So Dubya is the first President to call for a Palestinian State? Whoopdi-doo! How about he does something proactive then? Like applying political pressure on Israel to stop their illegal land grab? As opposed to jabbering on about a 'road map to peace'.

As for referencing the Prince Charles ban, it proves nothing beyond the fact that whilst the US is quite happy to take us to war (seriously damaging our relations with several European countries), ask our help in policing a Saddam-free Iraq (at a cost to the treasury of £5M a day), seriously harm our remaining steel industry by levying illegal tariffs and to let us pay the hefty bill for an expensive, resource-consuming, ill-timed and needless state visit, we are far too afraid to even run the risk of offending the US by sending over there someone with a dissenting view.

Last time we seriously annoyed the US incidentally, they petulantly refused to back our excursion into Egypt due to the disagreement over the privatisation of the Suez Canal, simply because they didn't like the fact that another country in this world might have considered taking military action without first consulting them. The Suez Crisis of course, was the catalyst that led to the break-up of the British Empire. Oh yes, and after then-President Eisenhower had retired he admitted that we were in the right over the whole affair. Which was nice of him.

1. You first raised the point regarding Bush and Palestine. I merely commented on America's lack of action to back up their calls for peace. Yes, no other country has particlarly distinguished themselves when it comes to dealing with the problems in the West Bank, but I didn't say that the US has the worst track record, nor did I claim that the EU has better dealt the conflict.

2. It is entirely possible to view Suez as Britain's last fling of the imperial dice; the motivation for intervention in Egypt can be attributed to the sense of moral and military superiority that had accreted in the centuries of imperial expansion. However, you must remember that at the time, however odd it seems now to us, there was a widespread and genuine feeling that Britain had responsibilities in its empire to protect its people from all forms of demagoguery. Also, Britain was at the time very much a trading nation, with a vital interest in the free passage of goods and the abrupt nationalisation of the Suez Canal Company posed a genuine threat to British economic interests -for instance, we were almost entirely dependant on the Suez Canal for the transport of our oil imports, two-thirds of which was delivered by this route. And the British invasion only ever had one official purpose anyway- to stop conflict between the Israeli invasion forces (who had swept into the Sinai Desert on September 29) and the Egyptian army - to which end the operation was an admirable success.

And I certainly didn't imply that "imperialist expeditions in other countries are ok then if we are doing them without the USA?" I was simply pointing out that fact that our two countries' so-called two-way relationship is anything but symbiotic.

3. Yes, a few countries had already gained independence from Britain prior to the Suez Crisis but they are exceptions to the rule, and it is widely held that decolonisation did not begin in earnest until after Eden resigned and Harold Macmillan came to Downing Street. Keen to to put to bed the days of the empire and promote ties with Europe, it was he who appointed a minister who was to oversee the process of decolonisation. Perhaps you had not noticed the slew of countries far outnumbering those that left the empire prior to Suez, that were granted independence in the 6 or 7 years following the crisis?

As for me wishing Britain was an imperialist power again, nothing could be further from the truth. I firmly believe that we have far too many domestic issues that need resolving before we go conquering the world and showing the 'wogs' what's what again, old boy, don't you know?

And I am not anti-American, merely anti-American-system-of-government. Because,quite simply, I don't see how the spoils system has any place in a modern democracy.

Edited by the despotic banana (19 Nov 2003 5:03pm)

*sigh* wish i was there with all the trouble making crusties! (judging by this pic - bet some of you guys wish you were there too!)

[Link]

Edited by Bexter (20 Nov 2003 3:14pm)

It also demonstrates an earlier point. That the Socialist Workers hijack demos for their own publicity.

They're all dykes anyway.

That's the point, it's a good old beano! Highlight of the month for these guys/gals. Let's get them down Selhurst for a Jordan Out march. Would they come, nah he's not a powerful American.