Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Tuesday, April 10, 2007
Dennis Prager :: Townhall.com Columnist
Britain Was Once Great Britain
by Dennis Prager
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


It is painful to see the decline of Great Britain.

Greatness in individuals is rare; in countries it is almost unique. And Great Britain was great.

It used to be said that "The sun never sets on the British empire." That is how vast Britain's influence was. And that influence, on balance, was far more positive than negative. Ask the Indians -- or the Americans, for that matter. The British colonies learned about individual rights, parliamentary government, civil service and courts of justice, to name of few of the benefits that the British brought with them. Were it not for British involvement, India might still have sati (burning wives on the funeral pyre of their husband), would have no unifying language, and probably no parliamentary democracy or other institutions and values that have made that country a democratic giant, now on its way to becoming an economic one as well. But today, the sun not only literally sets on an extinct British empire; it is figuratively setting on Britain itself.

Two recent examples provide evidence:

One is the way Britain handled the recent act of war against it by Iran. Everything about the British reaction revealed a civilization in decline.

Whether the British sailors and marines should have put up more resistance -- i.e., any resistance -- to the unprovoked Iranian military attack is something for military and other experts to decide. Whether the captured sailors and marines offered more information and more cooperation, and more smiles than was necessary to the leader of their kidnappers, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, will also be determined in ongoing investigations. Whether the British government engaged in appeasement of Iran or ineffective diplomacy will also have to be judged.

What does seem clear, however, is that the British government did not confront the Iranians in any way reminiscent of a great country, let alone of Britain's great past. If we judge the British government's reaction alone -- without any reference to the behavior of the British sailors and marines -- Iran was the feared power, not Great Britain, which acted like the supplicant.

But what really makes one weep for Britain's lost greatness is what has happened since the sailors and marines were released.

The UK Minister of Defense, Labor MP Desmond Browne, announced that the released sailors and marines were all free to sell their stories to the media, "as a result of exceptional media interest." If this is not unprecedented, it would certainly be difficult to find anything similar in the annals of military history. Some of the captured sailors and marines have already earned large sums of money. The Guardian newspaper said the one woman who had been captured, Faye Turney, agreed to a deal with The Sun and ITV television for approximately $200,000. (American soldier Jessica Lynch, who was captured when her Army convoy was ambushed in 2003, received a $500,000 advance for her book, "I Am a Soldier, Too." But that was a book published later and she had never charged the news media when interviewed by them.)

And John Tindell, the father of another of the hostages, said the marines were planning to sell on eBay the vases given to them by the Iranians.

As The Australian reported, "Some of the sums being offered to the captives are higher than the money paid to service personnel maimed in Iraq or Afghanistan. The standard tariff for the loss of an arm is 57,500 pounds."

The Labor government's decision was described well by the mother of a British soldier killed in Iraq. As reported by Reuters: "The mother of a 19-year-old British soldier killed by a roadside bomb in Iraq at the weekend said she would be 'very shocked' if any of the detainees were paid for their stories. 'If you are a member of the military, it is your duty to serve your country,' Sally Veck, mother of Eleanor Dlugosz, told the Times. 'You should do your duty and not expect to make money by selling stories.'"

That pretty well sums up the revulsion many feel at the British government's decision.

The other current example of Great Britain's decline is the widely reported (in the UK) decision of schools in various parts of that country to stop teaching about the Holocaust in history classes. The reason?

As reported by the BBC, "Some schools avoid teaching the Holocaust and other controversial history subjects as they do not want to cause offence, research has claimed. Teachers fear meeting anti-Semitic sentiment, particularly from Muslim pupils, the government-funded study by the Historical Association said."

No comment necessary.

But a word of caution: If Great Britain can cease to be great in so short a time span, any country can. All you need is an elite that no longer believes in their country, that manipulates history texts to make students feel good about themselves, that prefers multiculturalism to its own culture, and that has abandoned its religious underpinnings. Sound familiar, America?

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Dennis Prager is a radio show host, contributing columnist for Townhall.com, and author of 4 books including Happiness Is a Serious Problem: A Human Nature Repair Manual.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Dennis Prager's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
Well Said Mr. Prager
Oh how the mighty have fallen.

Wow Handy
I had a neighbor in college from Nigeria who had a very similar view of Britain. Are you from a former colony?

The problem in Britain is that they (like most of Europe) have made 3 major mistakes:
1) They have let in a vast number of immigrants who refuse to assimilate and have a deep hostility to their new country.
2) They rely on the US to protect them, yet like the spoiled child protected by a rich daddy, despise themselves for their weakness, and despise their daddy for bailing them out all of the time.
3) They have bought the lie that liberals have tried to perpetuate since Versailles that all people are fundamentally good, that God is irrelevant, and that associations of nations can create niceness simply by being nice. It didn't work at Versailles, it didn't work in the 30's, it didn't work when the European powers pulled out of their colonies, and it will not work now.

As Germany and Japan bore witness to, extremist nations can become civilized, but the extremism must be beaten out of them, then replaced with a viable alternative. Even in her weakened state, Britain had the power to stand up to Iran much as they stood up to Argentina in the early 80's. What they lacked was the national willpower of Margaret Thatcher or Winston Churchill.

Handy
You might want to have a chat with some Argentinians soldiers or some of those terrorists (difficult I know as they are all dead) who took hostages at the Iranian Embassy about the efficay of British troops. Seems we have had rather more success in those areas than your boys of late.
I think you would also have to concede that our countries approach, albeit not entirely without fault, has certainly proven more successful in Iraq than that of the US.
Our country has also had to endure a US financed terrorist war in Northern Ireland for the last few decades though thankfully this does seem to have ended, helped greatly incidentally by this websites great Bete-Noir Bill Clinton but thats another story.

Great Britain
To be honest that tag has been a bit of an embarrassment for more than 100 years. So Prager is kinda right but his grandfather could have written that and not been wrong either. Like many places, there's a lot wrong with Britain but there's also an awful lot right about it - just like the States and just like France. Nowhere is perfect. As for our armed forces and the events in Iran - my view is that no soldier while still serving should be allowed to sell their stories. That said it is a tough one; if a paper is willing to pay that kind of money to someone whose ability to earn is dwarfed by those kind of sums, who are we to tell them they can't have it?
The problem is chequebook journalism. the Mirror won the top journalism award this year for its "scoop" on John Prescott's affair. But The Mirror got the story by forking out more than any of their rivals to pay the secretary / mistress. That's not journalism, that's just paying for stories. The press is lazy and rewards chequebook journalism, not real reporting. And while David Beckham's latest haircut / tattoo remains more important than real events, nothing is going to change.
Anyway, enough about Britain. The government did what was necessary to release the captured servicemen, and as I've said before unless anyone here has been a captive in that situation it's not right to criticise the actions of those that have. You get home, someone from a paper offers you more money than you've ever dreamed of having. What are you going to do?

On a totally different topic, but sticking with things that were once great, anyone else agree that this weekend's Masters was the worst ever? Full marks to Zach Johnson for winning it, but does anyone really want to see the Masters won by the player that makes the fewest mistakes? It's dull. I want to see someone winning it by making a string of birdies, not by making a string of pars. In trying to "Tiger-proof" Augusta, they've turned what was one of the highlights of the sporting year into a parade of woe. I mean, you just have to look at the galleries over the weekend - where was the cheering? Most of them were behaving like they were at a funeral, and if the Masters continues like that they might have been. Any thought?

Just maybe the Brits...
...are waiting to be led.They have spent gazillions of pounds sterling becoming a nuclear,navel,and army power since WWII,and nothing to growing a backbone of willingness to use it.This is a failure of their leadership amongst their own people.Even if it looks like you are becoming a permanent minority among the voters,it must be said over and over.Churchill spent years out of power until he became the right man at the right time in their history.Bin Laden was right:History respects the strong horse.A lesson all nations have to learn over and over again.

Degenerates
If this is true, and I know it to be true for Western Europe as a whole, and Mr Prager has some ominous words for America, than God help us all.

Degenerates
If this is true, and I know it to be true for Western Europe as a whole, and Mr Prager has some ominous words for America, then God help us all.

They have spent...
"They have spent gazillions of pounds sterling becoming a nuclear,navel,and army power since WWII,and nothing to growing a backbone of willingness to use it"

Why don't you tell that to Argentina.

America of course, has had the "backbone" to use its own military power several times since WWII, as we've seen in its successful wars against North Korea, North Vietnam and now Iraq. Oh wait a minute, those wars weren't successful were they? They just cost a great deal of money and got lots of (mostly innocent) people killed. Well, I guess a backbone isn't too useful without some brains to go along with it, is it?

Britian's Decline
It's a warning shot across our countties bow too. The weakness that has gripped Britian in the past 5 years or so, is alive and well in this country too.

You can see how Tony Blair was completely undermined by his parliment...heckling in the parliment chamber, a restless and passive population, and immigration laws that have brought them terror within their own country. It's a lesson of "what not to do" to destroy a country. Look at their military - 50% cut back in the once powerful and proud Navy, and troops that barely want to stand up for their own liberty and country.

We have our own version of decline here in America - it's called the democratic and liberal left. More passive than I've ever seen in my life, more determined to undermine the President than to stand up for what's right for the country. Liberal leaders that take it upon themselves to create policy, dictate the leftist
"rules" to the President. The American voter got waht it desired last year...and you will pay for it for years to come. We've alerted our enemies that we would rather talk than fight...even though their designs to kill the western way of life remain solid and resolute. Who will they attempt to reason with...tyrants, killers of women, children and inicients?

There's a '60's mentality here that will bring our enemies to our shores...it's a matter of when not if they will. We've lost our will to fight, loose lives for our freedom. We are living the "Fall of the American empire".

You can reverse the trend however - vote these passive wimps and "has-beens" like Murtha out in the next election. We can obtain some form of peace - BUT THROUGH STRENGHT.

Mr Handy
I'm very flattered by the love you have for my country, I really am.

But I don't think the harshness toward Britain is that warranted. After all, we copied our government and law from the Poms! Our Army, Navy and Air Force use British ways! (I must say though, I'd love to have the chance to eat an MRE...) Our spelling and culture are far more based on English than American norms!

I mean, there's no such thing as a Master Sergeant in the Australian Army, Lance Corporals are Army, and we're just as demilitarized as the UK is compared to the United States. We also embraced multiculturalism- We had to! We've had waves of Irish, Lebanese, Greek, Italian, Asian and now middle eastern settlers come to our country and on the whole they've helped refine what it means to be "Australian" just as we've done it to them. I'll reckon that the standard Aussie in the street could eat with Chopsticks and uses Greek terms in everyday language!

Helps to be friendly and happy. Generally people respond to happiness and acceptance! And if they don't... well, they know the way to the airport.

"Your whole kingdom..."
"Your whole little Kingdom is a worthless example to history."

Britain was and is a tiny country with few natural resources which nevertheless managed to create the largest empire in history. (And without which you'd be speaking Mexican today). It never had any business being a world leader, but did so for 400 years by dint of sheer intelligence and hard work.

The US is one of the largest countries in the world with huge resources at its disposal. And in spite of that your own global dominance is crumbling just fifty years after it first took shape.

I wouldn't go so far as to say your own country is "a worthless example to history", because it's rapidly becoming a great example of how to blow world leadership in record time, and when you had the biggest head start imaginable - much of it through institutions inherited or copied from the mother country you now with typical ingratitude seek to disparage.

The silliness of Handy's post...
... can be found as early as the first sentence:

"There has been nothing good about, let alone “Great” about Britain since the year 1776."

This is an absurd statement, easily demonstrated to be false by a little research into the name "William Wilberforce," or by seeing the movie "Amazing Grace," in current release in theaters, about this amazing individual. It took the United States the better part of a century to catch up to Britain's greatness in this regard. And that's just one example; lord knows that any serious student of British history can find any number of examples of greatness throughout the nineteenth and twentieth centuries.

Given such a patently ill-informed fizzle of an opening salvo, I can't be bothered to read the rest of it.

Fergus is Right
Here are some examples:

1)A little band of Welsh colonial soldiers held off 4000 Zulus for 4 days before the Zulus withdrew. They were led not by a combat officer, but by a sutbborn Scottish engineer. This was 1889.

2)A batallion of British Paratroopers held off an entire panzer division for 9 days during Operation Market Graden

3)A force of less than 15000 British soliders pacified Indonesia during the Communist insurrection there during the 50s.

4)Read about the Desert Rats of Toburk

5)A company of British Marines fought with the 1st Marines at Chosin in 1951.

6)Read about the British SAS during operation Desert Storm. Thier behavior was much different than the British Sailors.

The Brits may be down, but not out.




Who lost what
Gatto writes: America of course, has had the "backbone" to use its own military power several times since WWII, as we've seen in its successful wars against North Korea, North Vietnam and now Iraq. Oh wait a minute, those wars weren't successful were they? They just cost a great deal of money and got lots of (mostly innocent) people killed. Well, I guess a backbone isn't too useful without some brains to go along with it, is it?

Tell a lie long enough and eventually people will believe it. North Korea's army along with China's was kicked back across the 38th parallel and South Korea preserved. It is now a vibrant demacracy with a strong economy in contrast to the prison state to the north. I consider that a win. When US forces left Vietnam there was a peace treaty and the South was still intact. That too was a win. The fact that the South Vietnamese could not protect themselves without American help is not our fault. Americans just felt it wasn't worth fighting for. The resulting exodus out of Vietnam pretty much validated that the US was right. Thousands of people wound up in re-education camps or just disappeared. So much for the workers paradise they were promised. Vietnam is a police state and economic basket case like all Communist countries. We along with several countries kicked the Iraqis out of Kwuate, and preserved its independence from Saddam. As of Iraq today. Well, its citizens held free elections in spite of the violence. I wonder how may Brits, Americans or Aussies would risk sniper fire to go to the polls. The Soviet Union collapsed with some help from the Western Demacracies and Pope John Paul. Advantage US & Brittian.
The History Channel had a special on last month called The Dark Ages. The collapse of the Roman Empire brought on centuries of constant war and famine. I fear that is where civilization is headed today unless freedom loving people unite. As Ben Franklin said after the Declaration of Independence was written. "If we don't hang together we will most assuradly hang separatley."

No protesters
Why were there no (or at any rate, very few) Brits protesting against Iran? We know that Iran violated the law, because they gave two different sets of coordinates for where the sailors and marines were picked up. You don't change your story if you're in the right. We also know that there were tons of Iranians demonstrating against Britain.

So why were no Brits protesting against Iran?

And why did England struggle to beat lowly Andorra, winning by only 3-0?

Great Britain Not So Great Europe
Where Britain went wrong was in buying into the EU propaganda machine and deciding to cast its lot with the bloated bureaucracy and moral smugness of the continent. Instead of leading the EU (which would have been better for Europe) or minimizing its involvement with the EU (which would have been better for Britain), she chose the worst possible choice: sacrificing her Britishness for an amorphous "European" identity. As a result, instead of Brits, the island is now full of English-speaking kissers of the French derriere. It shouldn't be a surprise that her soldiers and sailors acted French in a pinch; that's the direction of the culture since the second world war, but especially since the late 80's.

