[moneyrunner]

"But nobody should imagine that Europeans are ever likely to share the priority attached by America to the value of military power."

At least not until the next time that Europe is threatened by a military attack. Reality intrudes rudely into pipedreams.

[ODDITHER]

The Europeans seem bent on repeating history. They have emotional alzheimer's. This type of behavior brought about two World Wars. The Europeans remind me of American Liberals. They are far more concerned with how things look than they are with how things are.

[Anamensis]

What Europeans are missing is that we have an enemy, a declared enemy, who wants to wage jihad on us and on Europe, and this enemy doesn't want peace. Oh well, they'll figure it out eventually.

[lavaroise]

What part of for or against terrorists they do not understand?

[Destructor]

"World views of US, Europe in stark contrast"

Thank God. Just look at how screwed up Europe is now. We do not want to be like Europe!

[Southack]

"For hundreds if not thou-sands of years, European countries made war repeatedly with each other. ... After World War II, they tried an entirely new tack, with the great experiment of European integration and institution building. ... the process transformed European attitudes. Europeans are now irrevocably committed to peaceful solutions for their own international problems..."

Rubbish. The Europeans INSISTED upon war against Serbia to "solve" their own internal problems in 1999. Before that, they DEMANDED war in Bosnia. The only reason that they claim that they want to find non-military solutions to their problems is so that they can justify criticizing the U.S.

[Southack]

"It is no surprise that US President George W. Bush's tour of Europe has been greeted by protests from Berlin to Rome."

Really? No suprise?

No on was surprised to see anti-nuclear activists PROTESTING the President most responsible for reducing global nuclear arsenals?!

The press was so surprised that they still haven't realized the irony...

[colorado tanker]

The author claims a "schism" exists between the U.S. and Europe but offers little evidence. The fact that Bush was greeted by protestors means nothing. The Left protests whenever the Right is in power. The Left protested against Cold War leaders and policies, but Europe remained anti-communist. The Left protests against "globalism" but Europe remains a market economy. Lefties protested against Bush and the war on terror, yet NATO backs the war and many European countries have or have had troops in Afghanistan.

There was a lot of talk about U.S. "unilateralism" after Bush abrogated Kyoto but Bush's success in building the anti-terror coalition and his recent triumph in signing an arms control treaty with Russia and winning Russian approval for abrogating the ABM treaty and agreeing to NATO expansion have silenced many critics.

Loudmouth socialists in France, Germany and Britain enjoyed bashing Bush, but their message is not resonating and recent electoral reverses are damping much of that down.

The main differences in policy right now are over the Palestine question and Iraq. If recent history is any guide, at the end of the day the Western policy will be much closer to the current Bush position than the European position.

[jadimov]

Attack. The Europeans are tired. They have been fighting internally since the collapse of the Roman Empire in 476. The peace since 1945 is the longest peace between major European powers since that collapse. The Europeans have no desire to get involved in another war anywhere. They were reluctant to involve themselves in the Balkans on Europe's periphery. As long as there is no unified hostile threat, they will continue to disarm and turn inward. They will not see the threat within until it is too late. Large unassimilated Muslim populations are already living in Germany, France, and Britain. The war will come from within when it comes and there will be bloody war in Europe again.

US interests will best be served by unilaterally taking action and forming coalitions with and accepting help from other nations on an ad-hoc basis. Waiting for consensus from lackadaisial partners will result in missed opportunities. This will probably mean the withdrawal of the US from all international and regional treaties. Or the US may remain a member in name only, using the organizations to its own benefit.

Schism. There is a schism between the Europeans and Americans. The schism is the result of different experiences. The US experienced WW1 and WW2 as wars of triumph. The US was a knight rushing in to rescue a damsel in distress. Ever since, the US has been the most powerful nation in the world. With the exception of Vietnam, the US has experienced successes. It is dominant in technology, economics, politics, military, and culture.

Europe had a different experience. In WW1, half of Europe required the aid of a weak outside power to survive. The other side had a humiliating defeat. In WW2, all of Europe was destroyed. Half required an outside power to intervene to survive. The other half was enslaved for half a century. Europe now finds that even united it is no match for a single country, the same one to which it is beholden. It is not a history that inspire confidence and pride.