Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the world

[Hawkeye]

Mr Blair said in a TV interview with West Country ITV that if Britain wanted a leading presence on the world stage it would mean sending troops into dangerous places far away.

Given the state of our country I for one feel we should not be looking to achieve a leading presence. It would be better if we were looking to set leading standards on issues like Health, Global Warming, Human Rights and Development of Third World Countries.

Not sending troops into dangerous places far away just to support the ego's of pricks like Bush and Bliar.
Let's face it what has it achieved overall?

Has it removed the threat of terrorism No

Has it provided stability in Iraq or Afghanistan No

Has it provided world peace No

Has the leading presence in the world done anything for Britain Yes
It has spent a lot of the defence budget Who or what the feck are we defending.

 

[Squirrel]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

My sentiments exactly Hawkeye. I'm no real lover of the French, but it has to be said, they are a leading presence in the world, but they largely protect their own interests. There seems to be something inherently wrong about trying to play the US's Deputy, policing the world, whilst our own house is in such shocking order.

 

[slim]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

We haven't been a real world power for many years. Politicians are costing the tax payer far too much with their policies

 

[Maxi_77]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

I would suggest that we should not join the French under the surrender monkey banner, and that whilst protecting our own intersts as best we can we should at the same time take the front of the stage in the battle against injustice around the world, that does not mean we need to either join US crusades or go and bash peoples heads together as a matter of course but it does we have to be prepared to when it is the only answer.

 

[slim]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

I would suggest that we should not join the French under the surrender monkey banner, and that whilst protecting our own intersts as best we can we should at the same time take the front of the stage in the battle against injustice around the world, that does not mean we need to either join US crusades or go and bash peoples heads together as a matter of course but it does we have to be prepared to when it is the only answer.

Nice Maxi however are we really in a position financially to do this. I agree that we should look after our own interests. So in that case we should be looking after the population of Zimbabwe which was part of the Empire rather than Iraq which was not.

 

[FunDiver]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

I totally agree with Hawkeye.

There are many other ways in which we could project our country onto the world stage, that don't include putting troops in every corner of the globe. We should strive to be a nation of excellence in something other than the quality of our armed forces.

Don't get me wrong, our armed forces are the best in the world and we should maintain that, but do we always have to sacrifice them to prove it?

Slim is right too, we are not the world power that we used to be, but due to our British stiff upper lip the government seem to think that we are, solely due to that fact that no matter how stretched the forces are, they always pull it out of the bag and work miracles!!!

God help us if (strike that) when Brown gets in!!

 

[Maxi_77]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

I would suggest that we should not join the French under the surrender monkey banner, and that whilst protecting our own intersts as best we can we should at the same time take the front of the stage in the battle against injustice around the world, that does not mean we need to either join US crusades or go and bash peoples heads together as a matter of course but it does we have to be prepared to when it is the only answer.

Nice Maxi however are we really in a position financially to do this. I agree that we should look after our own interests. So in that case we should be looking after the population of Zimbabwe which was part of the Empire rather than Iraq which was not.

I was deliberately non specific because what and where will always change, and whilst I would early like to see the demise of Mr Mugabe and his regime I think it needs more than just our willingness to enforce regime change there although I would agree it is needed and needed badly.

I think one of the clear lessons from both Afghanistan and Iraq is that regime removal is easy but the installation of a succesful new regime is the hard part, and also the really costly part. Any future attempts in this field do need far better plans than we have seen in recent years.

 

[slim]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

Peter
It really is a shame that Zimbabwe does not supply the USA with oil, perhaps then the situation may have been put to rights.

 

[Maxi_77]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

Peter
It really is a shame that Zimbabwe does not supply the USA with oil, perhaps then the situation may have been put to rights.

I don't know, considering some of those whom the US has supported over the years if Bob M made the right noises they may well actuall arm and help him.

 

[McHammock]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

My sentiments exactly Hawkeye. I'm no real lover of the French, but it has to be said, they are a leading presence in the world, but they largely protect their own interests. There seems to be something inherently wrong about trying to play the US's Deputy, policing the world, whilst our own house is in such shocking order.

Quote "The prime minister is expected to use a major speech in Plymouth today to say that the country needs to decide whether it wants to remain a major world power." Unquote
Link to Guardian article

 

[dunkers]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

We should maintain a strong military befitting our economic and historical standing in the world, but drop the interventionalist foreign policy. Our empire has been and gone and we have no right to be conquering foreign lands as a "pre-emptive" measure.

 

[Maxi_77]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

I agree that we should do what we can to retain a position in world affairs and we should be prepared to intervene militarily when it is appropriate, but that does not at the same time mean always joining in with the play ground bully.

 

[Deeps]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

Its getting a little boring all of this Blair and Iraq stuff.People seem to have short memories.Iraq was not complying to the weapons inspection mandate, they expelled all of the weapons inspectors(remember Hans blicks) .and Saddam had no proof of destroying all of Iraqs chemical, biological weapons.Do we just let them crack on and ignore everyone? Of course oil has something to do with it.What do you put in your car every week?water?. Its a massive massive issue and just because we live in a media world dont believe everything you read in the papers or see on sky.

 

[onions]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

Deeps, reference the last sentence of your post, I think you left something out. Don't believe what politicians say.

Semper Strenuissima.

 

[Passed-over_Loggie]

Re: Should Britain be wanting a leading presence in the worl

Looking at the opinions here and how the votes are stacking, I think New Labour's work is done here. The plan has worked. Having dragged us in to one half needless war and another totally needless one, with no real political thought nor planning, the UK is now fed up with being a World Power. The aims of International Socialism achieved at a stroke. We will truly only need a UK Defence Force, especially if we keep our nuclear big stick.

We can now feel comfortable being further integrated with the wider European good life. The Russians can start rebuilding their power base because they are now our friends. China's not a threat and they do seem to make all the gadgets we like. Of course, joining the World second eleven means that we shouldn't be running the Commonwealth and we can give our place on the UN Security Council to one of those nice new developing countries. We are all so engrossed in our houses, popular entertainment, shiny gadgets and whatever else requires no responsibility that we no longer give a sod who and where shapes our destiny. The US would never let anything nasty happen to us. What's that old song? "rather be a hammer than a nail"? My how fashions change.