Vance claims US and Britain ‘win every war' they fight together in address to American troops at UK base
Speaking to American troops stationed at RAF Fairford in Gloucestershire on Wednesday (13 August), the US vice president praised the 'beautiful alliance' between the two nations, adding that they have worked together to 'achieve great victories'.
Vance, who is currently in the UK with his family, said that throughout history, 'every time a great victory is won for freedom and for peace and for prosperity, it is almost always the Brits and the Americans that do it together.
'And we win every single time we go to war together. You guys know that as well as anybody.'
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
28 minutes ago
- Telegraph
Britain loses another industry after Starmer refuses to step in
Britain's largest bioethanol plant faces closure after Sir Keir Starmer refused to step in and save the industry. On Friday, the Government announced it would not give any funding to the Vivergo Fuels business in Hull, which is losing £3m a month. Around 150 workers are expected to lose their jobs at the factory, which is expected to close by Sept 13 and is one of only two domestic bioethanol production sites. The industry had hoped for a bailout after Sir Keir Starmer's trade deal with Donald Trump, which will allow the US to supply Britain with 1.4bn litres of duty free ethanol. But on Friday afternoon, a government spokesman said: 'This Government will always take decisions in the national interest. 'That's why we negotiated a landmark deal with the US which protected hundreds of thousands of jobs in sectors like auto and aerospace.' It said it had worked to understand the challenges faced by both Vivergo and the Ensus bioethanol plant in Redcar on Teesside, which has also been refused a bailout. But the spokesman said the Government would not offer any direct funding 'as it would not provide value for the taxpayer or solve the long-term problems the industry faces'. They continued: 'We recognise this is a difficult time for the workers and their families and we will work with trade unions, local partners and the companies to support them through this process. 'We also continue to work up proposals that ensure the resilience of our CO2 supply in the long term in consultation with the sector.' Unite, Labour's biggest trade union backer, heavily criticised the Government for refusing to bail out the bioethanol industry. Sharon Graham, general secretary, said: 'This is a short-sighted decision that totally disregards the benefits the domestic bioethanol sector will bring to jobs and energy security. 'Once again, the Government's total lack of a plan to support oil and gas workers as the industry transitions is glaring.' The union noted that bioethanol was a key component of sustainable aviation fuel, which is expected to be in huge demand in the coming years. The closure of the Vivergo plant will also represent a fresh blow to thousands of British farmers who supply grain to the site. A record number of farms are already closing for good after Rachel Reeves's changes to agricultural property relief made the future of thousands of rural businesses unviable. As well as the collapse of a major domestic market, the closure will risk pushing previously profitable farms into making a loss. A spokesman for Associated British Foods (ABF), the owner of Vivergo, said: 'It is deeply regrettable that the Government has chosen not to support a key national asset. 'We have been fighting for months to keep this plant open. We initiated and led talks with the Government in good faith. 'We presented a clear plan to restore Vivergo to profitability within two years under policy levers already aligned with the Government's own green industrial strategy.' ABF accused the Government of having 'thrown away billions in potential growth' and the chance to lead the world in bioethanol. 'The loss of Vivergo will be felt most acutely by our dedicated workforce and their families and by the thousands whose livelihoods depend on our supply chain, from farmers to hauliers and engineers.' During its talks with Jonathan Reynolds, the Business Secretary, ABF had demanded ministers step in to cover 'short-term funding of Vivergo's losses' as well as striking a longer-term deal to put its plant on a profitable footing again. Investment from Vivergo is thought to support around 1,220 farming jobs across the north-east of England. The UK imports around 45 per cent of its CO2 and sources have previously warned of a supply crisis without a domestic bioethanol industry if foreign sources were disrupted. In June, The Telegraph revealed a leaked memo by industry leaders that said the bioethanol sector was a 'critical component' of British food security and energy resilience. The memo warned: 'The closure of Vivergo would damage farm incomes, increase import dependency and undermine the Government's strategic goals across multiple departments.'
Reuters
28 minutes ago
- Reuters
Britain will not bail out bioethanol industry hit by Trump trade deal
LONDON, Aug 15 (Reuters) - Britain's government will not provide financial support to the struggling bioethanol industry, it said on Friday, leaving a sector hit hard by the UK's tariff deal with U.S. President Donald Trump facing imminent collapse. The failure of the industry, which supports thousands of jobs, could prove to be an embarrassment for Prime Minister Keir Starmer, who hailed May's trade deal as a boost to businesses that would protect employment and attract investment. It would also serve as a stark example of the global impacts of Trump's assault on world trade, with the industry's collapse set to deal a blow to production of byproducts including animal feed and carbon dioxide as well as the British farmers who supply the sector. "We ... have taken the difficult decision not to offer direct funding as it would not provide value for the taxpayer or solve the long-term problems the industry faces," a government spokesman said on Friday. The spokesperson said the trade deal had protected hundreds of thousands of jobs in the auto and aerospace industries. However, under the agreement, the UK's 19% tariffs on U.S. ethanol fell to zero, through a 1.4 billion-litre (370 million gallon) quota - a figure equating to the size of the UK's entire ethanol market. Britain has two major bioethanol plants in northern England - Associated British Foods' (ABF.L), opens new tab Vivergo plant and one operated by Ensus, owned by Germany's Sudzucker Group - which account for nearly all of its production capacity. AB Foods, which had said in June it would shutter the Vivergo plant unless the government stepped in with an aid package, said on Friday it would start an orderly closure process immediately with production of bioethanol and animal feed ceasing by August 31. Ensus has also said its plant faces closure. Bioethanol is produced from crops such as wheat and is used to make petrol greener and to produce sustainable aviation fuel. In June, Starmer's government launched its industrial strategy, promising to invest in the green economy. Both AB Foods and Ensus have said the trade deal, along with existing regulations that already gave U.S. producers an advantage in the British market, had made the environment impossible. "It is deeply regrettable that the Government has chosen not to support a key national asset," a spokesperson for AB Foods said, adding that the decision threw away Britain's sovereign capability in clean fuels. "Jobs in clean energy will now move overseas - principally to the U.S. but also to other countries with a more sensible regulatory environment," the spokesperson added. Ensus did not respond immediately to a request for comment. The government spokesperson said it would work up proposals that ensure the resilience of the supply of carbon dioxide, which is used in the soft drinks and nuclear industries and in hospitals.
