The US has to give a damn about dialogue with Britain (no ambassador)

[kskiska]

The absence of an ambassador serves the cause of anti-Americanism


There used to be a game at particularly drunken 1930s house parties - I must have read this in PG Wodehouse - in which one person would leave the room and the remaining guests then tried to remember who it was. Even the most sober reader, though, may have difficulty calling to mind the present US ambassador's name. The explanation is simple, however. There isn't one. America has not had an ambassador here for five months.

Not that, in recent years, you would have been much the wiser if there had been. Britain may be Washington's most devoted ally, and the London posting may be one of the most prestigious in the American foreign service, but the last US ambassador in London, William Farish, was so low profile that most people here were unaware of his presence or his departure.

Ambassador Farish was not the first envoy to get his job for services rendered - he was for years the Bush family's private banker - and he will doubtless not be the last. But the point was not that he was a political appointment rather than a career diplomat. It was that he was the original silent envoy, and his anonymity - save in bloodstock circles - came at a heavy political price.

It meant that, throughout one of the most demanding periods of modern transatlantic relations, America lacked a strong voice and presence on this side of the water. This was a double deprivation. It was a loss to Britain, since it left Tony Blair to take all the hits while attempting to mediate US policy in this country. And it was a loss to the US, because there was no one with the clout to mediate Britain's views back to the American administration and people.

more…
http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,1368064,00.html

[bemildred]

1. What part of "poodle" don't you get? nt

[autorank]

2. Why do we need an ambassador? The whole nation is our poodle.

We just say, hey, let's invade Iraq and get every body pissed off or maimed; and they say, "Well, quite right! We'll be right there." England doesn't deserve an ambassador, the country doesn't even warrant a Consul General.

The British people could have ousted Blair at any time! The Labour Party could have removed him as their leader for quite a while.

I think that their next ambassador should be a video phone kiosk, receive only for our instructions.


CORPORATE AMERICA controls the media and we get MANUFACTURED NEWS.
CORPORATE AMERICA now controls the voting machines and we get MANUFACTURED ELECTIONS.

[Benhurst]

3. Yeah, the Bush Crime Family has Tony "The Bridge" Blair.

Bush doesn't need an ambassador in London. He's got little Tony, bought and paid for.

[autorank]

4. They could do a musical "Our Man in London" with Tony Blair as the male

and canine lead. That's the perfect point...our android is in place.

The sequel could be "Doggie Style."