Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
I just want to point out that unlike most, if not all those other countries, Canada was not forced to go to war just because the British did. We were free to sit out if we saw fit, but we declared war on Germany anyway.
I didn't want anyone to make that mistake in the debate.
Carry on.
Canadians were true allies and it is with Canada and other part of the Commonwealth that we have a true special relationship
Events such as the Battle of Britain occurred well before the US joined the War, and the US only joined WW2 properly after Hitler's Germany declared War on them. Hitlers objective of a War with the US having been made very clear as early as 1928 he asserted that strengthening and preparing Germany for war with the United States was one of the tasks of the National Socialist movement.
Are you thankful that we did come save your butts during WWII?
I would suggest the US merely saved themselves like everyone else on the allied side of the War including the British, Canadians, Austrians, New Zealanders, Indians and of course Soviet Russia as well as numerous other nations, the difference being only one nation that came in to the war rather late seems to be of the opinion that they saved the world single handedly.
Battle of Britain -10 July – 31 October 1940 (3 weeks 3 days)
I am British and feel nothing but disdain for the Obama Administration, as British troops lay dying supporting an American led campaign in Afghanistan which has cost every British taxpayer £1000 ($1,700 USD) or £30 Billion ($50 Billion USD), Obama wouldn't even support Britain in relation to the self determination of the Falkland Islanders.
I laughed my head off when the British Parliament voted against action in Syria, still America can always ask their oldest ally the French (LOL) or perhaps the Germans (ROFL) or even the Argentinians (LMAO) to support them.
As for the last Falklands War if you had continued to try and deny us use of Ascension Island, US bases in Britain would have had to be closed for good.
Note Obama's unconstitutional participation in the Libyan war.
The US didn't need to involve itself in that British and French war for Libian petroleum.
Note Obama's unconstitutional participation in the Libyan war.
The US didn't need to involve itself in that British and French war for Liban petroleum.
If you are referring to Operation Ellamy it was part of an international coalition aimed at enforcing a Libyan no-fly zone in accordance with the United Nations Security Council Resolution 1973 which stipulated that "all necessary measures" shall be taken to protect civilians.
What is slightly more embarrassing is when you ask a long term ally for help and they turn you down whilst publicly criticising you in the House of Commons for your disappointing support in relation to issues such as the Falklands.
I don't think it even occurs to you that Britain was not attacked on 9/11, we were on 7/7 in 2005 but only as a result of backing US action and sending troops. The UK didn't have to send 40,000 Service Personnel to Iraq, it could have just stayed out of the conflict like the French did, whilst in terms of Afghanistan again the British didn't have to send over 10,000 troops, it could have just sent a far smaller paltry force like other NATO countries such as Germany and France, whose meager forces weren't in the thick of it in Helmand Province. Britain didn't have sacrifice 622 Service Personnel, with thousands horrible maimed or injured or spend £1000 ($1,700 USD) per taxpayer which amounts to £30 Billion ($50 Billion) on a US War on Terror. The same US which refused to extradite IRA Terrorists to Britain and didn't even outlaw terrorist funding when the UK was being subjected to terrorism.
Britain went out of it's way for the US after 9/11 and for what, so the US can refuse to back us on the world stage. I was actually pleased when Britain refused to back the US on Syria and I hope this sets the precedent for future US requests, as why should we back a nation on the world stage that won't do the same for us.
In terms of UN operations and EUFOR, Britain may still make some contribution, but in terms of the mandatory backing of the US, I think those days are coming to an end.
In terms of the UK vote on Syria, the Washington Post declared the episode to be the "biggest rupture in the US-British 'special relationship' since the 1982 Falklands war". Roger Cohen in the International Herald Tribune said that the vote "mark[ed] a watershed moment that leaves the 'special relationship' in search of meaning".
As for the Tales of Obama's Grandad being tortured by the British in Kenya as cited in Obamas's book, they turn out to be Bulls..t like everything else that comes out of his mouth.
Location: By the sea, by the sea, by the beautiful sea
68,329 posts, read 54,389,283 times
Reputation: 40736
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bamford
I am British and feel nothing but disdain for the Obama Administration, as British troops lay dying supporting an American led campaign in Afghanistan which has cost every British taxpayer £1000 ($1,700 USD) or £30 Billion ($50 Billion USD), Obama wouldn't even support Britain in relation to the self determination of the Falkland Islanders.
British troops have been in Afghanistan since 2003. If Obama ordered them there in 2003 and they went he must be a friggin' genius of a leader, eh?
What do you expect? Obama wants to cut the US down to size. Part of that includes alienating its allies.
Furthermore the English speaking nations are just a step down from the US in terms of evilness in his worldview. You get off a little better because you have single payer healthcare, but you're also nations that need to be cut down to size. UK among them though may be worse because the Empire ruled lots of places around the world.
So for Obama he's doing a good thing if he can help a basketcase country like Argentina take the Falklands from the UK, and if those 'privileged' Falklander oppressors are on record against it all the better as far as Obama is concerned.
The UK and other traditional US allies can look forward to this treatment when Dems are in the White House going forward. It won't always be the case, but it often will. Obama is the product not creator of the system.
Anyways here's one American who supports the Falklands not being part of Argentina.
I cringe every time I hear the words 'special relationship', there is no special relationship between the UK and US, and at least the current Obama Administration is quite open in it's dislike of Britain.
You need to grow a thicker skin. Who cares of some internet blogger doesn't like US.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
