I want to note that the auththor, Daniel Larison, is a writer for the American Conservative Magazine and is not a liberal (Yeah, I know it can be hard to tell the difference...)
1 posted on
04/02/2010 6:27:55 PM PDT by
GOPGuide
To: GOPGuide
Yeah, it was W who caused the change in status...from when he sent the bust of Churchill back to England. Uh-huh.
To: GOPGuide; All
Allies, we don’t need no stikin Allies.. Never mind we had Allies who helped us win the Revolutionary War...
3 posted on
04/02/2010 6:33:47 PM PDT by
KevinDavis
(No money for the moon, but money for High Speed Choo Choo's....)
To: rmlew
7 posted on
04/02/2010 6:38:13 PM PDT by
GOPGuide
To: GOPGuide
that magazine is garbage.
9 posted on
04/02/2010 6:45:00 PM PDT by
Rosemont
To: GOPGuide
Gee. I wonder why the Irish-Catholic Buchanan wouldn't like Britain....
11 posted on
04/02/2010 6:50:20 PM PDT by
Finalapproach29er
(Obama will sink as fast as he rose. Idolatry will not succeed. Be patient, folks...)
To: GOPGuide
Another of Zero’s “successes”.
13 posted on
04/02/2010 6:58:05 PM PDT by
eclecticEel
(Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness: 7/4/1776 - 3/21/1980)
To: GOPGuide
Hello Mr. Brown. As a sign of our friendship, here is an IPod with downloaded copies of my healthcare speeches on it; and also some DVDs my staff bought at WalMart that don't play on British DVD players.
14 posted on
04/02/2010 7:10:45 PM PDT by
SkyPilot
To: GOPGuide
Who cares? The “Britain” we knew for the ladt 10 centuries no longer exists. Its future is as an Islamic Republic. Britain is totally lost, and they did it to themslves, willingly.
To: GOPGuide
Like other alliances defined by the crucibles of WW II and the Cold War, the special relationship has lost its old purpose while the Global War on Terror has failed to supply a new one. Now there's an arguable premise if there ever was one.
18 posted on
04/02/2010 7:34:31 PM PDT by
Carry_Okie
(The Democrats were the Slave Party then; they are the Slave Party now.)
To: GOPGuide
But when Secretary of State Clinton recently expressed support for negotiations over the status of the territory, it appeared that neutrality had morphed into back-stabbing opposition. Clintons comment may have stemmed more from clumsiness than policyuntil sheep become strategic assets the Falklands will remain a low priority at the State Department. Equating America with the DOS or Clinton is equally deficient reasoning.
19 posted on
04/02/2010 7:36:30 PM PDT by
Carry_Okie
(The Democrats were the Slave Party then; they are the Slave Party now.)
To: AdmSmith; Berosus; bigheadfred; Convert from ECUSA; dervish; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Fred Nerks; ...
After decades of playing second fiddle to the U.S., Britain, like other U.S. allies, is prepared to chart a more independent course. It's about time.
21 posted on
04/02/2010 7:51:11 PM PDT by
SunkenCiv
("Fools learn from experience. I prefer to learn from the experience of others." -- Otto von Bismarck)
To: GOPGuide
Interesting.
I’m not sure I buy the author’s arguments in regards to Britain, though I do believe generally that the key alliances for the U.S. are changing somewhat. For example, I think it possible that Poland and India will be more important to U.S. interests in the decades to come than France or Germany will.
That’s assuming Obama doesn’t alienate every potential ally in the next two to six years, of course.
26 posted on
04/03/2010 12:07:12 AM PDT by
DemforBush
(Somebody wake me when sanity has returned to the nation.)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson