Well, I think the USA would be quite embarrassed. On the one hand, it is quite close to the UK but on the other hand, there is a very strong Irish community in the USA. But anyway, I suppose that if the UK began invading any country without the USA being OK with it, the relationships between the two countries would become quite bad.
Remember the Suez crisis in 1956 and how the USA made the UK and France understand that it didn't want them there. It would be less or more the same, I think.
2006-12-03 01:59:25
·
answer #1
·
answered by Siobhan 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
The UK has enough on its hands without us, namely the Scottish and the Welsh, not to forget our brothers and sisters in the North.
A lot of their troups are fighting in the Near East.
Our army might be crap, but I'm sure we would not need the US to defend us. They would not want to anyway, there's no oil to be had, and Shell already got what little gas there is.
Anyway, they are here already, so are the Yanks...
2006-12-01 01:07:47
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
It would mean that the world had fallen into chaos and starvation, and the USA would probably already be a radioactive wasteland, incapable of doing anything, most of its population dead or dying.
All the European postwar institutions: NATO, the EU, the Council of Europe and so on would have to be defunct and the rule of law meaningless.
2006-12-01 01:00:10
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
like that is been stated u . s . militia spending is over six hundred billion 2d international militia spending is china at one hundred+ bn. the most stepped forward technologies we've 34 air craft companies while china has decrease than 3 lowly stepped forward air craft companies. no longer to teach U.S. armed civilian militias and a civilian gun possession of one hundred ten guns in protecting with one hundred human beings. Militias with Armored workers companies and prepared militia approaches besides as gangs that are better ideal armed than maximum international militia. it would want to be a chilly day in hell if the U.S. were to be invaded. something round 35-40% of militia spending and 40 5%+ of global gun possession it would want to be epic despite the indisputable fact that it does no longer be accessible. fortuitously lobbying from unnamed communities has allowed for the civilian disarmament of different international places it would want to be very puzzling to take united statesa.. China and all its militia might want to no longer take our civilian inhabitants on my own thoughts you i will upload Russia to that project, we would nonetheless win.
2016-10-08 01:21:53
·
answer #4
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
Nothing because the British would take care of the Irish easily and if America interfered then they would be next and America doesn't want to get on the bad side of the Brits....trust me.
2006-12-01 11:17:21
·
answer #5
·
answered by HHH 6
·
1⤊
3⤋
Seeing as how the "Troubles" have existed in varying degrees of intensity for more than two-hundred years, I imagine America's feelings would be what it's always been-- dismay.
2006-12-01 01:16:30
·
answer #6
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
UK and Ireland have been at it for years, and our response has been a sternly issued Yawn.
England is our principal ally, a democracy and a not a threat to export terrorism, anthrax or mustard gas to rogue nations.
Do you really think this comparison makes any sense?
2006-12-01 01:02:45
·
answer #7
·
answered by chocolahoma 7
·
1⤊
3⤋
Sit back and watch.
Play a moderator's role after either side gets exhausted.
2006-12-01 01:01:24
·
answer #8
·
answered by Saadi 5
·
2⤊
0⤋
well why would the uk attack ireland they have nothing the uk wants except magners cider and guiness
2006-12-01 09:56:00
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
2⤋
We'd stand by the UK.
2006-12-01 01:12:04
·
answer #10
·
answered by SGT. D 6
·
0⤊
2⤋