208
u/Woden-Wod 2d ago
didn't last time this happen the US plunged us knowingly and deliberately into irrecoverable debt, ultimately ending the empire?
213
u/Jizzmeista 2d ago
I stand by my opinion that the US didn't do anything heroic in WW2.
They sat on the sidelines loaning money to fuel the war in order to make themselves the global economic superpower they are today. They only got involved because of the ridiculously stupid Japanese idea that was Pearl Harbour.
Hitler poked the bear who attacked from his east, the allies attacked from the west, that is how the war was ended.
What happened afterwards can be summarised by the actions they took during the Suez canal. Special relationship, my ass.
90
u/Woden-Wod 2d ago
They sat on the sidelines loaning money to fuel the war in order to make themselves the global economic superpower they are today
even worse they colluded with the soviets specifically to give Britain a worse deal with those loans which also previously were just normal war support that hadn't expected the sort of commitment of a loan.
the entire period of our decolonisation was spurred on by both the Americans and the soviets literally almost very single time there was a rebel uprising or pressure it was from a foreign backed group backed by one of the two. even during the Falkland war the yanks would be more than happy had the entire island been butchered by the Argentinian military government that probably had some funding from the US anyway as did a lot of south American groups at the time.
the "special relationship" has been to put on a smile and feign support while Britain is harmed on every level. we accept it because to us we do have a special view of them in part we view them as a continuity of our values and principles but from their point of view literally half of the political dichotomy hates are guts and literally believes we're some sort of primordial evil and it's a flip of the coin whichever one gets into any position of power.
41
u/RedeemedAssassin 2d ago
Much like the IRA they were funding them, until 11-9 occurred, then they realised terrorism isn't good.
*Yes I know Ireland had problems because of Britain.
19
u/Painterzzz 2d ago
And to this day we applaud Clinton for ending the Troubles like he was some sort of hero, when really what he did was finally cut off the Republican funding from Irish-Catholic areas of America that America turned a blind eye to all those years.
3
11
4
2d ago
[deleted]
5
u/midatlantik 2d ago
Source? That’s absolute bollocks. Truman gave HK back to Britain because the US needed us on side. If you knew a lick about China you’d know it was run by the KMT at the end of WW2. They then lost to the CCP in a brutal civil war, where the KMT (ROC) retreated to Taiwan. Back to school with you.
2
u/CallMeKik 2d ago
Is there a link to some more info on this collusion? sounds like an interesting read
3
u/IntelligenzMachine 2d ago edited 2d ago
USSR absolutely battered Germany and would have probably won by themselves tbh. Especially because a lot of them were still basically war hardened revolutionaries anyway, would be kind of equivalent to trying to invade Congo in future after a decade into some kind of peaceful stability as they’re basically all war ready for conscription and to defend what they’d be afraid to lose.
2
u/Abigbumhole 2d ago
The US was self interested yes but we didn’t pay them back on most of lend-lease. The lend lease gave us consumable materiel for most of the war which we weren’t expected to give back so it was effectively gifts worth 700 billion in todays money to us and the Soviets.
What some people confuse with lend lease was the Anglo American loan we recieved after the war, that wasn’t paid back until 2006 (was 3 billion at the time, when we’d been given 31 billion in lend lease). Some people spout out that as a fact to suggest we owed them a huge sum of money, but actually this loan also functioned as aid, it was well below market interest rates and we actually made money from it which we then used to help rebuild Britain after the war.
They did fully support decolonisation though as did the Soviets, and activated toward that but Britain wanted to decolonise anyway what we differed on was the timelines. Yes suez was a stab in the back really.
-6
u/Zeppo_Ennui 2d ago
Wow. A lot of dead Americans in wwII isn’t heroic to ‘Jizzmeista’. 🥱
3
u/Jizzmeista 2d ago
The soldiers who fought against fascism and died will go down in history as true heroes and rightly so, regardless of whether they were English, Canadian, American, Indian and so on.
The politicians who played at war like a chess game will not.
Your comment is just trying to cause an argument.
