Yes -- FCS Discussion Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, [6], 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

Subject: Yes

Author:
Steph (U.S.)

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 16:27:44 11/28/04 Sun
In reply to: Ian (Australia) 's message, "Steph, I dare say you are far more aware of this history than most Americans" on 11:26:15 11/28/04 Sun

I agree that many Americans have a less positive view of our early conection to the crown. But I do think that many of us have a positive view of Great Britain. We were allies through all of the 20th Century.
There are substantial differences in functioning between our systems. I only wanted to point out that they are different developments of the same system. If Cromwell had made the Protectorship directly ellected and their had been no restoration, the American system would be standard through out the English Speaking world.
As for us joining the Commonwealth it is something that would have to be worked at just as Federation will have to be worked at. As for having only one vote, we had only one at the U.N. and the U.S.S.R. had three. We didn't like it but we lived with it. Regarding multilateralism, I guess I hold to view that the purpose of the state is to defend the persons, rights and interests of its citizens. To sacrifice those to international concensus would be to deligitimize itself.
Cheers
Steph

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Well said

Author:
Ed Harris (Venezia)
[ Edit | View ]

Date Posted: 16:39:20 11/28/04 Sun

I don't always agree with Dubya, but making US defence policy dependent on the consent of foreign nations is rather an abrogation of the Commander-in-Chief's responsibilities. Look at how much fuss we're making over here about the Euro-army! It would be hypocritical for Brits to criticise Americans for refusing to do something which we refuse to do ourselves.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]