Why are successive British government SUBSERVIENT to the USA?
819721
Coz Tony Blair is a major butt kisser
185497
Because you don't have the same political system as the UK.  Once you elect a President it is very very difficult to get rid of him (as you found with Clinton) because he is elected for a fixed term and he is there by right.\n\nIn the UK, the Prime Minister is "first among equals" i.e. he has special rights because he is Prime Minister but he is only Prime Minister by the will of parliament.  The moment he loses the support of the other members of parliament, he is out of office.  If the UK parliament decided to get rid of Tony Blair, it would take them 24 hours at most to call and hold a "vote of no confidence" in his administration and then parliament would have to either support a new government or call a general election.\n\nTherefore, in the US, it is difficult to fire President Bush:\n(1) Because the Presidency is a wholly separate office from your legislature.\n(2) Because you have fixed term administrations
276497
cgalloway1973 is right, I'm British, and believe that we are just as capable as the Americans. BTW, to the guy who mentioned that we were (supposedly) kicked out of every country we conquered, you're wrong! It's true that we were kicked out of a few of the Nations, but we decided to give most of them back by free will alone! This inter-nation rivalry has to stop, WE'RE ON THE SAME BL**DY SIDE!!! That saying, "all the gear, but no Idea" is just a bit of friendly banter, but there are a few people here who take it too far.
506902
I don't understand how American protects the English. They are allies. Both support each other. The British have thier own military and spies. They spy on the U.S. citizens communications and the U.S. spies on thier. Then they swap interestin information. That way no one spies on their own citizens, although it is now obvious the U.S. does keep records of peoples phone calls, whether or not they actually listen to them.\nRegardless, the U.S. doesn't really PROTECT them, their just buddies.
232308
A better question would be to ask why the government of the United States sends the US military into other countries in peacekeeping roles (Bosnia, for example) while the countries in the area - who's own best interests would be served by not having their neighbor self-destruct - do nothing.
400914
its complicated.\nUK and US were allies. US helped with industry, which it sailed to UK. germany sunk some ships with US citizen eg the lusitania.\nmostly beacuse a lot of it allies, canada, australia, UK etc were fighting and US interests rested more with them than with Germany
225184
I don't know.  Below is the UK's Ministry of Defense (Like the USA's DoD) which controls all branches of the British military.
927263
So they can keep each other in check, and no one branch has total control. The way the US was created was to ensure true liberty for its citizens, and this is a big part of it. I wish I could go into more detail, I think it may be referred to as a "system of check and balances."
620700
The Brits kept Hong Kong as theirs to watch over China (strategic location to bomb china if need be, as was their thought process after ww II) But as per the treaty they signed with China, it was handed over in 1997. And now it is a Chinese territory, but runs on its own steam with a state govt. etc.
736499
In their eyes, they are protecting their loveones from.... us.\n\nIf you look at it from their perspective, you can't blame them.   It's no different than the Brit's occupation of America or Northern Ireland.    \n\nNo one has a right to enter another country and impose it's will.
186096
The company in Dubai that wanted to buy the ports from Great Britain own ports around the world. They are a reputable company, and I am sure it all boiled down to the all mighty dollar, or pound sterling as the case may be. You have to remember that it was not the government of Great Britain selling the ports, but a company based in Great Britain. I am sure we have many corporations and business in America that do business that the government would not approve of.
694334
America can't do anything on it's own without the Brits
973641
Why not they already control the United States.
587238
Well it would depend on the Constitution of the particular country.  But as an example the United States and Great Britain both have bi-cameral legistative systems.
658266
no it is not treason, it is difficult to join the military of another country, but it CAN be done. the fact that the UK is an ally makes it much less difficult. another option would be to join the American military and do what is called a foreign exchange option. it is where you serve in their forces while one of them serves in ours. it is a rare but normal option. not many get into the program because it is not very popular but it does exist. to learn more you can talk to a Representative from the UK military. it may take time but with persistence you can find one who will listen and help rather than laugh at you. i have known of people who have done both so i know it can be done. and the British are as eager to have people serve as the Americans are
542152
Bloomin' cheek. I suppose these US government officials have got diplomatic immunity.\n\nLook if we've finally got the Queen to pay tax, surely it's a small thing to start getting foreign dignitaries (not just the US, in case anyone starts) to cough up what they owe! Time for another campaign ...\n\n8-]
986530
3 countries.\n\nPre 1920's British Mandate. Its the logical next step.\n\nI have a feeling 2 of them will be great future allies to us. One hosting one of the largest US military bases in all of history.