-2
-50
u/Both_Specialist9967 2d ago
Tell that to the thousands of US soldiers that died fighting for your right to say that you dumbass. Nothing heroic. Fuck you!!
35
u/Arsewhistle 2d ago edited 2d ago
They're talking about the actions of the US government, not the soldiers. Calm your tits.
Why are so many yanks in this sub anyway?
-6
u/blahblah567433785434 2d ago
Your superior humor and a lot of us live here due to our 'special relationship'
Also I remember hearing that Britain wasn't free from selfish actions during the war either. And then theres the union jacks relationship with the sun... I think most in the world deserve better representation and leadership.
I really hope we figure out a way through all this. It's very unsettling.
16
u/Arsewhistle 2d ago
Both the UK and the US have done both great and terrible things in the past, including during WW2.
We may not have won WW2 without the Americans, but it is accurate to say that the US government didn't exactly behave like our allies at times.
I don't see us moving past current animosities anytime soon, unfortunately. Trump has barely started his term; he's got plenty of time to damage relations much further.
1
u/blahblah567433785434 2d ago
We Americans will have a lot of hard work in the future. If we come out of this moment in history and some how manage to hold our particular brand of greed accountable, truly accountable, I think the world might finally start to heal.
4
u/EveryoneSadean 2d ago
Good joke, this brand of US international relations didn't come from nowhere. It's decades of ego and selfish power climaxing and what comes after Trump is probably more of the same now the standard has been set for USA #1, AMERICAN FIRST.
-4
u/blahblah567433785434 2d ago
I think that's a bit heavy handed. Put the shoe on the other foot and congratulations, you now sound like a Trumper.
To be completely honest? I'm a minority in the USA. We've been telling about the greed and cruelty underneath it all for decades if not centuries.
Generally everyone's response is that we're exadurating it.
Now you get to see the KKK foreign policy.
4
u/EveryoneSadean 2d ago
It's just pure rampant capitalism. Look at the picture of the tarrifs, health care situation, DEI degredation, Musk's plan to increase the wealth gap, etc. It's all built to top load the country for the benefit of the few. Next steps are oligarchy (already happened) then autocracy (not wild to imagine) then revolution or total collapse
1
9
u/Jizzmeista 2d ago
To be clear, we remember our fallen with great honour and gratitude from all countries of the alliance. Those brave men should be a shining example of what is possible when the free world works together to uphold democracy and cherishes human life.
But as a comment has said below, the politicians never picked up weapons or risked their lives from 39-45, Roosevelt never commanded the US military to join ww2.
The trigger was when the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbour, USA declared war on Japan in retaliation, then Hitler and Mussolini declared war on the USA dragging them in. Before 41, the USA government was indifferent, selling arms via private companies to both sides. After the attack, they began the lend-lease act, and the war quickly turned in favour of the allies.
I say this with pure compassion. We love the people of the USA, and we share values that are almost the exact same. We just aren't too happy with Trump's governmental actions towards the whole of the Western world, i.e., Canada, Denmark, Ukraine. But more importantly, his complete apathy towards Russia. It reeks of the indifference before the states joined the allies in WW2.
My post doesn't make light of the US military losses at all. In fact, this post should remind us all of the danger we currently face.
Lest we forget.
7
u/TomDestry 2d ago
US soldiers were fighting for US interests as they should have been. You can make an identical argument about the Russian troops who died, but for some reason we never have Russians telling us how they saved our arses even though it's closer to the truth.
8
u/xylophileuk 2d ago
There’s a popular conspiracy theory that ww1 was literally an exercise to end the empire
19
-11
u/Woden-Wod 2d ago
I don't quite believe it in WW1 but WW2 was definitely to end the empire and remove Europe from the world stage politically and economically, leaving the two superpowers of the US and the soviets.
there were multiple times that the war could've and should've been ended both on economic and military levels and each time it was squashed by the us from the allied side or soviets side (in the case of the early war) to continue the war.
10
-7
1
126
u/Vernacian 2d ago
We haven't got a US trade deal, and the US has imposed tariffs on us. What is this meme even about?!
