Question Time in New York

Nippy · Post by **Nippy** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 3:20 pm

I watched this on the BBC last night and I thought the British defence minister Geoffrey Hoon handled himself as a representative of the British government quite well. Then one person from the audience (stupid ****ing idiot, in my opinion) asked this question:

Why have the British government attatched themself to the US and George Bush, is it to make themselves seem important on the international stage?

Hello! Are you a complete arsehole by nature, or did you forget the past World Wars? How about the fact that most people living in the US are originated from Britain? The fact that most countries, including your own, speak English. How about 3/4 of the world once being British? Is this guy an idiot? Does he have any idea at all?

Is that what other people think? Does the community think that that is the reason Blair sided with Bush?

RandomThug · Post by **RandomThug** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 3:25 pm

Hey

Dont get stressed out about stuff like that, it happens all over the world all the damn time. Even such amazingly obvious crap like the WW's. What it is, is that everyone looks down at the man on top because thier not on top. Smart men fear the man on top and become his friend in hopes of sharing the wealth of being on top, while others who dont have what it takes to be on the level with the man on top grow to hate it... out of ignorance.

I know that might make no sense to you, but it works fine for me.

America in its short time as a country has done a lot for this large rock we live on called earth. Yet we will still be damned for every mistake we make.

thug

Nippy · Post by **Nippy** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 3:29 pm

Hey Thug, I'm British and I'm pretty damn proud of that too. I can say that we do make a difference on the world stage, we are a difference maker and the fact that the US and UK are allied is good for me. We've had the best, and longest running, ties in the world. It's when idiots like that neglect history that annoys me. Am I right in saying the US likes the Brits and likes the fact that we've sided with them?

fable · Post by **fable** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 3:36 pm

Just bear in mind that there is an unwritten law: most intelligent people, when placed before a camera, must make raving idiots of themselves. It never fails.

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 4:18 pm

Originally posted by Nippy

Hello! Are you a complete arsehole by nature, or did you forget the past World Wars? How about the fact that most people living in the US are originated from Britain? The fact that most countries, including your own, speak English. How about 3/4 of the world once being British? Is this guy an idiot? Does he have any idea at all?

Is that what other people think? Does the community think that that is the reason Blair sided with Bush?

I would rather believe that we are allied because we agree with the current politics, not because we are some dying empire that continues to demand respect for what we once were. I would like to think we are allies for the future, not the past. Are we qualified to demand respect for what was?? (especially in this day and age)...a domineering influence? I would like to hope we are looking forward, and not back. He has a valid question IMO.

The reason why Blair sided with Bush has nothing to do with history IMO. It does have more to do with the fact he is smarmy, he loves the high profile stage and makes a better foreign minister than a home minister

Call me a cynic.

Scayde · Post by **Scayde** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 4:30 pm

Originally posted by Nippy
Hey Thug, I'm British and I'm pretty damn proud of that too. I can say that we do make a difference on the world stage, we are a difference maker and the fact that the US and UK are allied is good for me. We've had the best, and longest running, ties in the world. It's when idiots like that neglect history that annoys me. Am I right in saying the US likes the Brits and likes the fact that we've sided with them?

I can't speak for an entire nation, but I am very glad that the UK and the USA are friends....For me, current politics aside, It is like remaining close with your family after you leave home..

(Does that make sense to anyone but me?)

P.S. Hiya RT, Nippy, fable, and Ysh...Don't get to see you guys much...

fable · Post by **fable** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 7:23 pm

@Scayde, good to see you.

gnomethingy · Post by **gnomethingy** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 9:46 pm

Originally posted by Nippy
I watched this on the BBC last night and I thought the British defence minister Geoffrey Hoon handled himself as a representative of the British government quite well. Then one person from the audience (stupid ****ing idiot, in my opinion) asked this question:

Why have the British government attatched themself to the US and George Bush, is it to make themselves seem important on the international stage?

Hello! Are you a complete arsehole by nature, or did you forget the past World Wars? How about the fact that most people living in the US are originated from Britain? The fact that most countries, including your own, speak English. How about 3/4 of the world once being British? Is this guy an idiot? Does he have any idea at all?

Is that what other people think? Does the community think that that is the reason Blair sided with Bush?

Id say that since the us WANTS the support of every other nation in the current doings... they dont actually need it to do what they want, but it strengthens there beleif in that what there doing is right, if everyone else is doing it too...why would such a question ever be raised?

Other than out of complete sutpidity or as the result some sort of adversarial impulse...

