NationStates Jolt Archive

Which nation do you believe is the closest US ally in terms of past wars and geopolitical considerations?

Probably Great Britain

Probably Great Britain

By all means GB!
Australia of course and though we won't admit it..........canada......

;)

Canada is the closest, geophysically. So, Canada.

It depends upon which country Bush needs in time of crisis and then they become"our bestest friends in the whole wide world".In reality its probably Britain or Canada but of course Britain has more use to the US in Europe and world affairs. :fluffle: Bush and Blair in perfect harmony.

I think the United Kingdom is the staunchest ally the U.S. has. According to the CIA's descriptions of countries, the relationship between the U.K.'s relationship with the U.S. was described at one time as "special."

From my point of view as a Briton:

The UK is the US' most reliable ally.

Israel is the ally the US values and supports the most.

The U.S does not need an ally just someone to back them up in UN votes

you left Israel off the poll.

I'll cast my vote for Canada. Historically, we've been on wonderful terms with Canada. The US-Canadian border is a continual example of trust between the two nations.

The UK government, I'm ashamed to say.

It has to be the United Kingdom. Although the UK should try to ally itself more with europe imo

you left Israel off the poll. Yes I did. Mainly due to the fact Israel has caused alot of trouble for the US in the past.

The relationship hardly works both ways.

Agreed 100%, Britain should look to Europe - and let's see the back of Teflon Tony!

It has to be the United Kingdom. Although the UK should try to ally itself more with europe imo

Because the rest of old Europe really backed the UK on Iraq? The UK and the US speak the same language, hold similiar values and come from the same traditions as the US is a fromer part of the British Empire. It seems the UK has alot more in common with the US than say France or Germany.

Canada - they're right next door...

The UK of course.
It is hard to see any difference between Britain and the US at all. Britain is the closest and most loyal junior partner of the US.

Israel has caused America no problems.
on the contrary, when Israel wanted to kill Sheikh Yassin the Americans gave them military helicopters to do it. as soon as Israel did it the Americans were first to condemn it.
*coughBushisanidiotcough*

I would have to say the UK but we're (Canada) a close second.

Britian and America aren't allies. that would require both giving ideas and then the best idea is acted upon. not a "let's follow the bigger idiot" contest (America wins every time)

The UK and the US speak the same language, hold similiar values and come from the same traditions as the US is a fromer part of the British Empire. It seems quite a portion of the former British empire has stuck together e.g. US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand

I voted other, it is a tie between Cuba and North Korea

I voted other, it is a tie between Cuba and North Korea
you forgot Afganistan!!!

I'd have to say the UK. Have we ever been hostile after 1900?

I think it's Australia. The U.K. would be the other logical answer. However, I think only Tony Blair's government is the true friend and not the majority British people.

The Australian government is a U.S. friend and I believe many more people in Australia (as compraed to the UK) are in favor of the U.S. I also think that the way of life/standard of living in Australia is very similar to that of the U.S.

I would have to say the UK but we're (Canada) a close second.

Probably, although I would lean toward Israel and Japan as well. Followed closely by France and germany....er, nevermind.... :D

Britian and America aren't allies. that would require both giving ideas and then the best idea is acted upon. not a "let's follow the bigger idiot" contest (America wins every time)
Well: The US is the most powerful country in the world. So every ally can only be a junior partner.

By the way: I would say that Australia is the second closests ally after Britain. There is this anglo-saxon connection.
Canada is far away from that. Probably due to the "evil French" influence within the country.

I'd have to say the UK. Have we ever been hostile after 1900?

Kind of....the global arms race between WW1 and WW2 put tension between us.

Canada - they're right next door...


Yes, Canada is right next door, but aside from that the two nations have a lot in common (except for the US' stupidity), The US has influenced Canada in a lot of ways ,ie, the Cold War, etc. Canada is also Americas largest trading partner (it is also the same the other way arround) and it was Canada that got the USA into NATO!

Britain aren't even junior allies. Blair lives to cover up for every one of Bush's mistakes, and that's a lot of work:) added to that that the British people don't even like America.

why are Japan on the poll but not Israel??? some kind of political statement??

Well: The US is the most powerful country in the world. So every ally can only be a junior partner.
That's the problem, isn't it? When it comes to boots-on-the-ground use of force, I'd have to agree with you, but that's not all an alliance is about. It's also about developing policy and actions so that you don't have to use force. It's about listening to good advice, checking each other's facts against your own and making sure there's a real understanding before taking action. Our allies who have less brute power still have intelligence and wisdom worth listening to without prejudice.

We need - we deserve - a government that does a better job of that than we've been getting the past three years.

I'd have to say the UK. Have we ever been hostile after 1900? The British invasion of Egypt in 1956 really annoyed the US, especially after the Soviets started threatening intervention to protect Nasser.

It seems quite a portion of the former British empire has stuck together e.g. US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand

It's called the commonwealth. Except for the US, that is.

why are Japan on the poll but not Israel??? some kind of political statement?? Israel is a liability for the US.

I could have included a bunch of other nations but I decided only to include the core ones.

It's called the commonwealth. Except for the US, that is. Pakistan is in the Commonwealth but that nation is no stable ally of the West.

Even old Mugabe was in the Commonwealth up until last year or something.

