could we stand up without the americans Watch

nikk
Badges: 14
Rep:
?
#21
Report 12 years ago
#21
In terms of military, we might not be that great but at the end of the day we are one of the few countries to have nuclear weapons and therefore fairly safe I would say.

America saved us in WW2, so we kind of owe them anyway.
0
quote
reply
gas_panic!
Badges: 12
#22
Report 12 years ago
#22
(Original post by cottonmouth)
I take it you mean in defence terms? Absolutely not. Tiny country with no nuclear weapons to call our own.....we'd be gone in sixty seconds.

Thats why Blair has to rim Bush. And why every damn PM will have to do it to every subsequent President. Until we get control of our own nuclear weapons.
So those nuclear missiles on our submarines arn't controlled by us then?
quote
reply
Bobbie W
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#23
Report 12 years ago
#23
we can of course stand up without the americans, we dont have a lot of trade with them, militarily we wouldn't be in the best shape, but if a proper goverment got into power and started a proper goverment, cutting civil service reform and military increases then I reckon we would be fine, never forget that we exploded from nothing to THE world superpower in 50 years and held that lead for 100 years. oh and course if you dont forget the fact that they rely on use a lot.
0
quote
reply
Toscar
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#24
Report 12 years ago
#24
a more pertinant question surely is , could we stand up without legs???
0
quote
reply
gas_panic!
Badges: 12
#25
Report 12 years ago
#25
All this ******** about Britain being like a U.S state pisses me off. Man for man we are the hardest nation in the world. If need be we could soon sort our military out. We have the best trained military personel in the world, its just its let down by lack of funding.
quote
reply
Ossie1701
Badges: 1
Rep:
?
#26
Report 12 years ago
#26
Tiny country with no nuclear weapons to call our own.....we'd be gone in sixty seconds.
Do we not have any Nuclear Weapons????
0
quote
reply
Johnny
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#27
Report 12 years ago
#27
Astor - please get a grip!

There is no way that we are the envy of the world becuase of our special relationship with the USA. No other European nation wants to be too closely allied with the Americans and as for the countries of the middle east... well I suppose there is always Israel, but as for any of the others I doubt they could be seen getting into bed with America the way we have unfortunately rushed to do recently.

In my experience the majority of Americans are ignorant of the outside world and way too "gung-ho".

I really feel much more European than American and am proud to feel this way. America has a shocking rep around the world after numerous foreign policy disasters and the further we can distance themselves from them the better.

As to other posters who comment on the lack of Britain's military strength... wtf? As if that really matters; are we in a new war or something?!
0
quote
reply
Astor
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#28
Report 12 years ago
#28
Astor - please get a grip!
..of?

There is no way that we are the envy of the world becuase of our special relationship with the USA
I beg to differ, the USA is the top dog, to be honest, morals aside, i prefered to stick with the bullies at school for my own protection, i think thats LIFE.

In my experience the majority of Americans are ignorant of the outside world and way too "gung-ho".
Wow, you've met 'the majority of Americans' - Im no American fan, but I would ask; have you actually been? - US has its problems, but there are, and have been, many great yanks. As for ignorant - I think any nation would be that is top dog - Britain was.

really feel much more European than American and am proud to feel this way.
Good for you, but genetically, your ancetoral make-up is probablly closely linked to American than native European, due to the racial-contribution.

America has a shocking rep around the world after numerous foreign policy disasters and the further we can distance themselves from them the better.
No it doesn;t, billions of people wish they lived in the states, or wished they had half of the average American, billions wish they lived American liberties - You are making sweeping statements which reinforce ignorance and intolerable motive. Name me some failed US foreign policies please, btw.

As to other posters who comment on the lack of Britain's military strength... wtf? As if that really matters; are we in a new war or something?!
Why defend such an argument? the UK is the second most powerful nation, by logistics, stealth, strategics and experience, and what is a 'new war' - a war is a war, and yes, we are in one.

