Nobody used you did they, somehow you managed to avoid all the horrible things Canada did to it's people. I am 8O
Should Britain and the United States merge?
- Thread starter dumpthemonarchy
- Start date
Nobody used you did they, somehow you managed to avoid all the horrible things Canada did to it's people. I am 8O
May as well just merge coke and pepsi and call it Poksi. It would probably taste like **** and nobody would like it.
Last edited:
Scotland isn't going to secede from the Union. They wouldn't want to miss out on all those English subsidies and they'll want English taxpayers to continue paying for their freebies, such as free medical prescriptions and free care for the elderly, which are denied to the English.
Not only that, but the so-called "Arc of Prosperity" which Alex Salmond, Scotland's First Minister and leader of the pro-independence Scottish National Party wanted an independent Scotland to join, which he said consisted of a group of northern European countries such as the Republic of Ireland (which broke away from the UK in 1922) and Iceland, doesn't look quite so prosperous and appealing to the Scottish people anymore.
Last edited:
Never could figure out why anyone would drink either of that sh*t. Years ago there was Kik Cola, terrible sh*t too and watered down, but we used to buy it because it was sold in 12 oz. bottles whereas the cheap bastards at Coca Cola and Pepsi only put theirs up in 10 oz. :lol::lol:
They say the old ally of Scotland is France which believes in statism. So Scotland wouldn't be in it. No huge loss. Independence is great, but not when the $$$$$ cost is too high. Scotland never had the same grievences as Ireland.
Holy Crap!
That is just like Quebec.
Oh, BTW. The Olympics are coming
.
Yep, the same Anglo prejudices
Oh for heaven sake there is far to much water between them to patch up the
revolutionary thread. The Tea Party wouldn't like this one bit.
revolutionary thread. The Tea Party wouldn't like this one bit.
They don't even have it and they still have to give it a different name.
We need to call it ice hockey to distinguish it from the much more popular sport of hockey which is played on grass or artificial turf, the game which was invented by the British in the 18th Century. The Canadians then thought it would be a good idea to play it on ice for some reason.
We do have an ice hockey league of ten teams, the Elite Ice Hockey League, which was founded in 2003, but which is not as big as other European ice hockey leagues..
The teams are Belfast Giants, Braehead Clan, Cardiff Devils, Coventry Blaze, Dundee Stars, Edinburgh Capitals, Fife Flyers, Hull Stingrays, Nottingham Panthers and Sheffield Steelers. The Steelers are, apparently, the champions.
Last edited:
Unless Greap Britain is ready to break up into individual States; dump the Monarchy and it's Parliament, this will never happen.Canada will be part of it. Not a political union, but an economic one and easy movement to live and work in the Anglosphere. The same language means a great deal. Europe and the euro won't work imposing rules on countries and voters who resent such top down bueaucracy. This is a natural route to go as so many links exist already. The UK might get a decent hockey team in the deal. And we might get a decent soccer team.
Should Britain and the United States merge? – Telegraph Blogs
Should Britain and the United States merge?
By Daniel Hannan Politics Last updated: December 29th, 2011
595 Comments Comment on this article
Time to repatriate the revolution
In George Bernard Shaw's 1928 play, The Apple Cart, the American ambassador blurts out some momentous news to Britain's King:
The prodigal, sir, has returned to his father's house. Not poor, not hungry, not ragged, as of old. Oh no. This time he returns bringing with him the riches of the earth to the ancestral home. The Declaration of Independence is cancelled. The treaties which endorsed it are torn up. We have decided to rejoin the British Empire!David Aaronovitch plays with the same idea in The Times today. I think he's trying to be funny, though I'm not completely certain. He uses the word 'ironically' in his column but, like many journalists, uses it to mean something along the lines of 'oddly enough'.
'We British pro-Europeans are beginning to sound more and more like Betamax enthusiasts arguing the superior merits of their systems against the unstoppable VHS tide', Aaronovitch writes. 'The people of Britain don’t get Europe, don’t like Europe and don’t want Europe'. Indeed.
And, since Britain is apparently too small to succeed on its own (pace Singapore, Switzerland, Qatar, Monaco, Norway, UAE etc), he suggests that we join the US. While, as I say, the proposal seems to be intended lightheartedly, the analysis that underpins it – the recognition that our two countries have a shared political culture and that Britain could benefit in many ways from repatriating the American Revolution – is moderate and reasonable.
The flaw in the Shavian fantasy of full amalgamation is, of course, that Americans are as jealous of their sovereignty as any people on Earth. Look at their (justified) suspicion of the United Nations. Look at their reticence vis-à-vis NAFTA. Do you really imagine that they'd accept a political union with 60 million Britons?
Just for the record, what we Atlanticists want is not a merger, but a free trade area. We'd like an organic, not a governmental union; ties between citizens, businesses and civic associations, not a combination of state structures. And we aim for it to embrace, not just Britain and the US, but the community of free English-speaking democracies – the Anglosphere. In fact, by coincidence, Iain Murray and James C Bennet explain how it would work in today's Wall Street Journal.
Of course, since Hawaii and Alaska were made States (and Hawaii was a Soverign Country before the American Missionaries overthrew the Monarchy there), there is some precedent for States thousands of miles from the mainland.
It's not designed to be a political union, so however Scotland votes in the future doesn't really matter. The idea of the Anglosphere goes beyond the USA or the UK. We've still got political colonialism to shed from England in the monarchy, we don't want more from anywhere else. Political union between independent countries is tough to pull off, look at the EU now.
To further answer your question, we in Canada are already on the route of exclusion of all the countries south of the USA. Castro was never considered by anyone to be a North American. Castro like all Cubans, and all Haitians, Nicaraguans, Salvadorans are Latin Americans. We are the North Americans along with the white, English speaking people of the USA, we know who is in and who is out. It appears we're fully committed to our North American Anglosphere. Our international inclusive credentials are looking a little shabby here.
There's little to apologise for here, we simply haven't had much to do with nations or lands south of the USA, which are far away and we know little about them. Although there's plenty of British colonial guilt to hang on to.
Reports out of Mexico lately have been a little shaky. Maybe people figure that is already too far south! :smile:
Does anyone else find this highly racist, or at least VERY bigoted, or is it just me?
There's racial tones there, Gerry. I can only speak for myself, but I think many times perceived discrimation against race or colour is actually discrimination against behaviour.
Ya, I live in a multi cultural society that is made up of far more than JUST english speaking "whites".