[alloysteel]

The UN has had FIFTY F***ING EIGHT years to get it right. They have history and the example of the League of Nations of what NOT to do. And what do they do? Go racing off in the exact wrong direction, bending to a totally unelected majority of totalitarian states, and thwarting practically every initiative for expanding human freedoms, in the name of "human rights".

The UN wouldn't even be as effective as it is today, without the support of the US. And they are just about to lose us, as they insist on their continued irrelevance.

[xm177e2]

The baby doesn't walk yet : let's kill the baby.

Does the UN appear to be moving in the direction of getting less crapulent, or has it just been drifting in a sea of appeasement, moral abdication, dictator-coddling, terrorist-loving, and indifference to human rights? I think it's the latter. If I saw the UN improving, I would be far more inclined to keep it.

[Britton J Wingfield]

one country, a voice, everyone equal

Yes, let's make Zimbabwe have a voice equal to England. Then everything will work out for the best.

[Bikers4Bush]

The U.N. is worthless. We need to kick it to the curb and use that money and land for something productive.

Let the world pick the pocket of some other country.

[Bikers4Bush]

Clean up aisle 9. Someone salt the slug.

[Billthedrill]

Let's tell things honestly : the current US-UK attack against France and Germany is an attack against a strong political Europe.

No, with respect, Pierre, it is not. It is simply that the French and the Germans, who have up to now exercised an inordinate domination of EU direction, are being reminded in this that Europe is a much larger place than those two countries with a much wider range of concerns than have been addressed there.

Spain and Italy, for example, have quite as valid a claim to the sobriquet "Old Europe" (perhaps somewhat more so in the case of Italy) as do France and Germany. Why then the tendency to represent the latter's consensus on the Iraq intervention as that of all of "Old," much less all, of Europe? If there is arrogance in evidence here surely there is plenty of it to go around.

My question is simply this - are France and Germany prepared to subordinate their own national concerns to those of a larger Europe, or pretend that all of Europe is being attacked when, in fact, it is they who differ from the rest of Europe and perhaps ought to subordinate those interests? Membership in a federation does not, after all, imply leadership even if you happen to be the first, or the biggest, members.

[wildbill]

Any Aerican card playing of the new Europe against the old Europe would not be possible unless the divisions were already there. Germany and France see themselves as the ruling states of Europe--but this can only produce antagonism from the rest.

And right now, with their economies and dreams of hegemony in Europe in disarray, they simply look ridiculous.

[TigersEye]

Your previous thread "shocking propaganda against France" generated an onslaught of taunts and insults (all well deserved and quite hilarious) but within it were numerous serious rebuttals as well. At the sight of the first post, a cartoon insult, you apparently dropped your gun and ran.

Things are a little different this time around. You have six serious responses from six different posters and only one slight jab. Still no response from you. Are you unwilling or unable to defend your position? If it is your aim to become the resident FR French joke you are well on your way. (As if America needed more material to make fun of the French with.)

Is this the best you can do? Are you the best France can do?

Here is a suggestion. Post #4 is a relatively uncomplicated and direct challenge to your position. How about giving us a cogent response to that?