I have some questions regarding the Conservative Party (aka the Tories) of England.
What is their stance regarding the war in Iraq? If they are against it, why?
If Blair is voted out, would the Tory PM be buddy-buddy with fellow conservative Bush?
What do Tories think of the upcoming civil wedding of His Royal Highness Charles, Prince of Wales?
What is their stance/attitude towards the US? Why is it so?
WRS
I’ll take a stab at this until some knowledgeable UK Doper can come clean up.
The Tories were against the War in Iraq - which seems to be a contradiction given the fact that they are the conservative party. However, the British political system is perhaps more adversarial than the American system. Most things that the Labour party is for the Tories automatically oppose. Thus, the Tories are really against the War in Iraq because Tony Blair and New Labour is behind it.
Doubtful. The reason for this is that the Tories already know who their PM would be — Michael Howard (the Opposition Leader). In Britain there is an entire shadow government already set up on the other side - you have a Shadow PM - the opposition leader, shadow ministers, etc. Since Michael Howard took a position against the War, he was snubbed at the Republican National Convention in New York. While he and Bush might put away his differences if the Tories were to win, it’s doubtful they would be buddy buddy - at least at first.
They have publically come out congratulating the Prince on his upcoming marriage.
As far as I can tell - it’s the same as the rest of the UK. There are bigger things to worry about - the Middle East, the EU, than to focus on the U.S. They do think that we are sometimes a bit pushy - and that we were foolish to re-elect President Bush. (Your own opinion, of course, might vary).
I hope that answers your question broadly - others can come along to nitpick and flesh out the details.
They weren’t against the war as a party, but they were eager to criticize Blair for supposedly misleading the country about WMD etc etc. Not a totally hypocritical stance (there were non-WMD justifications for the war), but still pretty opportunistic and cynical. They’re politicians.
Depends on the Tory leader. There is a strongly pro-US/Euro-skeptic streak in the Tory party, but also a strand of opinion that is cooler toward the US. Probably the answer would be ‘yes’ - the new PM would want to emulate the Maggie/Ronnie relationship.
I doubt there’s a party policy, other than the standard ‘good wishes to future sovereign’ thing Labour would also have. Party members probably have lots of different opinions, including ‘couldn’t care less’.
See answer to 2. Being pro-US is seen as the opposite of being pro-Europe. Some Tories have a romantic idea of the old trans-Atlantic relationship left over from WW2 and the Cold War. Some have a more foreward looking neocon-style idea that the world should be run by the ‘anglosphere’. Some are critical and hostile towards the US and lean more towards Europe, but are in a minority. there used to be some serious ‘little England’ types who disliked all foregners, but I think they whithered away.
That’s my take.
Tory party member here.
1 Iraq - We voted for the war based on the information that we were presented with. It now turns out that naughty Tony was lying through his teeth. It is impossible to say what we would have done if the truth was put in front of us. I suspect that we would still have supported the war - Saddam was a right bastard after all. Our ciurrent position is that we are there now and need to stay until the job is done.
Howard and Bush - there is no reason why they wouldn’t be close. It’s not as if we are going to pull our forces out of Iraq. Politically the Tories are closer to the Republicans than Labour is. Haviong said that it wouldn’t be a repeat of the Thatcher/Reagan love in.
Royal Wedding - We’re happy for them. This really isn’t a big deal over here. It certainly isn’t a political issue.
The USA - We like you in general. We’ve been pretty fond of you since Churchill. There isn’t the latent anti-americanism of some of the labour party in us. That’s not to say that we don’t have disagreements with you - and of course we have a few problems with the whole “American Hair” thing - but everyone else on the globe does.
This is not up to your normal high standards of accuracy!
The Royal announcement certainly is a big deal. Newspapers have devoted masses of space to it and it was the lead story on the BBC, ITV and Channel 5 news.
There have been national stories on where initially they would marry (Windsor Castle), why it wasn’t legal, what would happen if they registered the venue, which alternative venues could be used, whether the Queen would attend, what title(s) Camilla would receive, whether it would be a morganatic marriage, whether the Heir to the throne could marry a divorcee under Church of England law, and so on.
As for ‘being happy for them’:
Of those who responded to a Populus poll, 32% said they would support Charles if he remarried, while 29% were opposed.
However, most people - 38% - said they did not care, while 2% had no opinion.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/4252795.stm
Prince Charles, the heir to the throne, has complained that his future subjects have “tortured” him over his relationship with Camilla Parker Bowles.
Less than a third of those polled now believe that the prince should become king, and a further quarter even said that the monarchy should end when Queen Elizabeth II retires or dies, according to the poll.
What I meant is that whilst it most certainly is a big story - it’s not a political issue.
The OP asked what the Tory’s stance on this was - as if it were something that was a political issue. As you are well aware, it isn’t. The Tory’s (and the two soap dodging parties) haven’t got a stance on this.
I also don’t think we’re about to become a republic anytime soon.
I’ll let you explain to Mr Glutton about American hair (you can mention shorts too if you want!)
Um, I know not of this ‘American hair’ of which you speak.
(It’s not the musical, is it? Dang! I’m old. This is the dawning of the Age of Aquarius…)
I sometimes feel that in the UK we have three sorts of parties: the one in power, the opposition, and the rest. It’s just a thought, but I’d suspect that since Tony thinks being pally with the US is good for the UK, so will the next PM, of either party. (Of course, it might not work if US govt is pissed that he opposed Iraq, but that’s something else.)
Is WeRSauron’s interest based on concern about the Tories winning the next election?
In which case I think you can rest easy… it’s not going to happen. Not a chance. Tony and Labour have certainly lost support of late through the whole Iraq debacle, but I wager that a large percentage of the UK population would still be hard pushed to name more than a couple Tory MPs, and neither of them would be the current Tory leader.
As for the royal wedding; owlstretchingtime is right, politically it matters not a jot.
And you’ll be happy to hear that of all Johnny Foreigners, Americans come near the bottom of the list of those the Tories dislike most. 
Errmm . . . does being “near the bottom of the list of those the Tories dislike most” mean they like us or not?
He’s just playing on the Tories reactionary image. They do indeed like the US. During the lead up to Iraq they were taking “I like America more than you!” with Blair to almost laughable extremes. If anything the left wing of Labour is most hostile to American cultural and military imperialism; in common with the left throughout Europe.
I thought he was pointing out the current anti-immigrant hysteria within the Tory party. They don’t dislike Americans, because they’re too busy disliking everyone else.
I see very little difference between Labour and the Tories over asylum. Detention Centres anyone? They’re both chasing the same voters over this one. I’d put money on Labour introducing overseas processing centres in the next parliament (the current Tory proposal). Anyway this is a bit OT, my apologies.
Is there any party that’s friendly to immigration?
I’ve never heard anti-immigration ‘mood music’ from the Liberal Democrats - our 3rd largest (by number of seats in the House of Commons) political party. But they don’t have even a nominal chance of winning next time. Or even coming 2nd despite the hype. But I doubt they’d describe themselves as friendly to immigration. That’s probably akin to calling yourself ‘pro-abortion’ in the States.
A few marginal parties are - Specifically Respect (which has a reasonable chance in Bethnal Green) which is a hard left party formed by the MP for Bagdad Central - George Galloway.
The Greens are too - and they have some local councillors. Outside of that it’s a question of levels. Labour act tough and do sod all about it. It’s their biggest electoral weakness and they know it. The Tories on the other hand talk tougher and do sod all about it, but the electorate think they might.