We In The U.S...
...need to make some decisions. Are we to follow Britain and "old Europe" in their stampede over the cliff's edge or will we come to the realization that we stand alone in the world. Not really alone because "In God We Trust", even though it was deleted from our newest minted coin.
If we are to survive we must begin to wage war aggressively. Not IAW the U.N. Charter and we must have an attitude of "world opinion be damned". We must shift our entire national focus away from old Europe towards the Pacific Basin. Old Europe is like a leech slowly sucking the blood from our veins. DD

I must say
I've read here some of the most infantile remarks ever on TH. Bad teeth? Good grief. Like a pack of jackals.
I don't think Britain-bashing is necessary. Some of their captured soldiers certainly displayed less than we would have expected of them. So did some of ours at Abu Ghraib. And so do some of you with the kinds of comments you've made. Not worthy.

Darvin
Exactly.

We've shed far too much AMERICAN blood for old Europe now referred to as Eurabia. The H*ll with em.

THAT SAID, check out my blog for several HARD-HITTING articles on Liberal MOONBATTERY, The Goreacle, and the lib's view of National Security, ala Turbin Durbin and RINO Hagel the bagel.

Thanks for the Brits . . .
I am amazed by some of the posts which lack appreciation for our friends in England. No country -- either England or the good old USA -- is perfect. It is a difficult world we live in. A world where terrorists are commited to the goal of killing the "Infidels" (anybody who doesn't accept their view of the world), and are willing to die in the process, needs a free world that stands together. If the USA and England and other nations in the free world start criticizing one another, God help the world! Brits, I appreciate you. I'm not in love with the idea of a monarchy, but that's your business.

Handy
You said: "I’m almost willing to lay odds that if any American soldier has trained with the Brits, he’d actually choose a Canadian Red Cross Girl to back him up instead. At least you’d get a donut and a smile before you take your last breath."

WRONG! I trained and served with the Brits and they can have my back anytime. Their biggest fault was to blindly support us in the Iraq fiasco. The Brits know you don't make threats that you can't back up. My question to you Handy is are you US military or a mercenary? I would hate to realise that the US miltary has sunk so low as to attack a friend fighting with them.

"Great" Britain.
Every country makes the mistake of over reaching resulting in its demise.



Visit: http://OsiSpeaks.com or http://OsiSpeaks.org

Great Britain
Julius Caesar, in his "de Bello Gallia", used the expression "affeminandus animus", to describe the softening of the will of a once warlike nation. This expression no doubt now fits the once Great Britain. What a pitty!

well
I was hoping to gat an answer from Handy but I guess it is not to be. You folks enjoy the day.

BAH
What price honor (or honour as the Brits spell it)?

I fear America is heading down the same road.

roadkill writes
"North Korea's army along with China's was kicked back across the 38th parallel and South Korea preserved. It is now a vibrant demacracy with a strong economy in contrast to the prison state to the north. I consider that a win."

Yes, and thanks to that "win" we are now threatened by a paranoid, nuclear armed state run by a psychopath. That kind of "win" the world could do without.

"When US forces left Vietnam there was a peace treaty and the South was still intact. That too was a win. The fact that the South Vietnamese could not protect themselves without American help is not our fault. Americans just felt it wasn't worth fighting for."

Yes, but why did it take the US ten long years to come to that realization? Vietnam was never worth fighting for, but it took you countless billions of dollars and tens of thousands of American lives for the penny to drop.

The point I am making is that, regardless of how powerful you are, you have to have know when force is appropriate and when it is not. Even the right's iconic hero, Winston Churchill, said that jaw-jaw is always better than war-war.

Perhaps a naval officer on the spot might have done something to try and prevent the capture of those British troops, but there could be all kinds of reasons why he didn't - such as that he didn't realize what was happening until it was too late, or that his rules of engagement didn't allow it. Regardless, the troops are all back home safely, without bloodshed or a major international incident, and I'm sure that *most* people would regard that as a pretty good outcome.

Britain Once Great
Dennis is correct that the British influence on India had some positive longer term effects e.g. parliamentary government. However, to stop there is to make the mistake that all neo-cons make and which led to the current disaster in Iraq.

One cannot neglect to also take into consideration the culture which is affected by the imperial power (or soft hegemony to use a neo-con euphamism). In fact, the Muslim population in India which ended up in Pakistan (after 500,000 deaths)had the same British influence and a quite different result. Similarly, the British rule in Palestine had very different results for two distinct people with distinct cultures. I would suggest that the reason Israel is a Democracy had little to do with the influence of the British Mandate.
Brisish hegemony over Aeden similarly left little political influence in its wake. Similarly, the British Mandate over Iraq between 1920-32 left little lasting influence. Churchill described it as attempting to put a tent on a volcano.

I would suggest that the soft hegemony thesis is an inadequate explanation. Something more is required of the culture of the subject people in order for it to be successful. That is the lesson of the British Empire and it is the lesson of Iraq today.

Back at you England
Oh, how have the English chickens come to roost? For a long time the English have criticized the Americans of being money grubbing and self-absorbed. "This cup of tea tastes rather bitter doesn't it, old chap?"

Where were the rest of the Euro-snobs? Were they standing shoulder to shoulder with England? No, they sold out England to protect their business interests with Iran. European Union in a pigs eye it is. Only when their money involved is there a Union.

The sailors and Marines are only doing what the rest of the world is doing. "Getting what they feel is owed to them." "It's not about English patriotism Love, it’s about the money."

So much about the English stiff upper lip, now that lip is down in the muck, sucking up what they feel is owed to them as fast as they can.

I have always admired you English for your strength and resolve, but please, don't forget in what being English is, sadly, you are part of the EU, but always remember, you are England and nothing else.


There is a difference ...
Understand that there is a difference. A difference between being an American and being a citizen of the United States. To be an American is to answer a mystic call, to know there is something other than the material. It has always been that way.
Anticipate nothing but animosity and betrayal and treachery from your neighbor and you won't be dissappointed.
Does anyone believe that most of our polititians are Americans. Foolish person. These are people who belong to the church of personal aggrandizement. The church of what's happening now. Their vision of America is the enviromentally friendly shopping mall between the two oceans with milions of new customers crossing the imaginery borders.
The American Mystics Logo is not 'Free is for Me' in reference to material goodies.

"Quis Quondam Eram"
Oh how the mighty have fallen. Another 10 years of uber-liberal pacification schemes "Mighty 'ol Blighty" will have achieved what took centuries to overcome - serfdom.

Liberalism + Multiculterism + Feminism = The emasculation of society.

The wolves are surrounding the henhouse!

Iranian induced allied bickering?
Really, ladies and gentlemen! Must we let the failure of 14 men and one woman to see trouble coming and call for help turn us into a bickering group wondering about our past?

One of my English cousins died last month. He had 12 tanks shot out from under him and left Egypt in WWII with a head full of German supplied shrapnel. But, he and eleven other US Grant tank crews, including one manned by Yanks over for a month to see how well it worked vs Hitler's Mark IV Tiger tanks, managed to stop Rommel and provide the first victory against Hitler. It saved the U.S. from losing the European battle ground before we had anyone ready to fight!

We owe a lot to each other and don't need to waste time comparing our records. What counts now is to either figure out how to become Muslims and live in something mistakenly called peace without freedom; or learn how to tell appeasers to get out of the way by voting them out of office in any nation that has no will to resist.

Get to the right question folks!

Pretty Handy, Wil
Handy: Hear! Hear! Absolutely spot on!! And, in passing, a prayer for the many thousands of dead ANZACs and other (Kenyan, Rhodesian, South African etceteras) wild colonial Men (And Once-Free-British and now enslaved Hong Kong Citizens) who had the decidedly bad fortune to have chosen to have a Limey at their backs rather than the likely much more efficacious red cross lady!

Wil: Once 'great' britain's and the rest of the pathologoically hesperophobic and morbidly ingrate Euro-peons' hostilely colonizing turd-wurld barbarian migrants are but the symptom of that post-Christian squalidly fasciSSocialist collective's dead and decadent decline and degeneration, not its cause!

John Bull no more
The power and strength of Great Briton has been sapped by the new castrati, the heirs to Chamberlain's appeasement mentality and socialism. They have passed through the apathy phase and are now poised for dictatorship, by Islamofacists, as is the rest of Europe. If there are any Churchills, they aren't stepping up.

I can only hope that our military would never shame themselves in the same way the Brits did.

John Bull is now a impotent steer, being fattened for slaughter.

Yo Gatto
If we hadn't fought in Korea, the nuclear threat would still be there, but would include South Korea as well. The world is a dangerous place and has been since its beginning. Although Viet Nam was a distant land, it was one of a number of countries around the world where communists were attempting takeovers. Like Europeans before Hitler began his attacks on neighboring countries, someone had to make the decision to confront it before the cost in lives escalated from tens of thousands to hundreds of thousands. Handy was right.

UK in the 'john'
This article is almost too sad to comment on. It hasn't been that long since Churchill and Great Britain were a force to deal with (WW II). But Churchill was a Victorian and politicians today are so cowed by the press that they surrender before loosing treasured poll points. The Queen is no longer a rallying point, but an excuse for a tea cosy decoration, and little more. How fast the once mighty have fallen. Londonium indeed.

An Object Lesson
Britain has been slapped, and we should wait to see if there is any response before roundly condemning the entire country. So far, signs are not hopeful.

"But a word of caution: If Great Britain can cease to be great in so short a time span, any country can. All you need is an elite that no longer believes in their country, that manipulates history texts to make students feel good about themselves, that prefers multiculturalism to its own culture, and that has abandoned its religious underpinnings. Sound familiar, America?"

That would be the Democratic platform supported by all the limp-wristed Liberals. No wonder it looks so awfully familiar...

Gatto
Gatto:
You're falling right into roadkill's accusation-- rewriting of history.

roadkill writes
"North Korea's army along with China's was kicked back across the 38th parallel and South Korea preserved. It is now a vibrant demacracy with a strong economy in contrast to the prison state to the north. I consider that a win."

Yes, and thanks to that "win" we are now threatened by a paranoid, nuclear armed state run by a psychopath. That kind of "win" the world could do without.

Do you not recall the next course of events after we pushed the communists back to the 38th? A power struggle escalated between Gen. MacArthur and Pres. Truman. Of course MacArthur believed the military should continue their campaign for addit'l acreage, but Truman disagreed. MacArthur tried to make an end-around Truman via Congress and found himself summarily 'retired'. Bottom line-- Truman made a political decision not to push further. I won't criticize that decision due to my lack of study in re: to his motivations at the time. Any Comander in Chief in history decisive enough to drop A-Bombs or order a March to Atlanta for complete and total victory deserves my benefit of the doubt.

addit'l piece
I slipped on the submit button--

bottom line: Truman 'chose' to call of the dogs in N. Korea. This was NOT a military defeat.

Doesn't add up to a hill of beans
Firstly, in the grand scheme of things events in Iran over the last couple of weeks amount to little more than a bout of sabre rattling by an Iranian administration buoyed by being in the rare position of being on top. By that I mean the British were never going to take military action to regain its captured servicepeople when diplomacy was always likely to work. One sure way to see them all coming home in crates would have been to escalate military activity. I'm no great fan of Tony Blair but in this instance I think he did what was best, and I dare say the majority of the UK believes that diploacy was the only real way out. As for selling stories, well, as i said before, anyone who has been in the same position can criticise but those who haven't - well, I know we'd all like to believe that honour comes first but in reality I suspect most of us would do thee same. Someone is offering an amount of money that is the equivalent of a lottery win; an amount of money that could set your family up for life. I suspect most of us would have been sorely tempted at the very least. as for this daft debate about Britain's place in the world, people seem to forget that the world has changed a little bit in the last 50 - 100 years. The world we know now is unregonisable even from the world that Winston Churchill knew, and he's only been dead for 42 years. Britain may no longer be the great world power it once was (in fact we have known that for donkey's years) but it is doing fine. You should come and work here for a while - most yanks in London love it.

British war Hero movie
pulled by the BBC for being too Positive! Just proves how screwed up Liberal thing is all over the world!

Read the full article here.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/04/08/wiraq308.xml

Opps
should have been...Liberal thinking.

Clownlike Ineptitude
This was the most idiotic manufactured, made-for-TV, clown-like episode I've seen in awhile.
Really, Royal Navy personnel "captured" by swiftboat driving wild-eyed Iranians?!
You're kidding me, right?
You couldn't make this up if you tried.

Then these military people tell us "fighting back wasn't an option"...?!

No, this isn't the beginning of the end for Western Civ. The End really started in 1914 with World War One.

This is just comic relief in the overall sad pathetic picture.

Multiculturalism and PC KILLS!
enough said

Dude
We're all prone to making generalisations about every strand of Johnny Foreigner. the French are this, the Germans are that, and yes, the Yanks are whatever else. I think the same applies the world over, but I know plenty of British *ssholes and plenty of fantastic Americans.
At the moment, it's true, American foreign policy has had an incredibly detrimental impact on how foreigners see Americans. Just look at this thread for plenty of reasons - your allies in Iraq have some people kidnapped, diplomacy gets them out and suddenly we're worthless losers with no place in the world and with worthless soldiers. Go figure why you're not as popular as you once were.

Faye's autograph
Faye Turney should keep wearing that elegant blue scarf for her book tour.
It'll make her more visible in those vast crowds of autograph seekers.

Smugness
I've had English and Australian roommates, and I spent a year and a half at York University doing a post doc.

In each instance, I found that when conversation turned to my Americanness, I was put on the defensive.

Whether Australian or English, these folks are fed a constant diet of how much better they are than you and me, the dirty Americans.

With thanks to Colonel Potter: Horse hockey.

I must admit that the state of education in the United States is deplorable. I found out just how far behind I was when I roomed with those two Australian brothers. Both were educated in Australia and then New Zealand, and did not have fancy prep school backgrounds. But their education followed the excellent British model, and I estimate that at age 18 I was about 3 years behind them in most subjects, except for math, where we were roughly on equal footing.

And my public high school has received award after award for "excellence," and is undoubtedly excellent compared with many public schools in this country.

So the Superiority Brothers had a point--they could see I could match them in the I.Q. department, but my education needed a major attention. I had a lot of catching up to do.

But their disdain for the country in which they were receiving their college education grates on me to this day. It was insufferable.

Living in York, England's Second City, brought home the general disdain in which today's British hold you and me. My nationality was held against me nearly constantly, and not just with disapproving head shakes or perceived eye rolling, but with constant barrages of insulting negative comments to my face, from nearly every side.

I made many dear friends in the home country. But I can't help but feel that America now stands alone, ready for the wolves to tear her apart or to stand up and fight.

If we lose our national will the way England has, then our Islamic adversary will have his way with us, and my granddaughters may indeed wear the hijab.

I can't stand it, and I'm glad I'll be gone when the fall finally comes.

Questionable
The author wrote:

"... The British colonies learned about individual rights, parliamentary government, civil service and courts of justice, to name of few of the benefits that the British brought with them..."

========

Really!?