I think Johnny, you are underestimating the UK and that you feel you have few commonalities with British achievement and customs - You live in a fantastic well-developed, sucessful nation with a lot to show for itself, given geopolitical conditions.
0
quote
reply
an Siarach
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#29
Report 12 years ago
#29
(Original post by zooropa)
British PM's are always under pressure to maintain this "special relationship". So what if the US has the same language? So what if we have historical ties? I don't think we need any "special relationship" with the US.
We are branches of the same greater civilization. We share language,history, culture, ideals of law and general ethics/pinciples. A scenario which might cause a divergence of our nations is horrible to contemplate and would be negative for the world as a whole.
0
quote
reply
an Siarach
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#30
Report 12 years ago
#30
(Original post by nikk)
America saved us in WW2, so we kind of owe them anyway.
I always resent this. As if they could have won the war without us, or the Ruskies. The war was lost by the Axis as a result of 3 factors ; Britain resisting, Hitler hating Stalin to a suicidal extent ( and everything that entailed ) and the USA (belatedly) becoming involved.
0
quote
reply
an Siarach
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#31
Report 12 years ago
#31
(Original post by cottonmouth)
I take it you mean in defence terms? Absolutely not. Tiny country with no nuclear weapons to call our own.....we'd be gone in sixty seconds.
Thats almost funny, but its too retarded. We are the fourth richest nation in the world, one of the nuclear powers with one of the most advanced militaries and the largest navy in western europe. Even if none of this was true who exactly would get rid of us in '60 seconds' ?
0
quote
reply
xelprep
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#32
Report 12 years ago
#32
Envious of the relationship with USA? envious of what? you mean not having their own July 7th incident?
0
quote
reply
ArthurOliver
Badges: 9
Rep:
?
#33
Report 12 years ago
#33
(Original post by Weejimmie)
What do you mean "We"? Who are "ourselves"?

There is no such thing as "Western civilisation". There are many western ciovilisations.
OK, I disagree, I'm happy to talk about Western, Chinese, Islamic, and Indian Civilisations. They may each be complexes of different languages, cultures, ethnies and regions, but they have an overarching coherence and identity and share -especially- a religious, political, philosophical framework which makes them recognisably discrete civilisations. To me and most.

As I've said before, I think you're premature in declaring the victory of the West. On ***uyama vs Huntington I'm with H.

That's F-u-k-uyama! !!
0
quote
reply
an Siarach
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#34
Report 12 years ago
#34
(Original post by ArthurOliver)
OK, I disagree, I'm happy to talk about Western, Chinese, Islamic, and Indian Civilisations. They may each be complexes of different languages, cultures, ethnies and regions, but they have an overarching coherence and identity and share -especially- a religious, political, philosophical framework which makes them recognisably discrete civilisations. To me and most.

As I've said before, I think you're premature in declaring the victory of the West. On ***uyama vs Huntington I'm with H.

That's F-u-k-uyama! !!
I agree with you on this one. Im not a fan of ***uyama. Edit : Why in the name of God is Eff-Ew-Kay censored out?
0
quote
reply
Johnny
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#35
Report 12 years ago
#35
Oh dear Astor... a grip on the real situation of course.

Have I ever been to America? Only for eight weeks up and down the east coast! (Atlanta, Orlando, St.Petersburg, Washington D.C., New York, North and South Virginia, New Hampshire and Massachusetts.) So actually I believe that I do in fact have a pretty accurate view of the average American. They are ignorant and badly-educated as a whole. After two months I became thoroughly sick and tired of explaining to countless individuals where the UK was - some ally!

"but genetically, your ancetoral (sic) make-up is probablly (sic) closely (sic)linked to American than native European"
Umm... I fail to see the impact that genetics have in this instance. Firstly the statement itself is totally ridiculous, verging on laughable really since the great majority of human genetic variation is accounted for by single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs), which are substitutions in individual bases along a chromosome present in a significant fraction of the human population. Most analyses estimate that SNPs occur on average somewhere between every 1 in 100 and 1 in 1,000 base pairs in the euchromatic human genome, although they do not occur at a uniform density. Thus follows the popular statement that "all humans are at least 99% genetically identical". Culture is what defines our outlook and seperates us from the Americans and in fact makes us more european both in nature and in our foreign policy descisions. If we share

"Name me some failed US foreign policies please, btw."
Whoops! Shot yourself in the foot with that one! I'm afraid the list is of American blunders is almost endless. Here are just a few though to keep you busy:

Haiti - 1915 - to present
Korea - 1952
Vietnam - 1961-75
Cuba 'bay of pigs' - 1961
Dominican Republic - 1962
Cambodia - 1986-78
Israel/Palestine
The arms given to the Mujaheedin in Afghanistan - 1980s
Angola - post 1974
Grenada - 1983
Somailia - early 90s
The arms sold to Saddma Hussein's govt in the early 90s to help him fight Iran

But wait there's more; closer to home in recent decades, the U.S. has been accused of complicity in the overthrow of Guatemala's liberal nationalist Jacobo Arbenz (1954), Brazil's leftist Joao Goulart (1964), Chile's Marxist Salvador Allende(1973) and Bolivia's nationalist Juan José Torres González (1971), in the prevention of Uruguay's Frente Amplio Party taking power (1971), in arming El Salvador's government to prevent El Salvador leftist rebels from taking power (1980's), in military attacks against Social Democrat Juan Bosch in Dominican Republic (1963), Marxist Fidel Castro in Cuba (since 1960), Nicaragua's leftist Sandinista government (1980's), Grenada's leftist government (1983) and Panama nationalist Manuel Noriega (1989), and in an intended coup against President Hugo Chavez, Venezuela (2002).

Oh dear. It seems that your favourite bully is not so glamourous at all:

"It seems incredible, but it can be shown that since the end of World War II, U.S. interventions throughout the world have resulted in the deaths of more than two million persons, wounded and maimed many more, have caused dislocations, have uprooted masses of foreign nationals and destroyed infrastructures and economies."

Oh and that last comment I made (As to other posters who comment on the lack of Britain's military strength... wtf? As if that really matters; are we in a new war or something?! ), this was merely a passing reference to the absurdity of the idea that we needed a strong army to protect the UK. I find it highly unlikely that we stand any risk of invasion at all by a foreign power. I know we have a strong army, but why exactly do we need it? We are not currently in a war, only numerous peace-keeping operations and one illegal occupation. The looming conflict with Iran would also not be a war as any invasion at this point in time would be illegal under International Law (in accordance with the nuclear non-proliferation treaty at least).
0
quote
reply
cottonmouth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#36
Report 12 years ago
#36
(Original post by an Siarach)
Thats almost funny, but its too retarded. We are the fourth richest nation in the world, one of the nuclear powers with one of the most advanced militaries and the largest navy in western europe. Even if none of this was true who exactly would get rid of us in '60 seconds' ?
hahahaha, when you go and read up on our nuclear capabilities you'll feel like a ****** We dont have control over our nuclear weapons at all.

When asked where our nuclear weapons are, the standard answer is they wont confirm or deny. Even MPs sont know where theya re. We DO NOT HAVE AN INDEPENDENT NUCLEAR DETERRENT, not since the cancellation of the Vulcan bomb, and the adoption of Polaris, then the Trident missiles. Technology was so expensive and complex that it was beyond Britains capabilities at the time, ans so they are made available by the US, which ALSO CONTROLS THE GLOBAL SATELLITE GUDIANCE SYSTEM! Even if Blair ordered the firing of them, they wouldnt have a target unless guided by america. In fact, France has more of an independent deterrent than we do. The American govnt have said that in return for their assistance with nuclear powers, we MUST give them control the intelligence services and they therfore have access to all the intelligence we have. When Tony Benn was minister of technology, he has to ask americas permission before britain was allowed to proceed with the uranium thing using the centrifuge- we had to consult the Atomic Energy Commision in Washington.

This is why Blair had to follow Bush to war. We would losr our pretence to the rest of the world that we have an INDEPENDENT nuclear deterrent. Showing the world we are a non-nuclear tiny island. Of interest to america simply because their bombers can fly from British bases, giving them easy access to Europe if they need it.

I have read super-extensively on the subject of Britian and its nuclear capabilities, sis a whole damn project on it, consulted with people in governemt (with the help of my head teacher), so before you call me retared, i suggest you go and check out some of the actual facts. If we fell out big time with ameirca, they wiuldnt help us with the nuclears, leaving us wide open to attack by stronger countries.
And you ask who? Well, the western world aren't really liked by many other parts of the world are they? Let me tell you, if we didnt have americas backing, and china or japan decided to attack us, we would, as i said, be gone in sixty seconds. Or maybe a little longer.