Well, prior to Bush taking office, the USA and Canada were considered the closet allies and the best friends. The UK only became a closer ally to the US then Canada after Blair gave unquestioning support to Bush. Lets not forget who did the most for the US on 9/11, it wasn't the UK, it was Canada.

The British invasion of Egypt in 1956 really annoyed the US, especially after the Soviets started threatening intervention to protect Nasser.
Well, we all have blips in our foreign relations, don't we?

Israel is a liability for the US.

I could have included a bunch of other nations but I decided only to include the core ones.

Japan? South Korea? i have no idea where you got them. a lucky dip maybe??? South Korea can't spare the Americans anything because everyone is at the DMZ. you can see what people thought of those two by the amount of votes they got. well Israel's a liability, prove it. WE bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor 22 years ago, WE freed all the hostages in the Ethiopian airport. anything else. oh yeah every time America goes to war they use Israeli intelligence because it is the best in the world. every war except Iraq. result??? judge for yourselves.

That's the problem, isn't it? When it comes to boots-on-the-ground use of force, I'd have to agree with you, but that's not all an alliance is about. It's also about developing policy and actions so that you don't have to use force. It's about listening to good advice, checking each other's facts against your own and making sure there's a real understanding before taking action. Our allies who have less brute power still have intelligence and wisdom worth listening to without prejudice.

We need - we deserve - a government that does a better job of that than we've been getting the past three years.

Total war is when a nation uses everything in its arsenel to destroy the enemy, such as troops, tanks, WMD's etc.

Beleve it or not, it is not the USA (11,000 nukes) with the largest nuclear stock-pile, but Russia (26,000+)...

So, in theroy, if the two countries went to war, Russia would win. But if they were to use their nukes in reality, it would result in a stalemate, in which the world would be blown to kingdom-come!

But, interms of 'useable power,' ie, troops, technology and tanks ('boots on the ground'), the USA would win., but it would be a long hard war, in which both sides may become bogged down. So after this war, the entire US military would be depleted and anyone would beable to attack the US and win!

The US military has superior equipment ,in most cases, but the Russian military is better trained and larger than the US military.

Israel's a liability, prove it. WE bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor 22 years ago, WE freed all the hostages in the Ethiopian airport. anything else. oh yeah every time America goes to war they use Israeli intelligence because it is the best in the world. every war except Iraq. result??? judge for yourselves.

Perhaps, however the US finds it's self in the trouble they are today in large part because of their support of Israel. I would have to agree that based on that support Israel is more of a liability to the US then an asset. Certainly not saying Israel has never done any thing to help the US. However I believe that Israel in the times we live in now, the cons far out-weigh the pros.

Japan? South Korea? i have no idea where you got them. a lucky dip maybe??? South Korea can't spare the Americans anything because everyone is at the DMZ. you can see what people thought of those two by the amount of votes they got. well Israel's a liability, prove it. WE bombed the Iraqi nuclear reactor 22 years ago, WE freed all the hostages in the Ethiopian airport. anything else. oh yeah every time America goes to war they use Israeli intelligence because it is the best in the world. every war except Iraq. result??? judge for yourselves. Israel receives something like 4 billion a year in aid from the US. What does the US receive in return? Sharon won't even accept Bush's Roadmap!

It was Israel that ignored US warnings in 1967 and began a war that led the world to the brink of nuclear war (yes, the Soviets were preparing to bomb Israel in retaliation for Israel's attack on the Golan Heights).

I don't think Israel has ever quite explained the USS Liberty incident fully either.

The US military has superior equipment ,in most cases, but the Russian military is better trained and larger than the US military.

The Russian military is better trained? Where did you get that idea. Training costs money. As far as being larger, in terms of what are you Measuring?

The UK only became a closer ally to the US then Canada after Blair gave unquestioning support to Bush.
Unquestioning, maybe. Not without cost. Not without a little under-the-table payback. And if you're wondering what that payback is, ask yourself why Bush got the coldest reception from the Irish of any US official visitor in living memory.

It's because amid the sound and fury of chasing down Islamofascists, the Bush administration is very quietly cracking down on US support for Mr. Blair's little Irish problem.

Israel or Great Britain

Israel receives something like 4 billion a year in aid from the US. What does the US receive in return? Sharon won't even accept Bush's Roadmap!
And as long as Bush's roadmap includes a Palestinian right of "return," no Israeli will - or should.
It was Israel that ignored US warnings in 1967 and began a war that led the world to the brink of nuclear war
That would be because they couldn't ignore Nasser's blockade - a blatant act of war - nor the Arab troops massing on all borders.

The Russian military is better trained? Where did you get that idea. Training costs money. As far as being larger, in terms of what are you Measuring?

Everybody knows Russian soldiers are trained much better then U.S. soldiers.

Unquestioning, maybe. Not without cost. Not without a little under-the-table payback. And if you're wondering what that payback is, ask yourself why Bush got the coldest reception from the Irish of any US official visitor in living memory.

It's because amid the sound and fury of chasing down Islamofascists, the Bush administration is very quietly cracking down on US support for Mr. Blair's little Irish problem.

Ahhh, I had not thought of that. Nothing is free, that's for sure.

And as long as Bush's roadmap includes a Palestinian right of "return," no Israeli will - or should. Then why should US taxpayers provide Israel with billions in aid?

that war was actually one of Israels crowning moments, the US can't even defeat Iraq in half a year yet the Israelis defeated the Egyptians, Iraqis, Saudis, Lebanese and Jordanians in six days.

Then why should US taxpayers provide Israel with billions in aid?
Because Israel is a stable democracy. Because Israel doesn't fund indoctrination centers for anti-U.S. terrorists, in a region where every other government does. And because without Israel, the U.S. would be the only country in the world where Jews would feel safe from state-sanctioned persecution, and I don't think the U.S. political right wing wants that either, do they?

Then why should US taxpayers provide Israel with billions in aid?
to even the scale after Saudi Arabia and Iran donate billions and believe it or not, so do the british and Americans to the Arabs. all the stupid charities who believe that the palestinians are oppressed by the Jews so they send millions in aid which in turn goes to one of two places:
1)Arafats pocket
2)Iran in exchange for weapons

that war was actually one of Israels crowning moments, the US can't even defeat Iraq in half a year yet the Israelis defeated the Egyptians, Iraqis, Saudis, Lebanese and Jordanians in six days.
They didn't occupy those countries (Except part of Lebanon) like the USA is occupying Iraq. From what I've noticed in the past say three and a half decades, Israel's had a pretty tough time itself in the West Bank & Gaza. Militarily the US crushed Iraq just like Israel destroyed the other countries.

millions in aid which in turn goes to one of two places:
1)Arafats pocket
2)Iran in exchange for weapons
Don't forget 3) the families whose sons volunteer to blow up busloads of innocents.

Everybody knows Russian soldiers are trained much better then U.S. soldiers.

How do you figure? Russia can barely afford to maintain it's military, let alone train it.

Israel has caused America no problems.

Our "alliance" to them, has (to put it frankly), ticked off a lot of the Middle East, including Bin Laden - yet I can't blame the US for supporting Israel, being they are (politically) the most free country there. I just wish Ariel Sharon would leave, then I might not be so harsh towards them

How do you figure? Russia can barely afford to maintain it's military, let alone train it.

They have proved that time and time again, such as defeating 3000 french, led by Napolean.

And because without Israel, the U.S. would be the only country in the world where Jews would feel safe from state-sanctioned persecution, and I don't think the U.S. political right wing wants that either, do they?
That's bullshit of the highest order. There is plenty other places. Canada,for example. Also, with the patriot act, I'm not even sure that Jews feel safe from state-sanctioned persecution in the US.

Isreal.

Because Israel is a stable democracy. Sure, we'll just forget about the apartheid system that currently exists in Israel.

Because Israel doesn't fund indoctrination centers for anti-U.S. terrorists, in a region where every other government does. Well, I was unaware that Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, Oman and U.A.E. are sponsors of terrorism against the US. I thought they were US allies aswell?

And because without Israel, the U.S. would be the only country in the world where Jews would feel safe from state-sanctioned persecution, and I don't think the U.S. political right wing wants that either, do they? I'm not denying Israel's right to exist. I'm questioning the unconditional US support for Israel when it is unnecessarily dangerous.

They have proved that time and time again, such as defeating 3000 french, led by Napolean.

Um, what century are you in? Why would you possibly talk about Napolean and the modern Russian military? Why not talk about the beating they took by the Germans until the Russian winter in WW2....just as irrelevant. Hell, Napolean is even pre-Soviet Union, argueably the height of their military prowess. Since the fall of the USSR in the early 90s the former red army has crumbled. The US in fact pays for alot of the security of the Russian nuclear arsenal. I can promise you there are not many Napoleon era soldiers still around.... :D

I think the United Kingdom is the staunchest ally the U.S. has. According to the CIA's descriptions of countries, the relationship between the U.K.'s relationship with the U.S. was described at one time as "special."
"The special relationship" (quotes should go arround all of it) refers to the fact that both groupss speak the same language and are culturally very similar (compared to say China and the US). This meant that not only could basically the entire government of the US speak to anyone in the government of the UK, Australia & NZ, but that we knew each other would react similarily. While the language is still similar (although the US is becoming less English only) the cultural divide has increased to the point where the "the special relationship" no longer exists. And "the special realtionship" did include more than the UK, Australia and NZ being the most long lasting members, in fact "the special realtionship" can still be said to exist between Australia and the US.

That said, the closest ally of the US is not the UK but Canada, mostly because the UK has more power and therefore more interests which conflict with those of the US. The US is the major Canadian trade partner (by a lot) and nearly anything which is good for the US is good for Canada, meaning US interests are Canadian interests.

Um, what century are you in? Why would you possibly talk about Napolean and the modern Russian military? Why not talk about the beating they took by the Germans until the Russian winter in WW2....just as irrelevant. Hell, Napolean is even pre-Soviet Union, argueably the height of their military prowess. Since the fall of the USSR in the early 90s the former red army has crumbled. The US in fact pays for alot of the security of the Russian nuclear arsenal. I can promise you there are not many Napoleon era soldiers still around.... :D

Yes i know that but of course the Germans defeated Russians, they had bombs, tanks ie. that were better, we're talking infantry.

Our "alliance" to them, has (to put it frankly), ticked off a lot of the Middle East, including Bin Laden - yet I can't blame the US for supporting Israel, being they are (politically) the most free country there. I just wish Ariel Sharon would leave, then I might not be so harsh towards them
so you're saying that Bin Laden would have forgotten all about America if it wasn't for Israel???

so you're saying that Bin Laden would have forgotten all about America if it wasn't for Israel???

There are only two issues bin Laden had with America..

1) They were on holy land in Saudi - The Americans are no longer.

2) Their total support of Israel. - That still remains.

Those were his ONLY two beefs. You do the math.

es i know that but of course the Germans defeated Russians, they had bombs, tanks ie. that were better, we're talking infantry.

Go find a link to anything that talks about the superior training of the modern Russian soldier. You won't find one...Russia han't had the money to spare for more than just the most rudimentary training since the fall of the USSR. American soldiers train constantly.

Go find a link to anything that talks about the superior training of the modern Russian soldier. You won't find one...Russia han't had the money to spare for more than just the most rudimentary training since the fall of the USSR. American soldiers train constantly.

Yes but the russian troops are better trained in defending thier homeland, they are very well accostumed to it.

Before the attack of the Bushes, I'd say Canada is the closest, but now... I'm more inclined to believe that eitehr the UK or Israel.

Yes but the russian troops are better trained in defending thier homeland, they are very well accostumed to it. Russian troops have seen alot of action in Chechnya...

Russian troops have seen alot of action in Chechnya...

And have performed horribly.

Yes but the russian troops are better trained in defending thier homeland, they are very well accostumed to it.

Huh? Better trained in defending their homeland? Ok, that doesn't even make sense.

And have performed horribly.

I agree in that area.

Huh? Better trained in defending their homeland? Ok, that doesn't even make sense.

What i mean is they would take less losses in defending then in attacking then most other nations.

And have performed horribly. The second invasion of Chechnya in 1999 was a success from a military viewpoint.

Yes, Canada is right next door, but aside from that the two nations have a lot in common (except for the US' stupidity), The US has influenced Canada in a lot of ways ,ie, the Cold War, etc. Canada is also Americas largest trading partner (it is also the same the other way arround) and it was Canada that got the USA into NATO!

I never knew that. But in my opinion, it depends on the government. For example, if there was a really imperialistic U.S. government, Canadians wouldn't be a much of an ally.

There are only two issues bin Laden had with America..
1) They were on holy land in Saudi - The Americans are no longer.
2) Their total support of Israel. - That still remains.
Those were his ONLY two beefs. You do the math.
Bin Laden's ultimate goal is to set up a Muslim theocracy over the lands the Muslims held in their Golden Age, just before the Christian crusades, with himself as Caliph. The U.S., being the modern superpower, represents everything that Muslim fundamentalism deplores (equal rights for women, religious tolerance, free market capitalism) and so is a convenient scapegoat and focus for young Islamic men's rage and frustration.

It's not about Israel. It's about the Islamic world languishing while the modern industrialized world has prosperity and power.

It seems quite a portion of the former British empire has stuck together e.g. US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand

I dunno... the U.S. isn't even able to participate in the commonwealth games. Which, in my opinion, isn't really sticking together.

Israel is the United State's closest ally because Israel depends on the US for their survival.

Total war is when a nation uses everything in its arsenel to destroy the enemy, such as troops, tanks, WMD's etc.

Beleve it or not, it is not the USA (11,000 nukes) with the largest nuclear stock-pile, but Russia (26,000+)...

So, in theroy, if the two countries went to war, Russia would win. But if they were to use their nukes in reality, it would result in a stalemate, in which the world would be blown to kingdom-come!

But, interms of 'useable power,' ie, troops, technology and tanks ('boots on the ground'), the USA would win., but it would be a long hard war, in which both sides may become bogged down. So after this war, the entire US military would be depleted and anyone would beable to attack the US and win!

The US military has superior equipment ,in most cases, but the Russian military is better trained and larger than the US military.

But the Russians are destroying their nukes, the U.S. is just putting them in some underground facility at Cheyanne Mountain or something.

But the Russians are destroying their nukes, the U.S. is just putting them in some underground facility at Cheyanne Mountain or something.

And the US is actually paying for most of the destruction of Russian nukes as they don't have the money to pay to maintain them and they are just as afraid of terrorists getting them as we are.

Because Israel is a stable democracy. Because Israel doesn't fund indoctrination centers for anti-U.S. terrorists, in a region where every other government does. And because without Israel, the U.S. would be the only country in the world where Jews would feel safe from state-sanctioned persecution, and I don't think the U.S. political right wing wants that either, do they?

Lie. There's more than one free nation in the world.

Sure, we'll just forget about the apartheid system that currently exists in Israel. The West Bank and Gaza are no more Israel than Iraq is the U.S. There are Arabs living all over undisputed Israel and they have the same rights and protections as their Jewish neighbors.

Well, I was unaware that Qatar, Kuwait, Jordan, Egypt, Oman and U.A.E. are sponsors of terrorism against the US. I thought they were US allies aswell? To varying degrees, each funds wahabiist movements within their own countries - the madrasas that indoctrinate Muslim youth with hatred of everything Western and modern. That's where the violent fanatics are coming from.
I'm not denying Israel's right to exist. I'm questioning the unconditional US support for Israel when it is unnecessarily dangerous. And I'm not saying Israel is 100% right all the time. Sharon is, in many respects, a flaming idiot. But the fact remains that Israel is the only friend the US can rely upon in the region. The fact also remains that before Israel was established, every country in the world - every one, Canuck - turned Jewish refugees away when it was absolutely certain and widely known they would be killed if they went back where they came from. Fool me twice, shame on me.

France.


Sometimes your best real friend is the one that stands up and says "You look fucking awful wearing that shirt", instead of the lapdogs and yes-men that will approve whatever you do or say come hell or high water.

But the Russians are destroying their nukes, the U.S. is just putting them in some underground facility at Cheyanne Mountain or something.
The deal was that both sides keep something about 1500 nukes each. That is still enough to destroy the world several times.
So quite frankly it doesn´t make much sense to argue who would win this. Likely the US, but the world would be completly radiated.
A war between US-Russia is also very unlikely since both have actually common interests. Islamists terrorism is also a thread for Russia and the rising islamists movement effects the Caucasus (not just Chechenya also the russian republic Dagestan) and Central Asia and mainly the former Soviet Republics who are now members of the CIS(Community of independent states - a kind of Commonwealth which inludes 12 of 15 (all except the three baltic states) former Soviet Republics. Furthernmore the rise of China can be a thread for Russia as well. There is still a border dispute about a small little island at the Urumtchi (though most disputes were settled). However China needs more and more energy imports. So: Siberia is interesting for the Chinese. And it is very low populated. 20 million Russians in that region only. And after all 140 million people in Russia and 1,3 billion in China. So, the Russians are most interested in a strategic alliance with the US. The US is as well interested in containing China - like in the Taiwan question and in other issues as well.
Due to this common interests the US and Russia are going to be working together more closely in the future. That`s a given.

China is potentially the biggest geostrategic thread for the US.

France.


Sometimes your best real friend is the one that stands up and says "You look fucking awful wearing that shirt", instead of the lapdogs and yes-men that will approve whatever you do or say come hell or high water.

Good Point!

Jovianica, not trying to insult or flame you, but you're confusing Osama bin Laden with Ayotolla Khomani(sp). Bin Laden and Al-Qeda have a problem with American foregin policy (i.e. stationing troops in the Saudi Arabia, holiest place in Islam, blindly backing the Isralis, messing with the internal affairs of Arab nations, etc.), not this whole "freedom" and "way of life." That was Khomani. In fact, one of Al-Qeda's recruiting techniques is to make the people like they're one with their "Palistinian brothers." It should also be noted that other Islamic extremeist groups were turned off from Al-Qeda by this massive focus on the Palistinians. With the invasion and occupation of Iraq (the second holiest place in Islam) the U.S. has really helped increase Al-Qeda membership. (this is all from international relations experts, a CIA analyist and a Wall Street Journal article)

Lie. There's more than one free nation in the world.
Truth. Every free nation in the world turned the Jews away when it was widely known they were being sent back to slaughter.

Truth. In no other country but the U.S. and Israel are anti-Jewish hate crimes investigated and prosecuted aggressively. In France, frex, a Jew can be beaten half to death on national television and no one lifts a finger.

The West Bank and Gaza are no more Israel than Iraq is the U.S. There are Arabs living all over undisputed Israel and they have the same rights and protections as their Jewish neighbors.

To varying degrees, each funds wahabiist movements within their own countries - the madrasas that indoctrinate Muslim youth with hatred of everything Western and modern. That's where the violent fanatics are coming from.
And I'm not saying Israel is 100% right all the time. Sharon is, in many respects, a flaming idiot. But the fact remains that Israel is the only friend the US can rely upon in the region. The fact also remains that before Israel was established, every country in the world - every one, Canuck - turned Jewish refugees away when it was absolutely certain and widely known they would be killed if they went back where they came from. Fool me twice, shame on me.

You forgeting that that was a long time ago, not to mention the countries coudn't take that many people, because by then, jews that were afraid of Hitler ( I'm assuming that you mean what happened in WWII) had already left for all the free nations they could get to, like the U.K., the U.S. and Canada. And those countries couldn't provide for the new wave of jews, because they were already crammed with refugees.

Truth. In no other country but the U.S. and Israel are anti-Jewish hate crimes investigated and prosecuted aggressively.

UK? Eire?

Truth. Every free nation in the world turned the Jews away when it was widely known they were being sent back to slaughter.

Truth. In no other country but the U.S. and Israel are anti-Jewish hate crimes investigated and prosecuted aggressively. In France, frex, a Jew can be beaten half to death on national television and no one lifts a finger.

That's France though and their not really into religion, unless it's catholic. If you didn't know, they just passed a law that says you can't show symbols of your faith in school.

I can see why Israel is not included. Although we have always supported them financially relations have varied depending on who was in charge. The largest bone of contention was not the war in 1967, but the fact that Israel made an unprovoked attack on our naval forces in 1968 (I believe I have the year right) and then claimed it was all a mistake. Also, during the 1980s, Yitzhak Shamir was a murderer almost on the scale of Hussein. U.S.-Israel relations beyond military and economic funding have only really begun to improve during the 1990s.

And, before I am accused of being pro-Palestinian, I know that the Jews who returned to their homeland during the 19th century were oppressed and frequently murdered by the Arabs who had settled in the region for the last 1000 years. However, the situation being what it was during the 1980s, there was no excuse for burying Palestinian families alive in their houses just to make way for Israeli settlements. At this point a different government is largely in charge and attempts have been made over the last 15 years by that government to remedy what happened. Therefore, despite the actions of both parties, there is still no excuse for the constant bombing attacks against innocent Israelis.

