[SlowOne]

Or...

Originally Posted by gramey

The sad part is that we as British people should care who the Americans elect as their President and what political leanings they have. Why should we concern ourselves with this? Basically because having slashed our armed forces to less than we'd need to defend ourselves we're totally dependent on the Americans to protect us.

We've always been dependent on the Americans for armed might, as has the rest of the World. We have not fought a war on our own since the Boer War. WW1 and WW2 depended on numbers made larger by the USA. We should concern ourselves because what the USA does drives what happens in the World. They are the largest single country with economic muscle. If we want to be independent, then a united Europe is our best chance, but no on wants to see that.

Originally Posted by gramey

A consequence of this is that irrespective of whether it's a democrat or republican in the White House, when they say jump our government say's "How high?"
Sadly neither the US or our own government have learnt from history that the nature of the people your dealing with and the geographical nature of their lands is unlikely to result in peace and stability, just ask the Russians?

It seems to me that the point everyone misses is that the terrorists always win. With one exception in the last 250 years, terrorists have always ended up in power. The USA gained power by acting as terrorists against us, and one can add Angola, Zimbabwe, South africa, Korea, Vietnam, Sudan, Eritrea, The Balkans, Mesopotania (where the UK were overthrown and split it into Irna, Iraq, etc.) and Northern Ireland. Until this is acknowledged and we start talking not fighting, little is going to change. We have no choice but to support the Americans if we want to fight, but the real question is "why fight?"

Originally Posted by gramey

What appears to have been missed is that Saddam Hussein only got into power in the first place due to contra funding by the CIA. He was backed by the US when they went to war with Iran, come to that so were the Iranians as the US were unsure who was going to win so backed their horse both way's. Tens of thousands died in what after 5 years ended in stalemate and back at square one, then you wonder why Iran hates America.
When he failed to tow the White House line and went into Kuwait the US were forced to do something about him rather than lose face. Having done this, but without a mandate to actually get rid of him, they then had to come up with another reason to go back, hence the disinformation about WMD's.
One good ol' boy when asked about his placing an order for a Hummer H3 and it's fuel consumption and if it worried him genuinely replied "Hell no, why else did we invade Iraq".

Spot on - we fight terrorists (or, in this case, we create them!!) and we lose - no surprise!

Originally Posted by gramey

If Obama restricts free trade it'll mean the yanks are back to having to accept home made sub standard over priced products that were shown up for what they were. When the likes of Honda & Toyota got round their restrictive practices previously by building assembly plants in the US and changing their brand name, Acura & Lexus, discerning Americans suddenly woke up to the fact that they didn't have to buy some shoddily made GM barge.

The reason that Toyota, honda, Nissan et al put plants in other countries is because their production systems demand it. The Toyota Production system (sometimes misnamed 'Lean') depends on being as close to the customer as possible. Their plants are there because that's how their production systems make money, not because of any political reason. BMW and Mercedes made pots on money sending cars from Europe long before they built plants in the USA - on the back of huge US subsidies, it should be added!

Originally Posted by gramey

Will Obama be all things to all people, unlikely, will he do a better job than the ageing McCain, probably, does it really matter who's pulling Gordon Brown or David Cameron's strings, not really, we''ll still be their lap dog and do whatever they tell us to do.

The aberration here is Bush Junior, not the USA. Bush Senior did no such thing in Gulf War1, indeed the UK were a willing partner. There has to be two sides to a situation, and one can argue that Blair was as guilty of thinking he could go against history as Bush was.

It's too easy to blame our stupidity in years gone by on being bullied by America. No one has to be bullied, especially not by a waning power. If there's blame to be apportioned here, we have to shoulder ours. Recession/depression changes the World, as it did in 1929. It's hard to see how the current politicians will be able to afford to act as they have in the past, and with (as you rightly point out) Russia and China on the ascendency, expect more listening and conciliation, not shouting and fighting. No doubt some of the compromises will be derided on here in years to come, but since we are no longer a World power (and neither are the USA) we have to get used to it.