Monday, July 26, 2010

Peter Hitchens on the "Special Relationship"

"But every time I hear the words ‘Special Relationship’, I feel faintly sick," he writes (which in good ole American means, "I wanna puke"); "And I yearn for a British Prime Minister with the self-confidence of Charles de Gaulle, who could tell the Americans to get lost from time to time, especially when they want us to join in their crazier military ventures" — Junior partner? Actually we’ve been America’s servile spaniel since 1940. "They would respect us more, and treat us better, if we weren’t constantly snuffling round their shoes with our tongues lolling out, like a pack of servile spaniels."

Labels: , , ,

Bookmark and Share


Anonymous Anonymous said...

Hitchens is as myopic as his brother.

Britain sold its inheritance for a bowl of porridge between 1914 and 1917, when it went from being - by a huge margin - the world's greatest creditor to being the world's greatest debtor, not to finance anything productive, but rather a mass slaughter of Germans.

The idea was to prevent Germany from becoming Europe's dominant power.

Pre-1914 Britain earned 10% if not 25% of its income from interest and dividends on its foreign investments; by the end of the war it was heavily indebted.

6:57 AM  
Anonymous Steven P. Cornett said...

RE: Anon,

And it was those banksters that held the credit of the U.K. (JP Morgan, if you want to know) that likely helped set us up for war. Wilson had a trick ploy to have a poison-pilled peace effort, designed to be unacceptable to Germany, that would end with the block rejecting the plan to be fought against by the U.S.

Yep. Between that and the Lusitannia (a British war vessel gussied up as a civilian ship), America was dragged into WWI by the same President that ran and won on keeping us out of it.

10:02 AM  
Blogger Mark in Spokane said...

As far as I am concerned, the United States should not have any "special relationship" with any European country, or any other country, with two exceptions:

1) The Philippines -- because of our seizure and occupation of the country at the end of the Spanish-American War, and our mis-management of the country during our colonization efforts there, we do have an obligation to that country.

2) Liberia -- which was a nation founded by freed American slaves who sought to return to Africa.

I think that we have obvious cultural and civilizational ties to other countries -- England first and foremost, but also other nations like Israel. We also should have very close ties to our neighbors to the north and the south. But "special relationships?" Nope. Except for the two exceptions I noted above.

12:41 PM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


Blaming it all on JP Morgan, who, by the way, spoke fluent German and French, and had studied Math at, and been offered a professorship in Math at Goettingen, then a school with a reknown far superior to Harvard and Stanford today, is a bit too simple.

For one, in 1914, the US had some very influential German Jewish banks on Wall St. such as Goldman Sachs and Kuehn Loeb, that were emphatically pro-German not least because of Germany's then stellar record of tolerance of its Jewish minority.

The banks did their part to move the US towards ending the bloodshed (and protecting their loands), but they alone wouldn't have been able to do anything.

You have to bear in mind that America's upper class at the time was very heavily Episcopal, that is Anglican, who essentially understood themselves as British who had to live in a country not under the Crown because of what the British Calvinists had wrought in 1776. And the Congregationalists, who abhorred kings and queens, thought that kaisers, i.e. emperors, must be even more horrid people.

Both sides entered the war thinking it would be a matter of 6 months, after which Germany would run out of nitrates for gunpowder, and both sides were incredibly stupid not to end the war asap.

11:44 PM  

Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home

Omnes Sancti et Sanctæ Coreæ, orate pro nobis.