Is America treating the UK like a colony?

janfebmar

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

Sweet mercy people actually buy the utter shite Trump sells. The Americans told Britain to get the fuck out of Suez not long after WWII and they did exactly as they were told. Some 'alliance' that is.

Suez in 1956 was a lot more complicated than that, and France and Israel were involved there too. The special relationship soon healed though, with Britain's first Hydrogen bomb test Operation Grapple which led to the 1958 U.S.–UK Mutual Defence Agreement. Six years after the crisis, the Americans amazed the British by selling them state-of-the-art missile technology at a moderate cost, which became the UK Polaris programme.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Suggesting the British are protecting us from the Russians and not themselves is almost as funny as...

It is not suggesting, it is stating. It came to light after 9/11 when then Fianna Fáil defense minister, Michael Smith, let slip in the Dáil that it was arranged the RAF would come to Ireland’s aid if there was a 9/11-like incident over Ireland.

Every now and again Russian military aircraft act the maggot and endanger our civilian aircraft / transatlantic planes by flying down off our west coast (Irish controlled airspace) with their transponders turned off. Norwegian military planes have to shadow the russian planes until our space, where UK planes take over, until the french in turn take over later on.

Quote: "the Russian flights, which are unannounced, do have the potential of causing a hazard to civil aviation." A pair of Russian TU-95 “Bears” appeared on British radars as they flew in an arc that took them on a flight path off Ireland’s west coast.

Subsequent reports stated that their transponders were switched off.

In contrast to civilian airliners, the Russians were not making it easy for other aircraft in the vicinity to be aware of their presence.

The RAF knew and duly sent up its Typhoon interceptors.

The bears looped around Ireland’s south coast and headed for the English Channel with the British fighters as close company.

Nobody panicked or fired a shot. Nobody was hurt, though Irish pride was somewhat dented.

The Bears had not penetrated sovereign airspace, but they had crossed through the Irish-controlled airspace, a much larger area in which civil aviation is the responsibility of the Republic’s air traffic control system."

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

It is not suggesting, it is stating. It came to light after 9/11 when then Fianna Fáil defense minister, Michael Smith, let slip in the Dáil that it was arranged the RAF would come to Ireland’s aid if there was a 9/11-like incident over Ireland.

Every now and again Russian military aircraft act the maggot and endanger our civilian aircraft / transatlantic planes by flying down off our west coast (Irish controlled airspace) with their transponders turned off. Norwegian military planes have to shadow the russian planes until our space, where UK planes take over, until the french in turn take over later on.

Quote: "the Russian flights, which are unannounced, do have the potential of causing a hazard to civil aviation." A pair of Russian TU-95 “Bears” appeared on British radars as they flew in an arc that took them on a flight path off Ireland’s west coast.

Subsequent reports stated that their transponders were switched off.

In contrast to civilian airliners, the Russians were not making it easy for other aircraft in the vicinity to be aware of their presence.

The RAF knew and duly sent up its Typhoon interceptors.

The bears looped around Ireland’s south coast and headed for the English Channel with the British fighters as close company.

Nobody panicked or fired a shot. Nobody was hurt, though Irish pride was somewhat dented.

The Bears had not penetrated sovereign airspace, but they had crossed through the Irish-controlled airspace, a much larger area in which civil aviation is the responsibility of the Republic’s air traffic control system."

No amount of 'defence' could have prevented a surprise attack like 9-11.

What protects against something like that is co-operation, sharing intel and being in a mutually protective union...not going off on a sulk because you can't get your own way and unicorns.

odyssey06

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No amount of 'defence' could have prevented a surprise attack like 9-11.

What protects against something like that is co-operation, sharing intel and being in a mutually protective union...not going off on a sulk because you can't get your own way and unicorns.

Mutually protective union which defends against nothing. Think you are confusing it with NATO.

Unicorn right there. Or is unicorn the codename for a new russian warplane?

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

No amount of 'defence' could have prevented a surprise attack like 9-11.

Nobody said it could. However since then security has been tightened up and the US is no longer soft on terror. Even people with suspected past connections are checked. Adams himself says "“Some of our political representatives have been denied access to the USA while others, including myself, have to regularly go through additional searches and scrutiny when we travel to and from the USA.” At the entrance to an event in the US a few years ago, Adams was pulled aside from the Sinn Féin visiting party by security personnel who examined his documents. After he was left waiting for 90 minutes while his passport was checked, Adams decided to leave the event entrance when it appeared there was no resolution.

Berserker

Berserker wrote: »

Every US president in my living memory has sold weapons to anyone and everyone.

In 1979 the US State Department banned arms sales to the British state in the Six Counties. Apparently that state's servants had been torturing the native Irish, and some people over in America decided to do something about it. Lovely to see such American defence of human rights, eh Berserker?

Source: [url=https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.3318/isia.2014.25.1?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents[/url]Here[/url], here and here.

Timberrrrrrrr

odyssey06 wrote: »

Sense of perspective here on when the red carpet was rolled out for Romanian dictator Nicolae Ceausescu as part of a British Airways trade deal...
https://www.spectator.co.uk/2019/06/why-ceausescus-1978-state-visit-was-far-more-humiliating-than-trumps-ever-could-be/

At least this time the red carpet is being rolled out for the USA!

Except there was no red carpet for trump :pac:

https://www.express.co.uk/videos/6043913617001/Trump-visit-President-has-no-red-carpet-laid-for-UK-arrival

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

Nobody said it could. .

So why bring it up then?

told the Dáil that it was arranged the RAF would come to Ireland’s aid if there was a 9/11-like incident over Ireland.

Britain is in our air space to protect itself. Catch yourself on..

odyssey06

Timberrrrrrrr wrote: »

Except there was no red carpet for trump :pac:

https://www.express.co.uk/videos/6043913617001/Trump-visit-President-has-no-red-carpet-laid-for-UK-arrival

Some sort of underling is about to have an exciting career opportunity in South Georgia. The island.

janfebmar

janfebmar wrote: »

The US President called the US-UK "special relationship" the "greatest alliance the world has ever known."
Actually when you think about it, and look today at the 75 anniversary of the D-day landings, it probably is.

Trump also said Britain and the US would be able to strike a "phenomenal trade deal" once the UK left the European Union.
He also said to Teresa May "I would have sued (the EU) and settled maybe. Perhaps you won't be given the credit you deserve". Interesting times.

But... but... Trump's a complete fúcking moron. What sort of person would quote him approvingly? I live in Ireland and I've yet to meet a single person who would. He's treated like the imbecile son of a local neighbour, about whom you don't wish to say anything negative out of respect for your neighbour.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Britain is in our air space to protect itself. Catch yourself on..

It is also, for example, in the instances above, protecting civilian airlines in our Irish controlled airspace, from crashing in to the Russian military aircraft who have their transponders turned off. So protecting everyone, because we cannot protect ourselves.

janfebmar

Deleted User wrote: »

But... but... Trump's a complete fúcking moron.

Show me a US president or even politician against who criticisms cannot be made. I still would respect and trust the USA a hell of a lot more than China or Russia.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

It is also, for example, in the instances above, protecting civilian airlines in our Irish controlled airspace, from crashing in to the Russian military aircraft who have their transponders turned off. So protecting everyone, because we cannot protect ourselves.

The Russian jets they intercepted were enroute to British airspace Jan. They were protecting themselves...we are collateral protection, to coin a phrase.

weldoninhio

janfebmar wrote: »

It is also, for example, in the instances above, protecting civilian airlines in our Irish controlled airspace, from crashing in to the Russian military aircraft who have their transponders turned off. So protecting everyone, because we cannot protect ourselves.

Unless the Russians are recruiting kamikaze pilots, I’m sure they’d be able to see other aircraft on their radar and keep clear of them.

Also hilarious to see people quoting some political about a 9/11 attempt in Ireland. We’d have time to build a fleet of aircraft before Mohammed and friends could find something tall enough to crash into in Ireland.

kingchess

janfebmar wrote: »

It is also, for example, in the instances above, protecting civilian airlines in our Irish controlled airspace, from crashing in to the Russian military aircraft who have their transponders turned off. So protecting everyone, because we cannot protect ourselves.

Out of curiosity but why would 2 Russian pilots want to kill themselves and their crews by letting passenger planes crash into them???

janfebmar

kingchess wrote: »

Out of curiosity but why would 2 Russian pilots want to kill themselves and their crews by letting passenger planes crash into them???

Accidents can happen. That is why the Norwegians, and the British, and the French, shadow them in their own military aircraft with their transponders turned on, unlike the Russians.

What were the Russian doing flying off the coast of Galway do you think? Trying to pick up radio na Gaeltacht?

DEFTLEFTHAND

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

The brits have a knack of always coming out on top in the long run.

This is plainly wishful thinking. 'Decline' not 'success' has by any measure been the dominant theme of Britain's economy for the past century. It has been in decline since at least the end of the 19th century. By 1919 it was far behind many advanced countries, most noticeably Germany, where the 2nd industrial revolution based on chemicals had propelled Germany ahead of Britain by 1900. The US and Japan were also significantly ahead of it as they had modernised later while Britain rested on her laurels.

Economically, Britain had not modernised when even countries like Poland was more advanced (most obviously in its mining technology) and because Britain had millions upon millions of workers engaged in mining, textiles and shipbuilding this more efficient foreign competition seriously undermined any post-WWI British attempts to put economic substance behind its world power claims.
Even France, which unlike Britain had WWI on its soil and was therefore almost totally ruined (especially in northern France) by 1919, had passed Britain by in modernisation terms by 1929 (as they had to start from scratch in 1919). Ironically, Britain's only economic rebirth since 1919 has been during its EU membership when it recast itself as a financial services economy and had far more global economic success. Like so much else, that piece of history will not get into any Brexiteer guide to English history.

And that's just the economic decline of the British state. Politically, even though Britain was on the winning side after two world wars, in both cases it was the indisputable loser on the winning side (and the US the winner). Heavily in debt, and using much of its post-WWII borrowed money to maintain a world power status through its rapidly crumbling Empire. That political decline since 1919, even though it received Ottoman and German lands immediately after WWI, should be obvious to even the most obdurate Brexiteer. It shaped its decision to collaborate with/appease Nazi Germany for six years until September 1939, it shaped it in Greece in 1947, in Suez in 1956 and in so many other places.

In very, very many respects it could be argued that Brexit is forcing the state to belatedly reflect economic realities of a much weaker English national economy rather than of a global British Empire world power economy.

DEFTLEFTHAND

DEFTLEFTHAND wrote: »

The EU will eventually implode without serious reform. Where are we at then?

In the meantime not having any sort of ally in the Union worries me a lot. I've a feeling that we're going to get rolled. Eventual tax harmonisation in particular is going to sting badly.

Right there is that absolutely bizarre anglocentric mentality which declares "The EU will implode", as if this is a surprising or original observation. Every state in the history of the world has 'imploded'. Only in the decidedly limited intelligence of the Brexit mind could this be considered incisive. That is the nature of all states. No exception.

The British state which its apologists go on as if it's some eternal entity can only be dated to 6 December 1922 in its current form. That's nothing. All my grandparents were born in the 19th century, one of whom was born in 1897 lived with us growing up in the 1980s. But the benighted morons who go on about the British state and resisting the EU haven't a fúcking iota about their own country's history and how it has evolved - never mind basic cop-on ideas like nothing lasts forever.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

What were the Russian doing flying off the coast of Galway do you think? Trying to pick up radio na Gaeltacht?

Playing chicken with British jets, who are stupid enough to play with them...what if a British pilot made a mistake and came down in Galway city?

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

Playing chicken with British jets, who are stupid enough to play with them...what if a British pilot made a mistake and came down in Galway city?

The British pilots were nowhere near Galway city. Much more likely was a pair of high speed Russian military aircraft with transponders turned off interfering with civilian aircraft off our coasts.

kingchess

janfebmar wrote: »

Accidents can happen. That is why the Norwegians, and the British, and the French, shadow them in their own military aircraft with their transponders turned on, unlike the Russians.

What were the Russian doing flying off the coast of Galway do you think? Trying to pick up radio na Gaeltacht?

You reckon they were playing Russian roulette?,and praying that aer lingus might put them out of their misery, I reckon they were testing the responses of the Norwegians,and the British and the French,A bit like Gary Power and the U-2 spy plane that was flying over Russia in 1960 and the Russians shot down,
I suppose if the sauce is good enough for the goose it should be good enough for the gander.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

The British pilots were nowhere near Galway city. Much more likely was a pair of high speed Russian military aircraft with transponders turned off interfering with civilian aircraft off our coasts.

You do know that another FF minister demanded to know why neither the Russians nor the British informed Irish aviation authorities that they were in Irish controlled airspace, both posing a threat to civilian aircraft as a result?

Timmy Dooley wrote:

The Russian and British unauthorized entry into Irish airspace had posed a threat, not only to Irish air passengers but to thousands of people flying from Europe to the United States. ''These maneuvers,” he said, “were not sanctioned by the Irish Aviation Authority and had put Irish air traffic controllers in the invidious position of not being able to carry out their duties effectively. This should not be tolerated.”

Aegir

Aegir wrote: »

so you are saying that Ireland does need air defence?

If so, then why does it hide behind the UK?

It's always so ineffably heartening to see Boards' most staunch defenders of the Realm concerned about Ireland's defence - now against the big, bad Russians. At other times, such as in 1601, we were expected to be grateful to the English for "defending" us from the Spaniards and at still other times, such as the 1790s, we were expected to be grateful for England defending us from those evil revolutionary French and their crazy ideas arriving in Ireland. Such genuine English concern for us, not for themselves of course.
As for this "Support Britain or the Russians will come for you", it all sounds very familiar so here's a modern twist on the Irish response to that plea for our loyalty to England: 'We serve neither Putin nor Brexit, but Ireland'.

Fan of Netflix

Quite amazing how the resident loyalists, Rangers fans and Brit army cheerleaders are so quick into these threads.

janfebmar

FrancieBrady wrote: »

You do know that another FF minister demanded to know why neither the Russians nor the British informed Irish aviation authorities that they were in Irish controlled airspace, both posing a threat to civilian aircraft as a result?

From the same FF government who asked the UK to defend Ireland from 9/11 type attacks? The British planes were scrambled to intercept planes without transponders. The UK planes had transponders so civilian aircraft were aware of their presence.

Anyway, back to something closer to the subject of the thread, would you agree with the US President when he called the US-UK "special relationship" the "greatest alliance the world has ever known"? If not, what alliance do you think was greater in world history?

janfebmar

janfebmar wrote: »

would you agree with the US President when he called the US-UK "special relationship" the "greatest alliance the world has ever known"? If not, what alliance do you think was greater in world history?

The British-Nazi Germany one was fairly strong back in 1935 whem both countries signed the Anglo-German Naval Agreement, in fairness (never mind those Nuremberg Laws being passed in the same year or that the French and Stresa Front were undermined by the British signing this - the British economy needed the business!)

Franz Von Peppercorn II

janfebmar wrote: »

From the same FF government who asked the UK to defend Ireland from 9/11 type attacks? The British planes were scrambled to intercept planes without transponders. The UK planes had transponders so civilian aircraft were aware of their presence.

Anyway, back to something closer to the subject of the thread, would you agree with the US President when he called the US-UK "special relationship" the "greatest alliance the world has ever known"? If not, what alliance do you think was greater in world history?

There’s no special alliance. Ask people in the US and they would have no clue. If you told them it was a foreign relationship they’d assume us/Israel.

FrancieBrady

janfebmar wrote: »

From the same FF government who asked the UK to defend Ireland from 9/11 type attacks? The British planes were scrambled to intercept planes without transponders. The UK planes had transponders so civilian aircraft were aware of their presence.

Anyway, back to something closer to the subject of the thread, would you agree with the US President when he called the US-UK "special relationship" the "greatest alliance the world has ever known"? If not, what alliance do you think was greater in world history?

The subject is 'Is America treating the UK like a colony?', I think that it is quite evident for some time that Britain is America's colony in Europe. They do everything they are asked to do. They will get a 'great' deal, problem is it will be a great deal for America, overseen by the man who wants to make America 'great' again, after all.

janfebmar

Franz Von Peppercorn II wrote: »

There’s no special alliance. Ask people in the US and they would have no clue.

You'd be surprised. Tomorrow for example they will be getting a lot of media from their President in Normandy, on the anniversary of the D-day landings. Many American families had family members who served in WW2, and the UK was their ally. Where they based their forces before the invasion of mainland Europe. And of course the US and UK were allies in the cold war, Gulf War 1 and 2, the war on terror etc.

janfebmar

Deleted User wrote: »

The British-Nazi Germany one was fairly strong back in 1935 whem both countries signed the Anglo-German Naval Agreement, in fairness

lol. The 1935 Anglo-German Naval Agreement between the United Kingdom and Germany regulated the size of the Kriegsmarine in relation to the Royal Navy. The Anglo-German Naval Agreement fixed a ratio whereby the total tonnage of the Kriegsmarine was to be maximum 35% of the total tonnage of the Royal Navy on a permanent basis. The Royal Navy was then the worlds largest and most powerful navy. At the onset of World War II it was still the world's largest.