Nov 16 2006
Continuing Forward In Iraq
As I said before, Bush and Lieberman are now the best hope for America and a success in Iraq. I echo Mac Ranger’s thoughts – thank goodness for Bush. Since I am not an angry lefty or righty, I still hold the man in high esteem. I learned with Reagan – who was incredibly unpopular while in office – not to listen the parties and just keep my own sense of what is happening. Reagan made me a conservative. The nastiness of the two parties made me an independent.
Anyway, Bush is not diverting from success in Iraq. He is out to succeed. No phased retreat like the Dems want. And if they Dems try and cut off funding to our troops, then they will pay a heavy price. America has one big fear right now, and that is the Democrats would screw up with the power they were given. It is no wonder the Clintonistas are trying to purge Dean and the netroots crowd. They are the force for surrender and impeachment in the Democrat ranks. And if they have their way, they will pave a path back for the Reps in 2008. Either way, Bush is standing tall – as usual.
Ken, to save you a little time, Churchill was prime minister two times and the dates are:
may 40- july 45 and 10/51- 4/55
So just a quickie list of Empire members that bailed out during those two periods would be fine> Happy hunting.
Actually you probably have a complete list in your head, so just jot em down.
Ken
I know this is a lost cause, but I will try one more time. The Europeans don’t like us because they are jealous of our power and wealth. They are none of them and I repeat none of them afraid we will invade their countries. When they need us to save them they will come to us again knowing we will do our best to help them. And if you ask any of the Europeans if they would like to come to the US to live they would jump at the chance.
I have never heard of anyone so down on the US and it policies as you are. Do you like anything about this country?
And please, please, I beg of you, quit quoting the Guardian (bastion of the leftist world).. They are worse than the NYT. Can I be more insulting?
Churchill was an influential politician of the “no compromise with Hitler crowd” then an “unconditional surrender” demander.
Throughout his political career he made speeches asserting that if England warred with Germany it would not be at the cost of the loss of its Empire. Hitler of course made no secret of his Anglophile
leanings and opposed the “Left” in his Party which argued for
a permanent alignment with the Soviet Union against the “decadent
UK” (it was, it needed America to bail it out) These latter openly
called for a politics which would help reduce British influence
throughout the world. Hitler though admired the Empire and
considered the Brits racial kinsmen who should keep it.
The UK had a strong political contingent, right and left ,calling for
compromise with Germany which in retrospect would have helped
maintain their power in Egypt and India for example.
Churchill ‘s anti-German biases harmed England, harmed
Europe, harmed Germany.
Barbara
The Europeans, conservative and liberal, generally rightly regard America as a nation purveying a “least common denominator/mass”
culture with undue emphasis on personal profit at the expense
of family, amd of quality (McDonald’s could have never sprung up
in France for example) .
Europeans test higher in knowledge about the world, eg
its geography, its political systems,its varying philosophies.
Even European countries with a reputation as decadent
(Holland and Sweden for example) have stronger family units
than America.
You are simply a comparatively uneducated, naeive Europhobe of the type which Europeans understand allows their government to intrude clumsily and dangerously throughout the world.