Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #1   Report Post  
Doug Kanter
 
Posts: n/a
Default

"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? :-)


  #2   Report Post  
Franko
 
Posts: n/a
Default

Sorry Doug,

I promise I will not do that again...

As for Pakistan, let them buy a few twigs from us...

"Doug Kanter" wrote in message
...
"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? :-)




Reply
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules

Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Clinton can't be all bad Jim, General 14 March 14th 05 01:34 AM
Clinton Told Bush That Bin Laden Top Security Threat Jim General 13 April 20th 04 02:34 AM
OT--Not again! More Chinese money buying our politicians. NOYB General 23 February 6th 04 05:01 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 03:56 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2025 BoatBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.
 

About Us

"It's about Boats"

 

Copyright © 2017