Thread: Lines in the Sand Board: Purgatory / Ship of Fools.


To visit this thread, use this URL:
http://forum.ship-of-fools.com/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic;f=2;t=020286

Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on :
 
How overtly facist would Trump have to be, that a political consensus would emerge in the UK that relying on the US is no longer in Britain's best interests ?

What would have to happen ?

For example, do we think that an attempt to intern the 800,000 DACA folks would be sufficient, or the shutting down of a newspaper ?

It is just I notice we are staying pretty quiet on Turkey's slide into the abyss.
 
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on :
 
Or is it just the case that this nuclear superpower will always be considered a better ally than Russia or China ?
 
Posted by Crœsos (# 238) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
How overtly facist would Trump have to be, that a political consensus would emerge in the UK that relying on the US is no longer in Britain's best interests ?

Historically, alliances are about reliability in pursuing shared interests, not shared values or approval of the internal politics of your allies. For example, the UK was perfectly willing to team up with Estado Novo-era Portugal as a fellow member of NATO, largely because whatever their failings in the areas of human rights they were considered reliable in terms of deterring the Soviet Union.

Of course the U.S. has always (with "always" in this case meaning "since World War II") made its promotion of democracy and human rights one of its selling points to its allies. This was always imperfect and sometimes was more theoretical than actual, but it was advanced as a selling point of allying with the U.S. Trump seems to be abandoning this longstanding position, so I guess it makes sense an alliance sold at least partially on those terms may be re-evaluated.
 
Posted by quetzalcoatl (# 16740) on :
 
It would depend on one's political views, wouldn't it? I would think that UK right wingers would be OK with very right wing US stuff, and the left not.
 
Posted by rolyn (# 16840) on :
 
Alliances tend to be formed between a Rock or a hard place. The alliance with Russia during WW2 is a good as an example of that as you could wish to find.

Britain is in no position to be telling America what it should or shouldn't be doing. Yes, we could distance ourselves on matter of principle. However, the day could return when we have to again call across the Atlantic because a greater peril has appeared on the Eastern horizon.
 
Posted by Schroedinger's cat (# 64) on :
 
There are some of us who think that Trump has already gone way to far, and we should break our alliance.

The question is, when will the political elite decide that the aliance is no longer politically good (for them, of course. They generally don't care about the rest of us). So the answer is a long way.
 
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by rolyn:
Alliances tend to be formed between a Rock or a hard place. The alliance with Russia during WW2 is a good as an example of that as you could wish to find.

Britain is in no position to be telling America what it should or shouldn't be doing. Yes, we could distance ourselves on matter of principle. However, the day could return when we have to again call across the Atlantic because a greater peril has appeared on the Eastern horizon.

If we accept morally bankrupt allies, and realistically we probably do - why would a Nazi America be better than a semi-communist China ?

Especially if the US becomes an erratic and unreliable ally under Trump.

[ 06. September 2017, 19:58: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
 
Posted by Gramps49 (# 16378) on :
 
The good news is Trump will be out of office within four years. Hang in there, the new people will be much better.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
Nobody batted an eyelid during McCarthyism, as far as I'm aware, and Trump hasn't gone as far as that yet. But Croesos is right about the real reason for alliances - pursuing shared interest.

On the question of human rights, the US has a long way to go before it enters the league of China, Russia and Turkey. If it does go that far, why would we switch from one ally to another equally as bad or worse? I note that I'm looking at things from Australia's perspective. We are only in Eurovision, not the EU.

Oh... hang on ... you guys might be in a spot of bother if those exit negotiations break down. But I'm sure you've got nothing to worry about with David Davis the Brexit Bulldog on the job. As Dead Ringers Davis says, "When in Rome ..... don't use the toilets." [Devil]
 
Posted by Galloping Granny (# 13814) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Schroedinger's cat:
There are some of us who think that Trump has already gone way to far, and we should break our alliance.

The question is, when will the political elite decide that the aliance is no longer politically good (for them, of course. They generally don't care about the rest of us). So the answer is a long way.

Actually it's the political elite that worry me.
To begin with, I thought surely no responsible people will vote for that clown when Hilary is so obviously competent.
And then gradually I found myself seeing a kind of supremely confident group of people wanting Hilary in so that their position was assured and for the first time I wondered if the conspiracy theory about the Illuminati that we'd laughed at was actually true.

GG
 
Posted by no prophet's flag is set so... (# 15560) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Gramps49:
The good news is Trump will be out of office within four years. Hang in there, the new people will be much better.

A very nice American fellow said something parallel to this while were on a ferry from Nova Scotia to Newfoundland, an 8 hour trip. We discussed the state of the world and assured me that the defective Bush president wouldn't be re-elected. It was late July 2001.

My American sister and my American friends said reassuring things before your last election as well about the merits of a less odorous Hillary over the full toilet you elected. So I don't believe you.
 
Posted by Russ (# 120) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:

It is just I notice we are staying pretty quiet on Turkey's slide into the abyss.

Has well-meaning condemnation by other nations ever achieved anything in the way of persuading democratically-elected governments to behave better within their own borders ?

Just asking...
 
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on :
 
Poland, for a given value of elected government.
 
Posted by simontoad (# 18096) on :
 
It might in America, in the medium term [Smile]
 
Posted by Russ (# 120) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Poland, for a given value of elected government.

Wasn't that international recognition for the Solidarity movement within Poland, rather than international criticism of Poland as such ?
 
Posted by Doublethink. (# 1984) on :
 
quote:
Originally posted by Russ:
quote:
Originally posted by Doublethink.:
Poland, for a given value of elected government.

Wasn't that international recognition for the Solidarity movement within Poland, rather than international criticism of Poland as such ?
Messages of support were sent by international leaders to what was, effectively, the resistance. In both the US and Turkey there are large numbers of people attempting to resist the onset of dictatorship.

Also international pressure had an impact on the transition in Tunisia.

[ 09. September 2017, 15:22: Message edited by: Doublethink. ]
 


© Ship of Fools 2016

Powered by Infopop Corporation
UBB.classicTM 6.5.0