“it is astounding that you would refer to Cuba, Vietnam and Korea" It is? I thought these were pretty good examples of American interference in state politics on a global scale, I could be wrong but I'm pretty sure that the wars in Korea and Vietnam were (under whatever guise) supported by America, not only that but so was the failed rebellion against Fidel Castro. So not only does America intervene in state politics but it also fails to actually complete its objectives in doing so. The
"Does India, Arabia, South Africa and every other country that Britain tried to rule by ruthlessness ring a bell in that narrow mind?" Oh yes they ring a bell, I believe that India and South Africa (and parts of Arabia) are part of the Old Empire and the new Commonwealth, I do sincerely hope that you are not trying to justify the current situation by saying that just because the British have committed several acts indiscretion in the past (bearing in mind what you have quoted are late 19th Century, early 20th Century, where as the instances I have quoted are all in the latter half of the 20th Century and early 21st. I'm not saying that Britain has always carried itself impeccably and yes there have been instances of ruthlessness but there have also been instances where Britain has stood against all odds pretty much by itself (See WW1 and WW2) waiting for our brothers across the Atlantic to mobilise their war machine and fight against the armies that would have eventually threatened the U.S.
“Does Ireland ring a bell?” yes it does, not only did we give Southern Ireland independence we have suffered for it for the last century or so, the terrorist activities in Northern Ireland are internal politics of our nation in the same way that Hawaii is several hundred miles from America and subject to it’s policies Ireland is less than a hundred miles away from England and has been a part of the UK for over two hundred years, now tell me that England does not have a right to defend it’s citizens against terrorists, especially on it’s own soil.
“We are interfering in the global policies of Iraq and Afghanistan?” I would have thought so since America has already invaded Afghanistan and Iraq (Gulf War) and plans to invade Iraq again they have replaced the Taliban and seek to replace Saddam Hussain with a more U.S friendly government, although these governments were hardly brought to power by democratic means (I’m not saying this is necessarily a bad thing) they were in power and generally accepted (unless you have evidence of an active resistance against these governments and to be honest the Northern Alliance a group of Warlords who want power from themselves is hardly a resistance or an alternative in my opinion).
“What a shame. How good do you think you would look in a turban?” I am wondering how such a situation would come about? Is Iraq and Afghanistan about to create an alliance and decide to attack the United Kingdom? And is America the only nation willing to come to our defence? I think not. Or is it that you think that America is the only nation that is capable of taking down Iraq? As I believe the current performance of American troops and history proves that America cannot even do that but never mind, I’m sure Britain, France, Germany, Canada, Australia and the rest of the world that wants to keep cosy relationships with the U.S will be willing to send in some real troops to take care of the enemy.
“You refer to Vietnam? What can you possibly know about Vietnam except for what the publishers of the newspapers want you to know? Were you there? I was and have the right to discuss it. What gives you the right to pass judgement?” Are you therefore saying that unless I am a combat veteran I have no right to discuss the implications of U.S military action, no in fact what you are saying is that I am a combat veteran of Vietnam I have no right to discuss the implications of that war, at the very least as historian and a political commentator I would like to express my right to comment on what I do know about which is the political, social and economic factors.
“You say America has no one else to blame?” you are absolutely correct, America has no one but it’s self to blame for the atrocities of September 11th, it’s intervention in Iraq was motivated primarily by oil, Osama Bin Laden did not launch this campaign for no reason, although his reasons may not seem legitimate to the majority of the western world I can at least see some sort of semblance of a defence of his actions, but having said that as a millionaire he should have had more intelligence to make his anger known in a more civil and respectable way.
“Last time I looked we weren't trying to blame anyone else” No but few Americans seem to realise that America is to blame for these events and they certainly aren’t fond of apologising for their mistakes.
“You want to make references to our president while you bow to a royal family that does nothing more than produce unending fodder for sleazy magazines?” Excuse me but I cannot see the comparison, the Royal family of the U.K is pretty much for all intensive purposes a ceremonial figurehead, if you wanted an accurate comparison I would have chosen the Prime Minister as he is much nearer to George Bush (in power) than any member of the royal family, but besides that I would like to see some evidence of this “fodder for sleazy magazines” because as far as I know, The Duchess of York, Princess Diana, The Duke and Duchess of Wessex are the only royals that have been written about in “sleazy magazines” and they have pretty much shunned from royal circles (both Princess Diana and the Duchess of York were not considered royalty after their divorces).
”I can accept all of these ridiculous comments as simply being from some small-minded individual who gets a kick from bashing America but then you have to say...IS AMERICA UNWILLING TO SACRIFICE SOME OF THE 250 MILLION POPULATION FOR A WORTHY CAUSE? That is the most pathetic statement I have ever heard in my life. Allow me to suggest you check history and count up how many Americans have sacrificed their lives over the years and the majority of it for OTHER countries, the rights of OTHER people to live free.”
Excuse me, I did not say that America has not sacrificed many of its young men’s lives in the past, what I am saying is that British Troops are fighting in Afghanistan against an enemy who should have been easily defeated in the first few days of the “War On Terror” if there had been a concerted effort to actually attack the Taliban and Al Queda instead of using the Northern Alliance to do the job. Apart from this fact there is the fact that the U.K suffered through two years of war (WW2) without the help of America at a time, when we needed it most, we struggled on barely defending ourselves against Japan in the far east and Germany and Italy in the west, we stood up to several months of continued battering and it was not until Japan actually destroyed the Pacific fleet that America actually woke to the reality that it was involved in the war. America only gets involved in a conflict if it is provoked or it has a vested interest in the outcome, so yes I will check history and yes I will find that America has sacrificed the lives of many men for other countries but only to preserve it’s dominance and it’s interests.
“Believe me, I would almost like to be president for a day, call all our soldiers home, eliminate aid to any country who badmouths us and sit back and wait for people like you to beg us to come back.” I await that day with baited breath, because you can be sure that the U.K will not come crawling across the Atlantic for aid. Oh and if this did happen could I refuse to recognise the independence of the 13 Colonies? and expect to see them paying taxes again?
“That's your right…a right you wouldn't have had without the assistance of the country you insult.” I hope I understand you right, but if I don’t please forgive me, I believe you are saying that America has protected British interests, when? Your help in defending Britain in WW2 came too late and I surely don’t think that you believe that Germany could have mounted a successful invasion after the Battle of Britain, so I’m not sure what you mean to be honest.
“ My problem is with people like you who appoint themselves as being arrogant enough to insult and chastize an entire country based on their own lacking interpretation of history” I have a lacking interpretation of history? First I’ve been told, I read history for fun and did it at A-level, I attend a history society but I mostly concentrate on 19th Century history, so yeah of course my interpretation of history does lack in the essential areas of American history because that whenever I read American history books I am shocked find such one sided view points and such blatant propaganda. I have no problem with American’s, I do have a problem with American foreign policy and those that advocate it.