The UK is abandoning its alliance with Trump as the United States 'withdraws from its leadership around the world'

  
Via:  krishna  •  one week ago  •  35 comments

By:   Business Insider

The UK is abandoning its alliance with Trump as the United States 'withdraws from its leadership around the world'
The UK is threatening to tear up its defense alliance with the US after President Donald Trump's Iran crisis triggered a rupture between the two countries.

S E E D E D   C O N T E N T


512

President Donald Trump.  Getty

The UK is threatening to tear up its defense alliance with the US after President Donald Trump's Iran crisis triggered a rupture between the two countries.

UK Defense Secretary Ben Wallace told The Sunday Times that the UK was looking to forge stronger alliances with other international partners that shared its priorities.

He said the US under Trump risked withdrawing from its global leadership role. Wallace also said Trump threatened to tear up the US's intelligence-sharing relationship with the UK.


Tags

jrDiscussion - desc
smarty_function_ntUser_is_admin: user_id parameter required
Find text within the comments Find 
 
 
 
Krishna
1  seeder  Krishna    one week ago

The comments came after Prime Minister Boris Johnson's government distanced itself from the attack that killed Soleimani, with UK Foreign Secretary Dominic Raab labeling it  a "dangerous escalation" that  risked a conflict  in which "terrorists would be the only winners.

 
 
 
Krishna
2  seeder  Krishna    one week ago

A spokesman for Johnson was also quick to condemn Trump's threats to target Iranian cultural sites, if carried out, as a breach of international law and possibly a war crime.

The UK is now openly threatening to tear up its long-standing defense partnership with the US.

Wallace told The Sunday Times that the UK was increasingly looking for alternative international allies.

"Regardless of what the US does ... we are going to have to make decisions that allow us to stand with a range of allies, the Five Eyes [intelligence partnership with the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand] and our European allies where our interests converge," he said.

 
 
 
WallyW
2.1  WallyW  replied to  Krishna @2    one week ago

"Regardless of what the US does ... we are going to have to make decisions that allow us to stand with a range of allies, the Five Eyes [intelligence partnership with the US, Canada, Australia, and New Zealand] and our European allies where our interests converge," he said.

Perhaps it is time for the UK and the rest of our "allies" to pay their fair share and provide for their common defense. For far too long the US has fought their wars at great human and material cost to us. The current status quo cannot continue

 
 
 
dennis smith
2.1.1  dennis smith  replied to  WallyW @2.1    one week ago

Absolutely correct Wally.

We have been the global leader for far too long.

I have questioned for years why other countries continue to ride on the coat tails of the US instead of stepping up and become leaders themselves.

We can be part of the world community instead of having to be a global leader.

Unfortunately politicians of both parties have done everything they can to insure the status quo.

 
 
 
Ender
2.1.2  Ender  replied to  dennis smith @2.1.1    one week ago

If there is going to be a world leader (and there will) why would you not want it to be us?

We have long had strong freedoms and opportunity, if I dare say, values.

I would rather us continue to be a shinning beacon on the hill.

Not be one to sit back while China and Russia maybe others exert their ever growing influence.

I refuse to be isolationist.

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.1.3  Ronin2  replied to  Ender @2.1.2    6 days ago

Isolationist?

We wouldn't get that damn lucky.

How well has US interventionism worked out? Name the great successes we have had.

As for China and Russia, if they want to waste their man power and resources trying to fix the rest of the world- then let them. Russia seems to need another Afghanistan to jog it's memory of what a bad idea foreign intervention really is.  China just needs a strong dose of reality; which Taiwan and Hong Kong seem to be giving them.

 
 
 
Split Personality
2.1.4  Split Personality  replied to  Ronin2 @2.1.3    6 days ago

We can certainly be non internationalists ( especially alone) without being isolationists.

The two are not mutually exclusive.

But remember, if China & Russia, or whomever, finally control all of a single resource

to the detriment of the rest of the world, what then?

Just grin & bear it?

 
 
 
dennis smith
2.1.5  dennis smith  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.4    6 days ago

It is unrealistic to think that one country can control all of a single resource.

