UK and US: the special relationship

This is based on a comment I read earlier on another thread. Rather than hijack/derail that thread, which is unfair to that thread's OP, I thought it might make sense to start this.

Does the 'special relationship' between the UK/Britain and the United States of America really exist in the sense that it's a two-way, reciprocated relationship?

I'm conscious of it having arisen during WWII but how has it developed since then? I appreciate that many American servicemen volunteered to fight in WWII and help in defeating Hitler's axis, I genuinely acknowledge the loss and sacrifice these people made. However, the point is, whilst these brave people were signing-up to do the right thing, to an extent, the American government were also hiring-out these people as there were strings, conditions &c. that came with the actions of those actually on the ground.

A genuine question: what has Britain got out of this, in a positive sense, post-WWII?

reply to post by Merriman Weir


McDonalds........................



Seriously though, the US pre WW1 (not 2) had no need for any special relationships - they were very happy with the position of 'splendid isolation' that they enjoyed.

WW1 and then WW2 obviously changed that - as a nation, the US realised that they were part of a connected world, whether they liked it or not and that splendid isolation will only work as long as others leave you alone.

In real terms, what the UK has got out of it is the longest period in European history without any major wars between member nations. Surely, that in itself is good enough?

My opinion is that we are 2 very closely matched counties in relation to almost everything.
We share a common goal in terms of democracy and freedom for our people and the world.
We have similar tastes and hobbies,
We laugh at the same things etc etc.

For me it's down to one question. If WW3 started tomorrow
Who as a government would you trust the most.


I know the UK would say the US
99.9% sure the US would say the UK

Originally posted by Flavian


In real terms, what the UK has got out of it is the longest period in European history without any major wars between member nations. Surely, that in itself is good enough?

I thought that was down to the European Union, they even got a Nobel Peace Prize and everything.

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by Merriman Weir

 

WW1 and then WW2 obviously changed that - as a nation, the US realised that they were part of a connected world, whether they liked it or not and that splendid isolation will only work as long as others leave you alone.

Agreed.

In real terms, what the UK has got out of it is the longest period in European history without any major wars between member nations. Surely, that in itself is good enough?

No, not really. Mainly because the special relationship seems to be really Britain and the USA not, Europe and USA. It seems that Britain has to play lap poodle to stop the rest of Europe fighting again? That doesn't really make sense when for the period you speak of, Europe has done much to try and unify/get along without Britain or America. In fact, they seem to think Britain and America should just # off a lot of the time.

Originally posted by khimbar

Originally posted by Flavian


In real terms, what the UK has got out of it is the longest period in European history without any major wars between member nations. Surely, that in itself is good enough?

I thought that was down to the European Union, they even got a Nobel Peace Prize and everything.

Haha great answer! The EU was Churchill's idea too, just not in its present form. Anyhow, i think NATO played rather a large role also, as well as the fact that all the major countries still had millions of living citizens who has gone through the horrors.......


Oh god, i am that inunred in ATS now i am even debunking myself!

England lost the Reserve Status.

They also only just finished paying america back for all the 'help' they gave.

England may have been better off if Germany had won really.

Did England ask Russia to pay it back for all the help they gave? Be pretty poor form wouldnt it?

Losing the Reserve Status to America was the worst thing that happened to England and the rest of the world. The Bretton Woods system was designed to give america all the cards. Then when they messed that up they just told the world : "The dollar is our currency, but your problem."

England would have been better off if they didnt make the mistake of asking america for help.

reply to post by Merriman Weir


That was my comment I guess, and there was a certain amount of sarcasm involved (I replied btw, in the other thread).

In my opinion the special relationship between our two countries, from a political point of view, is very one sided. One has to look no further than the extradition treaty which has plagued the media of late to see that.

America is a bully, America expects the world to abide by its rules and regulations, and thankfully, the UK is waking up to that and making a stance against it (again referring to the extradition treaty).

The American public on the other hand, they are no different to all the other people on the Earth. You have the arrogant, so far up their own backsides they could chew their food twice ones.

You have some of the kindest, caring and compassionate ones, who I have the privilege of knowing some of.

At the end of the day, the people that matter are waking up, and seeing the world (governments) for what they really are, and they are banding together to rant on forums and/or Facebook (lol). One day, the good people might just say enough is enough and actually do something about it.

This isn't about America and the UK, it is about the world, and one day we might hopefully get there.

Originally posted by tombangelta
My opinion is that we are 2 very closely matched counties in relation to almost everything.
We share a common goal in terms of democracy and freedom for our people and the world.
We have similar tastes and hobbies,
We laugh at the same things etc etc.

For me it's down to one question. If WW3 started tomorrow
Who as a government would you trust the most.


I know the UK would say the US
99.9% sure the US would say the UK

I disagree. No, actually, I strongly disagree. How many people on this site genuinely trust either of our governments? How many people on regular news sites, genuinely trust their governments? How many people in Britain or USA no longer vote because they no longer trust politicians (to act in anyone's interests but their own)?

