A 100 miles is a long distance in the UK, a 100 years in the US is a long time.

I went to Washington DC, the best part of that was Philadelphia.

45 minutes by train from London Euston. About the same time as my commute and I live in Zone 3. Might not be geographically that near but it's very accessible.

No one said it wasn't accessible.

> Might not be geographically that near

That was my point.

This is a nonsense comment. Easy to get to by train from London. Don’t be discouraged by this comment.

I think the point (see GP's other comment 'Philadelphia was the highlight of my trip to Washington D.C.') is that it's not part of a trip to London, your trip is to the UK, or England, you stayed in London, and visited elsewhere too.

A lot of foreigners seem to conflate London with the entire country in a way that doesn't seem to happen for other countries (you don't 'go to Paris' and actually stay in Marseilles) and some people outside London especially understandably don't like it.

Not that it's an unreachable distance away for a trip based in London.

It is clearly outside of London, but an easy enough day trip by train.

Since you brought up Paris, I'd compare it to Versailles.

As I said yes.

Not really considering Versailles is in the suburbs of Paris, whilst Bletchly is not a suburb of London but next to Milton Keynes.

Sure, but if Versailles is 30-45 minutes outside of central Paris by train, and Bletchley Park is about an hour or so outside of London, I'd venture that the extra ~hour round trip of travel time isn't that meaningful to most tourists.

I didn't say that you couldn't.