This is a second page of your comments.
The following comments reflect the balance of views we have received: The world vindicates the victors. We decry Hitler, but we honour Caesar. We call Stalin a brutal despot, but we also call Alexander the Great a brilliant tactician. All of those men killed into the millions, but two were exonerated--why? The hypocrisy will continue to flourish as long as we allow it to do so, and it shows no sign of abatement now.
Wes, San Marcos, Texas, USA
History is already doing its level best to vindicate Bush and Blair. Look at the reporting of the attacks on American soldiers. The reports seldom say how the soldiers responded to the attacks. The picture emerging is of American soldiers not retaliating, but suffering in silence. I would LOVE to know how many so-called Iraqi "hardliners" (as if there were also softliners, who just throw eggs or something) manage to get away after carrying out an attack on the best-equipped and trained army in the world. How many Iraqis have been killed by American soldiers since the war "ended"?
Colm, Milan, Italy
 |  I will forgive Bush and Blair if Iraq becomes a better place  |
I was against the war, but will forgive Bush and Blair if Iraq becomes a better place for its people and there is more stability in the middle east with real commitment to the “road map”. I don’t always agree with American policy, but at the end of the day they are our best friend in the world and we forgive our best friends things we would not forgive others.
Jeff, Amersham UK The saga is ongoing. Suspects are still held illegally in Cuba, Iraq is not stabilised, US soldiers are being picked off by snipers, a UK arms expert has committed suicide and of course no WMD have been discovered. Not until there is closure on all of this can anyone judge if history will vindicate this terrible twosome. I have a feeling it's going to get worse before it gets better.
Wendy, UK
Tony Blair has stated that he will be vindicated by history, it is shame that history will not win him the next general election. He will either have to discover WMD or stand down as leader for labour to stand any chances of winning a third term.
Gareth, Southampton
It's pretty simple. The US and the UK will be vindicated if in a time span, defined by public acceptance in those two countries, the situation in Iraq normalises and the current guerrilla war dies down. But I somehow don't see this happening. The portents are pointing the other way.
Theo Stauffer, Z�rich, Switzerland
| They both lied to the people of the world |
History will not forgive Bush and Blair. They both lied to the people of the world. They will be remembered as criminals who have brought suffering to so many people in the world
Inder Yas, Amherst, USA
The only way Bush and Blair will be vindicated is if the people of Iraq end up with a better life. At present, this is not happening. Life is worse for most Iraqi's. At least under Saddam they had law and order, hospitals, work, water and electricity for at least 6hours per day. They are not now getting this now.
H . Mactaggart, Stourbridge
History will record Bush and Blair as the political murderers of the 21st Century. They and their close associates who are responsible for the invasion of Iraq and for the death of thousands of innocent lives ought to be tried for War Crimes and genocide.
Ken Morris, Bangkok, Thailand
This pair provides courageous, outstanding, and consistent leadership for a better world.
Rich Hayhurst, USA
Our war of aggression against Iraq with the resulting deaths of six to ten thousand innocent civilians and tens of thousands of Iraqi troops defending their country, place us in the same historical position as Nazi Germany or Soviet Russia.
Dean Luckey, Plainfield, US
| The UK is caught in a dilemma |
The UK and the US share the common interest of expanding trade, human rights and democracy. The US was born in a revolutionary spirit and its purpose is to bring its core values to the rest of the world. You may disagree with these values but this trajectory is hard to refute. The UK will continue to support the US rather than the EU because the EU continues to define itself by what it is not rather than what it is. France can only shout about being "not American" but she does not have a serious alternative. So the UK is caught in a dilemma because while her economic interests seem to tend towards the EU her security interests do not.
Jonty Crossick, Brighton, England
WOW! I must say that in heavy times such as these it is was a pleasure to see some light and clarity coming from Prime Minister Blair. It is, however, ironic that as an American, I take comfort from a foreign leader. I have no doubt Mr Bush feels the same way, but he struggles to articulate the same message at home and abroad. And although I live in Pennsylvania, I can certainly identify with Mr Blair's reference to the guy in Nevada, or Idaho, and I appreciate his understanding.
Bryan Heigh, Philadelphia, US
Tony and Bush are probably planning to spin history in their favour; otherwise I cannot see how history can vindicate this tale of spin, half-truths and blatant lies.
Anthony Omodupe, London, UK
The following applies to the few British and American soldiers who fell in liberating 22 million Iraqis: "Never in the field of human conflict was so much owed by so many to so a few." Churchill
Youkhanna, YP, Turku, Finland
| Blair and Bush are true believers |
The problem with Mr Blair and Mr Bush is that they are true believers; idealists who see a grey world in black and white. Will history vindicate them? Not unless they find large quantities of WMD, no matter how many times they trumpet that Saddam was a bad guy. Why? Because there are a hundred Saddams leading a hundred countries right now, and the US and UK are certainly not willing to put the time and money and lives of soldiers on the line.
Mike, Minneapolis, MN If it is right to overthrow a unwanted leader that threaten the world, then who will help the world to overthrow Bush?
Juan Martinez, Mexico
History teaches us that Saddam Hussein was placed there with the help of the US and has done horrific things to his people while still having the support of the US. What good was done and by who? The only thing history will tell us is how misinformed the general public is.
Frederik, Zoetermeer, Netherlands
Would history forgive the massacre of hundreds of babies who died in the American bombing? Maybe historians can overlook this little detail, but ask the Iraqis who lost their loved ones if they forgive this "error"!!
Toh Chee Hwa, Singapore
| It seems that we in the US are far more attached to the UK than they are attached to us |
It seems that we in the US are far more attached to the UK than they are attached to us. Yes we often differ on foreign policy approaches, and follow our own specific self interests. We aren't always going to agree. Yet when our leaders do, the UK vilifies Tony Blair as George Bush's lackey. Maybe we just define our relationship differently. We see Britain as our parent (who we love despite a drive to continually prove our independence), Britain sees us as a provincial redneck cousin, who they get along with rather well but are kind of ashamed of.
Morgan, USA History will show that the attack on Iraq is another Vietnam. It will show that it was fuelled by ill-perceived threats and paranoia and greed for natural resources (oil in Iraq as opposed to Tin and Zinc in Vietnam).
Hechun Chen, Hong Kong
The US and the UK will be vilified not vindicated. To deceive an enemy is part of war strategy, to lie to your people and your allies is criminal.
Duane Longdo, Dawson City, YT Canada
I supported the war for one reason - Hussein was ignoring the UN provisions, the sanctions punished only the general Iraqi population and the UN did not have the will to break the impasse. All the other arguments were poorly presented and poorly supported. Bush and Blair took affirmative action that I think was necessary. Unfortunately Bush is out of his depth domestically, internationally, diplomatically, intellectually and morally (I'm being far too nice here). For all the complaints the British have now against Blair, they are lucky to have him as their head of government; in the US we have Bush. Think about it.
Simon Waugh , Jersey City, USA
My hope is that history will judge these men on what they have done, and not by the pious platitudes they spew out for their electorate. Will history be written by the faithful, or the truthful? This will decide whether they're seen as leaving freedom and democracy in their wake, or benefits for a privileged few, and more misery and despair for the majority.
Scott, Canada
The main players in the Iraq war were the US and the UK. However, Australia, the Czech Republic, Hungary and Poland, amongst others, shared the view of President Bush and Mr Blair. The special relationship is so evident that other countries are prepared to support the positions of the US and UK. This is an important counterweight that balances the anti-Western attitudes prevalent in many countries.
Andreas Stamp, Berlin, Germany
| As long as people choose to be ignorant they will be led by whoever is the best at marketing them |
It's is easy to blame the leaders yet it is the people of the countries from where they lead that need to take responsibility. Most people in the US have no idea of the millions Cheney will take from Iraq, the bombs that were dropped at no targets to enrich the military machine's profits, etc. As long as people choose to be ignorant they will be led by whoever is the best at marketing them.
Anne H, Monroe, USA Prime Minister Tony Blair's speech was one of compassion and political intellect. I feel both world leaders are sternly reminding the world, of a victory for freedom which involved the removal of a despot, and that in itself is more important than finding WMD.
Aaron Smith, Topeka, US
The invasion of Iraq has already been vindicated - even if no WMD are found. The correct judgement was that Iraq had a history of concealment and was not fully cooperating with verification attempts. For those who are interested in the UN charter I suggest they go and read Chapter 7 and start at article 39.
Andy, K�ping, Sweden
| The US will always take decisions in America's interests alone |
There is no "special relationship". It is a convenient phrase trotted out by the British media to support the idea that Britain has some influence on American policy. Nothing can be further from the truth; the US will always take decisions in America's interests alone. That's why they invaded Iraq and that's why you will get a McDonalds in your street serving genetically modified hamburgers whether you like it or not. As for history, it is a harsh judge as Bush and Blair will find, and it will not be written by News International.
John Allen, Aberdeen On the border between the US and Canada, in a town named Blaine, Washington, stands a structure named the Peace Arch. The structure was erected to commemorate the ending of the war between the US and Britain in 1812. On it are inscribed the words, "Children of a common mother." That's how I think of the relationship between the two countries. We are siblings, who may have squabbles and differences in opinion, but who love each other, nevertheless.
BJ, Washington, DC
While we maintain a double standard, which appears to be influenced by votes, no form of aggression is acceptable. There is no doubt that Saddam was an evil man and deserved toppling, but that should have been by the Iraqis, not by a foreign power engaged in nothing less than a turkey shoot against a comparatively defenceless army. I firmly believe the truth regarding the decision to invade is only now becoming public and that it will undermine any good resulting from the invasion.
Charles Bruce, La Paz, Bolivia
| A failure of the rest of the world community and the UN |
History will look at this not as a failure of the US and the UK, but as a failure of the rest of the world community and the United Nations. Too long have nations had commercial relationships with, tolerated, and even encouraged despotic rulers and regimes at the expense of human rights' freedoms, and justice. There will one day be a uniform standard of justice and human dignity that will clear away and relegate to insignificance the current crimes tolerated in the name of commerce and "cultural sensitivity."
John, New Jersey, USA In all of history, no one has ever exonerated an unprovoked invader. Human beings inevitably root for underdogs, especially when an underdog is picked on by bigger, stronger bullies. History will show the current war as a dark moment in the history of Western civilization, much like Hitler's unprovoked advance into Poland and France. Sometimes, madmen are at the helm, and entire nations are steered away from what they know in the core of their collective consciousness is right.
Andrew Rentschler, Lancaster, PA USA
A brilliant speech. PM Blair gave our leadership and people a "gentle reminder" to be better listeners regarding other's political needs, pay attention to the environment, and that not all can be won through a mighty military. He did all of this by appealing to "our greatness" as a society - which is a shrewdly effective way to get Americans to listen. Americans do have the desire to do what is "right" and do have a strong sense of national pride. I think his message will have an impact because of our "special relationship" with the UK and its people.
Carrie, New Jersey, USA
| The PM's speech was excellent in every regard |
The PM's speech was excellent in every regard. He is trying to keep the Western nations from continuing the nationalistic rivalry that is alienating the US. But I'm afraid he will fail, because Europe will never be cured of that my-nationality-is-better-than-your-nationality disease. You Brits amaze me. Please send your unappreciated PM over here. I'd take him to any of the last five presidents, any day!
Addy Jones, Chicago, USA If I were riding in a friend's car and I saw he was heading uncontrollably for a tree, and I refuse to tell him because I am afraid of being called a wimp, would history vindicate me? I doubt it!
Evans Eguavoen, Antwerp, Belgium
According to Blair, things are different in the 21st century. We fight different kinds of wars, not along national borders with large armies, but globally against invisible enemies. On the other hand, he still refers collectively to the French and Americans as if he wishes to hang onto the 19th century idea of nationhood. And where there is not a nation like in Iraq, he wants to build one. Blair's flawed political views reflect the cause of our problems in the modern world. He is intelligent and eloquent, yet history will prove him wrong.
Paul Mullenmeister, Toronto, Canada
I watched Tony Blair's speech on News 24. I thought it was brilliant - a broad strategic look across the world and America's role in it. As a dual national I felt he got to the heart of what the special relationship can mean.
Pam Wharfe, Brentford, England
| The relationship is not one-way |
The relationship is not one-way. The US helped Britain behind the scenes in the Falklands war and many US firms invest in the UK, creating many jobs for the British. In fact, the US is the biggest foreign investor in he UK.
Tom, New York Because both countries share values and a language, there will always be a special relationship. However, in the final analysis each country will work towards its own interest and there will inevitably be conflicts. My perception, living in both countries, is that most Americans genuinely like and admire the British and that most British genuinely like Americans, but not necessarily American policy in certain areas.
This affects many people's attitudes due to the fact that many in Britain believe the US sometimes takes advantage of its position as the dominant world power and does not always use its influence in positive ways. I think however that the special relationship between the two countries will survive for many years to come.
Gary Mofield, London UK and Los Angeles USA
No, Mr Blair, history will never vindicate nations which initiate wars. There is nothing moral about invading another nation; there is nothing moral about revenge; there is nothing moral about lies and deceptions and hypocrisy. There is nothing moral about rendering the UN impotent. Time wounds all heels.
Cran Herlihy, Perth, Australia
| I'd advise Mr Blair to watch his elephant with a great deal more care |
As a number of correspondents have referred to Canada's experience with the US the debate might benefit from one Canadian's perspective. The late Prime Minister, Pierre Elliot Trudeau, stated that US/Canada relations were akin to a mouse sleeping with an elephant, inevitably every grunt of the elephant is of critical importance to the mouse. You can imagine how important the mouse is to the elephant. I'd advise Mr Blair to watch his elephant with a great deal more care.
Timothy Law, Toronto, Ontario Many of us, especially in California, would gladly trade your Mr Blair for our Mr Bush By aligning with US so determinately, at great personal political risk, the Prime Minister may have kept a difficult situation from being unimaginably worse. Some here believe the American administration is overly populated by those with extreme ideology. Fortunately, our President remains open to those whose respect has been earned. Mr Blair has rightly earned Mr Bush's respect and our two nations are more secure because of that.
Ernie J Giramonti, San Francisco, CA, USA
I think its fantastic that the free people of the world stand together against merciless foes. I wish more countries would join in, recognise and prepare to fight for our freedoms and our lives against these terrorists who will give no quarter. There are already many countries who already support the values of freedom and democracy. People will in time come to see the evil that confronts us needs strong, swift and united action. Thank God that the free world is still capable of taking hard decisions and produces men of the calibre of Mr Blair and Mr Bush.
Peter, JHB South Africa
| Do you really think that executive leaders make their foreign policy decisions based on friendship? |
Do you really think that executive leaders make their foreign policy decisions based on "friendship" and "loyalty"? If they do, I certainly don't want them in power. A pragmatic leader will act in their domestic best interests, because it makes the most sense. Bearing this in mind, either US foreign policy decisions are enlightened but outrageously ham-fisted, or Bush himself is leading a personal agenda. Neither is a prospect to relish.
Rikk, Manchester, UK It is so much more than just a special relationship. It is a close partnership between the two greatest nations in the world, cemented by a common culture, a common language, a long-intertwined history, and a joint love of freedom. I was so proud to see Tony Blair so passionately praise America's love of liberty yesterday, as your forces and ours fight side-by-side to defend it. As a British citizen, I have no hesitation in quoting, on behalf of all Britons, the words of President Roosevelt: "We, too, born to freedom, and believing in freedom... would rather die on our feet than live on our knees."
Frank, Kent, UK
Even if history might vindicate this war in Iraq, Mr Bush and Mr Blair are not themselves in a position to judge on their actions in the name of posterity. They are quite simply interested parties in this conflict. If no WMD are found in Iraq, the pre-war WMD claims must surely be seen as baseless.
Topi Lappalainen, Helsinki, Finland
The term "special relationship" was grounded on a common language and a preference for pragmatism in politics. This pragmatism had a job to do in filling a gap before the creation of the UN. But the UN is now here. And it has a Charter. However evil Saddam Hussein was, there is no provision under the UN Charter to invade a sovereign state and bring about regime change from outside. Bush and Blair, in my view, have broken the law, and they must be held to account.
EB, Kingston upon Thames
| I have no doubt that a special relationship will survive |
I have no doubt that a special relationship will survive. These issues about intelligence and Guantanamo Bay are just being hyped up by the media. At the end of the day the two countries share common values, the same language, and a linked history. That will never change. On top of that we seem to find much in each other to admire. That's a good basis for friendship. But I agree that good friends are also good listeners!
Simon, Hertfordshire, UK The US government administration does not need the UK other than for political posturing. Tony Blair is an outstanding public speaker and a useful foil for the American administration. Mr. Blair is becoming less useful as his credibility continues to decline.
Al Weber, Cleveland Ohio USA
On the political standpoint the current much-hyped relationship is of no long term consequence. America and France once had a special relationship (to rid them of English domination!). Look now. Italy and Germany once had a special relationship. Look now. Removing Saddam was a very good thing to do. However, it should have been the main reason for the war from the beginning and it should have been done mostly by the Iraqis themselves.
Francois, Tokyo, Japan
The relationship is one-sided. The US is leading the UK (Blair) onto the path advocated by the Project for a New American Century-a unipolar and destabilizing approach to foreign policy. George W. Bush and Tony Blair are pawns of an extreme and unbalanced vision of US military dominance of the world to the detriment of the US economy and social fabric.
Jennifer Parker, Oakland, California USA
I have never felt more proud to be British. Mr. Blair is right, he will go down in history as a strong leader, who followed his beliefs, to be proved correct eons after his demise.
Jeremy Smith, Needham Market, England
Bush and Blair now justify their war on the basis of the hundreds of thousands of 'disappeared' Iraqis. What they don't address, however, is how many Iraqis were killed in this most recent invasion, or how many died from the effects of the US-inspired UN sanctions. Until they do, their hypocrisy is awe-inspiring in its self-serving and self-satisfied delivery. It may well maintain the UK-US special relationship - and serve to distance them from the rest of the civilized world.
David Austen, Pattaya, Thailand
Let me be frank. There is no country in the world that I would sooner die for than Great Britain. Not even my own. Cynics may argue that only the US has to gain from this relationship; that we "need" the British people to further our own ends. I disagree. The British people and the United States have one thing that is above all political and economic ties and that is culture and heritage.
Charles, Boston, Massachusetts, USA
There used to be joke about what is the US's largest aircraft carrier. The answer was the UK. It wasn't funny before and it's not funny now but it's all part of the "special relationship". Finally, Blair/Bush is giving me deja vu... it's uncannily like Thatcher/Reagan. Pass the dog biscuits.
Ajana, Hong Kong (ex-UK)
I am extremely embarrassed by many of my fellow Brits who spout of anti American rhetoric, which is ultimately born in jealousy and is very unbecoming. Who cares if the world thinks we are 'poodles, its a cheap and hollow insult. While I am all for a EU of nation states I don't think being closer to Europe means we have to lose our closeness to the US, its really up to our European partners to stop their childish anti European behaviour.
Tim Collins, Kent, UK
After two World Wars, the United Nations were created precisely to avoid "special relationships". People have very short memories indeed. The whole point of the war on Iraq, as defended by Bush and Blair, were the weapons of mass destruction. The debate on whether the British government manipulated the dossiers serves only to camouflage the real issue which is the fact that nothing could ultimately justify the loss of human lives and the degrading situation created by this unjust aggression, and the fact that no weapons were found. No, Mr. Blair, I am sure History will remember you!
Jorge Marques, Brussels, Belgium I find Mr Blair's recent comments just another example of selective amnesia. "If we are wrong, we will have destroyed a threat that, at its least, is responsible for inhuman carnage and suffering." whilst he is a guest of a country that put to death 71 people in 2002 which is a 7.5% increase on the previous year !!.
Ian Willetts, England
When I think of England and the United States, I think of more than a "special relationship", I think of a true friendship. Our nations have worked together for many years in some of the most important endeavours in history. I should hope that the current "issue" will not destroy a friendship that we have come to cherish and depend on. Say what you will about either country, but the fact is that when the time comes to stand and be counted, I as an American know that I can always count on the English, and the English can count on me.
Scott , Boston, Massachusetts, USA
Wake up Americans! The 'special relationship' goes only one way. You like the Brits and would back them up anytime, but not vice-versa. Tony will likely lose his job for helping you out. America no longer has a friend in Western Europe.
Ramesh Nehru, Mumbai, India The real test of this "special relationship" would be if Britain, like France and Germany, disagreed totally with a U.S. plan and did not back them. France and Germany distanced themselves enough from U.S. influence to have their own thoughts, and to stand by them. It is hard to say what would happen to the relationship if Britain did the same.
M. Clark, U.S.
Please correct your news bulletins. All day you have been reporting that the Americans hold two British men at Guantanamo Bay. In fact they hold considerably more than two, in totally appalling conditions which are a breach of all and every human right. They have identified two for a military tribunal, but more are held. I am very concerned that we will regard the problem as solved if the two who are to face the military tribunal are brought back to the UK. For the others, the problem will remain.
Judith Gillespie, Edinburgh
| What nation would trust any future actions of either country? |
The common history shared by the UK & the US will always keeps us bound to one another, but the obvious change is in the relationship both countries have with the rest of the world. What nation would trust any future actions of either country? With Blair & Bush, trustworthiness & forthrightness are commodities that both are sorely lacking. And again there's our two countries common ground...deceitful leaders.
Ken, Minneapolis, USA The two countries do not have a "Special Relationship" and nor should they. Americans, especially of Spanish descent, have stronger links with Spain; and Canada has always been America's closest ally. Britain's future lies in a united Europe as one country among equals, not tacked on as a minor appendage to the US superpower, no matter how benevolent and well-meaning the USA is.
Glyn, London, UK
Glyn from London stated that Canada has always been American's closest ally and not Britain. Talk about Revisionest History. Canada is America's largest trade partner, that doesn't really equal being a closest ally. (I suggest you look back at WWI, WWII, Cold War etc). Friendships are forged through the sharing of sacrifice. Not the sharing of trade. It does seem that reading the forum, Americans like Britain more than vice-versa. Well, I'll just say this to the British people. If you ever get into trouble and need help, do you really think Jacques Chirac will come save the day? Think long on that.
Brandon, Greensboro, NC USA
The only times the US and UK haven't been allies is when we were fighting each other. It seems obvious that one would have a special relationship with their most staunch ally. The door swings both ways. Things will be as they have been for a hundred years and more. We will be allies, we will prosper together, and we will lead all the world into the new age. It is in both our interests to remain shoulder to shoulder. Americans in general feel that we don't need anyone else. This is a good thing. But that doesn't mean that we don't want you with us.
Jay L., Virginia Beach, VA
Anyone who believes we have a equal relationship should understand that we can't even launch our own nuclear missiles without America's permission. The intelligence gathering is also one way as are some of the extradition Treaties signed by the US & UK. Ask any Canadian how one way the so called Alliance is!
Richard Medlycott, Reading UK
| We are just two countries which happen to share common values and ideals |
First of all I hate the term "Special Relationship" It sounds so cheesy! We are just two countries which happen to share common values and ideals. We were right to rid Iraq of Saddam as most of the people of Iraq will testify, As far as I can see WMD are a side issue and one not worth falling out over. Looking over the other comments written on this page I find it hard to comprehend why anyone would want to trust Europe more than the U.S and that goes double for France. I would rather trust a monkey with a machine gun than France.
Steve, London, England To Steve, London:
The only outcome of this war is the dispelling of the United Nations myth. What United Nations? All I see here are Bickering Nations. I guess good old Divide and Conquer still works. If you'd rather trust a monkey with a machine gun than a civilized nation just because they exercised their independence to say no to you then a what you'll get is a few monkeys in aeroplanes and that's what you'll deserve. As responsible citizens of civilized countries our immediate duty is to unite under a common mandate and repair as much damage as possible regardless of who caused it. And the BBC would be better off inviting a constructive discussion instead of trying to sow seeds of dissent.
Rashmi, Bangalore, India
The USA and the UK have lived and survived through much in the past few decades which has helped form the special relationship that the two nations hold today. In my opinion, a minor blunder such as this will not romp the relations in 2003.
Jonathan Josephs, Merea, Spain
The UK is a permanent member of the security council, it's about time we reined the US in a bit and started saying no once in a while before they go too far and take us with them. The respect the UK commands on the diplomatic front is arguably even greater than the respect the US commands militarily, we should work together to come up with more diplomatic solutions instead of throwing armed forces into every country we don't like the look of. Violence never solved anything.
Alex, Aylesbury, UK
The problem with the special relationship is that it distracts Britain from our more important relationship which is with Europe. We are a European nation and politically and economically it is our home. We have reduced our influence by sacrificing ourselves to a much larger country with which we have no voting rights unlike the EU where we are one of the big four. I wish Britain to remain a good friend of the USA but believe we delude ourselves with the special relationship now would be a good time to start downgrading it.
Graham, England
As Lord Palmerston once famously said, nations do not have friends, they have interests. That said, the relationship between the United States and the United Kingdom is about as unique in world affairs as can be found - and it is more one of equals than might be supposed. For the United States, Britain remains a viable military power that is able to both add credibility to U.S. actions and whose military is able to make a real contribution, unlike many of the potemkin military forces in Europe. For Britain, the United States assures that Britain has a viable counterweight to the Franco-German alliance within the European Union, and maximises Britain's freedom of action in other parts of the globe. The fact is that the "special relationship" is quite real, and it is founded on some hard headed and objective material interests.
James E. Geoffrey II, Falls Church, U.S.A. If the comments posted here represent "the balance of views," then it appears that Americans like the British a lot more than the British like the Americans. It doesn't sound like the foundation of a special relationship to me.
Chad Rue, USA
The UK is neither a leader in Europe nor in the world. It has held on to the illusion of power by taking part in the actions of the US, while losing ground in its own region to Germany and France, to name a few.
Jason Konik, USA/Poland
Blair believes that he will have more influence on US policy working from the inside, rather than from the outside. Smart fellow you have there. I would hold on to that one if I were you.
Rob Doering, New York, USA
| I don't know if British prime ministers genuinely grovel to America |
As Mrs Thatcher once commented, during her lifetime, every serious threat this country has ever faced came from Continental Europe and help always came from the English speaking world (primarily, but not exclusively the US). When has "Europe" ever genuinely helped this country? I can't think of single instance. I don't know if British prime ministers genuinely grovel to America. I DO know that a disturbing number of the political establishment are desperate to sell this country in its totality to "Europe"
Mark, UK Recent events provide England with a unique opportunity that should not be missed to make our alignment with the US closer and place clear blue water between us and Europe. Now that Europe is set to expand to 25 'nations' it is in our economic interests to be alongside the superpowers, not the 'little boys'.
Ian Sharp, Bath, England
I don't think that the relationship between the US and America will be affected as long as Tony Blair is at the helm of affairs. It seems as if he was placed in the highest seat in Britain to look after American interests. Whatever happens, Bush can bank on Blair. They need each other when the rest of the world is baying for their blood. It appears as though Blair's blind support of America is linked with his desire to secure a place for himself in history. Looks as if it is going to boomerang badly! Both these leaders will be judged very harshly.
Melanie Kumar, Bangalore, India
What Special Relationship? The US has only helped us (The UK) when it is in their own interests. At other times they have been against the UK. Asked why the United States entered WW1 Woodrow Wilson replied it was for business. I have seen very little change in that sentiment.
Richard Taylor, Augan, Bretagne, France.
| It's a storm in a tea cup |
The special relationship between the two countries will outlast all this furore. It's a storm in a tea cup. We were right to get Saddam out of power with or without WMD. Just because we can't find them now or ever does not mean he would never have got them in the future. Why wait to be hit before we hit back?
Les, Mooresville, USA Tony Blair just has to ask George Bush how high to jump and he'll do it. He wants to be everyone's 'best friend' and doesn't like when he isn't. George Bush tries to be the world hero, but it doesn't quite come off. Having said that, we have more going for a relationship with the US then with Europe!
Simon, UK/ USA
The people of Britain and the USA are more alike than they are different. All the talk of Brits being the poodles of America is pure rubbish. The relationship is more like siblings. We are brothers, and brothers will sometimes squabble. When all is said and done, however, we will support each other. If and when Britain finds itself in need, Americans will be there to help, regardless of administrations or politics.
Al, Minnesota, USA
It's a very special relationship. I don't think the bumps in the road over Iraq are going to cause any schism. The relationship is too deep, along many lines - economic, culture, language, and historic. The Iraq situation is and was going to be tough for both countries, if anything both may get closer.
Mike Daly, Hackettstown, NJ, USA I was a firm believer in the value of the special relationship. It was the ultimate protector of truth and liberty. The events of the last eighteen months have destroyed that.
Ron, New York, USA
The "special relationship" refers to mutual interests in freedom and democracy. The two nations have close intelligence links and their military branches are closer than with any other countries. The UK is no more a poodle of the US than they are the master of the UK. We are two grown up, sovereign countries who have much in common. For me I'll always side with the USA over "Europe" which has never (and still doesn't) stand by us.
Malcolm, England
The Guantanamo Bay issue could be the "make or break" time for the Prime Minister. The British captives allegedly involved in terrorism may be guilty or maybe innocent, but without a fair trial that will never be known. This is the best opportunity Mr Blair will ever have to re-assert his stature as Prime Minister, re-align himself with the will of the British people and re-establish his authority and popularity within Europe. If Mr Bush really wants to thank Mr Blair for his recent unswerving support for the invasion of Iraq, he could do worse than grant the British people nothing less than an independent trial for two of their citizens. Politically at least - he owes Mr Blair one, and he may increase his own dwindling popularity in the US by promoting the virtue of justice in a so-called free society.
Chris Westhead, Blackpool, England The continual fawning of UK politicians over the USA is deeply embarrassing to many Britons. The "special relationship" had real meaning during the Second World War. Our politicians should grow up and show some measure of independence; do they not realise that US Administrations will tell any country from which they require some support that they have a "special relationship" with them?
Richard, England
So Sandy Clark thinks the US and UK are 'as close a match on foreign policy you can get'. I will just say: Koyoto, International Criminal Court, Iran, Israel, Palestinians, World Trade Organisation, genetically modified food and so on. The attitude of Tony Blair to the USA and Bush is an embarrassment to most British people. Blair has stripped us of our own independence; 'USA right or wrong' is wrong for the UK. The relationship is one way.
Stephen Law, Stratford upon Avon, England The 'special relationship' appears to consist of the UK dancing to the American tune. There is never any sign that America will make concessions for the benefit of the UK, either politically or commercially. Given that, we would be better off distancing ourselves from the US as fast as possible.
Kate C, England
It is clear from the comments displayed that most people don't know what the "special relationship" actually is. Its roots stem from a "special relationship" on intelligence gathering and sharing. It is nothing to do with day to day relationships. It has served both countries well since WWII. A silly little spat is not going to damage it now; it has happened before. It will happen again.
Danny Streather, Southampton, UK It's high time we got back to embracing European values and left America to try and take over Middle Eastern and Asian regimes it doesn't like the look of, on its own. Better still, we should be supporting countries like France which try to prevent this American domination.
Liz, Cambridge
Blair and Bush won't be around forever, the relationship between the US and Britain will still be strong for years to come.
Sean, NY,NY
| Bush doesn't have many people around him who are able to play nice |
I had no problems when Bush's attack dogs went after world leaders who were anti-American as a matter of policy. What others called a "lack of diplomacy", I saw as a natural reaction to opportunistic and hypocritical politicians taking advantage of anti-Americanism. But now I'm starting to realize the Bush doesn't have many people around him who are able to play nice with others. It is an embarrassment that anyone associated with the US Government would publicly criticize their British counterparts. Blair stuck by the US when few others did. If there are any disagreements, they should have been settled discreetly.
Jim , NJ, US At the moment, the UK is the US's number one ally. I sincerely hope that does not change. For both countries, this is an important alliance.
James, KS, USA
| Tony Blair is a voice for Americans that is not being heard by our own administration |
From the American perspective, we still feel a special relationship and hope that it continues. Tony Blair has proven to be a strong voice of moderation, genuine diplomacy and political wherewithal. Far from being the "puppet" that his own constituency has erroneously labelled him, Tony Blair is a voice and guidance for Americans that is not being heard by our own administration. The UK is fortunate to have such a statesman at its helm and the US is fortunate to have such a statesman side by side with its own (too often myopic) executive government.
Aileen, New York, NY What special relationship? The US has interests, not friends. Let us hope that the sycophancy displayed by Blair towards Bush et al is beginning to cool off. Britain is viewed by the world as nothing but a poodle. It is thoroughly embarrassing.
Matthew, London
Tony Blair is a great orator. I personally would rather he was our leader, but, Bush will have to do. People in the US have the greatest respect for the UK. It's the only foreign country I will ever visit. The war in Iraq happened and I don't see why everyone is still making a fuss. The US and UK are as close of a match in foreign policy as you will ever get. Any discord will be minor at best and the war on terror will continue. I think the UK knows 9/11 could have just as easily happened on their soil. The UK is by far our strongest ally.
Mr Sandy Clark, San Francisco, USA
Isn't the special relationship based on most of our privatised utilities being owned by big US corporations? They own us, isn't Blair's visit just a case of him being called into the boss's office?
Phil, England
To Phil in England: would you be so pessimistic about US interests in the UK if you knew that the UK is the single largest foreign investor and that the UK and its citizens own more land in the US than any other foreign nation? Our relationship is truly special. While the US is suffering an economic downturn, 17,000+ jobs have been created in the UK based solely on UK investment inside the United States. If you had read the London Times last Thursday you would have known that. Financial bonds will always be more important than historical and cultural bonds. It just so happens that our two respective nations share all three.
Mike McCarthy, Boston, Massachusetts
Here in the UK we may think we've got a special relationship with the US, but spend much time there and it's clear that this view is somewhat one-sided. Over the years I've heard American politicians refer to their special and unique relationships with Canada - "our nearest neighbour and our closest friend", Mexico "our futures are inextricably linked by our huge common bonds" and Germany "our biggest trading partner and best friend in Europe". There is a very good relationship between our countries that has stood the test of time but it helps neither country to brand it as somehow "special".
John, England
One-Minute World News 
News services
E-mail this to a friend 
Printable version 
Original reports and updates from inquiry