I wont argue this much longer. Just go and look for the facts. It is widely acknowledged that we are not an independent nuclear power, we are dependent on America for help.
0
quote
reply
sara_b
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#37
Report 12 years ago
#37
um, do the words 'British Empire' mean anything to those of you saying we are dependant on the US?

We ruled the world before the US even got its NAME!
0
quote
reply
an Siarach
Badges: 13
Rep:
?
#38
Report 12 years ago
#38
(Original post by cottonmouth)
hahahaha, when you go and read up on our nuclear capabilities you'll feel like a ****** We dont have control over our nuclear weapons at all.

When asked where our nuclear weapons are, the standard answer is they wont confirm or deny. Even MPs sont know where theya re. We DO NOT HAVE AN INDEPENDENT NUCLEAR DETERRENT, not since the cancellation of the Vulcan bomb, and the adoption of Polaris, then the Trident missiles. Technology was so expensive and complex that it was beyond Britains capabilities at the time, ans so they are made available by the US, which ALSO CONTROLS THE GLOBAL SATELLITE GUDIANCE SYSTEM! Even if Blair ordered the firing of them, they wouldnt have a target unless guided by america. In fact, France has more of an independent deterrent than we do. The American govnt have said that in return for their assistance with nuclear powers, we MUST give them control the intelligence services and they therfore have access to all the intelligence we have. When Tony Benn was minister of technology, he has to ask americas permission before britain was allowed to proceed with the uranium thing using the centrifuge- we had to consult the Atomic Energy Commision in Washington.

This is why Blair had to follow Bush to war. We would losr our pretence to the rest of the world that we have an INDEPENDENT nuclear deterrent. Showing the world we are a non-nuclear tiny island. Of interest to america simply because their bombers can fly from British bases, giving them easy access to Europe if they need it.

I have read super-extensively on the subject of Britian and its nuclear capabilities, sis a whole damn project on it, consulted with people in governemt (with the help of my head teacher), so before you call me retared, i suggest you go and check out some of the actual facts. If we fell out big time with ameirca, they wiuldnt help us with the nuclears, leaving us wide open to attack by stronger countries.
And you ask who? Well, the western world aren't really liked by many other parts of the world are they? Let me tell you, if we didnt have americas backing, and china or japan decided to attack us, we would, as i said, be gone in sixty seconds. Or maybe a little longer.

I wont argue this much longer. Just go and look for the facts. It is widely acknowledged that we are not an independent nuclear power, we are dependent on America for help.
Im well aware of the situation with our nukes ( the warheads are our own and to suggest that we are incapable of overcoming any difficulties should the americans somehow turn against us is laughable). You seem to have forgotten to answer the questions raised however. Fourth richest nation in the world, one of the most advanced militarily, largest navy in Western Europe - so perhaps this time you can actually answer the question ; who exactly will 'get rid of us in 60 seconds' ?
0
quote
reply
cottonmouth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#39
Report 12 years ago
#39
Right. Go and google, to find im right about us relying on america. Try going to read up on the huge newspaper furore that was created when it became evident that we cant control trident from here. You find it laughable? I dont really, and neither do many other intelligent people. Neither does "bliar", poor sod. You say i havent answered your questions. Well you didnt answer mine. I asked you what us beig rich has to do with whether a nuclear power could take us out. Any county with nuclear capabilities could take us out. Im not daying they would, im saying they could. You need tog et over your natinalistic" we're Britain, we're great, we were well strong a couple of centuries ago, empire, woohoo" attitude, because its childish. The facts are staring at you i the face. Well they will be once youve actually gone and researched it, raher than relying on your wish for britain to be independent of America. This isnt "an siarach" world. Its the real world. Go and do google, now.
0
quote
reply
cottonmouth
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#40
Report 12 years ago
#40
oh, and yes, we have the largestnavy. But i think nukes are a bit faster than boats.
0
quote
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Were you ever put in isolation at school?

Yes (142)
27.41%
No (376)
72.59%

Watched Threads

View All
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise