From prior to March to May, Pukka. 2 articles. That's all. As for the WSJ, that's a cheap shot - you know that unless you have a subscription it's difficult to go and retreive that information. In any event, I've been here for 4 / 5 years, if I reacted to all the anti-British commentary that I've seen here in that time with the same vehemence that you do, I would have had a coronary.
All this does is make you look shrill, antagonistic and quite frankly, nuts.
But then again, I don't believe that your motivation is due to some perceived slight to the troops, it's your own pride and monstrous ego in this. A man who was truly, deeply indignant, would rather have written a letter to the editor, rather than hovering like a vulture for the opportunity to do a bit of Brit-bashing.
Ivan
I know that, 'twas just a dig: Check the style - doesn't it read like something found in a tabloid? Walks like a duck, etc.
Can you not grasp the simple fact that since this sickeningly snide article appears in the premier conservative paper in Britain, it very clearly shows that even among conservatives in Britain, anti-Americanism is rampant?
No, it simply demonstrates that this tabloid style of writing is generally accepted there, and the fact that the article appears in the leading conservative paper would probably be considered by the Brits to be a demostration of balance.
Can you imagine a similarly vicious attack on British troops being printed in the Wall Street Journal?
Of course not, not even in the NYTimes, Boston Globe, or even the Oregonian....The Enquirer, maybe
Get real!
I already am, buddy boy. Real, and True..
A great deal of intelligence can be invested in ignorance when the need for illusion is deep – Saul Bellow