Derek 2.0

I'm still discussing your first post

......As I said, in North America there would be further division before any union.......NAU is a tinfoil hat pipedream/nightmare.

EU member nations have surrendered their sovereignty?

And said criticisms were largely leveled against what/who? Once you understand that, then you'll understand the acute difference between the British efforts in Northern Ireland and the GWOT..........as pointed out by British Army leadership and myself several pages back, this of course being the reason for the two differing end (presumptive) results... Ahh not quite.......Cultural and operational differences found within the British populace between present day and a generation+ ago, which in turn (as I spoke to several pages back) equate to a reduction in political capital...

Without a doubt, its clearly a mater in perspective.....

Like I said, I was there over 25 years ago, it could have changed for the better, but I don't doubt its still overcrowded......and if funds are limited, there are many other Asian options were ones money would go further.......outside of Manila, the Philippines is very nice (and cheap).

The British have been doing counter-insurgency for centuries, with Operation Banner being the first major conflict fought within namely an urban environment.........the difference in preparation can be attributed to defense cuts within the 90s, coupled with the acute cultural and operational differences that can be found .........but as I said, my opinion is gleamed from the leadership of the British army, which held leadership roles in the three conflicts and has drawn the direct comparisons between the conflicts......your countering opinion is your opinion, of which I don't know (nor care) what you base it on.......

Yet none have "unionized" as you suggested the United States, Canada and Mexico will.....

That is subjective.......States like Texas or California already have a GDP of the same size as a Canada, South Korea or India....

Thats not enough time, but whatever you do, don't spend it in Richmond.....right at the Airport (near the main entrance) there is a SkyTrain station that will take you downtown (Canada Line Airport to Waterfront , the end of the line so you won't get lost)......if you're overnight, stay downtown and you'll enjoy Granville st, Robson st and Gastown etc

Stay at Atlantis.....we did it a few years back for the family at Christmas, after the wife and I going several times prior, but go off-season and you'll save a fortune....but pay the extra money to stay in either the Royal Towers or the Cove.....don't bother with the Beach or Coral towers.

Countries such as? You realize there is a segment (including the UK) that would like to abort the European Union..........

I agree, despite a very large (and well armed) segment of the American population fearing exactly that.........As such, I suggest a fractured United States (and perhaps a North America as a whole) a greater possibility than a United North America, which in and of itself is not likely....

But if he wants a sandy beach and heat, go to Cuba on the cheap or better yet, the Bahamas........perfect time of year to go to the Caribbean.

You would think, but downtown is far too quite and the air too breathable.........Richmond has far more than a few Chinese signs mind-you, and of course, the noise from the airport...... But I agree, save the money and spend a week in Vancouver and Richmond....for the real Hong Kong experience

Once before the handover.......my impression was crowded, dirty, and stunk, but had cheap bars....not sure if its changed under the new management...I much more preferred Tokyo, Kure, Yokohama and Singapore............Save the money and just spend a week in Richmond, British Columbia.

*cough* Energy Independence *cough*

........Yet lessons from Operation Banner became the British template for modern counter-insurgency operations in Iraq and Afghanistan. Of course, as mentioned, the similarities between the Troubles and GWOT have been cited by the leadership of the British army and the combined successes (and failures) of both campaigns are not only being taught to future generations in Sandhurst, but West Point and the IDF General Staff and Command Collage............But since you feel different, I'll leave it at that.

I never suggested both conflicts were of the same size. That to is incorrect, the British Army did make use of armed helicopters in Northern Ireland, use of tactical air power was restricted to the conflict, but then again it use was restricted in post-war Iraq due to the namely (like Ireland) urban environment. You brought it up.......but then again British loyalists are the minority in Ireland, and the majority of which aren't even Irish.......The IRA had a much more effect methods of countering British intelligence efforts then the various groups found within Iraq and Afghanistan. Likewise, unlike Iraq or Afghanistan, the ability of the IRA to target the families of those they fought was far greater within Northern Ireland. You understand the British Crown and the Head of the Church of England are one in the same right? Segments within the Irish Nationalist movement very much wanted the removal (and influence) of both the Church of England and Scotland from Ireland........this of course, as mentioned dates back to the mid 1600s.

The IRA received funding, weapons and training throughout Europe, North America, North Africa and the Middle East.....as such, British intelligence services efforts were global. The British leveraged the divide in Southern Iraq between Sunni and Shia Muslims much like they did with Roman Catholics and Protestants in Ulster.......As to "tactical squads", the ROE for the British SAS and Paras were far more "liberal" in Ulster (the allowance of Shoot-to-Kill of suspects) than Southern Iraq........There were numerous examples of both good and bad intel in both conflicts...... That is incorrect, Irish nationalists differences stemmed from not only self-government, but the common political divide (East versus West) found throughout the cold war, coupled with Roman Catholic vs. Protestant tensions that spanned all the way back to Cromwell.........

The Postwar Marshall plan and the rebuilding of West Germany (and Europe as a whole) was a hegemony against Soviet expansion, likewise the decades later rearmament of West Germany........There was little doubt though in the West German populaces collective minds that the Occupation Force of the Americans, British and French controlled both the internal and external security of the nation (the same can be said with Japan) It very much so was the stated strategy, but said strategy was rushed and doomed to fail from its start. Starting with the Bush Administration and compounded by the Obama Administration, the American led Allies didn't desire the generational long commitment to Iraq (and soon to be Afghanistan), evident by the rushed hand-over of both security and democratic governance to the locals........ I'm of the opinion, if we as in the West are not prepared to make a commitment similar to what was (and still is) made to Germany, Japan and South Korea, post invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan, we (as in the West) should have handed the keys over to a "puppet", be it an Iraqi army General or a tribal warlord....and allow them a wide berth in seeking internal security of their countries.

Differences such as? My opinions are formed by both retired Generals Sir David Richards and Sir Peter Wall, both having leadership roles in Northern Ireland and Iraq/Afghanistan. Both Generals applied successfully tactics and strategies developed in Ulster to the populace in Southern Iraq and Afghanistan..........Broad enough?

Yes, I know....I said as much.

Sorry if I wasn't clear......in the past, we as in the West certainly installed and supported puppet regimes, that is without a doubt.......The current Iraqi Government though, the same Government that rejected a US status of forces agreement several years ago, is not a puppet......fore if it were, the Americans would have never left and ISIS would have never have been able to take root in the level that they did.

We didn't......if we had of, and supported them, the mess that is Iraq wouldn't have taken place........a 2.0 version of this guy perhaps: In some areas I do and have no qualms speaking to it.