was "The people, not the powerful". Clinton was an internationalist, and an environmentalist. The Senate is controlled by the Democrats, and the Senate Democrats are controlled by it's liberal leadership.

They aren't. I'm sure Republicans have used similiar slogans and Clinton as an enviromentalists was a joke. The Democrats for the most part are remarkably similiar to the Republicans. The only real issues that Democrats differ from Republicans is school vouchers and some stuff on the enviroment.

There still is no major liberal party in America to speak of.

[Saint Marcus]

influential conservative American political philosopher Leo Strauss"

Influenital? I have never heard of him. Sounds like someone is using a strawman.

What do you expect, the guy is dead. And it's not surprising you don't know him (how many political philosophers of the 20th century do you know?).

They aren't? The democratic candidate for President's slogan was "The people, not the powerful". Clinton was an internationalist, and an environmentalist. The Senate is controlled by the Democrats, and the Senate Democrats are controlled by it's liberal leadership.

You're not from this side of the pond. Saying Democrats are liberals is a joke. Granted, they aren't as conservative as the republicans, but if you compare them to the European liberals (like the Dutch VVD) they are awfully conservative.

[Saint Marcus]

The Democrats are no where near liberal. If anything they are a centrists party.

Exactly.

That's why the author is right in saying the liberals (by european standards, since the author is from Britain) have little influence in the US.

[Shi Huangdi]

"and USA isnt at war"

We are at war, though not in a traditional sense. We just faced a severe attack from Al-Qaeda, we now need to send forces itnernationally to get them. Even know we have troops in Afghanistan.

"I also beleive that the USA would be willing to goto war with europe because of this"

I doubt it. You talk about siding with the US or Europe, but that is silly because US and Europe are allied through NATO. The US has no reason to fight the EU and vice versa.

"The Democrats are no where near liberal. If anything they are a centrists party."

Which is why they wanted to not give tax cuts to the rich, ensure perscription drugs for all, raise the minimum wage, etc.

"we say support terrorism can simply labeled "bad"."

You are right, they can simply be labeled bad. You probably mis-spoke however and forgot to put the cannot. In any case though if they are actively harboring and supporting terrorist that work against us, that represents a causus belli.

"Because of Bush's incompetent comment about Iran the conservative religous fanatics now have more power and just made life harder for people fighting for democratic reforms."

Democratic reforms were not happening anyway. All power was held by the Ayatollah, and considering their leadership is made up of religious fanatics, they probably were not considering giving it up. By calling them what they are, it will make it easier for the public to support action against them if that is deemed neccesary.

"and with Bush's ever friendly foreign policy it will be nearly impossible to do anything in Iraq."

We'll see what comes out diplomatically.

"The distinction between terroism and freedom fighting is based on perspective."

Well, the ones we are fighting, Al Qaeda, are pretty bad. They want to kill Americans, because we stand in the way of their goal of uniting all of Islam into one big fundamentalist state.

"oppressive governments we propped up."

We did not prop up Milsoevich. We also did not prop up the Taliban, we propped up the Mujahadieen, and the Taliban took power later.

"Clinton signing on welfare reform stopped any dreams of having a real liberal AMerican president."

I don't think Clinton had any real deeply held political beliefs, other than advancing his own power and popularity. Gore would have been more liberal probably.

"Still having the judicial branch decide who should run the executive branch stinks of judges playing politicians."

Such situation are unwelcome, but there was a legitmate question of law in the case, and when big enough such questions of law are handled by the supreme court in the US.

"Clinton as an enviromentalists was a joke"

What do you mean? He gave many new pro-environment executive orders, and created vast swaths of new Federal land.

"The only real issues that Democrats differ from Republicans is school vouchers and some stuff on the enviroment."

Not true. Many democrats, including Gore, favor perscription drugs for seniors. Democrats are pro-gun control. Many favor funding for abortion. They want to spend more on education and health care. They want to spend less on defense. They want tax cuts to be mainly reserved for the middle class. They favor Gay Rights more. They are liberal on most issues.

"And it's not surprising you don't know him (how many political philosophers of the 20th century do you know?). "

Plenty-- Friedman, Rand, Lenin, Stalin, Mussolini, Morgenthau, etc.

[Immortal Wombat]

I didn't want to join the Euro, but if State #51 to the new America is the alternative then...

[Bereta_Eder]

why don't you want to join us?

[Immortal Wombat]

I like the pound. I like being British, and I like being the bridge between Europe and America. But America's going sucky.

[Rage]

IMO Britain has 3 choices
1. Continue the close relatioship with the US and eventually(im talking centuries here) become a member
2.Join Europe anddo everything the french,german and Belgian tell us.
3.Stay independent and become a minor power.

Personally id rather be ordered around by an American than a German

[Bereta_Eder]

you remind me of a british politician I heard in a conference in my postgraduat studies (don't remember his name) he was wittingly sayin the same things.
he gave me the impression of a man stuck in the past somewhat.
his main beef was with the germans and how to contain the germans and so on...

[red_jon]

Originally posted by Rage
IMO Britain has 3 choices
1. Continue the close relatioship with the US and eventually(im talking centuries here) become a member
2.Join Europe anddo everything the french,german and Belgian tell us.
3.Stay independent and become a minor power.

Personally id rather be ordered around by an American than a German

Western Europe is much closer in ideology to the United Kingdom, but too many of our citizens don't realize it. Britain, like Europe, is much more left-libertarian than the US.

And do you honestly believe the US and UK will exist as nation states in a coupla centuries time?! What was the political world like 300 or 400 years ago?

[Immortal Wombat]

Yeah, but if we join Europe, we have a good chance of being "senior partners" along with France and Germany, and get a significant say in what happens.

[Bereta_Eder]

coming to think about it he was always speaking about thatcher and seemed to have an unhealthy fascination for her. could he had been a torry *shudder*
then we had dinner, some students and the panel of the conference, I talked to him somewhat. I found it a pitty that such wit and inteligence was consumed with the past...

BTW I can tell you some funny stories about Thacher and the germans but you'll have to pay me 'cause it's really a drag

[red_jon]

Originally posted by Immortal Wombat
Yeah, but if we join Europe, we have a good chance of being "senior partners" along with France and Germany, and get a significant say in what happens.

Exactly, since when did we get a say in what the US does?

[Rage]

But we wont be equal parners france and germany nearly always ally against us when it comes to europe.
And I lived in Germany for 2years(i had to to keep my job)-i wasnt bothered ith germans then but after being called a British Sh**head for every day of the 2 years i quickly changed my mind