Spectator
an hour ago
- Spectator
Trump and Putin fundamentally misunderstand each other
Let the trolling begin. Chicken Kiev was the airline meal served to the first planeload of Russian diplomats, government officials and journalists as they flew to Anchorage, Alaska. Russia's veteran foreign minister Sergei Lavrov arrived dressed in a white sweatshirt bearing the logo 'CCCP' – or USSR in Cyrillic. Russian State TV viewers have been treated to video montages of the greatest moments of US-Russian cooperation, from astronauts meeting in the Mir space station to soldiers embracing on the Elbe river in 1945. The US side, by contrast, has done their bit to make the visiting Russians feel unwelcome by billeting the Kremlin press corps in a sports stadium equipped with army cots, flimsy cloth partitions, and too few electrical sockets. Petty mutual insults aside, Putin has in many ways already got what he wanted even before he sits down with Trump. The pomp and security theatre of a great international summit underscores Putin's senior place in the pantheon of world leaders. Europe's heads of government have to crowd on an hour-long conference call to get Trump's ear. Putin, by contrast, is important enough for the president of the world's most powerful country to fly high hours from Washington to meet him. Respect and face time are what Putin has always craved most, and in speeches and historical essays he has often complained that the West has consistently snubbed and disregarded Russia. With the Anchorage summit, Putin at last has secured Trump's undivided attention – for a few hours at least. When it comes to the actual talks, however, there's ample scope for a derailment. Both sides fundamentally misunderstand the other's position. Trump, perhaps naturally for a former real estate mogul, seems to believe that Putin's primary interest is taking Ukrainian territory. That's not the case. What Putin truly cares about – and has repeatedly demanded – is the removal of Ukraine as a strategic threat to Russia. That, in practice, means not only keeping Ukraine out of Nato but also restricting the size of its military and restoring the rights of Russian speakers, Russian-language broadcasters and the Russia-oriented wing of the Ukrainian Orthodox Church. Putin, in short, is fighting to make Ukraine a docile ally and part of Moscow's political and economic sphere of interest. Putin, for his part, believes that Trump is mostly interested in money, deals and enriching his friends. To that end, Putin has brought along not only his top diplomats but also his finance minister Anton Siluanov, who has played a key role in Russia's largely successful effort to sidestep western sanctions. By dangling the prospect of joint ventures with US companies to open up Arctic gas fields and other multi-billion dollar baubles, Putin believes that he can bamboozle Trump. But Trump is not entirely the useful idiot that the Kremlin seems to take him for. In recent weeks Trump has accused Moscow of feeding Washington 'a lot of bullshit' and threatened 'serious consequences' if Putin does not agree to a ceasefire. It is easy to forget that the principal reason the two leaders are meeting today in Anchorage is because of Trump's as-yet unfulfilled threat to impose devastating secondary sanctions on countries that import Russian oil and gas. But rather than actually follow through on that ultimatum – which would involve the US effectively launching a trade war on Russia's main customers India, China and the EU – Trump chose to call a summit rather than be seen to be chickening out. By Trump's account, the Anchorage talks are a 'feel-out' to determine whether a peace deal is possible. Putin, for his part, has welcomed Trump's 'positive engagement in the peace process' – without apparently shifting an inch on his basic demands for Ukraine's surrender. The key question will be whether Putin has got the message that Trump's famously prickly ego demands concrete results, not more 'bullshit'. Putin's own ego, no less prickly and enormous than Trump's, demands that any concessions be framed as a deal and not as something dictated by the Americans. Hence the raft of economic proposals that Siluanov will be bringing to the side talks with the White House team. Then there is a raft of unfinished business between Washington and Moscow concerning strategic nuclear weapons, most urgently the New START treaty that both sides have abandoned and which formally elapses in 2026. Space cooperation is another area where Putin can happily sign on the dotted line. The one deal that the two men will not be doing today in Anchorage – at least according to Putin's spokesman Dmitry Peskov – is a grand deal ending the war in Ukraine. But there is hope that the Alaska summit could at least be the beginning of the end.