Didn't the Irish and Scottish both, at some point or another, fight *AGAINST* totalitarian British Rule? Didn't India!? And South Africa?


And I thought the American Revolution was *also* to fight *AGAINST* British tyranny.


And, as I recall, in fact, the Colonies threw out parliamentary government in lieue of a republican form of government based upon the (ancient) Roman models. Indeed, the Revolutionaries *cited* [English] Common Law -- including the "courts of justice" and judicial procedings -- which predated Great Britain and laid their ideals about individual rights firmly at the feet of Natural Law, which also predated Great Britain.


Get it right. There was nothing peaceable about Great Britain's imperialistic conquests. Great Britain forcibly subjugated it's "colonies" and "territories", spreading at the point of the sword or gun as mercilessly (if not more so) than Islamism.

Were there positive results? Certainly. But the Ends still don't justify the means.



Is it just me, or is historical revisionism rampant amongst TownHall pundits these days?

Dude 3344
"The Zulus ended up winning that war?"

Which war would that be? The Zulus won their Little Bighorn at Isandlwana, and then the British proceeded to wipe them out.

Was there a Zulu war I'm not aware of that the Zulus won? I know Shaka was a great chief, but he was able to do his thing before the British really got serious about Africa.

Methinks you saw Sean Connery and Michael Caine portraying a couple of British soldiers, watched the movie's depiction of Isandlwana and concluded 'the British got wiped out here--they must have then lost the war.'

Go look up the Zulu war and find out who really lost.

Gatto
"America of course, has had the "backbone" to use its own military power several times since WWII, as we've seen in its successful wars against North Korea,"

SOUTH KOREA is free today because of us and, in part, England. If we did not intervene, there would be no South Korea. I've been to SK, and the older folks who were around then -- before the current hippie-wannabe generation -- remember and are deeply grateful.

By that measure (the only reasonable one), the Korean War was a success.

***

"North Vietnam..."

WE LOST that one because we weren't allowed to fight, we allowed ourselves to be handcuffed by people who think like you. Go to Little Saigon (Garden Grove, CA, down the road from me) and tell folks there what a bad idea it would have been to keep their country free. Be sure to wear body armor.

By the way, no attempt was being made to invade or over-run the North, just to defend the South.

***

"...and now Iraq."

a) This one isn't over yet by a long shot even with all your wishful thinking.

b) Your troops are there too, which will make it equally a failure for England.

c) I'm troubled that you'd gladly don a burka just to be able to say "I told you so".

"Oh wait a minute, those wars weren't successful were they? They just cost a great deal of money and got lots of (mostly innocent) people killed."

SAME THING happened in WW2. Guess that one wasn't worth it either. Maybe Wendell Wilkie was right...

***

"Well, I guess a backbone isn't too useful without some brains to go along with it, is it?"

AMERICA ON THE WHOLE has both, but to hypothetically grant your point, it's better to have at least one, while you have neither. Which you will now prove by changing the subject when I ask you what your plan for defeating Islamic terrorism is...

Logically speaking...
If you are Tony Blair, and the following apply:

1. You have no interest in starting a war;
2. 15 of your servicemen have been captured by a decidedly psychotic enemy;
3. You give a rat's hindquarters about your troops' safety;

The last thing you want to do is:

1. Say threatening things to Iran.


On the other hand, if you're President Ahmedinejad, and the following apply:

1. You don't want to start a war (You're not ready yet!)
2. You want GOOD publicity;
3. You've dealt with a nation which, unlike the USA, declares war far more trigger happily and uses far deadlier and cruel methods of war than the USA ever will- Malaya, World War II, The Falklands, Idi Amin's hostages, Gulf Wars I and II are all examples;

When the UK asks you politely for its soldiers back you hand them over.

Won't comment on the payment of the soldiers (other than that it is not their problem- it is the MoD's problem for letting them) but I don't see how anyone could fault the UK for using the quiet menace of genteel British diplomacy to get what they want.

Wacky
Erm, without wishing to sound ungrateful, I have to take issue with your third point about British trigger-happiness, and our deadly and cruel methods... can you explain that? I mean without going back to our colonial past. Are you saying that we fought in both Gulf wars using more deadly and cruel methods than ths US? And more deadly and cruel methods than the Germans and Japanese in WWII? And how were we so much worse than the Argentines in The Falklands? Can you explain what you are talking about?

Sabre rattling
Making a lot of noise about what they would do if their sailors were not released would have not served any purpose. Uncertainty about what might happen may have served them better in this incident.

Great Britain is not the feared lion that it once was but it is not a paper tiger like France. Provoked they will respond decisively and aggressively.

The media circus surrounding the released sailors is lamentable and may have no lasting effect in troop morale.

A possible benefit is the dissemination of the real story which may reduce any propaganda value that Iran may have gained by it’s actions.

Gatto, Pt 2
NORTH KOREA

"Yes, and thanks to that "win" we are now threatened by a paranoid, nuclear armed state run by a psychopath. That kind of "win" the world could do without."

WHAT KIND of illogic is that? More bow-and-scrape diplomacy in the tradition of Neville Chamberlain? You're saying that if we had not defended South Korea, Kim Il Sung and now his son would have spontaneously risen from the slime of Marxism with the blessing of the USSR and PRC and become nice people and all of Korea would now be a unified democracy?

We would have had a nuclear armed state run by a psychopath now if we never set foot in Korea, the difference being that there would be no South Korea because Kim would have the whole peninsula.

Anyway, now that we have just such a state, what is your solution for this problem? More appeasement to strike terror in Kim's heart?


Handy, Handy...
...Handy. You display the stereotypical Yank view of the world in your last post, even your own 'back yard'.
I suspect you are a post pubescent school boy whacking off to 80's war films so please ask your geography teacher to show you where Argentina and Venezuela are.

And Wacky
I'll tell ya, you want to avoid the Poms in the final if you get there... I saw Chris Cairns with his two wee boys on the tube this morning at Canary Wharf - unfortunately he's a Kiwi and retired but he'd still smite Glenda to all parts of the Caribbean! Hopefully he is bringing his kids up here...

A Boxing Lesson

....."The bigger they are the harder they fall" ...that was a quote by heavyweight champion Joe Louis before he knocked out Primo Cannera ...

.....another famous quote by Louis before he knocked out Billy Conn was ..."He can run but he can't hide" ...

.....Neither can Britain nor the USA hide from their inevitable knockout ...we are the victims of our own Political Correctness ...we are the Primo Cannera and Billy Conn to China's Joe Louis ...the next Industrial Giant and future heavyweight champion of the World ...

.....It is ironic that China ...a Communist country ...is using the economics of Western Capitalism to bury us .....COLOSSUS

Brits aping French
Britain today is quite similar to France in WWII - lacking the manhood to defend itself.

Thanks for nothing? No, for plenty.
Dear United Kingdom:

I love you. I always have.
I love that you have cared enough about your history to keep your monuments standing. I love that you honor your past and aren't trapped in the bubble of "contemporary-mania" (i.e. the idea that any book, scientific invention, movie, or idea more than ten years old is "lame" and "irrelevant"). But I'm worried about you. I read stories about the encroachment of "tolerance" for Sharia-dedicated Muslim immigrants on your educational and legal systems, and I think, "No! Please, God! Not my England! Let there always be an England, and never, ever, ever be a Londonistan!"

Handy says, "Thanks for nothing." So I thought I should come up with a little list, Great Britain, of all I have to thank you for, and all that the Muslims would toss onto the fire if they had their way:

Thank you for Chaucer and the birth of poetry in the English vernacular.

Thank you for Shakespeare and, as Harold Bloom puts it, "the invention of the human." Thank you for stories that can reach across the centuries and the generations to touch the minds and hearts of people today.

Thank you for Queen Elizabeth I, who, for all her flaws, showed us that a woman COULD achieve political and social greatness and function as a strong leader.

Thank you for King James I and the most widespread translation of the Bible into English.

Thank you for John Locke and Edmund Burke, whose wisdom helped to guide the Founding Fathers as they built the governmental framework of our new nation.

Thank you for Jonathan Swift, Alexander Pope, William Wordsworth, John Keats, S.T. Coleridge, Jane Austen, Charlotte and Emily Bronte, Charles Dickens, George Eliot, Anthony Trollope, Rudyard Kipling, and more great novelists and poets than I have room to mention here. Thank you for keeping the memory of the works of these great writers alive in the minds of your contemporary citizens through both education and film adaptations.

Thank you for "I, Claudius," for teaching a handful of us that watching the machinations of the early Roman emperors and their circles is a darn sight more entertaining and satisfying than the likes of "Survivor."

Thank you for "Doctor Who." Heterosexual female's opinion: Christopher Eccleston and David Tennant are HOT! Tom Baker -- well, he isn't hot, but he's still the best Doctor.

In the eyes of those Sharia-abiding Muslims to whom you're tempted to cater, all these things I have just thanked you for are worthless. The concept of individuality is worthless. The notion of Beauty in art is worthless. Let that crowd have in-roads into your system -- as I fear you already have -- and soon, everything I love about you will be gone.

Save yourself, Great Britain! SAVE YOURSELF NOW!


Dude
Well, you lucked out. I don't know where that pub was but it must have been a right dive. For what it's worth, I apologise. I remember getting a very frosty reception at a bar in Rapid City, SD, because I was British. Apparently the patrons were upset about British soldiers being in Northern Ireland. Well, there's no shortage of ignorant bums the world over. That said, many non-Americans see the current US foreign policy as war-mongering, kind of shooot first ask questions later. It's not helping the image of Americans but I think most decent people can tell the difference between the individual and the admisnistration.

Handy, And While We Are...
..engaging in juvenile playground banter, wasn't it your brave boys who had to 'phone ahead' to ensure they didn't meet any opposition during the 'rescue' of Jessica Lynch? Made it look good on Fox News though I suppose.
Pamela, please look out for Life On Mars, great British drama, new series of Dr Who looks good too!!!

Britian and America
The issue of Great Britain is terribly complicated. For the past week, I've been reading super-historian Niall Ferguson, especially two of his books: Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order, and a similar book, Colossus, about what he calls "the American Empire." The books are wonderful. It sometimes seems as if every page has as much insight as most authors generate in an entire book. One fascinating point he makes in Colossus is that America can't depend much on Europe or Japan for military support. The reason: European countries and Japan are turning into "national retirement homes." They're becoming nations of old people. Also, Britain and America now have in common something that wasn't present before VietNam, an unwillingness to take casualties in support of national interests. Adjusted for population numbers, the U.S. suffered in World War II more than 100 times the number of killed-in-action that we've endured in Iraq. Yikes. Ferguson's books are long (but highly readable). Starting Wednesday and continuing into next week I'll be writing about them on my site (www.camp2008victory.townhall.com) Let me know what you think. Tomorrow: Mitt Romeny; Thursday: Niall Ferguson; Friday or Saturday: more Niall Ferguson.

steve maloney
ambridge, pa

Attitudes
I work offshore the Louisiana and Texas coasts on a variety of foreign-flagged vessels with the bridges often manned by Europeans: generally British, Dutch, or Norwegian (and toss in some Canadians for a little North American flavor).

It is not 100%, but there is largely a snooty attitude towards America. And in a sense, who can blame them? We have a media that undermines everything we do, everything we stand for, and liberals who would climb out onto a branch and saw it off to separate itself from anything that even remotely suggests a conservative stance. When I have to attend management meetings onboard, these "sophisticated" souls think nothing of making snide remarks about our nation in response to something just observed on the news. On the other hand, I would never dream of visiting their countries and disparaging them politically, even when such criticism is well-deserved.

I do not respond to every flippant dig, but there are times when I have had enough and I defend this nation in no uncertain terms. Silence generally follows as the brave ones contemplate their fate in a world without America.

They may someday get their wish. In fact, it is already coming their way on their own home front. It brings me no joy to see what is happening to their societies, and anguish to see what is happening to mine as political correctness and appeasement trump honor, decency, and integrity.

To have us and Brits pointing accusing fingers at one another and insulting each other ought to please Iran, and of course, our media.

It all depend...
On what one's definition of 'Great' is.

This little Island and its people has had more influence for good in this sin sick world than all other countries in the world save maybe Israel.

If greatness is measured in military might then you're case is made. And if that is the only definition you hold you betray your own Jewish heritage.


Blah blah blah...
Great Britain is an island, like O'ahu, Honshu, and Bali -- but it is not a country. The United Kingdom is the name of the union, but Scotland, England, Wales, and Northern Ireland are the countries that make it up. So if you can't even seperate the name of an island from that of a country you have little more to say than a Belgian. As for losing wars and invasions... Which general did the North Vietnamese study? GEORGE WASHINGTON. Yes, the USA's first president. And which people infilrated more people's lands to take them over than anyone else in history? AMERICANS. Hawai'i, Hopi, Yahi, Miwok, Yokuts, Choctaw, Cherokee... Yes... Americans are angels.

Gatto, first of all...
"Mexican" is not a language. I think the word you are looking for there is "Spanish". And, by the way, the Dutch and the French settled my area of North America before the Brits, but don't let the facts get in the way of a good story.

Secondly, the reason we "lost" according to your criteria, is that the spoiled, ignorant, inexperienced "peaceniks" wrongly influenced political policy. Sadly, those same young kids are now the doddering old fools who populate Code Pink and other looney-left fringe groups. I went to a town meeting the other day where "impeach Bush" the undercurrent, and not one attendee, save myself and the 9/11 inside-job-conspiracy-theorist) were under the age of 80. We need to muzzle these octagenerians so that America can shed its sissified veneer and get back to being the courageous and self-sacrificing force that we once were.

As for Brittain being great, that is a matter of perspesctive. Those of us with Irish heritage never found the behavior of the Brits worthy of praise.

Dude
I agree entirely about behaviour towards individuals. I would hope that even my worst enemies here on Townhall would find me a personable and polite chap in the flesh! But I am a bit biased... that said, I would like to reiterate that the influence of Sharia law here in the UK seems to be wildly exaggerated. There may well be kangaroo courts within the Mulsim communities here, as may be the case the world over. But I am unaware of those being legal, and I am certainly unaware of any form of Sharia law being worked into the court system of the UK. To be honest, I don't really know where these stories come from (the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph at a guess) but I can assure you they are greatly exaggerated.

A few things I forgot:
Monty Python.

"Fawlty Towers."

Winston Churchill. (HOW could I forget HIM??)

William Wilberforce (mentioned upthread, but he deserves as many mentions as he can get).

Alfred Hitchcock.

Cary Grant.

Charles Laughton.

C.S. Lewis.

J.R.R. Tolkien.

Kenneth Grahame.

"Foyle's War."

Emma Thompson.

Darn, this could go on all day...

Now, don't anyone mistake me. I'm a conservative; I believe in smaller government and greater individual responsibility; I believe in meritocracy and in the power of the individual; I believe collectivism and Groupthink and over-reliance on government have been largely responsible for the suffering humankind has experienced throughout history. But darn it, I love England and I love soooo many things English. Were I not an Anglophile, the nation's buckling under to Muslim pressure and to Sharia law would mean nothing to me. As it is, Dennis Prager and I are of one accord. It IS painful to watch the fall of Great Britain.

Again, Great Britain, SAVE YOURSELF!!


Two Cents More
The business about a nation's willingness to take casualties goes to the heart of the contemporary debate on Iraq. There's a terrible irony here: most soliders in Aghanistan and Iraq (ones I know and one I hear from or read about) are willing to fight and die for their country. In most cases, family members and friends salute the soldiers, men and women, for their sacrifice and patriotism.

The home front is a very different place. For some Americans -- or is it many? -- watching the war on TV in the U.S. seems to be a more wrenching experience than fighting it. Also, there's a sense that if we just "bring the boys and girls home" the terrorists will somehow go away in peace. If that's the lesson of 9/11, we need to learn a new lesson or two.

We have a curious situation: the soldiers are willing to take the battle to the enemy, but the home front is having some sort of nervous breakdown.

By the way, I think historian Niall Ferguson would agree with everything I've said here. He's at Harvard and Oxford, and I'm not, but then he's never been to Ambridge. :-)

steve maloney
ambridge, pa

Handy First Post
Handy: "There has been nothing good about, let alone “Great” about Britain since the year 1776. It was in decline for many decades before."

Hmm. I dont suppose you actually read history? 1776 was beFORE the Industrial Revolution, which transformed Britain FIRST. The rest of the world, including the US, FOLLOWED. The British EMPIRE reached its height in terms of influence and land mass by the NINEteen Twenties... etc...

Handy: "Freedom-loving people are having to clean up all the British mouse droppings left behind. And, those smug bastards sit back and pretend they are oh-so-civilized."

WHICH "mouse-droppings"? And to which "smug bastards" are you specifically referring? Hardly ALL Britons?

Handy: "But, the real disrespect should go to the people of Britain who hide behind the royal skirts and the despicable historical myths of “Greatness.”

Just wondering WHICH "people of Britain"? I know many, and know of NONE who would fit this description.

My English ally...
"Really, ladies and gentlemen! Must we let the failure of 14 men and one woman to see trouble coming and call for help turn us into a bickering group wondering about our past?"

Old chap (I'm from North Carolina so I say that with a bit of a drawl), I'm with you on everything except to some degree on this point. The problem is that I wish we could say this strange mentality was limited to just 15 Brits and maybe 1,500 Yanks, and all of France -- we could handle it (what else is new).

I'm sure Iran is taking a shot at some divide-and-conquer with this incident and is having some success, and the Islamists in general have been having a lot of success with this even well before it. If they know anything at all about the current state of American and European politics (and they do, probably better than most Westerners), they would be fools not to exploit the current divide between sobriety and honor vs. comfort and appeasement disguised as sobriety and honor.

I have heard about the schools in England that are refusing to teach about the Holocaust for fear of offending Muslims. Is N Chamberlain alive and well and running England's schools?Hopefully it is a tiny minority of UK schools but even so, there should be Englishmen and women in picket lines surrounding said schools all day every day, throwing tomatoes at the administrators as they go to work each morning day until they back off such a colossally stupid idea. There is no reason or excuse on God's green earth to refuse to teach about the Holocaust. The whole purpose of teaching history is lost the moment one even entertains such a thought, especially when we're at war with an entity that harbors an anti-Semitism so vicious that it would make a Nazi vomit.

The fact that there are no such picket lines -- or at least are not great enough in number to report internationally -- tells me that Prager is right, England is dying and America's got the sniffles. Secular humanism is the ultimate divisive philosophy because it isolates everyone into individual self-absorbed kingdoms that means there is no God and no-one is really right and no-one's really wrong except everyone who disagrees with the leftist libertine mealy-mouthed I'm-Okay-You're-Okay foreign policy and nanny-state domestic policy -- which disagree-ers are collectively Satan himself by these theological lights -- and thus makes community and unity and belonging to and believing in something larger than yourself all but impossible.

This in turn produces people who believe that there is nothing worth dying for -- or for that matter, even risking soiling your strategically torn $200 jeans and tummy shirts and Versace dresses for -- which in turn produces peoples and countries that are no longer worth dying for.

Someone mentioned earlier that part of the problem is a failure to learn about Arab and Muslim culture. I think that's true to a small degree, but there are ALWAYS things you don't know about when going to war, so that's not in and of itself a reason not to defend yourself. Somehow we didn't know the hedgerows in France were 6-10 feet tall instead of 2 feet as in England. You can prepare youself ad infinitum but that the end of the day, each new war is to one degree or another on-the-job training.

But first and foremost on our plate is a failure of our OWN culture -- the very weakness and softness that our enemies VERY rightly see as their greatest opportunity. If the Islamists knew that the West was absolutely resolved to win, they would have left Iraq and Afghanistan long ago and would be setting much, much smaller goals. But they know that the West is rotting and that therefore time is on their side...

(By the way, the first victory against Hitler was the Battle of Britain.)

Handy Second Post
Handy: "An average American teenager with no training could and would, kick a Brit sergeant’s skinny rump in two punches."

Absolute nonsense. Some American teenagers are fit and strong. Others are fat and can hardly walk, let alone run. And run they would have to, should they be stupid enough to try and "kick a Brit sergeants skinny rump."

Handy: "But, he’d stand beside him and protect him once he discovered what a coward that Englishman really was.

Rubbish. Again, false generalisation. Some Englishmen are cowards. Others are not. Some Americans are cowards. Others are not. And usually, the cowards are the ones with the biggest and most bellicose mouths.

Handy: "Simpler just to say that I would gladly follow any Aussie soldier I’ve ever met into battle, or to lead him, because there really isn’t any “quit” in those guys (blokes?)."

What was I saying about "mouths"???? Fact is I doubt anyone but a total idiot would follow someone as deranged as you into a sweet shop, let alone a battle. I say "deranged" because of the idiotic generalizations you have been making, which is evidence enough.

Handy Third Post
Handy: "You have no idea of how weak your guys are. Let me tell you, you little Limey scumbag, those 15 Brit “heroes,” had they been Americans, would have taken out at least three times as many of the enemy before dieing themselves."

First off, "vespanat" said NOTHING which should have let you to referring to him as a "little Limey scumbag." He merely made a few points contrary to yours. Get over it.

Second, how do you KNOW that "Americans" would have "taken out at least three times as many"? I think you are back to your big mouth again.

Would we judge ALL the US military by what happened at Abu Gharib? Or by the "friendly fire" from AMERICANS responsible for the death of Pat Tillman? OR by the "friendly fire" of the gungho American pilots who shot up the BRITISH convoy killing their British Allies???

No.

Handy: "Of those who are strong, they overrate themselves. If they prevail against a weakling on the playground, they become bullies, and convince themselves that they are really cool."

This sounds VERY much like.... YOU.

Handy: "We whipped your butt 231 years ago and you simpletons haven’t won a war against us or without us ever since. But, we are saddled with cleaning up your messes everywhere."

Well, there WAS that business with Napoleon in the early 1800s, which means you either know nothing of history, or you are a liar.... As for "cleaning up the messes everywhere..." More nonsense.

Depressing comments
Britain regularly scores highly in `Pro-American` surveys, usually only scoring lower than Israel sometimes India in having a favorable view of the United States.

Britain has committed more troops to operations in Iraq and Afghanistan than any other nation save America...and sufered more casualties than any other nation save America.

British people look back with incredible fondess and pride at the Anglo-American unity of WW2.

British people love American culture and society and their media is absolutely infested with American news items, shows, movies etc etc.

Yet I browse this website, looking for American solidarity towards the recent capture of the British sailors, and all I see is dislike for Britain that borders on hatred.

Yes, it was a blow to British national pride. Yes, the sailors weren't perhaps as stoic as one might have hoped.

But the situation was resolved without any deaths and without an hysterical outbreak of war.

However, much to my shock, this isn't good enough for our `allies`.

On the same week four British soldiers are killed in Iraq, Britain is called a nation of weaklings, a bunch of imperialists (without irony), a politically correct bunch of cowards with no backbone...and a country full of anti-Americans (they know this because they heard it expressed in a British PUB).

Sometimes I wonder, with friends like these?




Let's Not Forget....
Gatto writes, "Britain....never had any business being a world leader, but did so for 400 years by dint of sheer intelligence and hard work."

Uh, not to mention exploitation of a lot of people and resources it had no right to exploit.

Seamus
Maybe a steady diet of anti-american crap from sone of the posters like vespanat, Critical Bill, and a slew of others, here and in GB have soured us a little.

THE BRITS SERVE AS EXAMPLE AND WARNING
I am amazed at all the anti-British venom that this story generated. I have served with the Brits in Desert Storm and Iraqi Freedom. I did not find them wanting for courage and/or devotion to duty. I would still rather be in a fox-hole with a Brit than a Muslim American. Admittedly, they (as a culture) have let the decay of their fundamental social structure slowly erode their former greatness. I am not angry about this but saddened, because the font of so much of our own heritage is British. I do hope that from the ashes of the old empire that a group of Brits will emerge to reclaim at least a portion of their former greatness, the western world will be a lesser place if England sinks completely in the Islamic tide. If our nation does not heed the warning signs we are doomed to the next footnote in history, that is if the Imams will allow any references to us in the Jihadist textbooks of the 22nd century.

GunnyG
Don't for johninoregon, who only two posts before you provided a splendid object lesson in BAF nuttery.

whoops
*forget, not for

Thanks For The...
...honourable mention Gunny G. However as I have repeated ad nauseam on these hallowed pages I am not anti American, merely anti some of it's more ludicrous and morally dubious acts of foreign policy. Thanks for caring though!!!

To Seamus
It's so easy to shorthand a nationality, isn't it? How else do you explain the way I was routinely treated by Yorkers upon finding out I was American? They stopped being interested in who or what I was as a person and put me into their little preconceived mental box to stay after that.

Then the rude comments would start.

Now, I don't know many English outside York. I know a lot of Yorkers who do not think in such a manner, and who were always interested in me rather than using me as a Bush voodoo doll. I'm interested in history, sociology, and anthropology. Each of these disciplines touches politics in some way. I also care very deeply about the shared Anglo-American cultural tradition, and I see it under assault both here and there. I'm with the gray-bearded Tories who would stand up to the assault. But we're mighty few.

How many Yorkers cared to find out my interests, my cares, my likes and dislikes? Quite a few. I left many fast friends. But every day there's somebody who can't resist getting a dig in about how uncouth, uneducated, rude, pushy and uppity I and my fellow countrymen must be. Mostly this came from rude, pushy, uppity English folks with less education than I had and who had never once set foot in America. So you can imagine my thoughts as I listened to their 'wisdom' poured out upon me.

Honestly, when I come across their type here or there I try to be polite and move on. Some of the driest wit and most elegant use of language comes from the Englishmen who don't let their prejudices control them. Plato may have pioneered the ideal of detached observation, but the (old) British personify it. To care passionately yet exercise discipline in assessing a situation is a difficult and very British cultural quality that inspires emulation. You'll enjoy yourself immensely around such folks.

Anti-British? Perish the thought. Anti-anti-American? Absolutely.

Great Britian
Dean Barrett said Britian had become not a paper tiger but a paper tiger kitty.

Under Elizabeth I, Britian began to rise from the shadow of France and Spain. Although she did not realize it then she had become Great Britian. Now under Elizabeth II the evidence of decline is clear and the fact that the greatness is lost is abundantly clear.

The sun setting?
I lived in Brighton for two summers. I found the older Brits to be very sympathetic to America, the heritage of our alliance in WWII and a real disgust with France and the coming EU back then in the 1970's when I visited there. I have taught Brit history in college and in high school curriculum. I am an Anglo-lover but since WWII, when Bevan , Atlee and the Socialist Labor Party began to rule and undermine Brit heritage, the sad decline probably was in the cards. Their colonial empire was gone by 1960 in fact and theory. They still were willing to stand against the Reds though they often sympathized with them until the Thatcher era. Churchill would be spinning in his grave if he saw the pacifist socialists today running the culture, kow towing to PC multiculturalism though he promised the colonies citizenship if they helped in WWII, and he would not take kindly to the imans and Islamofascism. Blair tried but his own party and the culture behind them have not remembered their WWII courage or spine. The Brits in the military are brave and yet have to follow their civilian rules of engagement. Those rules are now weak kneed and would not be recognized by Montgomery. The ilk of Absolutely Fabulous though riotous are now leading Brit society. We will have to see if another generation will push back the socialist tipping point. I pray so. But, when we see only 4 % of Brits admitting to being Christian, one wonders just where they are not only spiritually but physically. As in up to facing their external and domestic enemies instead of caving into the Chamberlain scenario!

It's a done deal
As far as Britain and Western Europe are concerned, it's all over except for the waiting. We here in America have to decide if we have the courage and the strength to not follow their lead.

We're all being diluted
While the latest humiliating episode might have tagged the British, if we're honest I expect we'd all have to admit that the vision and strength that made Britain, Australia, Canada, New Zealand, and America great has been severely diluted by socialism and multi-culturalism over the last half-century. Hopefully we can all aid each other in the revival.

Will Britons Commit National Suicide?
They certainly are on track to do so.

Americans must not avert their eyes from this developing train wreck.

What is happening in Great Britain today and tomorrow is exactly where the Leftists in America wish to take our nation.

Perhaps that when the first European country falls to an Islamic revolution, and becomes a European caliphate, Americans will finally stop being seduced by Leftist claptrap, and be galvanized to fight for national and cultural survival.

Churchill's unheeded Warning
Exclusive: Winston Churchill On Islamism
by Adrian Morgan
The Family Security Foundation, April 10, 2007

Sir Winston Churchill noted the THREAT OF WAHHABISM on June 14, 1921 at the House of Commons in a speech following the March 1921 Cairo Conference. At that time, Churchill was secretary for the British colonies, and he had been involved in the creation of Iraq (in 1921), Jordan (Transjordan) and Palestine.

"A large number of Bin Saud's followers belong to the Wahabi sect, a form of Mohammedanism which bears, roughly speaking, the same relationship to orthodox Islam as the most militant form of Calvinism would have borne to Rome in the fiercest times of [Europe's] religious wars.

The Wahhabis profess a life of exceeding austerity, and what they practice themselves they rigorously enforce on others. They hold it as an article of duty, as well as of faith, to KILL ALL WHO DO NOT SHARE THEIR OPINIONS and to make slaves of their wives and children. Women have been put to death in Wahhabi villages for simply appearing in the streets.

It is a penal offence to wear a silk garment. Men have been killed for smoking a cigarette and, as for the crime of alcohol, the most energetic supporter of the temperance cause in this country falls far behind them. AUSTERE, INTOLERANT, WELL-ARMED, & BLOOD-THIRST, in their own regions the Wahhabis are a distinct factor which must be taken into account, and they have been, and still are, very dangerous to the holy cities of Mecca and Medina."

The Bin Saud to whom Churchill refers here is King Abdul Aziz bin Saud (c. 1880 - 1953), who would go on officially to establish SAUDI ARABIA in 1932.

http://www.familysecuritymatters.org/global.php?id=877480

rhampton7
Churchill's assessment of our Islamist enemy rings as true today as it did in 1921. Nothing has changed about the Whahabbists, nothing has moderated in their blood lust.

The only change is that they've now been able to take over entire middle eastern countries, largely due to Western foriegn policy malfeasance. Yeah, I'm looking right at you, Jimmy Carter.

Esprit de corpse?
Re defence personnel selling story rights to media, I think this has set a precedent & has opened up a nasty can of worms & we will see more of the same in the future.

This can only have a negative impact on the esprit de corps. Why would a troop ever risk probable death by fighting his way out of a tight corner for the good of his corps, versus surrendering, (& possibly disadvantaging your side's position), saving your life by denouncing your govt & giving up all secrets willingly, upon release saying it was all obtained under duress, knowing there is a good chance of making a pile of cash? Why risk your life unnecessarily? Dead people tell no profitable tales. Could this create a mercenary philosphy among the troops in the future? Could some relatives of those captured be chiefly motivated by gold & apply huge pressure on the govt to give in to hostage-takers' demands? Wait & see.

Gunny
You have your human moments Gunny, but you're also a bloody liar sometimes and you know it. Or is that just being economic with the truth? I have said countless times on these threads that I am far from anti-American, if I was I wouldn't have married an American and planned to spend the rest of my life there. Sometimes I have even addressed those commentsw directly at you. There is a big difference between being anti-American and not agreeing with GOP talking points or the columnists on Townhall. Don't worry, I won't press you for an apology... I don't know why I took the bait anyway...

dovenator
Good point. I hope we can stand firm and not allow our country to go down the way Eurabia has.

http://peppermintsplace.townhall.com
Chapter 11 of Juliet's diary is on my blog with BrianR's After Action report on the demise of Johnny Sutton.

My spy sources say...
Secret documents now reveal that the "Brits" were actually French journalists dressed as British Marines placed in a rubber raft out to check out Al Gore's theory of global warming. That fact was revealed by how easily they gave up to the Iranians, in true French fashion. Of course when Iran's dictator-president found out they actually were Frenchmen, he freely gave them back, complimenting them on a job well done to make Iran look tough. (wink, wink...)

Great Britian
I consider Great Britian a staunch ally that is infested with Bleeding Heart Liberals such as our own U.S.A. who are constantly attempting to undermine anything slightly conservative. That having been said as I read this article it reminded me somewhat of the gradual demise of our own country since the presidency of Jimmy Carter. If you knowck the Brits isn't it somewhat like the Pot calling the Kettle Black. Our own government has reprimanded and in some cases courtmartialed members of the military for firing too many rounds of ammunition when involved in a firefight. Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton backed down from every provocation thrown at the U.S.A. during their presidencies.
My last comment is I wonder how much money the Saintly Senator from Arizona named John Mc Cain has garnered from his numerous books depicting his heroisim in Vietnam ???
On 9/12/2000 one of the few nations that stood with us after the WTC attack was Britian, and the term GREAT is in the mind of the beholder.
LONG LIVE GREAT BRITIAN !!!

To the 5th Typist Regiment
Townhall brigade, MillerLite Company;

I agree selling the story of your capture is shameful
I agree the smiling and groveling to the Iranians was completely gay (insert apology here)

-Especially without any covert coercion signs for our interpretation-

But blaming these kids for the policies of Britain is a tad too severe

What you guys need to understand is that without Nationalism there is no need or, psychological space, for the kind of fierce loyalty you guys expect.

What is the point of giving one’s life, Heck; even one’s discomfort for one’s country if you have been taught in school, over and over, that all cultures and nations are equally worthy?

To believe that Britain is more worthy than Iran is; Eurocentric, racist, bigoted, etc., etc., etc, and etc. I'm sure a multicultural bloke can explained it even better than me.

In the Church of Multiculturalism; Great Britain is no better than Persia, does not deserve a higher respect or, higher sacrifice.

Soldiering is just another government job; with steady pay and with excellent benefits.

Why stick out your neck more than necessary?

After all; the European Union for sure would not stop their busy cocktail schedule to come to your rescue and,

NATO is worthless even in the Balkans

Your government has announced they will retire from Iraq come next summer and,

the same people that won’t move a finger to help you get out of Teheran:

Will put you in front of a War Crimes Tribunal in the blink of an eye; if you happen to shoot an Iranian in contravention of the old holy and pious “Rules of Engagement.”

The sailors are getting such welcome mat in Britain because they did what Tony Blair wanted them to do: avoid a confrontation with Iran; at all cost.

Multicultural greetings to ya'll

peppermint
It doesn't look promising. The democrats are fools and the republicans are cowards.

I laugh
at the idiocy of some people here. The self-righteous gloating and the oversimplification of anything more complicated than 1+1=2.
The Islamic world is not uniform. There is no "Muslim" opinion on anything because the Islamic world is as diverse as the West. There are Muslim fanatics and there are nominal Muslims. Pakistan and Egypt have high birthrate while Algeria, Iran, and Turkey have birthrates simaler to Europe. Indonesia, Syria, and Jordan have birthrates simaler to that of the US, if not lower. (check the CIA website for more details)While Indonesia has a growing fundamentalist ultra-minority (under 10%) Iran has a growing liberal plurality. Morocco already is relativel liberal.

Europe is Europe, not "Eurabia". It always has been, always will be. Unless you listen to people like Mark Steyn without reservations you's try to get a more balanced understanding of it. But if you do listen to Steyn without questions why haven't we celebrated absolute victory in Iraq/Afghanistan yet? Why are the Baathists still strong with Iraqi Sunnis, even if Hussein was executed? Why did Bush not carry the popular vote in 2000 when he was supposed to win in a landslide?


Let's cast our lot with China so when it runs out of water and collapses from within we can join them. In the meantime we can alienate ourselves so much from the birthplace of our heritage that we will no longer have an identity other than what is sold to us in tract houses and strip malls.

The Brits have lost their stones..
It's so funny to hear all of these Brits tell us they are this and that, when in reality they are nothing and have been nothing for the past 200 years. Their 'empire' has collapsed and they are nothing without it. They are sort of like FranceArabia, but only three-fourths of the way down the same road. Even their 'famous' Navy has been gutted and shrunken to about the size and strength of the Belgian Navy. What a joke! Brit forces? Haha! Did anybody really wonder why Bush kept them down in the mainly peaceful South of the country, where Saddam killed more people than most anywhere else? If they had control of the volatile 'Sunni Triangle' they would have lost ten times as many forces as the Americans have, and would have pulled out years ago! They don't have the balls for anything and cry & whine for weeks when one of their soldiers dies in the line of duty. You really have that strength and resolve through the thick and thin? We are still laughing and shaking our heads at your 'Royal cowards' in the hands of the Iranians. As usual, we always knew your military force is crap and has always been crap (for many decades now). Thank goodness soldiers of the very distant past have not acted in the same manner (with the same excuses) when fighting wars and conflicts. How would they have turned out if all soldiers did fight and manage themselves in the same way as your '15 cowards?' Think about it!

We might have inherited some form of their government institutions, but we made them better, kicked their limey asses out, and certainly don't have a ridiculous royal/elitist families who still own more than 70% of their pathetic island. Americans have the longest standing representative constitution and have never tried to form an 'empire' beyond their borders. This is something that the Brits cannot face, in their own evil & despicable history of colonization, murder, pillage, starvation and rape of the hundreds of millions of people who dared get in their way (on their own 3rd world lands). They want to really speak of the American Indians? They were the reason most of them were killed off! Most were killed off under the British flag (and other Euro-state flags) through disease, land grabs, stolen trade routes and imperialism! The only reason the Brits were able to get a footing in the world was because they had superior firearms technology (besides spreading disease to people who had no immunity to it) and used it against the 3rd world people they came to conquer, before they sucked them dry for everything they were worth (and then some).

I will never visit (or buy any products from) their disgusting country of PC idiots, drooling with some sort of pride for their institutionalized anti-Americanism, while wading knee-deep in their ridiculous liberalism (and soon to be, Sharia Law/sympathy). I guess you really need something to anchor yourself down, when you are surrounded by failure, cowardice, stupidity, ignorance and a lack of leadership when it comes to anything. Does jealously, spite, demise and envy really get to you that much where you need to resort to this kind of attitude? Apparently so!

Whatever makes you feel better and sleep well at night, you worthless saps...

Bush's war on Iraq? Hardly so, and you Brits were just as anxious as Clinton and Blair to take out Saddam (which the whole world stated was a threat to the world for 12 long years)! Bush took out Saddam on the same reports and intelligence supplied by Clinton and Blair! You mindless Brits don't know politics from reality! Thanks for forming the lands of Iraq in the first place. Just one more area of the world we have to clean up, left over from British/Euro imperialism and GREED! We also love how you formed the lands that now make up Palestine and Isreal, while selling out to your own PC madness, to now stab the Israelis in the back.

I can see how you barely beat the rebels of Argentina, while taking big losses. The only reason you had a chance against these third world forces was because they weren't trained enough to drop their bombs at the right height, before they were armed. If they did know, you would have been utterly destroyed! They slapped you around for a long time, before you even knew what hit you! Your final victory was more of luck than anything else. You avoided helping in Vietnam because you were too scared of China and were too fond of the real Communist movement. Before I forget.. Thanks for finally having the vision to pay back your WWII debts, a couple years back! It was about time, since it was your same cowardice and appeasement that allowed WWII to start in the first place! As if your colonization didn't destroy and maim half the world, your wars finished the parts you might have missed! Maybe now you can concentrate on paying back your debts to us from WWI!

Thanks Brits! You can rot for all I care. We are not allies, just a separate (thank GOD) people who 'sometimes' have a similar interest.

Your ignorance is appalling...
"Europe is Europe, not "Eurabia". It always has been, always will be."

You really want to tell me Europe is the same as it has always been? Haha! You really that ignorant, with your head deep in the sand? Europe is EURABIA, since in a generation or two, they will be totally taken over by Muslims (with their own foreign/domestic policies being anti-West and Pro-Muslim, now)! What is the naive birth rate of EuroPeons? Now tell me what the birth rate of the Muslims are, with millions more converting every year? It's just so funny to hear how several EuroPeon government now have to bribe and subsidize their own citizens, just to have babies to (someday) increase the welfare monies. Eurabia is reality and Europe has gone bye-bye! Good riddens!

I mean really.. How much longer can they survive on their subsidized everything, five weeks of vacationa and massive pensions? I will do the jig when they ultimately fall on their face, since their lazy, worthless and degenerate bums have been riding our coattails for far too long (giving us grief about it, every step of the way). Sucks to now be on the bottom of the totem pole, eh Eurotrash? I can see how they would cringe when their latest EURO-AUTHORED financial report stated their economy is 25 years behind ours. How can the EU have an economy like ours (in GDP worth), but with an addition 200 million people? Could it be there is something seriously wrong in Eurabia?


"Unless you listen to people like Mark Steyn without reservations you's try to get a more balanced understanding of it."

Mark Steyn is an island is a sea of liberal group think over here. Many others have come out of Eurabia to state the same thing and they come from all walks of life and all political backgrounds. Statistics, decisions on politics and demographics don't lie!


"But if you do listen to Steyn without questions why haven't we celebrated absolute victory in Iraq/Afghanistan yet?"

I somehow recall Bush and Blair stating that this is going to be a long, drawn-out war that is going to go on for many more years (before an absolute victory). You mean your liberal liars didn't discuss this with you??


"Why are the Baathists still strong with Iraqi Sunnis, even if Hussein was executed?"

It's confirmed you are really that ignorant. Baathists mostly come from Sunni tribes, so of course the allegiance is going to last, even with Saddam dead. You really think Nazism went away when Hitler died? Most Germans still have the same ideology as the Nazis, as well as so many other EuroPeons. They just go under a different name now and have no military to back it up! The Sunnis are much more cooperative with the new government of Iraq than before Saddam had been executed for his crimes. Things take time, but all you simpletons want are timetables and strategies that lead to ultimate failure.


"Why did Bush not carry the popular vote in 2000 when he was supposed to win in a landslide?"

Who said Bush was going to win in a landslide? Here we have the electoral college and not the 'mob rules' style of 'popular vote.' Do you even know the USA is a representation government, with independent States? Go back to bed, imbecile.. You certainly know nothing about America and even less about Eurabia and the Middle East.

Divide and Conquer
All this anti-British stuff is exactly what the enemy wants.

I work in the defence industry. I know how much handwringing liberalism there is in my country; and I also know that you in the United States are having to defend conservative values.

Yeah, it's embarrasing what happened.

But let's pull together. The great nation of the United States of America, and the old nation of Britannia.

what I would like to know is...
....where can I find a conservative forum of discussion with no liberals and no foreigners?

Truth hurts?
"All this anti-British stuff is exactly what the enemy wants."

The Iranians kidnapped the "15 royal cowards" since they already knew anti-Americanism is institutionalized in the Untied King-dumb (and especially in the rest of Eurabia). You already dropped the ball decades ago, and the enemy has known this for the same amount of time. They did it since they knew you would blame your allies, before you blamed them. You would never see this sort of drivel in mainstream America, especially during wartime (with allies).

The anti-British sentiment is deserved, since you have become what 'you claim' to hate.

As Mark Steyn did say many a time (and ultimately wrote a great book about), America is truly alone to fight to forces of fascism and liberal group-think that will eventually destroy us all. Steyn is correct, and is one of the strongest voices to actually be honest and blunt about it.

Another post
Erm ...

I think some people missed the point.

I share your distain for what has happened, but what is the point of holding a blanket anti-British viewpoint?

What about those of us in the UK who defend the US in the face of relentless anti-American liberalism?

I didn't choose the place of my birth, but I'm an ally. We are not all liberals ...

Dude3344
Extraordinary comment. Have you checked the 48% of the population voting Democrat in these United States? It seems to me that the LAST thing the Democratic leadership wants coming out of Iraq is good news favorable to the US. Add in the MSM as well for good measure. And you are worried about the opinions of a few Brits???

Cat napper
...And where can I find a conservative column which isNT bashing one of our closest allies? Fact is that when "liberals and foreigners" post - and the two are not to be equated - it livens things up around here.

I mean, there is only so much gungho stuff a person can take in at one time. Easy to be gungho from behind a keyboard.

Weslo
Weslo: "If they had control of the volatile 'Sunni Triangle' they would have lost ten times as many forces as the Americans have, and would have pulled out years ago!"

Er... How do you KNOW this??

Weslo: "They don't have the balls for anything and cry & whine for weeks when one of their soldiers dies in the line of duty."

Well, when "one of their soldiers" is shot by "friendly fire" it can be rather irritating. Especially if the event has been covered up for the sake of unity with their "Allies," the US. If the British Prime Minister had read postings such as these beFORE committing himself on the side of the US, he would have surely taken a different decision.

Weslo: "We are still laughing and shaking our heads at your 'Royal cowards' in the hands of the Iranians."

You know what this reads like? The liberal British newspapers writing about Abu Ghraib, and tarnishing ALL the US military with the crimes of the few... So keep laughing, if it amuses you.

Weslo
Weslo: "They want to really speak of the American Indians? They were the reason most of them were killed off! Most were killed off under the British flag (and other Euro-state flags) through disease, land grabs, stolen trade routes and imperialism!"

This is incredible. So bad I dont know where to even begin to address it. Let's see. 13 colonies largely along the eastern seaboard win their independence, forming the Unites States of America. Over the course of the following century, the United States expands WESTwards... until it reaches the Pacific ocean.... Bringing "civilization" to the "savage"... And this is all BRITAIN's fault?? Hmmmm.

Jimmie Joe
there you go...calling names. I asked a simple question. One which you did not answer but instead resorted to twisting my moniker.If you do not know the answer to the question that I asked.... feel free to scroll by my post. I did not insult anyone, but you try to insult me.

Will
Of course I'll "admit" it! Not only that, but I LIKE it! Would you have preferred a French "mindset"? Hardly! My point with Weslo is that he decried the many "evils" conducted by the British in the name of Empire, and still managed to blame them for stuff that can hardly be more their fault historically than ours. This is both pointless and ridiculous. And for what? Because 15 British soldiers/sailors behaved as they shouldnt have??? This is as old as war itself. It isnt as if they shot up some village full of civilians or something...... which reminds me... but let's not go down that road in OUR history, either with regard to the American Indians or Vietnam...

Weslo
I live in California, I grew up in California.
You know what... I might actually have a clue about life in the United States you moron.

As for those lovely predictions... Those are all from Mark Steyn. Yeah... Check your sources.

cat trapper
You may find this difficult to believe, and you seem overly sensitive. I MISTOOK your moniker. You may note that I have posted a number of posts in a short space of time....

You said nothing particularly offensive, and I have no reason to "insult" you. I merely used your point to make another one. Which is fair play. I didnt INTEND to answer your question directly, as it seemed of a rhetorical nature, but point out that "foreigners and liberals" liven things up.

And so no. I did not TRY to insult you. I seem to have done so unwittingly, for which I apologise. In the meantime, I would suggest you lighten up just a little.

shrew
from wher do you drw your conclusions about me? I don't think you have enough informaqtion to be so shrill.

Jimmy Joe
Fair enough... we all make mistakes. And no, I am not sensitive, in fact you, (nor anyone else, for that matter) can not hurt my feelings on this board. If I were of a delicate type I would not have chosen the inflamatory "handle" that I have taken.

As for livening things up. Discussions can be pretty heated just among consservatives especially when you have members of the Republican, Constitution, America First and Libertarian parties all claiming to hold title to "conservative".

cat trapper
Fair enough... though if I may say, your handle doesnt strike me as inflamatory at all..!

And yes, I agree that between the groups you mention, things can get a bit heated, but there is often a consensus in which posters are singing from the same hymn-sheet.

Hey Shrew
where are you? Have you gone off to to spew your hatred elsewhere?

Dear Lord
Please Dear God bless the United States as well as Great Britian and all of our few staunch allies and save us from the liberal bleeding Hearts of each of our nations, and GOOD NIGHT ALL

Okay?
"Kangaroo writes: Tuesday, April, 10, 2007 9:21

I live in California, I grew up in California.
You know what... I might actually have a clue about life in the United States you moron. "


Sure.. Just like your hero, Nancy Pelosi. That's the thing about you California fruits and nuts.. You don't know anything besides what Hollywood wants (or tells you) and your other appeasement monkeys. You know as much about America as the average Euro-tard and that isn't much! What did I say that isn't true and what did I quote from Mark Steyn? I never read his book, but just mentioned the title! Learn to read and comprehend before TRYING (and yet failing) to debate what I typed. Seesch...

Anti-British Feeling
Folks,
Let us begin by getting our facts straight here!First off, the British forces defeated the Zulu horde at Roarke's Drift in 1879, not 1889. Secondly, as someone pointed out the British won the Anglo-Zulu War of 1879, and the second war of 1906, as well. The third point is that someone mixed up the two movie versions of the Zulu War with Michael Caine starring in "Zulu" and the Burt Lancaster, Peter O'Toole, John Mills epic known sa "Zulu Dawn" actually portrayed the British defeat at Islandhwana earlier on the afternoon of January 22, 1879. Finally, for what it's worth, "The bigger they come , the harder they fall" was an utterance out of the mouth of Jack Dempsey in regards to Jess Willard in 1919.
Enough of the pedantry! I will not defend indecision in the face of the enemy at any time. I will, however, refrain from hurling invective and insults at our British cousins on this issue. Tony Blair stood wiith us in the War on Terror and that is more than can be said for the feckless French or Germans. Granted, today Tony sounds an awful lot like Jimmy Carter, but the fool America elected in 1976 is still making a spectacle of himself and it took the British thirty years to sink as low as we did a generation ago.
I think we can write this off as another liberal disaster. Certainly, some Britons are outraged at the supine response to this Iranian piracy/kidnapping. Unfortunately they are drowned out by the left wing media now prominently represented by the BBC. I fear the same type of response if something similar happens when Madame Hilary is President of the United states of America.

Jimmy who???
"This is incredible. So bad I dont know where to even begin to address it. Let's see. 13 colonies largely along the eastern seaboard win their independence, forming the Unites States of America. Over the course of the following century, the United States expands WESTwards... until it reaches the Pacific ocean.... Bringing "civilization" to the "savage"... And this is all BRITAIN's fault?? Hmmmm. "


Oh man.. Don't tell me you're from Britain. I can almost see it, with all of the revisionism and plain ole stupidity. In case you didn't know, Britain and France were the ones with the only official policies of GENOCIDE against the American Indians. They were there since the early days and most tribes/natives were completely wiped out before 1700! Everywhere the European powers went, they wiped out 90% of the natives within a hundred years of their arrival, through war, land grabs, slavery and disease! Try reading a book on the subject! Even the most Leftist (but still semi-credible) historians state that Americans can only be held liable for hundreds (not thousands) of Indian deaths from 1800-1870 (and almost all were killings of self-defense when attacked). When the United States was actually the UNITED STATES, there were only 700,000 Indians left. What happened to the millions more, before there was even a glimpse of the USA? Did they disappear or hide behind the trees? Now there are many millions of native Americans in the USA.. Many, many more than what the USA began with!

For people who pride themselves on knowing their history you liberal wankers apparently know nothing about history.

1) As already pointed out, the US didn't even exist as a country since 1776, almost 300 years after Columbus landed on Hispaniola. Blaming the deaths of Native Americans during that period on the US would be like blaming the 100 years war on George Bush... Oh, I forgot, the liberals and Euro-tards do.

2) The vast majority of Native Americans died from epidemics of diseases to which they were not immune. (Read: 'Guns, Germs and Steal' or 'Plagues and People' for good exposes).

3) Even after 1776, the US was only a small sliver of North America (less than 5% of the area of the continent), the rest being controlled by France, Spain, Britain and Russia (Alaska). Again, only an idiot (or a Eurabian) would blame the US for the deaths of Indians in French, Spanish and British controlled territories.

(4)The estimates of the population of Native Americans in 1492 are wildly varied.

** From:The Native Population of the Americas in 1492
Second Revised Edition
Edited by William M. Denevan

William M. Denevan writes that, "The discovery of America was followed by possibly the greatest demographic disaster in the history of the world." Research by some scholars provides population estimates of the pre-contact Americas to be as high as 112 million in 1492, while others estimate the population to have been as low as eight million. In any case, the native population declined to less than six million by 1650. **


Who was responsible for all of the native deaths in Mexico, Canada and Alaska, while they were Russian, British, French and Spanish territories? Any clue, or was that all of the 'evil Americans' fault, too? Did you know the Brits had a jolly ole time hunting down the natives in their Canadian territories, just for the hell of it? Who caused the demise of the natives in the Caribbean? Australia? Africa? India? Southeast Asia? Philippines? South America? Millions and millions of deaths/murders without any Americans around! Who killed them off for power, greed, gold and new resources? Americans?? This has been YOUR LEGAGY for the past thousand years and somehow you remain proud of it! Haha!

Get past third grade and then come back to me for a real debate. It was a pleasure educating you, Eurabian revisionist!

Gee.. You imbeciles are a HOOT, at best.

Face the facts..
"Enough of the pedantry! I will not defend indecision in the face of the enemy at any time. I will, however, refrain from hurling invective and insults at our British cousins on this issue."

Your jolly ole cousins in the Untied King-Dumb would have an even more jolly time telling you how much fun they are having watching your failures (if it was our troops that surrendered and spread their Iranian propaganda, while humiliating the whole country before the world)! Think about it!

Why hold back when most of their island would have a ball telling you about how they revel in your misery and failure (even when we are talking about the future of the Western world here)??!

Weslo
I can't stand Pelosi, I've never voted for anyone but the most conservative candidate and I'm well aware of life in the US. You are so consumed with your arrogance that you can't grip the fact that California might actually not be the same all the way around. Sheesh... With people like you no wonder why America is on the decline.

Dude3344
It appears that I wrote:

"Yes, and thanks to that "win" we are now threatened by a paranoid, nuclear armed state run by a psychopath. That kind of "win" the world could do without."

I failed ot add quotation and attribute that statement to Gatto. I was responding to his/her off-base claims. I want no ownership of that statement.

There, now my post shouldn't look so bipolar.

Great Britain Once.
I was a Brit soldier on the battlefield before my 18th., birthday. I have nothing but respect for any man who spent time on a battlefield. Only those that have been there can know the horror of combat and its long lasting effects. To all you Anglophobes, how many spent real time on a battlefield? My house was 80% destroyed in the blitz. At 14 I raked incendiary bombs of its roof. My Dad had lost a lung in WW1 and was unable to do it. Let me tell you about a GI riding on a bus with us civilians. We went past a battery of AA guns just as they fired. He was terrified and screamed out "You people are crazy." He jumped off the bus at the next stop. No nation has a monopoly of courage, wisdom or battlefield skills. The US screwed up plenty of times, but you are so bloody brainwashed from birth that you are the best at everything that you truly believe it. As for Korea.......When the Chinese crossed the Yalu and drove the US south to the 38th., parallel, only 1 in four had a rifle, the rest had grenades. They got a rifle by picking one off the battlefield. Yet they pushed the best the US had to offer back to the now demarcation line between North and South Korea. US Marines did not call it a retreat. "We are just advancing in a different direction." Other than Indian tribes and an effete Spanish military, the US has NEVER won a war on its own. If you are so bloody great why are you asking the rest of the world to pull your chestnuts out of the fire and bewailing the fact the the Euros want no part of your bloody war. And yes, my wife and I were taunted by British citizens on a bus. My American wife stood up and told them "He fought in Burma for the British Army when he was 17." How come all this damn bitterness and hatred. I have sent this link to an old Burma friend in the British Legion,. I hope he posts it on every British Legion website so that the only friend we have in the world knows what Americans really think about them.

xi-xi and dude
I never heard anything so fatuous as "Well I was in England once, and someone insulted me"...or I had a roommate from England, and she was snooty:
Therefore English are snooty and don't like Americans
I think they were probably discerning, and didn't like YOU!
I'm aghast at the posts here... I'm beginning to think that these columns are like CHUM--they attract the pirhanas and sharks who are eager to attack.

Settle down kids.
Try laying off the Brits a little bit. Some people posting here must either really young, or simply far to dramatic and emotional.
Calm down.
The Brits are still our allies, we already bash most of the world simply because they are beneath us, but why attack our loyal allies?

People saying anti-American things in English pubs is not surprising.
Get me drinking in my American pubs and I'll probably say irrational and poorly thought out things as well.

Also remember, its easy and "cool" worldwide to be anti-American. Its in vogue, its something every coward pulls out of their hat.
Dont take it so seriously. They are cowards or they wouldnt be afraid to go against popular opinion.

I support my country, to the end. I also support Britain and our original major ally, Spain. They were destroyed internally by liberals.



LIBERALS ARE EVERYONES ENEMY, proud nationalist peoples all over the globe need to realize we are barely holding onto our freedoms to even BE nationalists if the socialist liberals arent stopped from influencing public opinion.

And the actual article..
Dennis Prager is wrong. Hes caught up in the moment, no major mistakes were made in this hostage crisis and while I believe in national honor, duty and pride.. this outcome did result in life.
This incident does not spell doom for the nation of Britain.

Though what people are not saying, is how the USA assisted the UK in this ordeal by lining up a godlike military next to Persia's borders.

We probably deserve some credit for their release as well, honestly.

There are far to many divisions in the western world, and far less unifying elements. The old marxist dream of a "socialist world" is not only failing to come to fruition, but not a strong enough future to hold off the islamic hordes.

What we need is a semi-unifying element like the popes of the middle ages, or the roman empire of ancient times.










Unfortunately, money is the only unifying element now and no western nation has enough to unify our nations against islamic terrorism due to oils influence on Germany, France and the rest of our nations.

We are pretty much done for (the west), unless we can simply get out of the oil business completely and let the mideast go back to the 3rd world status it always has been.

That is the only solution.
Not war, not democracy, not spreading freedom.

Dude
Dude: "There are those from your native land that derive joy from American soldiers dying though..."

I was referring to this comment, which indicates that you DO "give a d*mn about what foreigners think. Otherwise you wouldnt have made this statement. Nor does the fact that "The Shrew" showed up strengthen your case. You were making too broad a generalization, which is equally applicable at home, among the groups to which I referred above....


Weslo
Weslo: "Research by some scholars provides population estimates of the pre-contact Americas to be as high as 112 million in 1492, while others estimate the population to have been as low as eight million."

Hmmmm... and you chastise ME for "ignorance and stupidity"?? Heh! A bit of a gap between EIGHT and ONE HUNDRED AND TWELVE...????

AND you fully believe that the US is responsible for killing only "hundreds" of Indians over the 1800s...??? And I am a "revisionist"????? Heh again!

Oh. I'm definately NOT British. So even T
THAT particular guess was wrong. No surprise there either, of course...

Cinaed
The most sensible comment I have seen posted under this article.

Sad
I find it sad to see the decline of Britain. I have often wondered if all the King Henry's and ElizabethI and Churchill are clawing their way out of their graves to kick some booty! But then again I am thoroughly sure our founding fathers are trying to do much the same. I am not ready to count out Britain yet. I see alot of people, albeit slowly, waking up over there to what faces them. They are having much the same problems we have...gripped by entitlement and socialism. We all know it is ingenuity and hard work that equals sucess but it seems these days everyone wants something for nothing. There are many posters on this site that are taking it upon themselves to decide history especially in the case of Iraq. That gives new meaning to hubris. History is not decided yet and quite frankly it is just begginning in regards to the problems in the Middle East. If we were to pull out tommorrow it will only prolong the inevitable not change it. Hold on to your socks the war really has only just begun.Steve I very much enjoy your posts by the way....keep posting.

newsflash
Bashing the Brits is not going to solve anything. another newsflash. As much as we might like to let Europe fall we can't. So get over it. And get over yourself. The Brits are in way deeper than we are, so it's gonna take some serious thinking to solve these problems.

Stop arguing trivialities, folks.
OK comments from a non-Brit & non-american (aussie actually).

Look, we've all got our idiosyncracies as nations. We all have our own particular strengths & weaknesses.

I've lived in Britain nearly 4 years & there is no question the smug anti-americanism in epidemic proportions there. And there's plenty of condescension toward aussies (the convict card is as old & as pathetic as the brit military )& they look down on every other nation on earth too, but dont dare say it about coloured nations because that wouldnt be polite) But they are most vocal about the french, the americans & the aussies. I'm sure it's envy (we kick their buts in sport & america kicks their but in...well everything, France is an old foe). Because there is no question the Brits like to think they are the best. But thinking and reality are 2 differnt things. And they cant stand the fact that they are an irrelevance in the world today compared to what they were & compared to what America has been for the past 100 years.

On the other hand, the number of boorish, uncouth, uncultured Aussies is legion. One of the reasons I cant go back there to live. A very uncultured 'macho' nation (those who travel can be cured) who thinks that aust is a somebody on the world scene - they have no idea we are a piddly little country of 20 million & zero international clout.

Then there's the americans. Why cant they keep their voices down? why do they have to announce their presence wherever they go? do they not know that when they do this, its like emittinga foul body-odour?). these guys have seen 1 (umpteen?) too many hollywood movies & they think that this is america & its their god-given right to parade themselves everywhere. A major factor in anti-americanism.

canadians: whats with the socialism? is it a french thing? is it the snow?

NZers: i cant think of one comlaint...but I'll keep looking.

Yes these are all stereotypes, but they didnt come from nowhere.

I've lived in the middle east. guess what? they never bag each other, but instead speak very highly of one another. respect.

Is it a race thing? Possibly. But more than that it's an english culture thing. We are generally all super-dooper competitive relative to the world scene. we cant stand losing. and thats why collectively the english speaking nations have had the influence they have had. And we are spreading our culture to the rest of the world, for better or for worse.

So lets realise our own negatives (awareness is the problem half solved) & focus on each others' positives.

America is a world leader in every field of human endeavour. Enough said. If martians were going to focus on one nation to study, the US would be it. There is magic there.

Britain is the gold standard of fairness. They have spread this fair thing to all corners of the world. They have invented most of the world sports that exist today. They basically invented democracy.

Australia is the role model of conservatism in the western world today (so says mark steyn & other political commentators & I think that's right....lets hope it continues)

cant say a lot about the canadians except that they are among the most pleasant & unarrogant & sensible people i have ever met.

NZ: the best at sport per capita in the world.

Back to Dennis. He does have a point, ie. leftist policital, & as a consequence cultural Britain, is becoming p*** weak. they are letting the team down. Everyone knows it. They've done to death the PC concept. Ease up on it guys & spare us all.


And let's not forget
And also Dennis' other key message, we must never forget the real enemy, leftism (PC in disguise), which is a cancer within the system & can bring down the US (& other countries) as easily as it can the UK. Well maybe not AS easily, but it can happen.

Kangaroo court maybe??
"I can't stand Pelosi, I've never voted for anyone but the most conservative candidate and I'm well aware of life in the US."

Sure you do. Now go back and dream of Pelosi bringing back Sharia Law to the United States (from her oh so 'successful journey' to terrorist-state Syria), just like most of your State of fruits and nuts. You still couldn't take a thing away of what I had said, but I had already expected your quick surrender to the facts of the matter.

Better luck next time, and it was my pleasure to educate you.

Jimmy smokes crack & I don't care.....
"Hmmmm... and you chastise ME for "ignorance and stupidity"?? Heh! A bit of a gap between EIGHT and ONE HUNDRED AND TWELVE...???? "

The point I was trying to make (even to an illiterate imbecile like yourself) is that they accuse us of MURDERING TENS OF MILLIONS OR MORE and that the real number of naives fell below SIX MILLION in the mid-17th century and then went well below A MILLION, a century later! All of this happened before there was even a dream of 'The USA.' Where are all of the EuroPeons who feel the guilt and sorrow of what their ancestors had done to the American natives and the hundreds of millions more around the world? Just brushed that little portion of history under the rug so easily? Understand now?? lol I'll even take an admission of guilt for the centuries of slavery (and the slave trade) that provided at least 70% of their economy that built their wretched island of wankers!!


"AND you fully believe that the US is responsible for killing only "hundreds" of Indians over the 1800s...??? And I am a "revisionist"????? Heh again! "

Yes. Prove me wrong on exactly what I said and please don't list sources like Ward Churchill. My facts still stand and don't try to put words in my mouth. Like I said before.. Most naives were already killed off by the Euro-states (fighting for control of the land) and disease spread through trading routes and the battle for new (or stolen) trading routes!


"Oh. I'm definately NOT British. So even T
THAT particular guess was wrong. No surprise there either, of course"

Maybe French?? Same mind-numbing drivel from the same socialist tree of failures, hypocrites, uneducated dolts, revisionists and losers!

Suicide could be your best option...
"To all you Anglophobes, how many spent real time on a battlefield? My house was 80% destroyed in the blitz. At 14 I raked incendiary bombs of its roof. My Dad had lost a lung in WW1 and was unable to do it. Let me tell you about a GI riding on a bus with us civilians. We went past a battery of AA guns just as they fired. He was terrified and screamed out "You people are crazy." He jumped off the bus at the next stop."

Sure.. Whatever. Maybe next time you shouldn't elect leaders that choose cowardice and appeasement to let WWII start in the first place! Peace in our time, right?? I have Hitler's word and signature on this piece of paper, right?? It's because of Brit imbeciles (like this) that we have situations we are (again) facing today. It's like 1935 all over again and you want to do NOTHING about it! You had the same strategy then and between 50 and 100 million people had to lose their lives, since TOTAL INACTION (to you) was better than a little preventative action (that could have easily stopped Hilter in his tracks. Thanks for wiping out generations of people and destroying half the world with your stupidity and PC action. I see you have learned ABSOLUTELY nothing from your own warped history, but with THAT MUCH revisionism floating around in Eurabia, I can see where your ignorance comes from.

I can see how you Brits would want to take the Holocaust out of your history books, because it offends too many people, especially the Muslims. Is that utterly pathetic or what?? Stick a fork in your island, since you are DONE!


"No nation has a monopoly of courage, wisdom or battlefield skills."

We know! Just look at Europe for god's sake! You are the best and most prime example. The EU has how many forces that are really deployable to the battlefield? Like maybe a handful, at best?? Aren't you the ones who keep telling us the 'real fight' is in Afghanistan, but we have to pull teeth just to get more Euros to send troops to the 'most important battlefield' in the world? Do you know what NATO means and what its real role is? Isn't that strange to hear such hypocrisy from 'our staunch allies?' You have no idea what 'team player' really is, but then again, how would you know(?) since America has been saving your worthless butts for the past 100 years and then some!


"The US screwed up plenty of times, but you are so bloody brainwashed from birth that you are the best at everything that you truly believe it."

We are the best(!) and we screwed up at what?? Screwed up by getting dragged into your wars every fifty years, since you were so hell bent to destroy yourselves over greed, genocide, colony and institutional barbarism (that practically defines your has-been culture)??


"As for Korea.......When the Chinese crossed the Yalu and drove the US south to the 38th., parallel, only 1 in four had a rifle, the rest had grenades."

The Americans were outnumbered so badly and still kicked major butt on the battlefield. Check out the casualty/death counts for the Communist side (& the American side) and see who did the real fighting in that war. The only reason they came back to that line was because the pathetic UN came in to create a peace offering and came up with that awful cease fire that did nothing but prolong the conflict to the situation we are seeing today. All the UN does is create chaos and they never ends conflicts! It's sort of like Saddam's Iraq since 1991, before the USA finally took the right steps to get rid of his regime forever more! Anything else, or shall I just laugh (and spit) in your face some more?

Oh yes.. The sun has definitely set on the Brits. Good-bye and good riddens.

Great Britain is no longer Great because
because they no longer rule the world?

because they no longer support us in our
war on Iraq?

because at least London no longer has any British
in the city - everyone is a foreigner?

because their soldiers had the nerve to come
home alive?

Sorry, I still like the Brits. Once an Anglophile, always an Anglophile, I guess.

I am glad that the soldiers are back. To sacrifice their lives would be a ridiculous waste. I can't imagine what it would have accomplished except to get us into war. I'm
presuming here that they were not "invited"
into the country, or did I miss that bit of
information.

Britain Was Once Great Britain
The sovereignty of all nations must be destroyed before we can implement the New World Order. Britain is just a little ahead of us. The hate America taught in our educational system and unhindered immigration is encouraged to bring this about. The Beast of Revelations (total control) is nipping at our heels.
Clarence

the glee and venom
so obvious in thses posts is saddening to Me, as we watch our great friend Britain sacrificed on the very alter we here in USA are lining up to worship before, multi-culturalism. The lesson to be learned here, is not who can keep whose butt or who can scream the loudest and foulest at one another, but rather to see the path we are on, just a few steps behind our "cousins' across the pond. how lose behind, was not oh so long ago that Britain, when faced with another act of international piracy had warships enroute in days, headed for the falklands. The same should have, would have happened on this occasion save for the moral confusion spread by the left through out the UK, very similar to the way our own children are being poisoned by the lefts greatest bastion, "education" ( re-education or indoctranation more accurately). T'was not a shortage of ships or capable forces, but merely the lack of will, that prevented the UK from responding with terrible vengence upon these animals from the 7th century death cult. and the lack of will is the fruit borne thru the teachings of the left, and their great gods moral relativism and multiculturalism. The same poison is spread here as from cropdusters, thru every medium, shaming and damning the greatness of western civilization, convincing OUR children that its not worth defending, indeed should be ashamed of.

from the cuban missle crisis thru viet nam, all thru the cold war, and the thousands of lil battlefields in countries across the globe, we stood down and stopped the communist threat of the soviet union, and yet, now, before a barely stone age enemy, I fear for My nation, my children, My civilization, as never before, becasue the traitors inside are unbarring the gates, and welcoming the enemy to come in.

CBP

...the will of the masses is divided by far-reaching distortions and the mass mind is corrupted by a knowledge worse than ignorance because it is false.
Ely Culbertson

USS Pueblo
I think Dennis is overstating the lack of military reaction Britain took. After all, they were just taking a play from the US playbook when we did nothing in 1968 when N. Korea captured the USS Pueblo in international waters. One crew member was killed and 82 taken prisoner. The ship was filled with secret electronic gear. After 11 months, the US issued a written apology and promised not to spy again. N. Korea still has the boat. What was our excuse for no action then? They didn't have nuclear weapons in 1968!!

Do you remember the famous picture N. Korea released of the crew? All of them were flipping the bird to the camera! People in the USA weren't sure if they were flipping off the US for not rescuing them or if it was showing defiance to the N. Koreans.

Not so great...
They stopped being "great" when they started embracing europeon socialism, it's been downhill for them since.

Dissenter57
"What country is that? Iceland? Certainly not this Third World banana republic."

You can't talk about the UK like that! Oh wait...yes you can.

Dude
Dude: "You should lay off the booze or something man. You totally have me pegged wrong."

I havent pegged you at ALL. I took issue with something you actually SAID, from which a person could reasonable conclude, in all SOBRIETY that you ARE concerned about what the Britons think.

No big thing. Now you say you are NOT concerned. Fine. Big deal.

Weslo
Your "smoking crack" is just bullying. Stick with the facts, and argue on FACTS. Leave off with the mindless insult.

Same goes for the "illiterate" business. If I WERE "illiterate" you would be totally wasting your time posting, which would make YOU incredibly STUPID. Why would you READ what a person writes, and THEN reply, and THEN say they are "illiterate"?

One OTHER possible conclusion, if you are not in fact incredibly stupid, is that you are blatantly INsincere. You obviously KNOW I am "literate" but accuse me of what you know I am not!!

Now, to the "issue." First off, WHO "accuses" ANYone of quote - "MURDERING TENS OF MILLIONS OR MORE"??? NObody who posted HERE. And NOT "Britons". Most either dont have ANY idea of the "numbers" involved - no more than you do. And which you admitted in your last post.

"Yes. Prove me wrong on exactly what I said and please don't list sources like Ward Churchill. My facts still stand and don't try to put words in my mouth."

This is just nonsense.

Weslo: "Like I said before.. Most naives were already killed off by the Euro-states (fighting for control of the land) and disease spread through trading routes and the battle for new (or stolen) trading routes!"

... ditto. You are historically illiterate.

Weslo: "Maybe French?? Same mind-numbing drivel from the same socialist tree of failures, hypocrites, uneducated dolts, revisionists and losers!"

I dont know what you have against the French now, but I dont really care. Wrong again... Why am I not surprised?

Weslo
"Even the most Leftist (but still semi-credible) historians state that Americans can only be held liable for hundreds (not thousands) of Indian deaths from 1800-1870 (and almost all were killings of self-defense when attacked)."

"Yes. Prove me wrong on exactly what I said and please don't list sources like Ward Churchill. My facts still stand and don't try to put words in my mouth."


Allow me...
"The Cherokee Trail of Tears"

"Between 1830 and 1850, about 100,000 American Indians living between Michigan, Louisiana, and Florida moved west after the U.S. government coerced treaties or used the U.S. Army against those resisting. Many were treated brutally. An estimated 3,500 Creeks died in Alabama and on their westward journey. Some were transported in chains."

3,500

"No one knows how many died throughout the ordeal, but the trip was especially hard on infants, children, and the elderly. Missionary doctor Elizur Butler, who accompanied the Cherokees, estimated that over 4,000 died--nearly a fifth of the Cherokee population."

4,000


Source: http://www.rosecity.net/tears/trail/tearsnht.html

So that's just 7,500 right there. The trail of tears wasn't the only Native American deaths. I don't know why anyone would cite "leftist historians" though but "hundreds" is idiotic.

Patriot
Nicely done.

Did you note John Hawkins article "American Heroes"....

John Hawkins: "Andrew Jackson: "Old Hickory" was a ferocious Indian fighter, a warrior's warrior, and a common man who played a crucial role in the expansion of the United States. He smashed the Creek Indians and took 8 million acres at their expense"

How does one "smash the Creek Indians" withOUT killing them? How does one take 8 MILLION acres and remain "blameless" in Weslo's sense of the word??

When I read contributions such as his, I am embarrassed to call myself "Conservative", though that is what I am.

JimmyJoe
Not all of America's history is "pretty" but the beauty of America is that we can fix things that are unconstitutional, like the DC gun ban. Lincoln freed the slaves because he knew it was anti-American. America has changed since the 1800's. 3500 dead Creek's isn't insignificant, neither are the 4000 Cherokee that died just in the trail of tears. That doesn't even include, the countless Crow, Navajo, Comanche, Blackfoot, Seminole, etc. The number isn't *just* thousands, it's tens of thousands.

There are many "contributions" that lack fact and reason, from all sides, on many subjects. :(

Weslo and Handy
You know full well that the United Kingdom has, and NEVER has been, as militarized as any European state or the United States after World War II.