 
 
 
Ronin2
2.1.6  Ronin2  replied to  Split Personality @2.1.4    6 days ago

What single source can they control? Oil? The US has plenty of our own.

It is really our "allies" that take advantage of the US that should be worried. They are very reliant on oil and other raw materials from abroad.

If Russia was so strong US sanctions wouldn't affect them nearly as much. Same with China and our tariff war. If Russia and China want to over extend themselves and play world policeman; and try their hands at nation building- then they deserve the same disasters that the US has been rewarded with.

Besides, anyone that thinks the US is isolationist is nuts. We would be out of Afghanistan, Iraq, and Syria by now if we were. We wouldn't have increased out troop presence in Saudi Arabia if we were. 

Frankly I am glad Trump is making our "allies" nervous. Maybe they will finally put on their big boy pants and realize the free US ride is over; and they need to take care of themselves.

 
 
 
Larry Hampton
3  Larry Hampton    one week ago

Rump has the strategic intelligence of a cement block. 

 
 
 
dennis smith
3.1  dennis smith  replied to  Larry Hampton @3    6 days ago

Name calling has no value.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4  Paula Bartholomew    one week ago

WTG Trump.  You just alienated one of our strongest allies.  Don't expect an invite to the UK anytime soon.  The Queen is not amused.

 
 
 
cjcold
4.1  cjcold  replied to  Paula Bartholomew @4    5 days ago

None of the royals ever liked him in the first place. In fact they loath him for good reason.

Trump told Howard Stern live-on-air that he could have "fucked Princess Diana but she would have had to take a HIV test first." 

Trump called Meghan Markle "a nasty woman" for her negative opinion of him.

Trump breaks Royal protocol by touching the Queen on the back.

Doubt they'll be inviting him back anytime soon.

 
 
 
Paula Bartholomew
4.1.1  Paula Bartholomew  replied to  cjcold @4.1    4 days ago

The only one who would welcome him would be the former Prince Andrew.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
5  Vic Eldred    one week ago

By all means the UK should step forward into a leadership role in the middle east. I think the President should completely withdraw from the middle east and let the Europeans and or the Turks deal with a problem that has more to do with them than us.

 
 
 
MrFrost
5.1  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @5    one week ago
By all means the UK should step forward into a leadership role in the middle east.

But Kusner is doing such a fantastic job of bringing peace to the Middle East.../s

I think the President should completely withdraw from the middle east and let the Europeans and or the Turks deal with a problem that has more to do with them than us.

Israel will not be pleased. 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
5.1.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  MrFrost @5.1    one week ago

So, you want the US to stay?

 
 
 
MrFrost
5.1.2  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.1    one week ago

So, you want the US to stay?

Where did I say that? 

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
5.1.3  Vic Eldred  replied to  MrFrost @5.1.2    one week ago

You didn't. You seem to be agreeing with me. I wasn't sure.

 
 
 
dennis smith
5.1.4  dennis smith  replied to  MrFrost @5.1    one week ago
By all means the UK should step forward into a leadership role in the middle east.

But Kusner is doing such a fantastic job of bringing peace to the Middle East.../s

No better or worse than previous administrations have done.

I think the President should completely withdraw from the middle east and let the Europeans and or the Turks deal with a problem that has more to do with them than us.

Israel will not be pleased. 

Isreal has been a county for over 50 years Time for them to make other alliances in the ME. We are not their keeper.

 
 
 
MrFrost
5.1.5  MrFrost  replied to  dennis smith @5.1.4    one week ago

Isreal has been a county for over 50 years Time for them to make other alliances in the ME. We are not their keeper.

I totally agree. We should pull up stakes and wish them the best. 

 
 
 
MrFrost
5.1.6  MrFrost  replied to  Vic Eldred @5.1.3    one week ago

You didn't. You seem to be agreeing with me. I wasn't sure.

I was, to a point. I have said for years that we should cut all ties with the ME. 

 
 
 
dennis smith
5.1.7  dennis smith  replied to  MrFrost @5.1.5    one week ago

We certainly agree on this.

I also think we do not need to continue to be global leader. 

 
 
 
Ender
5.1.8  Ender  replied to  dennis smith @5.1.7    one week ago
I also think we do not need to continue to be global leader.

[Deleted]

Of course we should step down ...s/

 
 
 
WallyW
5.2  WallyW  replied to  Vic Eldred @5    one week ago

I agree. Let the ungrateful bastards take care of their part of the planet.

 
 
 
Vic Eldred
5.2.1  Vic Eldred  replied to  WallyW @5.2    one week ago

Ungrateful and spoiled. The UK is depending on President Trump for a nice big trade deal after they leave the European Union. Maybe they should get nothing and btw it's high time they put some money into their own military!

Keeping the Straight of Hormuz open would give the Royal Navy some much needed experience!

 
 
 
cjcold
5.3  cjcold  replied to  Vic Eldred @5    5 days ago
more to do with them than us.

In case you hadn't noticed, the world has become a very small place. 

Isolationist policies won't do the US any favors.

Trump is rapidly alienating all of our traditional allies. 

The US can't go it alone in this day and age.

 
 
 
charger 383
6  charger 383    one week ago

They could not do any better, They used to say the Sun Never Sets on The British Empire, they used to rule a large part of the world but could not keep control.  

USA had to save their asses in two World Wars

They can't even keep their Prince happy any more

 
 
 
Sean Treacy
7  Sean Treacy    one week ago

The headline is false.

 
 
 
Nerm_L
8  Nerm_L    one week ago

Why would the UK tearing up its defense alliance with the US be a bad thing for the United States?

Making a threat really needs to mean something.   

 
 
 
Ronin2
8.1  Ronin2  replied to  Nerm_L @8    6 days ago

The second the British had to face some 3rd world dictator they would be screaming for the US help to do all of the heavy lifting. 

They need to lose our number. This is a one way alliance that only benefits them.

 
 
 
dennis smith
8.1.1  dennis smith  replied to  Ronin2 @8.1    6 days ago

Brexit will force the Brits to become more self reliant on itself. 

 
 
 
cjcold
8.1.2  cjcold  replied to  Ronin2 @8.1    4 days ago

So you understand nothing about global realities? 

Pretty sure the Brits fought beside us in two world wars as well as a few police actions..

 
 
 
Ronin2
8.1.3  Ronin2  replied to  cjcold @8.1.2    4 days ago

You have that wrong.

The US saved their asses in two world wars; and did most of the heavy lifting in those police actions.

They are riding our coattails, not the other way around.

Take a look at the breakdown of the NATO/Libyan War- if you can call it that.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2011/04/us-dropped-76-bombs-libya/349265/

This Monday, March 28, President Obama defended his decision to join the allied forces in Libya and clarified that US involvement would be limited and supporting. By the next day, according to the Pentagon, "the United States had fired all but 7 of the 214 cruise missiles used in the conflict and flown 1,103 sorties compared to 669 for all other allies combined," Reuters reports . "It also dropped 455 of the first 600 bombs."

The Associated Press
notes that this Saturday the US is expected to divert the rest of the military effort to other NATO countries. But, as the New York Post's Michael Goodwin points out, "In truth, there is no NATO without the US," so it hardly seems like these numbers will stay the same as long as the coalition is present in Libya.

https://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/may/22/nato-libya-data-journalism-operations-country

Click on chart for Coalition forces and sorties flown. It is a joke. There is the US, and then everyone else. Consider this was a war for British and French oil development contracts in Libya- you would think our "allies" would have done the heavy lifting and supplied the vast majority of the assets.

 
 
 
It Is ME
9  It Is ME    5 days ago

Wallace said the UK would need to reduce its dependence on US military assets.
"We are very dependent on American air cover and American intelligence, surveillance, and reconnaissance assets," he said. "We need to diversify our assets."

Trumps been pushing ALL Allies to be more dependent on their own capability to Defend themselves, since even before he was elected.

It's working. jrSmiley_13_smiley_image.gif

 
 
Loading...
Loading...

Who is online



GregTx
Old Hermit


28 visitors