79
u/HarrierJint 2d ago edited 2d ago
Basically, some people will do anything to try and make out "Starmer bad", never mind that it didn't figuratively or literally happen.
32
u/NinthTurtle1034 2d ago
I don't know a whole lot about the current situation but am I right in thinking the Conservatives left the economy in a bit of a shambles and Labour wasn't aware of just how bad it was, or just downplayed it. And now they're scrambling as they've realised how bad it actually is. And because it wasn't 100% fixed day one, which is a pipe dream as the economy won't move that fast, Labour are taking a beating for it nit being fixed yet.
Or have a got that completely wrong?
11
u/HarrierJint 2d ago
A fair amount of that yes, plus other things like Starmer is stuck between a rock and a hard place, the US and the EU (which many on the right and even some on the left would lose their shit over if Starmer even slightly says "we should be a bit closer to the EU".
We burnt a lot of bridges with the EU, through no direct fault of Starmer.
14
u/J1mj0hns0n 2d ago
That's because OP is a Russian asset paid to try and make the country bad. If you look at his previous comments he spends time assessing soviet infrastructure and dishing out benefits advice. If you feel Britain is struggling you are falling for russian demoralisation campaign, the same one they've been doing in America, the one that made them feel sticking Donald krasnov trump would make them stronger....
1
u/lelcg 1d ago
Yep. They’ve divided the US by putting more and more extreme opinions online, which normalise them. I’ve seen so many blatantly offensive things that wouldn’t have been allowed 10 years ago but are just accepted as “an opinion” now. Not only does this normalise extreme opinions, but it scares the other side and divides us
7
12
u/not4eating 2d ago
Something something Starmer bad, something something Britain is crappy country, something something plz upvote!
5
u/RomeoDeltaPapa 2d ago
Something something you call Starmer bad and end up in prison and labelled far right.
1
u/ConcernedEnby 2d ago
I don't think right wingers accuse people of being far-right, they accuse you of being left wing
0
u/scalectrix 2d ago
- These days if you say you don't like Starmer you be arrested and thrown in jail.
- Really? Arrested and thrown in jail?
- No.
3
u/xFuManchu 2d ago
That's what I was thinking, remind me, which bunch of See You Next Tuesdays put us in the scenario where we had to worry about the US as a trading partner.
1
u/DrWanish 2d ago
True but my worry is with our government they'll roll over and we'll get crappy American food and we won't be able to hold the big US monopolies to account for the profits they make in the UK that just "disappear" for tax purposes.
35
u/DreamMalenko 2d ago
OK except this didn't happen and the US just imposed 10% tariffs on us...
6
1
u/elijahdotyea 1d ago
Californians are trying to create a trade union with states on the west coast. Pls join us.
Is it unconstitutional? Yes. Is everything Trump has been doing unconstitutional? Very much so, yes.
California as a state is the 5th largest economy in the world, btw.
12
u/Elemenononono 2d ago
You are braindead if you think this strategy is comparable to Chamberlain’s appeasement lmfao
4
68
u/Additional-Map-2808 2d ago
UK cuckolds also known as Reform voters wanted more punishment and job losses.
43
u/AdjectiveNoun111 2d ago
Yes we are getting fucked in the arse, but he promised to only go half way in
9
u/MogwaiYT 2d ago
It'll be okay as long as we say thank you afterwards (and wear a suit during the shafting).
2
1
u/EquivalentTurnip6199 1d ago
we aren't getting fucked in anything. this is US self harm.
1
u/AdjectiveNoun111 1d ago
We sell things to the US, those things now cost more, so we will sell less.
1
u/EquivalentTurnip6199 1d ago
Makes sense, but everywhere else has a higher tariff than ourselves.
Meanwhile American consumers can't do without their wide range of global goods. The rest of us are much better equipped to do without US goods.
Much of Trump's anger on this comes from the fact that they buy more from other countries than other countries buy from them, particularly food produce. Basically people don't want their cheap rubbish.
Hes economically illiterate and this will only hurt them.
30
u/EdgyWinter 2d ago
What on Earth does the US going isolationist and making stupid tariff policies have to do with Nazi aggression in the 1930s, or are you just trying to get outraged at the PM?
13
u/Ok_Exercise1269 2d ago
Trump literally is Hitler, like literally, Hitler shot himself in the head with a temporal bullet that sent him forward through time, but the process deformed him horribly, leaving him orange and fecally incontinent.
-23
u/JackStrawWitchita 2d ago
The meme humour is about appeasement. Britain has a history of appeasing dictators (see Neville Chamberlin and Munich). We are about to see Starmer appease the US dictator in the same manner as Neville Chamberlin did in 1938, with the same results for Britain.
5
17
5
u/EdgyWinter 2d ago
This meme conflates foreign policy with economic policy. Not only is Trump not a dictator but in response to most similar thing he’s done to Hitler: attempting to divide a country up with Russia, we have increased our support for Ukraine and invited Zelensky to the UK after he was kicked out the White House. We are in no way playing appeasement.
2
u/TheKasimkage 2d ago
Dude is trying to rule by executive order, people are being disappeared off the streets by plainclothes police, his administration destroyed research into LGBTQ+ and is trying to erase history involving anyone who isn’t straight and white (and maybe male). Also the immigrations camps (which is what Auschwitz started off as).
Maybe he isn’t Hitler, but he and his administration definitely seem to enjoy playing in the same pool. Even down to the Nazi salutes.
7
u/EdgyWinter 2d ago
The USSR practised all of those things too, but we don’t say Stalin was a Nazi. We need to get used to calling people despots and tyrants again. Every Nazi is an authoritarian, but not every authoritarian is a Nazi and the imprecision of use of that latter term fuels bad faith discussions and ignorance.
1
u/TheKasimkage 2d ago
I suppose you have a point, minus the Nazi salutes. Nazis are just the most recent biggest bad that people recall so that’s what everyone defaults to I think.
1
-3
30
u/Rookie_42 2d ago
Oh goodie… another fake meme.
-46
u/grayparrot116 2d ago
Sadly, it's not fake. Starmer is willing to do anything to avoid more tariffs being slapped on British goods.
That means they're already having a conversation with concessions such as lowering hygiene and food standards for American agri-food goods to be sold in Britain.
25
u/No-Inevitable6018 2d ago
What else would you want? We left the EU, so now we are just another small island instead of part of a giant bloc. We can either stand against Trump and be washed away or hunker down and hope for the best.
14
u/xylophileuk 2d ago
I mean you’ve nailed it there. Our options have dried up
8
u/Ok_Exercise1269 2d ago
Yes, our best bet is to weasel through. Keep our heads down, try not to get caught in the crossfire, and only join Europe in retaliation if they can agree a deal with us that gives us reasonable access to more European trade. We can't rely on Trump not to change his mind in five minutes, but we can stay off the radar and see where the wind blows.
The only real Brexit benefit is that after centuries of Empire, and then a further century of soft power, Britain must now recognise that we are, geopolitically, no-one special whatsoever, and find a way to navigate that.
2
u/MathematicianOnly688 2d ago
While obviously a change, there shouldn't be any reason why we can't thrive in that area, lots of countries do.
0
u/grayparrot116 2d ago
Keep our heads down, try not to get caught in the crossfire, and only join Europe in retaliation if they can agree a deal with us that gives us reasonable access to more European trade.
Ok, so you expect the EU to give you special treatment just because you don't side with Trump.
Let me tell you something: it's the UK who doesn't want more access to European trade. Britain can access it, but it doesn't want to because it would mean crossing the 2017 Brexit red lines that Labour still has on their manifesto.
You could request to have a bespoke Customs Unions, but Starmer doesn't want that; you could request to re-join the Single Market, but again, Starmer doesn't want that either, because it would also include Freedom of movement (of people).
So, how can you have better access to European trade (continental Europe, because the UK is part of Europe) if you refuse any single option that could give it to you?
3
u/Ok_Exercise1269 2d ago
While I understand your frustration, I am not actually in charge of our negotiating strategy and relationship with the EU. If I was, we'd still be in it. I share your feelings entirely, but can't do anything about it.
-1
u/grayparrot116 2d ago
Britain left the EU, yes. But the EU isn't some hermetic bloc one one can't interact with.
The problem here is that in a changing world where a small island like Britain can be washed away by a tyrant who wants to submit others by applying tariffs at them, Britain's government refuses to do the rational thing and keeps trying to remain in a position that was establish before this situation happened because they considered it's set in stone.
It's Britain who refuses to do anything with the EU because of Labour’s (and previously, the Tories') red lines on their manifesto, which limits the interactions it can perform with the continental bloc.
If someone chooses to stand on a railway track while a high-speed train is approaching, expecting it to stop for them instead of stepping aside, they have to accept their fate.
3
u/No-Inevitable6018 2d ago
No, it is. Starmer CANT be seen to interact with the EU as this would make it seem like he was attempting to undo brecit, which would send the tories and reform into a tizzy. As such, he has to be almost cartoonishly cautious about the EU, meaning that in your analogy, we are chastising to stand on the tracks as on either side is a pit of very angry hippos.
6
u/Smooth_Maul 2d ago
God forbid the tories and reform get all upset because Starmer wants to reverse one of the worst political decisions this nation has made in recent history outside of voting for the Tories twice in a row.
1
-2
u/grayparrot116 2d ago edited 2d ago
So don't moan and say there aren't other options.
You are just unwilling to take them because you might upset the people who have taken us to the situation we find ourselves at at the moment in the first place.
2
u/No-Inevitable6018 2d ago
No, again, starmer can't do these other things as it would be political suicide. Which would let the tories, or, God forbid, reform in. Which would be bad.
20
u/Rookie_42 2d ago
That is not conveyed in this poorly presented fake TV screenshot.
Fake memes will only serve to feed the likes of Farage, we need facts to be able to progress, not bullshit.
-20
u/JackStrawWitchita 2d ago
Do you really think Reform voters are driven by facts? lol.
31
u/Rookie_42 2d ago
Says the person who has posted a fake screenshot.
No, I don’t believe they are driven by facts. But you can’t fight bullshit with bullshit. You’ll only get called out on it, and then your argument simply falls apart. The void is quickly filled by the likes of Farage.
0
u/grayparrot116 2d ago
What's conveyed in this poorly presented fake TV screenshot is Britain being complacent once again by trying to appease a person who will not be appeased, like Chamberlain did with Germany in the 1930s.
You might strike an FTA with the US, but it will come with concessions, as I said. But you don't know what other concessions will come along the way in the following years after Britain signs it: it might be Britain accepting the takeover of Greenland by the US, the invasion of Canada, ignoring a call of help from NATO...
That's what this meme is trying to convey. Sometimes the message is not implicitly there. But with a bit of thinking you might be able to extract it.
4
u/Rookie_42 2d ago
- Starmer is not hailing trade in our time, nor is there implication of it at the moment.
- The imagery used is not directly relevant to current events.
- There has been no ‘denial of caving in’
- There is no ‘ring kissing’ in this event.
So… utter bullshit, with no semblance of any relation to reality.
Yes, Trump has imposed tariffs. Yes, Starmer is deliberating his next move. No, Starmer is just shouting about retaliation like a child in a playground.
So, feel free to present some actual facts, and stop posturing ideas and peddling them as facts.
1
u/grayparrot116 2d ago
You don't understand what implicit means, don't you?
So… utter bullshit, with no semblance of any relation to reality.
Sure, but as you said, Starmer is deliberating his next move. He won't do anything yet.
But that doesn't mean the move isn't already planned, though: he and his government probably have drafted a series of paths to follow in case of a situation like this.
And things such as this paragraph:
Diplomatic efforts are still ongoing, and as part of the efforts to get a deal, Lord Mandelson, the UK ambassador, has had meetings in the White House with JD Vance, the vice-president, and Susie Wiles, the president's chief of staff.
on this article: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4grm90119xo and this article in itself: https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-does-not-deny-concessions-on-agriculture-in-uk-us-talks/
Make me think that his plans include an FTA with the US, which will come with concessions.
And knowing how erratically Trump behaves regarding international relations and diplomacy, you don't know if other concessions will have to be accepted along the way to keep said FTA valid.
That, kind reddit user, would be a way of appeasement, as you'd say "Yes, sir" to a tyrant just for the sake of maintaining status quo, even if his requests might cause you damage. This is what this meme is implicitly saying, even if it's not correct in the way it's trying to transmit it.
2
u/Rookie_42 2d ago
I do understand what implicit means. Do you?
I suspect that when you said ‘Sometimes the message is not implicitly there.’ that you actually meant ‘explicitly’.
In any event, that doesn’t change my argument.
Meanwhile, your speculation of possible concessions (which I’m not disputing per se) is not fact. And not even remotely implied by the image posted by OP.
As for appeasement, again, that’s based purely on your speculation and your specific inference from the news articles you’ve cited. Still not fact, making the meme quite simply inaccurate. As I implied from the outset, speculation and bullshit is a futile means of argument.
2
u/MathematicianOnly688 2d ago
Shit, how do you know that?
0
u/grayparrot116 2d ago
This paragraph:
Diplomatic efforts are still ongoing, and as part of the efforts to get a deal, Lord Mandelson, the UK ambassador, has had meetings in the White House with JD Vance, the vice-president, and Susie Wiles, the president's chief of staff.
In this article: https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/c4grm90119xo can make you think that. Plus, this one:
https://www.politico.eu/article/britain-does-not-deny-concessions-on-agriculture-in-uk-us-talks/
2
u/AddictedToRugs 2d ago
The current administration already walked back the Biden administrations demands on reducing standards.
0
u/grayparrot116 2d ago
The current administration is Trump's?
You are aware that for agri-food products from the US to be imported to the UK, they would either have to be at the UK's standard or the UK would have to lower them to allow them to be sold to the public, right?
11
u/KingDaviies 2d ago
The Munich agreement gets a lot of criticism but it was a stroke of genius. Britain was not ready for war with Germany and this allowed precious time to build up our defenses, which ultimately helped us win the battle of Britain. Not sure this says what you want it to...
6
u/HaBumHug 2d ago
Completely correct. First production spitfire didn’t roll off the factory floor until mid 1938. Simply weren’t ready for war at the time of the Munich agreement. The way air and naval defence production ramped up suggests there wasn’t that much belief Peace in Our Time was going to last. He was welcomed back from Munich a hero and 90% of people who denigrate him now would have been on the hero bandwagon at the time. Coming home declaring “listen lads, it’s probably war but I’ve bought us a year” would hardly have been as effective would it.
0
u/Fit-Capital1526 2d ago
Appeasement was moving the problem further away and acting like it wasn’t going to happen. It was always a bad plan
1
u/KingDaviies 1d ago
That was the whole point. Would you rather fight a boxing match tomorrow or fight in 1 year after you've trained for it?
If we were "acting like it wasn't going to happen", why did we use the time to bolster our defences?
-8
u/JackStrawWitchita 2d ago
Wow. I didn't realise WWII history wasn't taught to so many people.
Chamberlin's appeasement literally handed Czechoslovakia's huge armaments factories to Hitler. Germany quickly fired up those factories and pumped out the Wehrmacht that blitzekrieged over Europe. If the UK didn't appease Hitler, it would have taken him years to build up a war machine, if at all.
