"Franko" wrote in message
...
It is also interesting (for some) to note that Europeans tend to cheer
more
for US presidents who are hesitant to exercise the "big stick" but prefer
to
use diplomacy (e.g., Clinton, Carter), and understandably, jeer the US
presidents who do not hesitate to exercise the "big stick" and use less of
diplomacy (e.g., Bush, Bush, Reagan).

From a European's (especially the German, French and Russian) point of
view,
more talk is more favourable for their interests. When the US uses their
military might against a real/perceived enemy, that "enemy" is almost
always
armed/equipped by (guess who?) the Germany, France or Russia.

Hang on a moment. Are you suggesting that lurking behind all the front-page
rhetoric, there might be economic reasons for the attitudes of other
countries? Money as a motivation? How dare you suggest such a thing. It's
heresy.

Perhaps you can help me reinterpret the photo op we set up with the
Pakistanis a year or so ago, where they wandered the mountains pretending to
help us track down Osama bin Laden. Shortly thereafter, it was announced
that they would be "allowed" to buy weapons from us. Is it possible the
whole thing was insincere right from the get-go? :-)