# May I be the first to say sorry to the British



## jetboatdeath (Mar 13, 2009)

Link



> The Obamas, Barack and Michelle both, pretty much diplomatically botched the recent visit of British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and his wife. Oddly enough, the U.S. Old Media seems uninterested in the story that is a hot topic in England, a story that's left many Brits a bit miffed.





> Now, I thought that Obama was going to improve our relations with "the world" once he took office? So far, all he's done is tell our enemies he's their friend and carelessly wave off our actual friends.
> And, as I mentioned at the top, the U.S. Old Media has been ignoring this story.
> Imagine that?


----------



## jarrod (Mar 13, 2009)

to which briton are you saying sorry :roflmao:

jf


----------



## jetboatdeath (Mar 13, 2009)

You cought it pre edit  :ultracool


----------



## Andy Moynihan (Mar 13, 2009)

I too was pissed off by this.

Of all the people to alienate, not your last remaining ally for ****in' out loud.


----------



## Hagakure (Mar 14, 2009)

Ummm.... I had no idea this had even happened? When did he even come over? No seriously... 

For my own part, I'd be amazed that Brown managed to get something right.


----------



## myusername (Mar 14, 2009)

As a Brit, I can stress that on the whole people over here will find this amusing! I accept your apology but there really is no need. We as individuals can not be held responsible for our statesmen's behaviour. In truth, I personally welcome this type of relationship between our two country's leaders much more than the cosiness of Bush and Blair. The notion of George and Tony "praying" together whilst making their decision to ignore the UN and go to war was a little more concerning to me than this current situation. Our country's are still allies but now hopefully without the mutual ego stroking and religious zeal that characterized Bush and Blair's "special relationship."


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 14, 2009)

I'm not quite as forgiving as *MuN* on this one but I too do not hold an ill-feeling towards any individual American here for what your new leader has done.

Knowing how the Great Game has been played and still is being played throughout the globe I am amazed that the advisors to the President didn't stop him from trampling roughshod over the diplomatic link with us.  Make no mistake, in political terms this was pretty serious 'message sending', even if Obama didn't have a clue as to what message he was actually sending.

I haven't made any comments about this because I've had serious family-centric woes to deal with but for me it was a foretaste of change in the wind.  If it had been me that was PM, then I can assure you there would have been a strongly worded reproving diplomatic communique delivered.

So thank you for recognising what had happened, *JBD*.


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 14, 2009)

*Ahhhh hello*...... _He is new to the job and so are his staf_f.  I imagine that almost every Presidency or Premier around the world has made some mistakes with gift giving. 
	

	
	
		
		

		
			



I see this as much ado about nothing! 


As to our relationship with the UK.  I am sure that *everyone* knows we are all still tight.


----------



## jarrod (Mar 14, 2009)

obama should have given him a boxed set of 'the young ones'.  that would have been hilarious!

jf


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 14, 2009)

Because Obama is new to the shoes, I don't necessarily hold him accountable for this gaffe but I'm sure that the diplomatic staff has not changed from the previous Presidency yet ... has it? 

I'd be amazed if the actual machinery of government has altered at all - it certainly doesn't over here when there's a new occupant of Number 10. The Civil Service is the 'flywheel' in the engine that works to smooth out the fluctuations caused by the democratic process.

So that means that this was either incompetence or a deliberate 'brush off' or someone in the Diplomatic Service really doesn't like Obama and dropped him in it.

Of such subtleties is the web of world politics spun. A lot is said by such apparently inconsequential things as sending back Winnie - I'm more affected by that than the duff gift exchange to be honest.


----------



## crushing (Mar 14, 2009)

I have read the DVDs include ET, Star Wars and Psycho.  I hope it's the original Psycho and not the remake as the would make it especially embarrassing!

I wonder if President Obama will present Chancellor Merkel with a Netflix gift card upon her first visit?  That way she could choose her own movies.  From backrubs to facerubs. . .


----------



## Brian R. VanCise (Mar 14, 2009)

No Sukerkin here everything changes very quickly.


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 14, 2009)

Colour me astounded!  Cheers, *Brian*.

How then has such a faux pas been avoided in the past,  if everyone is new to their jobs and are unadvised/unsupervised?


----------



## crushing (Mar 14, 2009)

Brian R. VanCise said:


> No Sukerkin here everything changes very quickly.


 
While there is a quick transition of people, things like tradition, honor, and etiquette don't change all that much.


----------



## jarrod (Mar 14, 2009)

i think that it was an intentional message that the diplomatic relationship between the US & the UK is about to change.  i don't think it has to be a bad thing though.  it's kind of like when your family puts limits on how much you can spend on each other for birthdays & christmas.  you still love them, you just don't need to spend all that money right now.  

really i think even if this isn't perfect, it's preferable to the monkey-see-monkey-do relationship of bush/blair.

jf


----------



## Hagakure (Mar 14, 2009)

Good point Jarrod, but seriously, what DOES the "special relationship" mean in 2009? Surely it can't be that important for the US in particular? 

At the end of the day, perhaps it is time to _see other people_? The UKs future in my humble opinion lies at the heart of Europe. (Likely to get a panning from the Brits on here *ducks*) I _used_ to be a huge Euro-skeptic, still am in many ways, but culturally and economically, in terms of alignment and who we mainly do business with now, it's the USE we need to kiss up to, not the USA.


----------



## crushing (Mar 14, 2009)

jarrod said:


> i think that it was an intentional message that the diplomatic relationship between the US & the UK is about to change. i don't think it has to be a bad thing though. it's kind of like when your family puts limits on how much you can spend on each other for birthdays & christmas. you still love them, you just don't need to spend all that money right now.
> 
> really i think even if this isn't perfect, it's preferable to the monkey-see-monkey-do relationship of bush/blair.
> 
> jf


 
There is a big difference between the personal relationships that may develop between heads of state and decorum and etiquette in receiving an official head of state.  Clinton got the reception right on the first try.  Bush got it right on the first try before the personal closeness developed.  If Bush didn't, it would have been all over the media; headlines and scroll bars.  Mispeaking and saying something like "is our children learning" pales in comparison to a snub like this.

Now I've got to take a shower because this is getting too close to defending Bush, for whom I don't much care.


----------



## jarrod (Mar 14, 2009)

Hagakure said:


> Good point Jarrod, but seriously, what DOES the "special relationship" mean in 2009? Surely it can't be that important for the US in particular?
> 
> At the end of the day, perhaps it is time to _see other people_? The UKs future in my humble opinion lies at the heart of Europe. (Likely to get a panning from the Brits on here *ducks*) I _used_ to be a huge Euro-skeptic, still am in many ways, but culturally and economically, in terms of alignment and who we mainly do business with now, it's the USE we need to kiss up to, not the USA.



i think you're largely right about the interests of britain.  but please stop saying "special relationship".  i just keep picturing bush & blair acting out scenes from brokeback mountain.  hey, was that one of the 25 dvds?  what about 'jungle fever'?  hm, there's a lot more to this gift-decoding than i thought...



crushing said:


> There is a big difference between the personal relationships that may develop between heads of state and decorum and etiquette in receiving an official head of state.  Clinton got the reception right on the first try.  Bush got it right on the first try before the personal closeness developed.  If Bush didn't, it would have been all over the media; headlines and scroll bars.  Mispeaking and saying something like "is our children learning" pales in comparison to a snub like this.
> 
> Now I've got to take a shower because this is getting too close to defending Bush, for whom I don't much care.



dude, i got it quoted, no take-backs! YOU STUCK UP FOR BUSH!  scrub all you want, you know this filth will never come off :wink2:

jf


----------



## Hagakure (Mar 14, 2009)

jarrod said:


> i think you're largely right about the interests of britain.  but please stop saying "special relationship".  i just keep picturing bush & blair acting out scenes from brokeback mountain.  hey, was that one of the 25 dvds?  what about 'jungle fever'?  hm, there's a lot more to this gift-decoding than i thought...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Dude, you know that the thought of Obama and Brown oiling up and gettin' down 'n' dirty floats your boat! Why deny it?


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 14, 2009)

Can't have been that big a thing, I don't think many of us noticed lol!
Honestly, had no idea. Mind we've been short handed at work due to another problem across the water so have been busy but even so I've seen the news on the television etc and read papers, I don't remember any outcry, don't think many people noticed the Obamas were here lol!
Wouldn't say there was a big concern about it. This is the only link on a British newspaper I could find.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...classic-movies-Lets-hope-likes-Wizard-Oz.html


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 14, 2009)

It's one of those things that has slipped in under the radar because other, more visceral, events have overshadowed it.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 14, 2009)

Actually I think such a gaffe would endear Obama to the Brits as Americans usually like to give BIG and EXPENSIVE pressies over (the Texas bigger and better syndrome), this time we can feel superior and condescending rofl!

Ok, it's released now so can post.._2 men arrested for murder of the soldiers in NI_

The OP link said there was a huge uproar here, there simply wasn't as sukerkin says other events were in the news, most people didn't even know he was here.

BBC are saying three men though


----------



## MarkBarlow (Mar 14, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> Can't have been that big a thing, I don't think many of us noticed lol!


As long as the US media is having thigh sweats over Obama, don't expect much negative press and, in my opinion, any mention of the slight to the UK would have to be presented in a negative light.  Whether it was from ignorance, pettiness or a hint of changes ahead, it was unfortunate and needs to be corrected.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Mar 14, 2009)

I'm still trying to get my head around the fact that the DVDs were Region One. The Obama team has been very tech savvy throughout the campaign, transition and early weeks in office. Sounds like poor staff planning, communication and bad last-minute recovery. Gawd, maybe staff were rifling through desk drawers at the last minute to find a gift. But, as they say, the fish stinks from the head down, and Mr Obama must own this mistake.

The return of the Churchill bust was in the news weeks ago. I believe it was to be shipped to the British Embassy. That never made any sense to me. It was moved into the Oval Office after 9/11, if I recall. The President can decorate his office how he chooses, but it was poor timing to toss it out of the WH altogether. It was a decision that didn't need to be made.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 14, 2009)

MarkBarlow said:


> As long as the US media is having thigh sweats over Obama, don't expect much negative press and, in my opinion, any mention of the slight to the UK would have to be presented in a negative light. Whether it was from ignorance, pettiness or a hint of changes ahead, it was unfortunate and needs to be corrected.


 
Why? it's only diplomatic gifts, It's not as though the Browns would actually be allowed to keep anything anyway, it's all logged in a book ( all civil service depts have books where gifts have to be written in) and it will be put away as official not for the Browns to actually use. I can't think anyone cares what pressies they give each other, we just don't want another poodle Prime Minister to America's president.

The thing is as well, we expect nice pressies from the older Europeans  like France,Scandanavia, Germany, Netherlands, Luxembourg etc because well they are sophisicated and have been around long enough to have antiques to give to each other, how can I say this...we expect Americans to be brash and gauche diplomatically so it doesn't really bother many of us. :uhyeah:  
Anyway it's the thought that counts lol!


----------



## Hagakure (Mar 14, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> Can't have been that big a thing, I don't think many of us noticed lol!
> Honestly, had no idea. Mind we've been short handed at work due to another problem across the water so have been busy but even so I've seen the news on the television etc and read papers, I don't remember any outcry, don't think many people noticed the Obamas were here lol!
> Wouldn't say there was a big concern about it. This is the only link on a British newspaper I could find.
> http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/wor...classic-movies-Lets-hope-likes-Wizard-Oz.html




As I mentioned earlier, I wasn't aware that they were even here. :ultracool


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 14, 2009)

Hagakure said:


> As I mentioned earlier, I wasn't aware that they were even here. :ultracool


 
and do we care? ...Nah! LOL! More importantly Six Nations is on!


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 14, 2009)

Hagakure said:


> Good point Jarrod, but seriously, what DOES the "special relationship" mean in 2009? Surely it can't be that important for the US in particular?
> 
> At the end of the day, perhaps it is time to _see other people_? *The UKs* *future in my humble opinion lies at the heart of Europe.* (Likely to get a panning from the Brits on here *ducks*) I _used_ to be a huge Euro-skeptic, still am in many ways, but culturally and economically, in terms of alignment and who we mainly do business with now, it's the USE we need to kiss up to, not the USA.


 
I agree with you actually! We used to have a lot in common with America but now it seems we and Europe are diverging from America. If the views on MT are a reasonable representation of American views as a whole it seems as if America is getting more and more right wing, pro Creationist Christainity, more gung ho than we are. Abortion is still an issue as is the death penalty and same sex marriages whereas with us they aren't. Our views on global warming, fossil fuels and the future of our planet are also opposed to each other. The 'torture' flights over European and British airspace has cause far more concern than any presents from the President. The sheer high handedness is breath taking. 
I do realise however this is much to do with the politicians not the people of America themselves, it would be a shame not to be close but I can see a break coming and I can also see America being isolated in the world. Australasia's future is in the far east, ours I think will be in Europe and possibly the far east too, the markets there are opening up all the time. Africa has it's own problems and is looking to China not America or Europe. We need peace in the Middle East, we don't want to worry that America is going to invade Iran or/and Syria and our Prime Minsister dragging us in too.


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 14, 2009)

I'm surprised that you're being so blase, fellow British chaps and chapesses. The exchange of gifts is all part and parcel of the whole diplomatic Game and is often used to pass on messages that are not expressed in explicit words.

This particular gaffe, as I said earlier, was either a huge fumble by Obama's staff (and therefore mere incompetence), a lack of understanding of the significance of such things by Obama himself (which does not bode well for his foreign policy performance) or a deliberate snub/brush-off by the new President to our government (and implicit within that, the Crown).

We, as unimportant individuals, may well take the "So what?" attitude. That is, however, not the way such things will be seen by those elevated enough to play on the Worlds Stage.

Whether it's a good thing or not I wouldn't like to say at this point. I used to be pro-Europe at one time and then I saw how we, as the American phrase so robustly puts it, got the 'shaft'.  We pay and pay and get nothing whilst the French do nothing and get everything, for example.  Since the '60's, I have always been against being so closely associated with America's foreign policy adventures but it was a necessary thing both for 'them' and 'us' whilst the Cold War rumbled on.  Given the choice, if you asked me right this minute, I'd rather not be part of any alliance that had the French in it but that's about all I could articulate (painkiller masked migraine is degrading my ability to reason).


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 14, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> I'm surprised that you're being so blase, chaps and chapesses. The exchange of gifts is all part and parcel of the whole diplomatic Game and is often used to pass on messages that are not expressed in explicit words.
> 
> This particular gaffe, as I said earlier, was either a huge fumble by Obama's staff (and therefore mere incompetence), a lack of understanding of the significance of such things by Obama himself (which does not bode well for his foreign policy performance) or a deliberate snub/brush-off by the new President to our government (and implicit within that, the Crown).
> 
> We, as unimportnat individuals, may well take the "So what?" attitude. That is, however, not the way such things will be seen by those elevated enough to play on the Worlds Stage.


 
As I said though the Manderins in Whitehall will be laughing up their sleeves at the gaucheness of the Obama camp, it gives them the upper hand for a little while. Obama's retinue will all be blaming each other while the 'Yes Minister' types will be oh so understanding as the American delegation stands there looking all apologetic, One up for us! Gamesmanship a la Terry Thomas.


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 14, 2009)

An interesting take on it that I hadn't considered :tup:.  Of course, that's only if it was a mistake.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 14, 2009)




----------



## Tez3 (Mar 14, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> An interesting take on it that I hadn't considered :tup:. Of course, that's only if it was a mistake.


 
Too many years spent in MOD Main Building London lol! 
Whether or not it's a mistake, it will be treated as one, another chance to patronise our cousins and put them off balance. They are always looking to wrong foot others, hell, they even do it between departments.


----------



## Hagakure (Mar 14, 2009)

Sukerkin mate, I hear what you're saying completely, but I genuinely _don't_ care. I'm on the verge of being forced to change job, I don't know if I'm going to be getting a new one anytime soon, but I'm being put in an untenable situation, I've a toddler that doesn't sleep, I'm wondering how I'm going to pay the rent for my house, bills, food etc. These are the issues I'm concerned with, if the politicians and in particular Obama want to play silly buggers then that's what they do. In my view anyway. 

With any luck, my family and I won't even be living in the UK in a few years time either. 

Tez, the 6 nations, where England are getting spanked?


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 14, 2009)

England playing France tomorrow.

contact SSAFA, trust me.


----------



## Hagakure (Mar 14, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> England playing France tomorrow.
> 
> contact SSAFA, trust me.




England playing at Twickenham? I wish the All Blacks could play in the 6N....  

SSAFA? Why mate?


----------



## Makalakumu (Mar 14, 2009)

Sometimes I get the feeling that politics (national and international) is just a soap opera put on for our benefit.  Nothing of real import gets decided on these "missions" and the real dirty work is done in dark and ugly places by people who spend very little time in front of lights and cameras.


----------



## MarkBarlow (Mar 14, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> Why? it's only diplomatic gifts, It's not as though the Browns would actually be allowed to keep anything anyway, it's all logged in a book ( all civil service depts have books where gifts have to be written in) and it will be put away as official not for the Browns to actually use.
> Anyway it's the thought that counts lol!



I wasn't concerned with the presents as much as the return of the Churchill bust and the apparent slighting of Brown over the visit.  Also, it seems Obama is determined to not have a close relation with the UK.  When friends and supporters are dwindling, you don't give the cold shoulder to the few that remain.

Of course, if folks in the UK don't think it's a big deal, who am I to tell you otherwise.  Everyone views the world from their own unique perspective and what upsets me may well pass unnoticed by someone else.  Suffice it to say, I wished it had been handled differently.


----------



## Hagakure (Mar 14, 2009)

MarkBarlow said:


> I wasn't concerned with the presents as much as the return of the Churchill bust and the apparent slighting of Brown over the visit.  Also, it seems Obama is determined to not have a close relation with the UK.  When friends and supporters are dwindling, you don't give the cold shoulder to the few that remain.
> 
> Of course, if folks in the UK don't think it's a big deal, who am I to tell you otherwise.  Everyone views the world from their own unique perspective and what upsets me may well pass unnoticed by someone else.  Suffice it to say, I wished it had been handled differently.



I think there'll always be to some extent that close bond between the US and UK, in the same way there will be between the UK and Canada, Aus, NZ etc. In this case, one particular president, good or bad can try and make whatever diplomatic statement they like, but ultimately, I don't think it'll change much. 

We have the same language (yes, I know there are nuances, slang etc that's different but we _still _speak the same language) and a symbiotic history. Regardless of whatever politicians do/say, I like Americans. The _vast_, overwhelming majority I've met have been open, friendly, gregarious, hard working, articulate and fun to be around. That's not meant to blow sunshine up the collective American behinds here D) just relating my experience. Some noob president won't change that view.


----------



## myusername (Mar 14, 2009)

MarkBarlow said:


> I wasn't concerned with the presents as much as the return of the Churchill bust



I would have to sympathise with Obama on this one! He is an ugly bugger isn't he? Would you really want his bald, cigar munching, gurning face in your front room?


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2009)

Hagakure said:


> England playing at Twickenham? I wish the All Blacks could play in the 6N....
> 
> SSAFA? Why mate?


 
Off to work at moment, I'll PM you when I get back.


----------



## grydth (Mar 15, 2009)

While countries would go to war over trivial and personal slights in the 1800's, I can't imagine this faux pas changing the fundamental relations between the nations. I am not going to bed tonight worried about war with the UK being imminent. Obama will learn from it, the Brits will persevere and the alliance will carry on.

The only thing that does bother me is, had Bush done it, the US media would be filled with condemnations of how (allegedly) stupid Bush was. While I far prefer Obama to Bush, media idolatry and gross favoritism are always a matter for concern.


----------



## Marginal (Mar 15, 2009)

All this over a pencil holder and a plaque? 

Seems par for the course with England.

The talking hat.
The queen being alive since 1776...

We know the Brits can't and/or won't do much other than offer an offended sniff and maybe a strongly worded letter.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2009)

Marginal said:


> All this over a pencil holder and a plaque?
> 
> Seems par for the course with England.
> 
> ...


 
It was the American press that was getting it's knickers in a twist not the British press or the people, we have more important things on our minds at the moment, the imminent liklihood of N Ireland kicking off again so it shows how much you actually now about what goes on here. We barely noticed. Your Obama haters are making a big deal about it we're not, we don't care.

Oh and England? No, son, it's either the United Kingdom or Great Britain. England is one country of the few we have here.

No idea what talking hat and the queen bit are about, want to elaborate?


----------



## Gordon Nore (Mar 15, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> It was the American press that was getting it's knickers in a twist not the British press or the people, we have more important things on our minds at the moment...



Thank you for reiterating this important point. GB, as you point out, is in a state of grief over recent atrocities. It faces the same economic crisis as the USA and the rest of the world. There are too many pressing issues to count. The Churchill and Region One DVDs are a low priority, I'm sure.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2009)

The bust of Churchill actually belongs to us, it wasn't a gift to the Americans and is worth a lot of money. It was lent to President Bush for the first term of his office after 9/11, he wanted it hang on to it  but there's no reason why President Obama should have to have it if he doesn't want to.
Churchill was the finest war leader going but a lousy politician, the people voted him out of office after the war. He's remembered for his leadership during the war but if you look at what he did before and after the war his record is not good. He was a Liberal for a while too.


----------



## crushing (Mar 15, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> Your Obama haters are making a big deal about it we're not, we don't care.


 
I haven't heard the Clinton's make a big deal out of it, although they seem to be the type that may be enjoying it.

While Obama apologists may want to spin the the lapse into simply being about Churchill and DVDs (neglecting the press conference and formal state dinner -hope they didn't send a staffer to McDonalds for the dinner), one doesn't need to be an Obama hater to think that any representative of the USA, especially the President, should act with respect and proper etiquette.

The fear of the "ugly American" stereotype may be what is driving many people to call out our representatives that fail decorum.  I should hope such an exercise in respect is non-partisan.  

Maybe there is an escape clause for acting responsibly when a leader is "too tired"?  Which may have the Clinton's smiling even more.
Barack Obama 'too tired' to give proper welcome to Gordon Brown
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/wor...d-to-give-proper-welcome-to-Gordon-Brown.html


----------



## Marginal (Mar 15, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> No idea what talking hat and the queen bit are about, want to elaborate?


The talking hat incident's referenced here:
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0CE1DB163AF934A25756C0A967958260

The 1776 thing: 






Gaffes to be sure, but not the stuff of international incidents. (Freedonia excepted.)


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2009)

No one 'took offence' at either of those incidents. Being British we always see the funny side of incidents like that, the times I've seen either incident on the television it's always been in a comedy situation.
We're not all fans of the Royal Family anyway.


----------



## Gordon Nore (Mar 15, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> The bust of Churchill actually belongs to us, it wasn't a gift to the Americans and is worth a lot of money. It was lent to President Bush for the first term of his office after 9/11, he wanted it hang on to it  but there's no reason why President Obama should have to have it if he doesn't want to...



I hadn't realized that. I recalled only that it was in the Oval Office and that President Obama's team was going to send it to the British Embassy. So, in that respect, his actions were diplomatically proper I suppose. Nothing to get ones knickers in a twist about.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2009)

It's a bronze by Sir Jacob Epstein and it's worth thousands of pounds and as much as Blair liked Bush, he can't give away something worth that much belonging to the nation.
http://epstein.3forming.com/Gallery/Three_Dimensional_Works_by_Jacob_Epstein/Page/3.aspx

Diplomatic etiquette is the art of one upmanship done in genteel surroundings, diplomatic talk is saying what you don't mean. 
I wouldn't expect a politicians to know the nuances of such diplomatic present giving, thats why he has a staff. I'd suggest it was his staff to blame either through ignorance or design. Perhaps someone out there wants Obama to look inadequate?
Presents given to British Prime Ministers don't become their property, they are keep for the nation however at the end of their term of office the PMs are allowed to buy anything they have been 'given' if they want to keep it.

American ambassadors to the Court of St James seem to be alone in the fact that they aren't diplomats, being a political appointee not a member of the diplomatic service so perhaps there's room for a lot of mistakes to be made when the American Ambassador recommends to the President such things as presents or how things work here.

Our politicians may want a close working relationship with American politicians but we don't, Blair's devotion to Bush has cost us dear in service peoples lives. We'd be happy just trading and being 'cousins' with American, we don't want our Prime Minister being that pally with a President again.


----------



## myusername (Mar 15, 2009)

Marginal said:


> We know the Brits can't and/or won't do much other than offer an offended sniff and maybe a strongly worded letter.



