World owes US a debt, says Brown

phoenix80

Banned
The world owes a debt to the United States for its leadership in the fight against international terrorism, Gordon Brown has said.


The prime minister described the link with the US as the UK's "most important bilateral relationship" ahead of his first talks with President George Bush.

A foreign office minister had suggested the two countries would no longer be "joined at the hip" on foreign policy.

Mr Brown arrived at Andrews air force base near Washington on Sunday night.

International issues
The talks at Camp David on Monday were expected to include Foreign Secretary David Milliband and US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice.


They are expected to discuss international issues such as Iraq, Afghanistan, the Middle East, Darfur, Kosovo, world trade and climate change.

Analysts will be looking for signs of the Brown regime distancing itself from the US during the trip.

Private dinner

BBC political editor Nick Robinson said Mr Brown was "walking a tightrope" in his dealings with America.

He needed to reassure Mr Bush of his commitment to the Atlantic relationship as well as convince British voters that links between the US and the UK would be different to those maintained by former prime minister Tony Blair, our correspondent said.

The prime minister was flying to Camp David for a private dinner with the president on Sunday night at his Maryland retreat.

He will then head to Washington on Monday for cross-party talks with senate leaders and members of congress.
Earlier this month, Foreign Office Minister Lord Malloch Brown said it was time for a more "impartial" foreign policy and for Britain to build relationships with European leaders.


But en route to the US, Mr Brown described himself as an "Atlanticist and a great admirer of the American sprit".

"As Prime Minister I want to do more to strengthen even further our relationship with the US," he said.

"It is firmly in the British national interest that we have a strong relationship with the US, our single most important bilateral relationship."
Mr Brown said the shared ideals of two centuries of history "have linked the destinies" of the two countries.

He also quoted Winston Churchill - the first British prime minister to visit Camp David - who also spoke of a "joint inheritance".

This close relationship would help in the fight against nuclear proliferation, global poverty, climate change and global terrorism, Mr Brown said.

"And we should acknowledge the debt the world owes to the United States for its leadership in this fight against international terrorism," he added.

Tony Blair enjoyed a close relationship with Mr Bush but there has been speculation that Mr Brown wants to keep his distance from the president.
The shadow foreign secretary, William Hague, told the BBC the prime minister and foreign secretary needed to set a clear stance.
He said: "They should not be leaving it to more junior ministers to create misunderstandings about the relationship with America, which is what has happened over the last few weeks.

"Our approach, the approach David Cameron and I take, is that our relationship with America should be what we call solid but not slavish and it should gain frankness without losing its closeness."
'Candid friend'

Liberal Democrat leader Menzies Campbell said three main issues should be discussed at the meeting.

"Renegotiation of the one-sided extradition treaty, the closure of the Guantanamo Bay detention centre and a negotiated withdrawal of British forces from Iraq," he said.

"These should be the objectives of a candid friend. The excessively subordinated relationship between the President and Mr Blair should be put to bed."
Speaking in the US, International Development Secretary Douglas Alexander emphasised the need for "new alliances, based on common values".

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/politics/6920877.stm
 
I have a strange feeling about this new PM. It's not then good I'm about to get laid feeling either. But hey, he might be alright but more then likely we will just be another of the norm.
 
He is doing what is in his countries best interest. Attacking Muslim nations when they do not pose a significant threat to the UK is not in Great Britan best interest.
 
With this remark, Mr. Brown has already lost most of his credit with the British people. We had all hoped there would at last be a change for the better, once Blair was gone. It seems the foreign policies which caused the terrorist attacks in the first place, are now likely to continue.
 
These people see democracy, freedom of religion, freedom of speech, human rights and secular laws as absolutely unacceptable behavior.
The fact that we exist with these values and our presence itself gives these ideas out to the world is reason enough for them to wage war on us. Also, for a lot of these people, waging a war against the West is THE thing that keeps them in power. If there's no struggle against the infidels of the West, there is simply no need for them to be in power.
It's a bit like hippies trying to turn every war into another "Vietnam" because their existence pretty much depends on it.
 
Criticizing the US for arming various Afghan militias to fight the Soviets may be considered idiotic now but remember that it WAS the Cold War and the Soviets were the main problem and needed to be contained. Something we don't really seem to take seriously because it's a problem from the past. It really bothers me when people shirk at the thought of Hitler and the Nazis but yet seem to have this warm and fuzzy idea about the Soviet Union.
Sometimes you have to settle for the lesser of two evils.
And plus, how on earth do you ever know whether or not you'll be fighting them 15 years in the future??
 
Criticizing the US for arming various Afghan militias to fight the Soviets may be considered idiotic now but remember that it WAS the Cold War and the Soviets were the main problem and needed to be contained. Something we don't really seem to take seriously because it's a problem from the past. It really bothers me when people shirk at the thought of Hitler and the Nazis but yet seem to have this warm and fuzzy idea about the Soviet Union.
Sometimes you have to settle for the lesser of two evils.
And plus, how on earth do you ever know whether or not you'll be fighting them 15 years in the future??

And going back to see who was the US president when Soviets invaded Afghanistan, only one name comes to mind: Jimmy Carter, the worst US president ever.

Many terrible stuff happened under his watch.... And we r still paying for his stupid miscalculations and naivete
 
arming the taliban to fight the soviets in afghanistan
50+ years of meddling in the middle east


very broad strokes.....but very much a case of cause and effect

Could you support your statement with some evidence(except of "very broad strokes")?

The Taliban has been born AFTER the Soviets left Afganistan(1986).
Then the American aid to all Afgan guerillas has stopped.

You could have said that the Americans did not prevent arming of the Taliban by the Pakistanis and the Saudis... this would be much closer to the truth... IMHO
 
Could you support your statement with some evidence(except of "very broad strokes")?

The Taliban has been born AFTER the Soviets left Afganistan(1986).
Then the American aid to all Afgan guerillas has stopped.

You could have said that the Americans did not prevent arming of the Taliban by the Pakistanis and the Saudis... this would be much closer to the truth... IMHO

Indeed. The main support for Taliban came from Saudi Arabia and other arab sheikhdoms of the Gulf.
 
Could you support your statement with some evidence(except of "very broad strokes")?

The Taliban has been born AFTER the Soviets left Afganistan(1986).
Then the American aid to all Afgan guerillas has stopped.

You could have said that the Americans did not prevent arming of the Taliban by the Pakistanis and the Saudis... this would be much closer to the truth... IMHO



fair call....arming the mujahadeen against the soviets, and a lot of that training and influence laid the groundwork for the taliban in later times.

sorry about inaccuracy of my statement....was only meant to be a very quick comment
 
I think we all have turns at getting into these sort of situations.

fair call....arming the mujahadeen against the soviets, and a lot of that training and influence laid the groundwork for the taliban in later times.

sorry about inaccuracy of my statement....was only meant to be a very quick comment
 
He is doing what is in his countries best interest. Attacking Muslim nations when they do not pose a significant threat to the UK is not in Great Britan best interest.


Please understand that Britain is under constant and increasing threat from Islamification, and foreign interests openly threaten us on a daily basis. Only this week we had another primitive Imam telling us, amongst other putrifications, that his attitude to beheading victims was ' Why on earth should we not slaughter Americans.' Why is there such an insistence on denial that the west are the victim targets of this developing ideology.


Command the future, conquer the past.
 
Back
Top