In terms of who is the staunchest ally (not taking the current war into consideration, but instead looking at things throughout the 20th century) it would definitely be the United Kingdom. As relations with Russia fell off during the later Romanovs in the 19th century we began to repair relations with Great Britain. WWI solidified that, WWII only more. They were also our best allies during the Cold War (Australia, Canada and Japan were close seconds).

In truth, most of Canada has always been friendly to the U.S. throughout everything (even now). The problem for us (and them) is Quebec. France and its outlying provinces have never been friendly to any country resulting from the British Empire or allying itself with the U.K. (and later the U.S.) unless it served their own needs.

Japan achieved quite a bit of their technological advancements due to us helping rebuild their country after WWII. Quite a few of their people were grateful that the military infrastructure was dismantled as the regime in power was oppressive and, though ruling in the name of the Emperor, kept him a virtual prisoner and used him only as a figurehead. It is much more cost effective to buy the resources needed than have armed forces try to grab it as well. Time and time again Japan has proven to be our friend (except sometimes when it comes to trade; but then, that's capitalism).

South Korea has wanted us out for the longest time. In fact, I think quite a few Americans are tired of resources going to guard the DMZ. The situation over the last 50 years in Korea is a prime example of what happens when we agree to follow U.N. mandates.

Australia has been close because the cultures are similar and we have both made the same mistakes when it comes to our aboriginal populations.

In France, frex, a Jew can be beaten half to death on national television and no one lifts a finger.

Are you speaking here of a particular actual incident?

Which nation do you believe is the closest US ally in terms of past wars and geopolitical considerations?

Not Britain, that's for sure. Britain is our historic enemy. We fought two wars against them, and they deceived us into getting entangled in two world wars. Brits are wonderful people, and Britain is a great country, but it is still our historic enemy.

Israel is the United State's closest ally because Israel depends on the US for their survival.
sorry you got it the wrong way round. the Israeli intelligence and technology are extremely important to the Americans. i would say that they rely on each other. bringing us back to the main point, Israel are Americas biggest ally because they look out for each other and rely on each other.

I would say UK (my home) but they have never seen eye to eye. the americans didnt support the brits over the Suez crisis (although Israel did) and Britain didn't support the US over Vietnam.

It seems quite a portion of the former British empire has stuck together e.g. US, UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand


Yeah, its called the British Commonwealth. The US isn't a memeber of course but most ex-colonies of the United Kingom of Great Britain and (Northern) Ireland have remained in the Commonwealth, which is a organisation like the UN, but not as powerful. And another point is that the Queen is still head of state of Cananda, Austalia, New Zealand and even Jamacia, so they are bound to remain kind of close.

Originally Posted by Bordoria
Total war is when a nation uses everything in its arsenel to destroy the enemy, such as troops, tanks, WMD's etc.

Beleve it or not, it is not the USA (11,000 nukes) with the largest nuclear stock-pile, but Russia (26,000+)...

So, in theroy, if the two countries went to war, Russia would win. But if they were to use their nukes in reality, it would result in a stalemate, in which the world would be blown to kingdom-come!

But, interms of 'useable power,' ie, troops, technology and tanks ('boots on the ground'), the USA would win., but it would be a long hard war, in which both sides may become bogged down. So after this war, the entire US military would be depleted and anyone would beable to attack the US and win!

The US military has superior equipment ,in most cases, but the Russian military is better trained and larger than the US military.



A good read about a hypothetical war between the US and Soviet Union in the 1980's is Red Storm Rising by Tom Clancy.

I do have to amend one thing due to Sanctaphrax's posting. Israel was also extremely important to us during the Cold War because of their intelligence network. Few people tend to remember the U.S.S.R. was no more friendly to its Jewish population than Germany, so Israel had a reason to ally themselves with us during this time. Stalin, for instance, was preparing for a purge of the Russian Jews just before his death.

Without the help of the Mossad I am sure intelligence gathering would have been much more complicated and unreliable, especially after the restraints put on our intelligence community in the 1970s.

You forgeting that that was a long time ago, not to mention the countries coudn't take that many people, because by then, jews that were afraid of Hitler ( I'm assuming that you mean what happened in WWII) had already left for all the free nations they could get to, like the U.K., the U.S. and Canada. And those countries couldn't provide for the new wave of jews, because they were already crammed with refugees.Put the crack pipe down long enough to do a web search on the S.S. St. Louis. That was May 1939, less than a year after Kristallnacht. Not an isolated incident either.

It's only a long time ago as long as people remember. When we start forgetting or discounting it? It's the day after tomorrow. Just ask the French.

Truth. Every free nation in the world turned the Jews away when it was widely known they were being sent back to slaughter.

Truth. In no other country but the U.S. and Israel are anti-Jewish hate crimes investigated and prosecuted aggressively. In France, frex, a Jew can be beaten half to death on national television and no one lifts a finger.

Canada has stricter anti-hate crime laws then the US, what the hell are you talking about?

Are you speaking here of a particular actual incident?Yes. A protest march in support of the Palestinian terrorists - the same one that spawned the now famous picture of a man holding up his toddler daughter dressed in a chador, with a fake bomb strapped to her body.

Yes. A protest march in support of the Palestinian terrorists - the same one that spawned the now famous picture of a man holding up his toddler daughter dressed in a chador, with a fake bomb strapped to her body.

Ah yes, not having a TV means that my news supply is less determined on what makes a good picture and instead by other criteria.