We wont do either Margie! We'll just take the p*ss instead


----------



## Gordon Nore (Mar 15, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> ...Presents given to British Prime Ministers don't become their property, they are keep for the nation...



Fast-forward fifty years: There will be a photograph of those Region One DVDs in a textbook (assuming they still exist), along with a caption explaining what a DVD is.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2009)

myusername said:


> We wont do either Margie! We'll just take the p*ss instead


 
Dead right we will!  :ultracool


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> It's a bronze by Sir Jacob Epstein and it's worth thousands of pounds and as much as Blair liked Bush, he can't give away something worth that much belonging to the nation.
> http://epstein.3forming.com/Gallery/Three_Dimensional_Works_by_Jacob_Epstein/Page/3.aspx
> 
> Diplomatic etiquette is the art of one upmanship done in genteel surroundings, diplomatic talk is saying what you don't mean.
> ...


 

Just learnt that one of our students has been killed in Afghanistan by a roadside bomb. this is what Blair and Bush did. If Obama never talks to our government again I shan't care.


----------



## Marginal (Mar 15, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> No one 'took offence' at either of those incidents. Being British we always see the funny side of incidents like that, the times I've seen either incident on the television it's always been in a comedy situation.
> We're not all fans of the Royal Family anyway.


Point being, nobody takes them seriously. Much like the incidents that earned the initial apology in the thread.


----------



## myusername (Mar 15, 2009)

Tez3 said:


> Just learnt that one of our students has been killed in Afghanistan by a roadside bomb.



Sorry to hear of your loss.


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 15, 2009)

I am far from sure that you have the right of that, *Marginal*. 

The Great Game has never gone away and whilst America might be able to claim that it hasn't been 'in it' long enough to be expected to understand the rules (or in fact does not want to play at all), the way the world works is still much the same in it's upper echelons as it ever has been since nations came to function as entities.

These things are subtle and it is only really in the past few years that peons like us have even had a sniff that they happened.

As one of those peons, I have to say that I must be a blip on the "noone takes them seriously" monitor . If 'you' chaps don't want or value our help anymore, the noted faux pas is a pretty good way of saying it as far as the Diplomatic Service is concerned.


----------



## Tez3 (Mar 15, 2009)

I hope they don't want our help, I hope that we won't get dragged into their pissing contests with the "A-Rabs" ever again, I hope we never get asked to help invade countries ever again. I hope we have leaders that have the balls to say to America, yes we like you but we aren't going to let anymore of our people die because you had a president that wanted to outdo his daddy when it came to invading "Eye-raq" and we had a spineless **** of a Prime Minister.

I'm sick of all the stupid talk that justifies what we are doing in these wars, I'm sick of the mealy mouthed politicians who carp on about this or that and the sniping between them. Brown and the government have said nothing about the DVDs for all we bloody know Brown said thats what he wanted. Diplomacy will carry on as it always has, too much is being read into all this. If relations between us were really that strained everything would have been icily correct, in 'families' there's always something that goes wrong. If there's any fault perhaps it's that America is taking us for granted, thats what the dvds probably meant.

After all these years what the hell are either side doing giving presents paid for by tax payers anyway? 

In the intel world the 'great game' is spying, taken from Rudyard Kipling's 'Kim', a man who lost his own son to war.


----------



## Empty Hands (Mar 15, 2009)

Sukerkin said:


> If 'you' chaps don't want or value our help anymore, the noted faux pas is a pretty good way of saying it as far as the Diplomatic Service is concerned.



I wouldn't take these things so seriously.  The diplomatic niceties don't seem to match up well to the actual relationship.  Take our relationship with Russia over the last 8 years.  Putin and Bush had by all accounts a very friendly, personal relationship.  Bush could "see into his soul."  They held hands and said nice things about each other and practically wrote Putin + Bush = BFF4EVA on their notebooks during 4th period. The diplomatic niceties were definitely there.

However, during the same period, there were extraordinary tensions between the two countries.  Clashes over SDI, the Ukraine, the recent war, spheres of influence and all the rest.  The diplomatic relationship didn't appear to ease any of that.


----------



## Sukerkin (Mar 15, 2009)

ROFL - thanks for that, *EH*.  This night I was in need of a good chuckle and that delivered.


----------