Theres always going to be smart mouthed idiots that spend hours apon hours thinking up there filthy little statements to try and belittle everyone who isnt them, as a rule there statements sound valid so they can feel good about it and avoid any kind of reprisal becouse there telling the 'truth' but on closer inspection you almost always see it for what it is...

fable · Post by **fable** » Fri Sep 13, 2002 11:32 pm

Re: Re: Question Time in New York

Originally posted by gnomethingy
Theres always going to be smart mouthed idiots that spend hours apon hours thinking up there filthy little statements to try and belittle everyone who isnt them, as a rule there statements sound valid so they can feel good about it and avoid any kind of reprisal becouse there telling the 'truth' but on closer inspection you almost always see it for what it is...

Too true. The problem is, these politicians usualy get away with it by raising the banner of what they call patriotism, reeling in citizens by deftly playing on emotions that no honest person would touch. And then, later, years later, when the histories are written, only then are the politicians portrayed in their true colors. But in the meantime, they've gotten buildings erected in their memories; while there are few buildings erected to the memories of those fallen in their pursuit of false visions and reelection schemes.

CM · Post by CM » Sat Sep 14, 2002 4:28 am

Actually quoting the economist - i am in love with that mag if you dont know it by now - they quote blair saying that he believes the best way to guide and "control" (my word) the worlds super power is to be its friends. And i agree. The US and EU have been drifting part and blair believes he is in the unique position *which he is* to bring them closer or work as a mediator. Thus he tends to side with Bush only to make sure that he can have the oppurtunity to alter Bushes thinking and make him more internationally acceptable. Good luck to him, he needs a miracle for that to happen.

Yshania · Post by **Yshania** » Sat Sep 14, 2002 7:33 am

Heck, Fas, you make him sound almost...intelligent!

But then again, such blatant patronising on his part does not illustrate his own intelligence, it only reveals that of his advisors who are probably rolling their eyes

BaronTx · Post by **BaronTx** » Sat Sep 14, 2002 8:11 am

Please give Bush a chance. If he was the unilateralist/war monger everyone says he is, Iraq would be in ashes by now and most countries would be goose stepping to his policies. He just wants the best for the country he was elected to lead.
He was governor here in Texas for 6 years. He brought political and ethnic diversity into his administration and Texas is far better off now than it was before his election.

I hope my post doesn't offend anyone (hoping a previous post of mine has been forgiven by the SymNation). Just trying to give a counterpoint to the discussion.

AntiChrist · Post by **AntiChrist** » Sat Sep 14, 2002 11:17 am

No. Bush is a war monger, but he needs Congress to let him start a war. We know he won't pay attention to the UN telling him to not attack. I'm sure he did fine in Texas, but now he has the whole world to deal with and he doesn't seem to handle it well. IMHO Colin Powell should have been president, but that's just me.

BaronTx · Post by **BaronTx** » Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:37 pm

Bush is a war monger, but he needs Congress to let him start a war.

Congress gave him that authority in a resolution passed on
9-14-01

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:56 pm

Originally posted by AntiChrist
No. Bush is a war monger,

Evidence please.

If the US had after 9/11 went straight to Afghanistan and started bombing...yes I would had called Bush a War Monger. Did he? Blind hatred of a person does give a person the right to label someone a War Monger.

State your evidence or retract your statement.

CM · Post by CM » Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:57 pm

He doesnt need the UN now at all. Also out of topic, but SYM is pretty much ok with different opinions. I mean come on if i can still have a civil conversation with folks after the stupid anti-american things i have done, then you should have no problem

gnomethingy · Post by **gnomethingy** » Sat Sep 14, 2002 12:59 pm

Originally posted by Weasel
State your evidence or retract your statement.

Thems fightin words... (Ho ho ho)

Gruntboy · Post by **Gruntboy** » Sat Sep 14, 2002 1:04 pm

Right on weasel.

And would Colin Powell do any different? He'd hunt the terrorists too.

CM · Post by CM » Sat Sep 14, 2002 1:13 pm

Ok just to cause even more problems. Bush is not a complete war mongrel, but its not like he is adverse to invading countries, violating international law and bombing where ever and when ever he likes. He uses the american military a little too easily.

Weasel · Post by **Weasel** » Sat Sep 14, 2002 1:27 pm

Originally posted by CM
Ok just to cause even more problems. Bush is not a complete war mongrel, but its not like he is adverse to invading countries, violating international law and bombing where ever and when ever he likes. He uses the american military a little too easily.

Now this statement covers at least the last 4 US Presidents. Check out my Topic, Power and Weakness and I believe you will find the reason the US does use military force a little to easily.

Would Colin Powell took a different approach in Afghanistan? I'm pretty sure as Gruntboy said...nope he would had been hunting terrorist as well. Powell had a hand in the war in Afghanistan. Now would have Powell adviced Bush to attack Iraq without going to the UN first, IMHO no. The hawks over-rode Powells advice and now you see the results. At the time, Bush was riding high on political clot and was ill advised by them to start on the path of the hawks.

Finally Bush (or maybe Powell) has been convinced to try and get the UN to back its decrees up. IMHO the right way.