(For some reason that sounds like a flame on someone or something, but isn't intended as such)

Definitely Cameron Tabrizi's pants. Without them...we would all die. Trust me...I just have this feeling that we would.

I have to say the UK because they helped the US in both World Wars :sniper:. The US did, of course fight a war for freedom against the Brits, but now they are real close to being the best of friends :fluffle:. Chances are that I just didn't do my homework, but I don't remember any time in US history that any member of the British Commonwealth that helped the US. Or maybe their forces mixed with the British forces? The same with intellegance and/or maybe other things too? Anyway, that's my opinion and I just confused myself :confused:.

I have to say the UK because they helped the US in both World Wars :sniper:. The US did, of course fight a war for freedom against the Brits, but now they are real close to being the best of friends :fluffle:. Chances are that I just didn't do my homework, but I don't remember any time in US history that any member of the British Commonwealth that helped the US. Or maybe their forces mixed with the British forces? The same with intellegance and/or maybe other things too? Anyway, that's my opinion and I just confused myself :confused:.
well done... you confused me too:)

intellegance


Irony.

Sorry.

France.


Sometimes your best real friend is the one that stands up and says "You look fucking awful wearing that shirt", instead of the lapdogs and yes-men that will approve whatever you do or say come hell or high water.

Only if you are smart enough to understand why he's telling you that instead of spitting at him.

they consider good allies the vultures that fly where the lion killed his prey.

I don't know, but most of our old allies are gone. The few we have left we are either abandoning (Republic of China/Taiwan) or otherwise profoundly pissing off (France, Germany).

Chances are that I just didn't do my homework, but I don't remember any time in US history that any member of the British Commonwealth that helped the US.

u didn't did your homework.

The Anzac Actively helped in the D-Day, in the mediterranean sea and in africa during WW2. i bet they helped also on the pacific front.


Cheers

Put the crack pipe down long enough to do a web search on the S.S. St. Louis. That was May 1939, less than a year after Kristallnacht. Not an isolated incident either.

It's only a long time ago as long as people remember. When we start forgetting or discounting it? It's the day after tomorrow. Just ask the French.

That was Cuba though. Cuba. Also, the article I read metioned the U.S. having concerns, but not taking any decisive action. Personally, I'm ashamed that the Empire couldn't do more, but we were very focused on the situation in Europe. The U.S. probably wasn't as focused.

The Russian military is better trained? Where did you get that idea. Training costs money. As far as being larger, in terms of what are you Measuring?

I think the other guy meant "more experience". Before Bush, war was not in the U.S.'s political diet. We may train every day, but they have a bit more experience at getting ripped apart.

the english are all at least part norman i.e. FRENCH who conquered this region neigh on a thousand years ago, and therefore constituted all of the aristocracy and much of the middle class for centuries with the current royal family being german. The main difficulties in ANGLO! - german relations have always been that we're too darn similar. */ end rant ;-)

Well, prior to Bush taking office, the USA and Canada were considered the closet allies and the best friends. The UK only became a closer ally to the US then Canada after Blair gave unquestioning support to Bush. Lets not forget who did the most for the US on 9/11, it wasn't the UK, it was Canada.

i agree, lets not forget whos air ports were the only air ports letting planes in on 9/11 Person International in Toronto was there to help when many of the american air ports went down. And i also agree with bush stomping on US/Canadian relations, i think that bush had his war plans before entering office and seen that Canada might not have the military strenght that he was looking for, so he went to the mother land looking for help. i do believe that relations with Canada are rather abused, canadian trade is something that he takes for granted especually when it comes to lumber trade. and lets not forget all that nice fresh water, if it wasent for Canada, were do you think that all that nice drinking water would come from? Mexico? i think not! "and what about the nice mexicans to the south? anyone concider then close allies?"

I don't know, but most of our old allies are gone. The few we have left we are either abandoning (Republic of China/Taiwan) or otherwise profoundly pissing off (France, Germany).

even governments that still give you full support (italy, Uk) doesn't rapresent what people really think about USA in these nations.

u should have specified if u tought about Government Support or People Support.

if u Say Government US best allies atm are UK (just cause Blair has too much to lose now) and italy (cause we like to feel important following someone bigger, what a shame) *atm italy is looked better than UK by Germany and France so if Bush wants some Euro support that's a better reference*


if u say people, i will say Israelians.


cheers.

It may have been said already...but our special relaltionship with the US didn't do us any favours when the Argentines invaded the Falkland Islands in 1982. Tried their best they did to stop the UK from defending the Islands. Were outraged when we acted unilaterally to re-take them by force. I think this 'special relationship' is one way.......Plus the US did not inform the UK government when they invaded Grenada in the mid 80's. SInce I think the isles are in the commonwealth, it might have been appropriate.

Besides I saw Farenheit 9/11 last night according to the film....Saudi Arabia looks like it might be.

It may have been said already...but our special relaltionship with the US didn't do us any favours when the Argentines invaded the Falkland Islands in 1982.
Did you ask for any? And we did give you intellegence info IIRC. Britain didn't need any help at all beating the Argentines.

Britain and Israel. They are way up the US's arse. Or the US is way up Israels. Depends on how you look at it.

Did you ask for any? And we did give you intellegence info IIRC. Britain didn't need any help at all beating the Argentines.

