Ahhh, we can dream, can't we?
Strangely, I agree with his central premise (but not most of the article). Britain DOES need to decide whether its future resides with the euroweenies, or with the Americans.
Wow what a choice. Hard decision. Either be a New World Order Pussy like France, or side with the only country on earth that will risk its own neck for Britain!
There's that dead horse again...sheesh. I thought the european talking points would be slightly different.
Idiot!!! Maybe the author of this article forgot (or else is as ignorant of history as anything else), but we did fly to the moon.
Reading this, you get the idea that the USA just started attacking people entirely at random.
Got a problem with that?????
Naive: A person who believes that the world is safe with Saddom on the loose.
Unilateral: A country who would pull it's troops out of the Korean Peninsula and Bosnia.
It's great to see liberals on the run accross the pond. Thanks to the internet and cable news, liberals are in trouble, even in Europe. This ones gabbing for something in desperation.
It certainly does remain the same good America and the European left remains the same stupid, wilfully ignorant Ostrich that ignored the rise of the Nazis, lauded the rise of Socialism/Communism and now wants to ignore the threat of Islamic fundamentalism and Middle Eastern tyrants. The European Axis of Ignorance and Apathy grows stronger every day.
No. It's called nipping the tyrant in the bud, something which the Europeans still haven't leaned almost 50 years after Hitler.
$48 billion increase on an already stunning military budget - while offering the less developed countries close to nothing in increased aid flows, debt relief and market access
Or maybe we've come to the conclusion that throwing money at countries who wallow in corruption is a colossal waste.
So, essentially the entire premise of this article is second-hand information ffrom an academic lefty. Oh, boy. I think if newspaper writers ahad to go out and do some research and actually do some thinking on their own that they'd all die of shock.
the weakness of its rules on campaign finance which allow rich, usually conservative, candidates to buy elections; the inability of American liberals to fight back;
A free clue. Rich liberals like John Corzine have been much more successful in buying elections than rich conservatives like Steve Forbes.
the weakness of its rules on campaign finance which allow rich, usually conservative, candidates to buy elections
I guess hes talking about conservatives like:
Sen. John Kerry (D-Mass.) ($620 million)
Sen. Jon Corzine (D-N.J.) ($400 million)
Sen. Herb Kohl (D-Wis.) ($300 million)
Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.) ($200 million)
Rep. Jane Harman (D-Calif.) ($75 million)
Sen. Lincoln Chafee (R-R.I.) ($63 million)
Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.) ($50 million)
Sen. Maria Cantwell (D-Wash.) ($40 million)
Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) ($25 million)
Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.) ($25 million)
Sen. Mark Dayton (D-Minn.) ($20 million)
Rep. Norm Sisisky (D-Va.) ($20 million)
Rep. Nita Lowey (D-N.Y.) ($20 million)
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) ($15 million)
Buncha right wing, gun-nut, militia types on that list.
This idiot is already out-of-date, today stories have appeared in which the Brits publicly said that they will use nuclear weapons if attacked with weapons of mass destruction. They have already made it clear that they are ready to join in a war against Iraq. If the left-wing laborites bring down the government, it will be replaced by the Tories, who are even more pro-American than Blair.