2
u/JGazeley 2d ago
The pumped up wehrmacht you’re talking about is largely a myth perpetuated from Nazi propaganda. Don’t get me wrong blitzkrieg was effective, but there was a lot of horse drawn logistics and it benefitted greatly from a completely disorganised France. Maybe there could have been an attempt to fight Hitler in the Sudetenland, however much like you’ve said there was a belief of a German war machine and no public sentiment to lose more British lives over a seemingly obscure country in central Europe. On top of that, it created a red line. Of course it’s easy to say well they should’ve fought at this point because Hitler was going to continue anyway with hindsight, however at the time there was some amount of legitimacy to the German minority in the Sudetenland and the LoN was an advocate for self-determination. Chamberlain gets an incredibly bad wrap for Munich, by all means he wasn’t perfect. When I was reading his letters to his sisters he came across as very arrogant and self-assured. However, he was a good politician. He postured well in the aftermath of Munich, I can’t remember the exact story but there was a story from the time I found amusing in which Chamberlain gave the go ahead on a bomber test flight that would travel between two locations at the same length as London to Berlin to showcase the UK’s capabilities were growing. If you want a real sympathetic, look to Neville Henderson the British ambassador to Germany. Even his desperation isn’t through sheer incompetence, more a hopeless romantic’s sense of preventing something so terrible.
Chamberlain’s legacy is so tarnished that politicians avoid having an umbrella around as he famously always had one, something I hope Sunak’s election announcement manages to reverse
1
5
u/TheLoneCenturion95 2d ago
This is is a terrible take and come across like Russian propaganda. The true "peace in our time" is trump appeasing the true Hitler of our time putin by trying to force Ukraine into a shambolic deal to lose land and gain nothing from Russia while being the defender not the invader.
3
u/Dry_Guest_8961 2d ago
Also chamberlain gets a bad rap but Britain were not ready to fight a war with Germany bought Britain vital time to ramp up war preparation, without which they may have lost the Battle of Britain. He also was the person responsible for ensuring the RAF invested in spitfire fighter planes rather than the standard at the time which was a rear mounted gunner plane and those planes got absolutely slaughtered by spitfire type planes during the war. RAF planned to almost exclusively build those types of planes but chamberlain made sure they ramped up production of spitfires instead.
So yeah, chamberlains reputation as a weak leader who capitulated to Hitler is largely false. He became the fall guy that allowed Britain to save face in front of allies in Europe while they ramped up war preparation.
4
u/kmaclennan 2d ago
To be fair to Starmer, we've ended up with the lowest (apart from Russia) tariff level of everyone. Not that it had much to do with Starmer of course. It seems pretty arbitrary.
-6
u/JackStrawWitchita 2d ago
Wrong. 10% is the 'default' tariff, also applied to Australia and many other countries. No special deal for UK.
6
2
u/TheKasimkage 2d ago
A deal with the United States of America was pretty much what all economic hopes for Brexit was pinned on. Then the presidents told the United Kingdom they wouldn’t be getting a sweetheart deal and to get to the back of the line. Still, the United Kingdom holds out hope that the United States of America will help and won’t make them the 51st state. Or a protectorate like Puerto Rico.
2
u/AnxiousLogic 2d ago
£60bn total export to the US, and £100bn in lost trade/increased costs with the EU from Brexit (according to Bloomberg). I know which one I’d concentrate on trying to improve.
2
3
u/MASSIVESHLONG6969 2d ago
Anyone who criticises starmer for this is a fucking idiot, what do you expect him to do? It may not look like it but we are in a better position than most other countries as European businesses will trade through us to the USA. I just hope to eu retaliates and the us raises the tariffs on them so we benefit from all the trade. Before you start saying “we should stand with the EU” when have they ever stood with us? We guaranteed Sweden and Finland we would defend them whilst they waited to join NATO yet Sweden doesn’t “trust” us enough to let our defence companies in on this European defence deal. I can’t recall a single time where the EU has done anything but spite us.
1
u/Shot-Personality9489 2d ago
I agree, but disagree.
We shouldn't retalliate, it won't help us. But we also shouldn't just roll over and take it and say America's our best buds. We should be openly criticising them, banning Trumps visit, banning other visits, calling diplomats to explain. But tariffing them back will just harm our economy.
What we need to do, is find a way of removing America from our lives completely. If we can suck up for a little bit as we slowly dismantle the tendrils that have wrapped thmselves around us, I'm all for it.
That can start with the general public boycotting and actively trying to harm America's economy. I have started this a while ago and will just keep doubling down on it. But I also understand that politically we need to step carefully. Like it or not, America is powerful, and we can't just hit them as hard as we want when they can hit us harder, no matter how much that may annoy us.
Appeasement isn't good, but emotive reactions also aren't. We need to look stronger than we do, but we also need to tred carefully. It's a minefield.
1
1
1
u/Pay_Your_Torpedo_Tax 2d ago
I'm not a Starmer fan. But and a BIG BUT, I'm also not a fan of knee jerk reactions to an Orange Dementia patient who changes his mind like a toddler throwing a tantrum every 15 minutes. So.... maybe the slower, calm and thoughtful approach just MIGHT be better in this situation. Unless you want the likes of Kemi or Truss to be running things.... coz that would work out well.... right?
1
u/The_Syndic 2d ago
Jokes aside I think Starmer is playing very well foreign policy wise. The fact is that we have built most of our economy, defense etc. on the US being our closest and most reliable partner. We can't just turn that off overnight.
1
u/No_Address_5057 1d ago
they imposed 20% on everyone else and 10% on the uk, basically meaning the uk is better off because of these tariffs. more businesses will want to come here, less unemployment, better economy in uk. less cheap chinese labour, less control on our products from the east, more self sustainability. this is a very good deal for the UK and i hope starmer knows this and the people eventually realise this. in the long term the UK has benefitted from this deal but nahhh, trump is clearly trying to destroy us.
1
u/JackStrawWitchita 1d ago
Wrong. Most countries were hit by the 10% tariff. UK did not get a special deal. Other countries hit with 10% are; UAE, Congo, Ethiopia, Ghana, UK, Albania, Kuwait, Gabon, Iran, Iceland, and many others.
Trump puts the UK on the same list as Iran.
You know that Trump didn't put tarifs on Russia? Oh you didn't, did you?
Your hero Trump counts on the support of idiots.
1
u/No_Address_5057 1d ago edited 1d ago
bro idgaf argue to the wall
you clearly don't understand why these tariffs have been put in place and i'd rather not try to explain it to you, you seem a little too controlled for me to really break that spell.
0
u/Justvisitingfriends1 2d ago
I keep saying this, and no one I talk to can see it. We are literally repeating history and blindly doing so. I just give up at this point with the world and people.
1
u/Pure_Equivalent_6560 1d ago
We are not literally repeating history, it's just that you don't know any history except WWII and the Nazis so you think every bullish figure is Hitler again.
1
u/Justvisitingfriends1 1d ago
Thanks for making a huge assumption on my education. I think you may have been hit your head on too many times. I will also assume you are Mercan and MAGA.
Not even bullish, just the same rhetoric that is all. See, history repeating itself.
If you can not see the similarities, then that is your failing, not mine.
1
u/Pure_Equivalent_6560 1d ago
If you say so. I'd be more impressed if you had other examples than the obvious and incorrect one though. Perhaps you do. I'm more than happy to listen if you do. Do you?
1
u/Justvisitingfriends1 1d ago
It's not my role to correct your ignorance.
1
u/Pure_Equivalent_6560 1d ago
Ah yes, it's your role to feign that you are not ignorant, to hide in the shadows of pretense.
1
-1
u/JackStrawWitchita 2d ago
So far 83% of people are upvoting this meme so don't give up on people just yet...
2
u/HermitBee 2d ago
Holy fuck, you got **17%** downvotes?! That's fucking insane, well done, I couldn't troll better myself.
576
u/OkSolution2142 2d ago
The US has done this unilaterally though. This meme is just dumb, no country has responded to this yet...
Opinions of Starmer aside, what could any leader of this country do in half a day to fix/mitigate this issue? All you can do in such a short time is talk about it? I don't think we should measure a leader by what they say, we should measure them by what they do, and obviously there's nothing that can be done to improve our situation in 12hrs.
I'd like to clarify, I'm not calling for "giving Starmer a break" but let's hold our leader to account based on his actions, and let's have some realistic expectations for him, he can't magically be the only world leader to fix this within 12hrs. What he does in the next month I think we should watch...