It's the same as in Australia. Our official army is about 25,000 front line troopers. That's barely 2 divisions (In fact slightly less). Why? Becuase we don't have the draft, we don't have a large army recruitment scheme, and as much as we respect and love our soldiers most of us just don't ever see ourselves being one unless our country got invaded (In which case the gloves come off.)

Britain has 100,000 troopers, which is about 7 divisions. Believe it or not, this was approximately its size at the beginning of all world wars Britain has ever been involved in. Yes, World War I, when they came to the aid of Belgium, being attacked by Germany, and World War II, when they came to the help of Poland.

In both world wars, Britain's army swelled to the very respectable 2 million mark, after 3 years of training. Why? Because just like us Aussies, most people in England have no interest in the martial life unless there was a really nasty sucker out there to beat. And let's face it, as far as nasty suckers go Saddam rates at a 3 out of 10.

Now, how many in the US Army? 500 000 in the regulars. Now, I know the various Guard units and reserves don't have the privileges the British Territorial or Australian Reserve units do (these units can opt out of foreign deployments) but doing the maths;

If the US population is 300 million
UK Population is 60 million
Australian Population is 20 million

US Army is 500 000
UK Army is 100 000
Australian Army is 25 000

You'll see that the US and UK armies are pretty much the same ratio among the population (1 in 600) where the Australian Army is positively puny in comparison (1 in 800).

So, what makes the United Kingdom so "weak?" Well, nothing at all! British power projection is based on its navy and has been for 400 years, much in the same way that the Navy does now for the United States (If you do the analysis you'll see that the Navy is THE service that does everything). You can see that there is no particular weakness on the part of the United Kingdom- simply that it is not a militarized state, at least in regards to the Army. Compare this to the French Army, where until 1996 Conscription kept the army at a near million man mark, with a country the similar population of the United Kingdom.

In world war I and II, both France and Germany had active PEACETIME armies of millions of men at the outbreak of war.

Now, you may have 100 000 crack soldiers capable of pulling off 6 aimed .303 rounds a minute (So much so that a line fusilade was mistaken for machine gun fire by bewildered German soldiers) but when you have 2 million men crushing down upon you, there's only so much you can do. Hence the tentative response that Britain's land forces always had to use in the world wars at the beginning.

This is not weakness. This is knowing when you're clearly fighting out of your weight zone.

Now let's analyze the latest incident. British sailors are alone, with a cruiser in support, (More like a destroyer- Britain no longer uses Cruisers) when Iranian patrol boats surround the boat.

Now, barring the pure incompetence of the signaller who should have told the boat to get the hell out as soon as he picked up the patrol boat's signatures (But perhaps they're invisible to radar?) what are the British to do?

1. Challenge, get shot up, and start a war which the United Kingdom is NOT ready for (Remember, demilitarized state here!);
2. Surrender and let the diplomats handle this?

Speaking to some army friends of mine, the so called vaunted Australians (Who are plucky as you like) would have surrendered without a fight. If it's not within your orders to engage, you DO NOT ENGAGE. Your ability to act has been taken out of your hands. And if your government doesn't want to start a war for whatever reason then you sit there and you let them capture you because that's part of the oath you made when you joined the military.

You always have to remember that. It's not lack of pluck- it's military discipline.

Pity about selling the story afterward. But that's not a decision we should judge individual soldiers on.

And to ask a question- how many former British Colonies are now successful nations? Why, we've got Canada, New Zealand, India's on the way, Australia, Malta, Malaysia, Singapore, South Africa...

How many French colonies are now successful nations?

Yeah, didn't think so.

And one final question: How many former American Colonies are now successful nations? And don't tell me there aren't any, because some philippine friends I know would be quite annoyed with you if you did...

:D

Who are these chumps trying to impress??
"Source: http://www.rosecity.net/tears/trail/tearsnht.html

So that's just 7,500 right there. The trail of tears wasn't the only Native American deaths. I don't know why anyone would cite "leftist historians" though but "hundreds" is idiotic."


That is an event that was caused by other events. Most of those people died of DISEASE (which people of that time knew VERY LITTLE ABOUT) and EXPOSURE (aka - They were not murdered)! Do you even know the history of anything? 99.5% of people moving to the West had no ordeals with Indians and never killed any. How many Indians killed 'white people' who were also living there for centuries or many decades? Where are their numbers of dead? You can use whatever numbers you want, but how can any of what you said be stated as 'forced genocide,' stated all the time by these EuroPeon socialists and other Marxist idiots??

You really want to call a forced march 'a genocide caused by Americans?' Haha! That was my main point and YES, you lost the argument again.

Here are the highlights of that time period:

April 22, 1818 - Chehaw Affair - 7 men killed (estimates from 7-40 killed), American troops attack friendly Indian village during First Seminole War

1832 - Black Hawk War - 850 men, women, children killed in war many at Bad Ax Massacre, Bad Ax Wisconsin by American militia and Indian allies

1838-1839 - Trail of Tears - 4,000 Cherokees, mainly died from disease and exposure during forced relocation. (see Indian Removal)

March 3, 1860 - Eureka, California - 80-100 men, women, children, Wiyot tribe killed by local hooligans

January 29, 1863 - Bear River Massacre - fewer than 250 killed

April 24, 1863 - Keyesville Massacre - Keyesville, California - 53 military age men, Tehachapi tribe

November 29, 1864 - Sand Creek Massacre - Sand Creek, Colorado - 150 men, women, and children killed, Cheyenne Indians

November 27, 1868 - Washita Massacre - Washita River, Oklahoma - 100 people killed; this is often considered a battle, not a massacre

January 23, 1870 - Marias Massacre - 200 Piegans, mainly elderly, women, and children

Like I stated before.. Many hundreds, but not many thousands (or millions, stated by all of our socialist enemies)!

You fail to realize that not just every material benefit these 'indians' gained - electricity, the wheel, and all post-Stone Age inventions were now there.

Every psychological vestige as well - starting with the very concept of American Indian or Native American or any other collective term.

The concept of American Indian is a modern one, not possessed by any Amerindians until they learned it from Europeans. An Indian's pre-Columbian identity was that of his or her membership in a particular tribe such as the Kiowa or Lakota.

This is why there were no Indians in America when Columbus discovered it. There were Chippewa and Iroquois and Mohawk and Miwok and Powhatten and hundreds if not thousands of others - but there were no Indians, because none of them possessed any sort of pan-tribal notion of common humanity and cultural identity.

These tribes were in a state of constant warfare with each other. Alliances were ephemeral and temporary. The fantastic level of violence perpetrated by pre-Columbian Amerindian tribes upon each other is documented by Lawrence Keeley in "War Before Civilization: The Myth of the Peaceful Savage."

In this state of perpetual war, victorious tribes seized control over the land of a defeated one. The Sioux, for example, kicked out the native inhabitants of the Plains, moving there after they themselves were kicked out of Canada by other tribes. Of course, the Sioux culture of the Great Plains with the eagle feather headdresses, hunting buffalo on galloping horses, was made possible by the introduction of horses by Europeans in the first place.

That larger and stronger tribes from Europe conquered all Amerindian tribes and took most of their land is in no way essentially different from their own pre-Columbian history.

Once again, it was a pleasure having to educate you (couple) monkeys, once again.

One more quip for the cowards like Jimmy
As I already stated, historians are in disagreement on the total Native American population at the time of first contact. A number between 20-30 million is considered most credible, though the highest estimates are around 80 million to over 100 million. I was just stating variable numbers from a number of sources AT THE BEGINNING period of contact.

By the end of the 16th century, credible estimates of the number of survivors is just over 1 million. Many, many more 'natives' killed each other over their own land battles and conflicts than anything the Americans could have done to them. That's a hard fact one cannot deny.

American (caused) Holocaust?? I don't think so...

'Wacky' liar..
"Now, how many in the US Army? 500 000 in the regulars. Now, I know the various Guard units and reserves don't have the privileges the British Territorial or Australian Reserve units do (these units can opt out of foreign deployments) but doing the maths;

If the US population is 300 million
UK Population is 60 million
Australian Population is 20 million

US Army is 500 000
UK Army is 100 000
Australian Army is 25 000

You'll see that the US and UK armies are pretty much the same ratio among the population (1 in 600) where the Australian Army is positively puny in comparison (1 in 800)."


You forgot to mention how many of these soldiers (of yours) are actually DEPLOYABLE for ACTION. The numbers are much less than what you have stated (including in comparison to the USA, in any ratio) and too many of your 'soldiers' are just sitting on their fat rears, collecting a check from the government (doing NOTHING). I can see why so many people now know of your military being weak, pathetic and incompetent (if they didn't know already, like I have known for years now).


"Speaking to some army friends of mine, the so called vaunted Australians (Who are plucky as you like) would have surrendered without a fight. If it's not within your orders to engage, you DO NOT ENGAGE. Your ability to act has been taken out of your hands. And if your government doesn't want to start a war for whatever reason then you sit there and you let them capture you because that's part of the oath you made when you joined the military.

You always have to remember that. It's not lack of pluck- it's military discipline."


The biggest reason so many people called your "15 cowards" a bunch of sissies, was because of WHAT THEY DID AND SAID while in the hands of the enemy, rather than being surrounded by a few patrol boats, then captured. This was just a good example of the difference between your military forces and our military forces.

Start a war with Iran's Navy? Haha! Didn't your government just get on the air and state you could have easily sunk the Iranian Navy within an hour or two?? You just got caught with your pants down and are now trying (so desperately, might I add) to make excuses for your pathetic military forces' actions in enemy hands.

Weslo
Despite you being VERy rude in calling me a liar, let's discuss "ready for action."

My coutnry's Australian army has 2 divisions. 3 BRIGADES are ready to go at any one time. That's less than one division.

The british army has 2 Divisions out of 7 ready for action anywhere in the world.

Of course it's tiny! These are two states who don't really pick fights with people. Not because they're weak (Talk to the Wehrmacht, North Koreans, Vietnamese, Iraqis, etc.) but because English speaking nations generally speaking have absolutely NO INTEREST IN THE ARMY. They'd rather join the Navy.

TamalackOfBrains...
"I love the habit some people have of hysterically putting objects of their contempt in quotes, as it would magically discredit them. Sure, we might think they're 'natives'.. but what if they were space aliens?? By murdering millions of them, we might have saved the world."


I have nothing but respect for the Native Americans. You can make up any lie or try to distract from the truth I have stated.. But facts are facts and you have none. What exactly was hysterical about what I said?? Is that really the best you have?? Ha!

Murdering millions?? Talk to the Brits and their Euro-trash partners in crime. That's their culture and history for centuries and what built their own lands up, since Day 1!!

Wacky liar Pt.2..
"Of course it's tiny! These are two states who don't really pick fights with people. Not because they're weak"

It's exactly because they're crap and have the USA to protect both of their weakling nations, coupled with the FACT that political correctness has crippled your armed forces and resolve to continue! Picking fights? What about responding to your worldly duties of protecting yourself and allies (esp. within NATO), before the threat comes home or taking action against people who hit you from abroad??

All you do is send the message that these monsters can hit you anytime they want, and you'd have to go begging to the good ole USA to get anything done against them. Thanks for nothing, you cowards!

Let me try this again...
Because after this you obviously aren't going to listen to reason. Not to mention, you can't go around calling people liars unless you have the contrary evidence. Free Speech all you like- calling other people liars when they're not only makes you look bad.

That discussion of troop numbers there was to show that the United Kingdom keeps as many men under arms per population ratio as does the United States of America.

If we use the statistics for per person how many people under arms per ratio of population in all armed services, in the USA that's 9 people per 1000, in the United Kingdom it's 11, and in Australia 6.33 per 1000 people. The numbers never lie; so what we have is that Britain actually has more people under arms than the United States does per person! These nations are for the most part very demilitarized through a long association with history, isolation, and belief in the Navy.

In comparison, Iran has 116 per 1000 people. Iran is obviously a militarized state. Before World War II, Germany had a standing peacetime army of 2 million men versus the UK's 100 000. Why was the British army so small? Because that's all they needed! In peacetime, the entire British army has never been larger than 250 000 men, and this was enough to cover one fifth of the globe. As George Orwell so sardonically said, "The British Empire, one fifth of the world, has need of less troops than a small balkan state." And he's right.

So once we're done with the reasons why English Speaking nations have such small armies (And the United States is no stranger to this- IT has a small army in comparison to its possibilities) we can talk about "shirking duties."

Now, onto International Obligations:

If you remember correctly, both the UK and Australia participated in Iraq and Afghanistan, the UK in very considerable numbers. The United Kingdom keeps a corps in Germany, Cyprus and Gibraltar. It also has troopers in Afghanistian, Iraq, and recently fought in Kosovo, Sierra Leone, the First Gulf War, and it's been on a perennial war with the IRA in Northern Ireland since the 1920s. The UK has always been the first to jump in if there's a problem.

Australia: Vietnam, Korea, Iraq, Afghanistian... then there are the things no one in the USA ever learns about, like the Solomon Islands Regional Assistance mission, an East Timor Peacekeeping force, Papua New Guinea, the list goes on.

I won't have you dismiss out of hand the serious work that the United Kingdom does in ensuring peace throughout the world. Of course the USA protects the world! I'm glad it does! But calling your staunchest ally (And I don't live in that country!) a coward is just plainly wrong and says more about your unthinking hate than anything you could ever say in response.

Weslo
Again, mindless bullying by dismissing those who take issue with you as "chumps," though I dont see how you come up with "coward." I'm just typing here... requiring neither courage nor cowardice....

First off, Patriot NEVER said a WORD about "forced genocide." So what on EARTH are you defending? He merely made the point that your "hundreds" of deaths inflicted on the native population was a slight underestimate!

Fact is that you have NO clue regarding the possible numbers killed etc by those "awful" Eurpoeans. As you have ALREADY admitted, so dont waste your time backtracking. And who are the descendents of those Europeans who did all that killing anyhow? WE are!

And who SAID that "America caused the holocaust"?? Neither Patriot nor I for sure, so again, I wonder if you are in some kind of "blog warp" or something?

Wacky
I wouldnt waste my time on this guy, except that I am doing absolutely NOTHING else right now! And I couldnt agree MORE with your last statement above.... Superb conclusion.

This illiterate twit again??! Oh my..
"First off, Patriot NEVER said a WORD about "forced genocide." So what on EARTH are you defending? He merely made the point that your "hundreds" of deaths inflicted on the native population was a slight underestimate!"

My points still stand and all you have is a steady retreat! Amazing stupidity! I was talking about what we are often accused of (esp. in Eurabia) and not everything of what was said within the last few posts! Read much? I still take it you're French or some other babbling monkey..


"Fact is that you have NO clue regarding the possible numbers killed etc by those "awful" Eurpoeans. As you have ALREADY admitted, so dont waste your time backtracking. And who are the descendents of those Europeans who did all that killing anyhow? WE are!"

Read what I said again and then come back to me with some real answers. We are what, again?? Not all Americans are descendants of the EuroPeons and even if we were, that would be like blaming some guy in the far corners of New Zealand, of the atrocities the Brits created in India! Hahaha! Did it take you all night to think up that weak and pathetic excuse? We might have European blood, so that means all of the Euro-empire genocides (worldwide) are somehow o