No, darling our country is fabulous.
2006-07-20 14:21:55
·
answer #1
·
answered by Valkyrie 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
Ha ha, this is a funny question. Especially in light of the fact Great Britain no longer has a foreign policy and just tows the US line on everything from trade to Iraq. As for the Royal family only Americans can answer that one, but i can only guess that an 80 year old women would spread less havoc globally than G. Bush.
2006-07-20 14:29:02
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
What a dream.Kings and Queens are existing species.They are preserved only in Britain.UK now is only a small country,with the colonies becoming fee it has no impact on world politics.UK cannot survive without the help of USA.That is why Bush is the God of Blair.Best thing Britain may become a state of USA now.
People all over the world are amused by King /Queen rule in Britain.Sorry it is the fact,the system is out dated.
2006-07-20 17:47:01
·
answer #3
·
answered by leowin1948 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Hell no!
Oh, and by the way, the Queen of England is just a figurehead mostly, the real power is held by the Prime Minister. The United Kingdom has a parliamentary system of government known as a Constitutional Monarchy. There are very few true (or "absolute") monarchies left in the world.
2006-07-20 14:20:37
·
answer #4
·
answered by Trips 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, America should give up on big government and hand this country back to the people where it belongs! And even though I admire the U.K. people. I respect their culture and ways. I think most Americans couldn't stand the thought of having a royal family.
2006-07-20 14:27:17
·
answer #5
·
answered by aaron g 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
To the wider constitutional consequences, life is to short to answer that question, but if American troops in Iran had been under British Generals command I don't think the place would be such a flash point as it is at the moment,
2006-07-20 14:24:37
·
answer #6
·
answered by ♣ My Brainhurts ♣ 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Who said America has independence we still own em don't we. that little colony across the pond, I love the yanks they are so much like us brits but with a different accent God Bless america and thats from a Brit, is there any yanks wanna swap houses for a couple of weeks holiday i got a one bed terrace, can i swap for a 12 bed terrace with 4 bathrooms, you lovely people
2006-07-20 14:40:10
·
answer #7
·
answered by Baz 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
No they shouldnt. America is better off without British rule, but we could use a different president in the White house.
2006-07-20 14:55:25
·
answer #8
·
answered by Missy 1
·
0⤊
0⤋
No, they wouldn't want that either, what is in the works in you being under Mexican rule.
La Raza: 'The Master Race'; for the race, everything, for everyone else, nothing.
And this is faciliated and supported by both Clinton and Bush.
Too bad for you if your not part of the Master Race.
2006-07-20 14:24:45
·
answer #9
·
answered by yars232c 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
Yes, think how much better the world would be if we British had a leash on America
2006-07-20 14:28:14
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
ordinary selfishness specially. in certainty, even as the colonists got here to u.s., there have been a large form of communities that got here. some got here to hunt for gold and different valuables, some looked for commerce routes to the Indies, some were attempting to ensure a foothold in a sparkling unexplored land for his or her respective international locations (Britain, France, Netherlands, etc), and purely some communities got here looking for equality or non secular freedom. The Puritans and Quakers were between the non secular communities that got here round. The Puritans were very strict of their non secular perspectives and imposed their techniques on others they met. This brought about some feuding with the section human beings (if the British weren't following the right Christianity, the natives honestly weren't). meanwhile, the Quakers, who settled interior the Pennsylvania were honestly very accepting of the community Indians. universal however, in the course of the early colonization of u.s., maximum moves antagonistic to section human beings were from the Imperialistic forces of eu international locations, mixed with greed for land, and a lack of comprehend-how of community American subculture. it is mandatory to keep in mind that u.s. changed into formed from a large form of peoples, even earlier we gained our independence. a number of them were more effective pleasant than others. Now after the first few generations, as Britain changed into placing out to consolidate its administration over the colonies and u.s. grew in route of turning right into a united states of america of its own, human beings possibly did not understand the discrimination that their moms and dads had confronted. So the violence between 1750 and 1900 (which fairly changed into maximum of it) changed into generations after human beings escaped from discrimination.
2016-11-24 23:26:28
·
answer #11
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