Honestly, I think the 'shared language' thing is a bit misleading. I think it creates this idea that we're more similar than we are. Give it another 20 or 30 years when America's language demographics change even further and Britain's does - and goes in different directions - I think the shared histories/culture thing will look even more flaky than it does already.

reply to post by Merriman Weir


Well according to Merkel this week she doesn't see Germany in any leadership role in an EU that doesn't include Britain. In point of fact, she actually said she thinks having Britain alongside is crucial for Europe - and i tend to agree with her. France cannot be relied on for anything other than feathering its' own cap, which Germany seems to be starting to realise.

Not a knock at the French by the way. France meant as in the state rather than the people (who i find generally to be lovely, if not a little weird!).

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by Merriman Weir

 

Well according to Merkel this week she doesn't see Germany in any leadership role in an EU that doesn't include Britain. In point of fact, she actually said she thinks having Britain alongside is crucial for Europe - and i tend to agree with her. France cannot be relied on for anything other than feathering its' own cap, which Germany seems to be starting to realise.

Not a knock at the French by the way. France meant as in the state rather than the people (who i find generally to be lovely, if not a little weird!).

That Angela Merkel really bugs me for some reason. She's only the German Chancellor...yet has the most power in Europe. Does anyone even know who the German president is without Googling it? Me neither.

Quick history lesson. Can any of you remember another German Chancellor in the past?


















Adolf Hitler!!!

She's bad news people!

reply to post by woogleuk


In point of fact, the UK media has blown the extradition cases out of all proportion. Aside from McKinnon, extraditions have very much been a two way street in the vast majority of cases. It is only those cases were there are legal quirks between the nations were problems have arisen (as you would expect).

Originally posted by woogleuk
reply to post by Merriman Weir

 

That was my comment I guess, and there was a certain amount of sarcasm involved (I replied btw, in the other thread).

Yes, I wasn't going to single you out or anything, just out of courtesy. I thought it might make for an interesting - and possibly informative - thread on it's own.

This isn't about America and the UK, it is about the world, and one day we might hopefully get there.

That would be nice, albeit a little Pollyanna-ish. The reality is that a global love-in is a nonsense in our global age. This week, in Britain, we've had to listen to Osborn's nonsense of a budget and both he and Cameron talk about the 'global race'. They both talk about "winning" the global race. To win in the way they talk about, means other people losing the global race. They don't want a global love-in. I'm fairly sure American politicians and businessmen speak a similar language.

reply to post by Just Chris


Helmut Kohl.

Various others also but someone else's turn next!

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by Merriman Weir

 

Well according to Merkel this week she doesn't see Germany in any leadership role in an EU that doesn't include Britain. In point of fact, she actually said she thinks having Britain alongside is crucial for Europe - and i tend to agree with her. France cannot be relied on for anything other than feathering its' own cap, which Germany seems to be starting to realise.

A couple of reasons for this: Firstly, even (New) Labour are talking about redefining the role we have in Europe, it's not a UKIP only issue these days, and it's a particularly massive albatross for the Tories at the moment. Secondly, and leading on from the first point, Britain is crucial for Europe as a whole, as Europe does fairly well out of Britain. Germany couldn't afford Britain to not have the kind of involvement Britain does at present, as it's only Germany and a couple of others who'd be left to pick-up the slack that Britain would leave behind. I think Merkel is beginning to wonder whether Germany backed the wrong horse when aligning with France.

Not a knock at the French by the way. France meant as in the state rather than the people (who i find generally to be lovely, if not a little weird!).

French people in France tend to be OK. French 14-year-old school exchange students staying for 6 months at a time are intolerable bastards.

reply to post by spangledbanner

England lost the Reserve Status.

England......

Did England.......

...... England and the rest of the world.....

England would have been better off.....

You make some valid points - but it's not England alone, it's The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, usually shortened and abbreviated to the United Kingdom or simply UK.

en.wikipedia.org...

reply to post by Merriman Weir


Interestingly enough, Merkel's speech where she made this point was to German financiers / economists / big business representatives. As a group, they are becoming more and more disenfranchised with the Euro and with EU interference in various policies.

It is actually a good time for Britain to be flexing itself a bit in Europe. I love the idea of the EU though - anything that promotes closer ties and co-operation with your neighbours has to be a good thing.

Originally posted by Flavian
reply to post by Merriman Weir

 

Interestingly enough, Merkel's speech where she made this point was to German financiers / economists / big business representatives. As a group, they are becoming more and more disenfranchised with the Euro and with EU interference in various policies.

It is actually a good time for Britain to be flexing itself a bit in Europe. I love the idea of the EU though - anything that promotes closer ties and co-operation with your neighbours has to be a good thing.

Europe, Asia, what next.......United Nations Of America! Just another step in the direction of a totalitarian one world government scheme, and that my friend certainly isn't a good thing!

reply to post by Just Chris


Why not? We are all the same species. Our problems mainly arise from self interest, whether that be in finance, agriculture, defence, etc.

Don't get me wrong, i like the fact i am British and i love all of our differences. I just do not see why a One World Government would necessarily be a bad thing - a lot of positives could come out of all being under the same umbrella.