The US Navy also pretty much took over the Royal Navys NATO duties during the Falklands Conflict, American supplies of fuel and spares were made available to the Royal Navy. The US was a good friend to the UK during the Falklands Conflict.

the english are all at least part norman i.e. FRENCH who conquered this region neigh on a thousand years ago, and therefore constituted all of the aristocracy and much of the middle class for centuries with the current royal family being german. The main difficulties in ANGLO! - german relations have always been that we're too darn similar. */ end rant ;-)
Eh, but the Normans were not French, they were more Scandanavian (Norman = Northmen) and German who took over a chunk of the French coast. William based his claim to the English throne through his Saxon (German) familly members. While th Norman aristocracy adopted the French language (partially, at the time of the conquest about 40% of them weren't French cpompetent) and were faithful (according to the standards of the time) servants of the French throne, they were culturally closer to the Germans than the French. The Norman aristocracy worked to become closer to their king (the king of France), but they were Germanic servants of the French kings.

Then why should US taxpayers provide Israel with billions in aid?
Because Israel is a stable democracy. Because Israel doesn't fund indoctrination centers for anti-U.S. terrorists... OMG...The US owes billions of Welfare Dollars to several dozen countries...Ever single Democratic country must receive Billions of Welfare...

From my point of view as a Briton:

The UK is the US' most reliable ally.

Israel is the ally the US values and supports the most.

LOL "Israel" spies on the US more than any other Nation. Look up Pollard - you shouldn't even need his first name. "Israel" sent Mossard to NZ and even used a fake passport they stole from some poor Wheelchair bound man. No ally would do this.

LOL "Israel" spies on the US more than any other Nation. Look up Pollard - you shouldn't even need his first name. "Israel" sent Mossard to NZ and even used a fake passport they stole from some poor Wheelchair bound man. No ally would do this.
Be realistic dude- The USA spies on everyone, the UK spies on everyone, Israel spies on everyone, France spies on everyone, Germany spies on everyone etc - allies or not.

The U.S., being the modern superpower, represents everything that Muslim fundamentalism deplores (equal rights for women, religious tolerance, free market capitalism) and so is a convenient scapegoat and focus for young Islamic men's rage and frustration.

The terrorists are largely unconcerned with our culture.

Bin Laden has never mentioned any of those things (equal rights for women, religious tolerance, free market capitalism).

Since 1996, Bin Laden has consistently given three reasons for attacking the US:

1) US military occupation in Saudi Arabia

2) Us support for Israel

3) The 1991 invasion of Iraq and the subsequent bombing and starvation of its children

These all concern US imperial interventions in the national struggles of Muslims.

He has barely said a word about Western culture. He did not denounce materialism or consumerism or liberated women. He has said that the West is "debauched" , but by blood, not sex. Feminism was of no interest. Women appeared in his statements only as victims of imperialism alongside children.

Bin Laden did denounce economic exploitaion, but not by capitalists (he is one), rather by imperialists brutally seizing land by force.

LOL "Israel" spies on the US more than any other Nation. Look up Pollard - you shouldn't even need his first name. "Israel" sent Mossard to NZ and even used a fake passport they stole from some poor Wheelchair bound man. No ally would do this.
why "Israel" it's Israel. and you're wrong. every ally would do this. Britian were caught spying on the head of the UN:)
besides, NZ shouldn't even be considered a neutral, never mind an ally. when NZ arrested two Israelis suspected of being spies (they were later released) Hamas sent a message saying that NZ were true allies of the intifada and of the "freedom fighters". what do you think the NZ government said:
1)nothing and hoped it would be forgotten.
2)completely discrdit the statement by saying that they were in no way friends of Hamas.
3)that they would welcome an alliance with Hamas.

number three was the correct answer. they said that they would welcome an alliance with Hamas.

PR of Sanctaphrax

America has no 'allies' anymore- just 'interests'. Iraq is an 'interest'. The UK is an 'interest'. Canada is an 'interest'. The two Koreas are 'interests'. Think about it, seriously.

Israel train US astronauts and were of immense help during the coldwar. They always support US foreign policy and have helped collect information on terror networks. An equally beneficial relationship? certainly, and in terms of agreement- the closest US ally

Israel train US astronauts and were of immense help during the coldwar. They always support US foreign policy and have helped collect information on terror networks. An equally beneficial relationship? certainly, and in terms of agreement- the closest US ally

I disagree, an ally is in some ways a partner, you can't have an equal partnership when Israel takes more aid from the US then basically any one in the world. Sure Israel helps America with stuff and they are paid quite well for it. In fact the US probably gives more money to Israel then Israel helps America. I think the US's true allies are that of partnership based on mutal ideas, not welfare.

the british govt...though i think most of the populus don't give a shit..me included

the british govt...though i think most of the populus don't give a shit..me included

I have to agree

Truth. Every free nation in the world turned the Jews away when it was widely known they were being sent back to slaughter.


While this was true during WW2, maybe you should move into the current century, where the borders of most western nations are open to Jews, no differently than people of any other religion. Time to move on from crimes commited sixty someodd years ago.


Truth. In no other country but the U.S. and Israel are anti-Jewish hate crimes investigated and prosecuted aggressively. In France, frex, a Jew can be beaten half to death on national television and no one lifts a finger.

Ummm....don't know quite how to put this politely, but uhh howbout BS!!!
In Ottawa (as in most Canadian cities), there is a hate crimes unit which actively carries out investigations into crimes committed against ANY religious, or racial group including jews.