Quote: "I'm Confused.
First people say that America are isolationalism and it took so long for them to jump in either World War, now people are complaining because America is jumping into everything?"
Actually if you think about it for a second you might realise that the problem has nothing to do with the individual situations.
What do both situations.. World War 2 Involvement, and the Iraqi Conflict (i'm not calling it a damn war!) have in common?
It is a very very simple common theme, that is played throughout ever engagement that the United States has ever fought in.
See the problem is quite simply this. During a few conversations last nite I was talking (well bitching) to a few of my american friends about this thread. Now a single reoccuring response began to appear.
Now effectively the situation is this.
Wars cost money, and as such Bush has had to spend a lot of money on this war against Iraq. Now a key issue is that Iraq has Weapons of Mass Destruction. Now oddly enough the UK news is either a)not up to date, or b)not telling us the whole story, because Iraq does have WMD. So our news is wrong telling us otherwise.
Now as a result of Britian also being involved as the United States' ally, we have also seen a huge budget spent on this 'war'. So naturally a problem I have, is the fact that these resources SHOULD be better spent on internal problems.
Pensions, Police, Hospitals, etc..
I can think of far better uses for £20billion than fighting a relatively pointless conflict in the middle-east. One that we have learnt had pre-fabricated evidence in order to gain the peoples emotes to go to 'war'.
Yet, because this is a war we are helping with. The Americans firmly feel that internal problems are of no consiquence, and putting as much money behind the war effort as possible is more important to help out the United States.
See this is the first part of the logic that gets to me. That Americans feel that they are more important to the British government than the well-being of the country itself.
This not with-standing, another point comes to light. We're doing all this because we're allies. So if this is the case then where were the American's ready to fight the good fight when Britian has asked for thier help?
While the UK might not be as gun-ho as the United States when it comes to feeling slighted, over the past few decades we have had incidents where the US help would've been nice, and was asked for.
Each time we have been given the response 'This is not our business', and it seems that the people would agree.
So what exactly made Desert Storm, the UKs business aside from the fact that our forces make up over 30% of the UN Peacekeeper force?
Why should we care that the Americans were attacked by terrorists, when they refused to lift a finger to help with the IRA problem?
Why should we care when the Americans want to fight against some dictactor simply because they're in a bad mood and on the war-path?
Sorry but friendship should go both ways... not just Americas.
Yes, the terrorist attacks were a trajedy and our people were also caught in that. From my perspective that makes it a joint problem.
From the American perspective, it was an attack on thier soil and as such it's thier problem, so the UN can't tell them what to do.
The UN can't tell anyone what to do, this is why Saddam was able to mess around the weapons inspectors for almost a decade. Yet this little defiance doesn't have the same resounding impact on the effectiveness of the UN as American telling them to get stuffed.
If people want to go back to the actions of World War 2 and how America got involved then fine. Let's cover the fact that America refused to directly help, and rather than lending us aid they CHARGED us for weaponry.. the country was trying to fight a war that ment the survival of the people; and rather than helping like an ally, or better still a so-called friend nation should. Britian was charged for every gun, tank, ammo, etc...
Until they were attacked during Perl Harbour they refused to lift a finger to help. Despite the fact that although Britian didn't need to fight, they did so anyway because it was the right thing to do.
Hear stuff like 'oh without the United States France would be German right now'.. The french government may have surrended and let an occupation happen, but this was to have as few casualties as possible. France had neither the natural protection, nor did they have the armed forces to fight an all out war. That said, the Resistance WERE the key to the Western-side victories. Without thier information and lives given things would've been much worse.
They acted as an early warning system for Britian, they marked the movements of the Germans throughout thier region.
France may have surrended but it doesn't mean they ever gave up hope, and it doesn't mean they didn't fight any less than any other nation.
..
That is my whole problem here. It's just a self-centered culture that cares nothing for those outside thier own boarders, but are willing to get cosey to get thier way. Maybe it is just my stubborn English pride; but tht just ticks me off.
And you can keep trying to claim i'm some pathological liar, or i'm spouting non-sensical ravings, or whatever. Choose to deal with what I'm saying however you want.. just stands as a fact that you can't handle some real home truths.
