When and how did X and Y become allies?

Question

This can be asked:

When and how did the USA and the UK become allies?

This can't be asked:

'Allies of evil' - US, England, Japan - and Australia? What about the rest of the UK?

Why, and what could be asked? Eg 'When and how did Australia becomes allies with US, England and Japan?'

---

Context:

---

From 1:28 - 2:00 in Fischer comments on arrival; comments on the United States, the (Icelandic-)American chess world champion and chess960 creator Bobby Fischer says:

axis of evil, blah blah blah. What about the allies of evil? What about the United States, England, Japan, Australia and so on? These are the evil doers.

What I understand so far:

1. England(/the UK?) - The US has been allies with England(/the UK?) since, what, early 1900s latest?

2. Japan - Not sure about the whole government, but Bobby had an issue with Junichiro Koizumi saying Koizumi was mentally ill (BOBBY OF ALL PEOPLE calls someone mentally ill) and points out how Koizumi and George Bush were friends eg 3:14 here.

This man is mentally ill. (...) This was absolutely cooked up between Bush and Koizumi, no question about that. Behind Bush were the Jews' telling him what to do, then Bush was telling Koizumi what to do.

What I wanted to ask:

1. Australia - what exactly is Australia's connection with the US, England and Japan? The only thing I've found is Australia evil, says Fischer that merely states that Bobby said Australia is evil.

2. Might the rest of the UK - Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland - be included in this so-called 'allies of evil' ?

3. Who else might be included? Canada? New Zealand? NATO? The whole United Nations?

Answer 1

This would be greatly improved by clarifying what the history question is. It should ideally:

• be about history;
• be a single question;
• contain as little distracting content as possible (e.g. don't talk about chess when you want to ask about history).

Other points for improvement; ways that the question lacks focus

In my opinion, there is a completely unnecessary focus and background relating to a chess player and chess.

While telling us what you "understand so far" you ask a question: "The US has been allies with England(/the UK?) since, what, early 1900s latest? If your question is how long the US has been allies with England and/or the UK, that could be a standalone question or maybe it has already been answered.

Then you make a statement about what a chess player said about someone else's mental health. I don't see the relevance of this at all.

Then you state your questions, and you ask a bunch of things about what might be included in one person's conception of "allies of evil." I have no idea how a history site can assist with understanding what one chess player was thinking. If I take your question at face value, this is a categorization that he himself made up and is using in an idosyncratic way.

Why the other question is a good fit for this site?

The other question asks a single, focused, question about history (albeit phrased in two different ways, but they are clearly the same question):

How did the US and the UK become such good friends?

When, and how did USA and UK patch things up?