[Gank]

Or maybe its because the Empire only just collapsed, as opposed to being ancient history.

[vyper]

Wha, like the illegal drug running into china, slave trading and turning whole continents into penal colonies? How did your empire benefit the Mauris or Aboriginies? Or american indians for that matter? Apartheid South Africa and the current Israeli-Palestine problem are both attributable to the british empire, likewise the problems in my own country. Indias a bad example to be using for your civilising effect, they had their own empires when you boys were pegging stones at the romans. A few unintended side effects cant be used to validate the whole thing, it was done for the benefit of the British people, nobody else. Instead of asking where would they be without you, maybe you should ask where would you be without them, would your country really be in the position its in today without the wealth its overseas enterprises brought in?

So many things to cover here...

The British Empire was first of it's peers to outlaw the slave trade and actively engaged in it's destruction.

India may well have had such empires, but they didn't have them come the 18th and 19th centuries.

I'm not even going to touch on the British involvement in Israel, since I've covered it in previous threads.

"likewise the problems in my own country" - And where might that be?

You're right in one regard - it existed in theory to serve the British people. Unfortunately, as you might find if you did some research, the British working class population was living in rather squalid condition - especially by the standards of some of the colonies.

Oh and before you once again ask what we should be thankful for as opposed to the world remember this: The British Empire burned itself out fighting against Nazi Germany - I'd say someone owes my ancestors a bit of thanks.

[NGTM-1R]

I'd argue the British Empire burned itself out fighting WWI, it just took some time to obviously decline...

[vyper]

I'd argue the British Empire burned itself out fighting WWI, it just took some time to obviously decline...

I think it's not unreasonable to say that post WWI the empire had a chance of rejuvenation, even if it was in some restructured form.

[Maxwell]

Sticking point seems to be software if I read this correctly.  Bearing in mind the US has had bad experiences with shipping out some of its previous mainline aircraft (Iranian F-14's anyone?), I'd say the caution is well warranted.
Just as the UK wants to see whats under the hood and guiding this thing, the US most likely does not want anyone (not even their closest friends, for fear of a leak) to know how the mysterious little black box inside it ticks.

The UK has invested many millions in a program that costs many billions, so they deserve a great deal of respect as partner... but this is like buying a truckload of soda on the condition the company selling it tell you whats in their secret syrup.

The recipe is worth more than that.

[karajorma]

the current Israeli-Palestine problem are both attributable to the british empire

Somewhat unfair. There would have been a problem wherever the Jewish homeland had been put. While it was admittedly ****ing stupid to put them somewhere they could make a prior claim to I don't doubt that there would have been issues regardless of whether the British were involved or not.

[Flipside]

One question that does come to mind about this is, how long did it take for the British to share the details on Chobham with the US? Iirc it took quite a while?

[Roanoke]

Anyone remember how the US shafted the UK after WW2 when they agreed to share jet engine info ? And once the UK did so, those dodgy yankes were "ha!ha!suckers!*runs*"

And how many times do I have to tell you fools ? the empire didn't crumble, we just gave it back. 

The British Empire was first of it's peers to outlaw the slave trade and actively engaged in it's destruction.

Bloody annoying given certain quarters are now try it on for compensation

[Gank]

The British Empire was first of it's peers to outlaw the slave trade and actively engaged in it's destruction.

Stopping to do someting doesnt excuse doing it in the first place. And you werent, the french were.

India may well have had such empires, but they didn't have them come the 18th and 19th centuries.

The Mughal Empire was in India at the time of the East Indian Companys conquests.

I'm not even going to touch on the British involvement in Israel, since I've covered it in previous threads.

fair enough

"likewise the problems in my own country" - And where might that be?

Ireland.

You're right in one regard - it existed in theory to serve the British people. Unfortunately, as you might find if you did some research, the British working class population was living in rather squalid condition - especially by the standards of some of the colonies.

I didnt say all the british people.

Oh and before you once again ask what we should be thankful for as opposed to the world remember this: The British Empire burned itself out fighting against Nazi Germany - I'd say someone owes my ancestors a bit of thanks.

The Irish done their share of fighting in ww2, including some of my own ancestors. Playing that card doesnt work with us.
Heres one of the more famous:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bernard_Montgomery%2C_1st_Viscount_Montgomery_of_Alamein#Early_life

Somewhat unfair. There would have been a problem wherever the Jewish homeland had been put. While it was admittedly ****ing stupid to put them somewhere they could make a prior claim to I don't doubt that there would have been issues regardless of whether the British were involved or not.

Maybe, maybe not, its doubtful the Israeli state would have been established had the ottomans still been in charge, they did after all teach the germans how to commit genocide on a mass scale.

Btw, whys the postcount thingy say leet?

[brozozo]

You had 1,337 posts. I was wondering what it meant until I noticed your current post count is 1,338.

[vyper]

"likewise the problems in my own country" - And where might that be?

Ireland.

Oh and before you once again ask what we should be thankful for as opposed to the world remember this: The British Empire burned itself out fighting against Nazi Germany - I'd say someone owes my ancestors a bit of thanks.

The Irish done their share of fighting in ww2, including some of my own ancestors. Playing that card doesnt work with us.

Firstly, I will point out that I never implied other nations didn't contribute to the effort. What I was drawing attention to was the fact that Britain gave up an Empire to win said war - that's no small sacrifice whether you like the empire or not.

Secondly, you're Irish. You've made it clear you don't like the Empire and blame modern (modern in the sense of post industrial revolution) Britain for unspecified but pretty obvious problems in your homeland. The feelings on both sides in the republic and N. Ireland aren't exactly rational - therefore, it's pointless us debating since we'll never reach a meaningful conclusion. No offence - but I've grown up in the West of Scotland, so I know this would be like banging my head off a brick wall.

[Gank]

You can hardly expect me to be grateful you lost something I dont think you should have had in the first place. The decline of the british empire has much earlier roots though, ww2 just sped it up.

As for me being baised against the british empire, maybe I am a bit, but you could take that as an indication of how the people on the other end of the effects of british civilisation feel about it. Ungrateful gits that we are.

[Admiral Nelson]

In case anyone is interested in the original subject of the thread, the issue with the F-35 technology transfer has been resolved., to no one's great surprise.

Link

[Gank]

When are these things due to enter service anyways

[Admiral Nelson]

About 2012 in the UK.

[Darius]

To coincide with the launch of the new aircraft carriers I think. Be a bit embarrassing to have a shiny new fleet carrier with no planes to put in it.

[karajorma]

The British Empire was first of it's peers to outlaw the slave trade and actively engaged in it's destruction.

Stopping to do someting doesnt excuse doing it in the first place. And you werent, the french were.

I don't think abolishing it under duress after a massive revolt and then reintroducing it 8 years later really counts.

Maybe, maybe not, its doubtful the Israeli state would have been established had the ottomans still been in charge, they did after all teach the germans how to commit genocide on a mass scale.

Who said that the Israeli homeland had to be in the middle east? My point is that wherever you'd put them there would have been problems, whether the British Empire was involved or not. Unless you wanted to establish a Jewish state in Antarctica you were going to have to displace someone to do it. Whether by buying them out or by removing them buy force.

[Quest_techie]

I'd accept jamaican hegemony......
what, no takers?

seriously though, the british empire was good for some nation states, it was terrible for others, the interaction of the cultures just worked that way, and that's how it will always work, it's not that empires are universally bad, or universally good, it is that they are a tool only useful in certain situations, mostly protecting itt bity nations from much larger hungry territorial nations

By having a larger hungry territorial nation taking it over? (!)

I was thinking hong kong \ britain\ china

I don't know all of the etails of any of that relationship, but it seems like it worked out better in the end

[aldo_14]

I'd accept jamaican hegemony......
what, no takers?

seriously though, the british empire was good for some nation states, it was terrible for others, the interaction of the cultures just worked that way, and that's how it will always work, it's not that empires are universally bad, or universally good, it is that they are a tool only useful in certain situations, mostly protecting itt bity nations from much larger hungry territorial nations

By having a larger hungry territorial nation taking it over? (!)

I was thinking hong kong \ britain\ china

I don't know all of the etails of any of that relationship, but it seems like it worked out better in the end

hong Kong was part of China ceded in the Convention of Peking following the 2nd Opium War.  It's impossible to say if China would be the same nation as is now, had those wars (and the 'unequal treaties' resulting) not happened.

EDIT; also, it's worth noting Hong Kong island, for example, was a barren rock when first occupied by the British.  IIRC rather than a nation state, the Hong Kong territories were mostly barren, with the total area ceded in the CofP having a population of (including Kowloon et al) about 120,000. 

[Nuclear1]

Who said that the Israeli homeland had to be in the middle east? My point is that wherever you'd put them there would have been problems, whether the British Empire was involved or not. Unless you wanted to establish a Jewish state in Antarctica you were going to have to displace someone to do it. Whether by buying them out or by removing them buy force.

Ancient history said it.  It's not as simple as "okay, we're going to stick the Jews... here!"  I know you're smarter than that, but it all has to do with religion.  Where else would you want to put the Israelis other than in their historic homeland?