Liberals, the Gift That Keeps Giving

We have lots of anti-American types living here, so visiting doesn't tip the scales much.

Historically, the English have had a strain of anti-Americanism on the right for a long time. It appears to be rooted in a condescending attitude, that we're unsophisticated bumpkins in our foreign policy, and maybe resentment that we became the superpower that England used to be in the good old days.

The reason I posted what I did was that your PM was unsatisfying. It doesn't explain why you would even bother to list the absurd demands of the Taliban in seriousness.

 

Point taken - I guess Iranian Monitor was a prime example whilst he was living in the US.

Umm no. Historically the English have had a strain of anti-Americanism on the left for a long time. Many on the left prefer to be allies of Europe than America. You only have to read our media to know that. Guardian on the left always criticising America and Times/Telegraph on the right promoting our relations with America. Obviously there are instances where differences occur - but you have mixed up our right and left.

However much of a joke you believe the Taliban to be and however much both of us do not believe that the Taliban would of been able to hand over Bin Ladin (as I explained in my PM) this doesn't take away the fact that in any other country an extradition request has to be proceeded with. America did not follow normal protocols however much you try and twist it. And yet when it is the other way round, America has refused the extradition of terrorists to Britain.

Whether you like it or not, Israel is an entirely seperate issue. We have a different perspective over here and our media (I say this diplomatically) doesn't always portray the same side of the story as the US media. I am not anti-Israel. I believe in the right of Israel to exist peacefully. However I am able to see where Israel has been wrong and deserves criticism. It used to be on the Politics board that any criticism of Israel was greeted with "your racist", "you're anti-smitic" etc etc etc. Well thats rubbish. Israel is a nation state and is not infallible.

 

Wait, Johnny RedBull is Ted Cikowski?

In that case, not only are you wrong, but Depeche Mode sucks.

 

Maybe I'm confused, but I seem to recall alot of vitriol towards America from the aristocrat right - the ones who want to go back to the good old days where the peasants knew their place.

The left, well I went to college at Berkeley and if you've seen one commie, you've seen them all.

I won't bother to defend the US on the IRA business, we have enough homegrown scumsuckers without letting the foreign ones hide out here. But criticizing us for not trying to extradite bin Laden is just silly. If we had assassinated him, I'd be much happier, and nobody would wring their hands for very long, not even you.

Yes, those accusations of racism are tired, and I don't think that Israel is above criticism. However, it's much easier to give them the benefit of the doubt rather than their opponents. If the stupid Palestinians would stop attacking Israel with whatever pathetic weapons they can get, they'd find out that they could live peacefully, as Egypt has for a long time. But they clearly aren't interested in that.

 

Yes, well there were some on the aristocratic right who supported Hitler and had agreements with him to set up here a power base if he invaded...........see - Oswald Mosely and Lord Rothermore for example. It certainly doesn't mean that the right as a whole did...........There are always exceptions to every rule..........

Traditionally the right here have been far more supportive of Britains trade, economic and military links with America than the left.

On the contrary, I'd of been very happy if Bin Ladin had been assassinated. I'd of been much happier however (although this is obviously a debatable pont) if Clinton had been able to get him from Sudan in 1996.

I agree that I would rather give Israel the benefit of the doubt over Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Hamas and what they say in statements or press releases. However I won't give them the benefit of the doubt over situations like Tom Hurndall where there was a blatent cover up. The IDF should of admitted their mistake and carried out a full investigation instead of being caught lying. It would of made much more sense than the situation as it stands which is many people do not believe that Israel carries out a full investigation when an accidental killing or the death of a civilian happens.

That plus the fact that even last year Israel celebrated it's bombing attack on the British administration there in 1946 by un-veiling a plaque, doesn't exactly portray a warmth to Britain.......therefore you just have to accept that a British viewpoint of Israel is going to be different than an Americans........it doesn't mean either is specifically wrong.

Times Article on last years celebration of King David Hotel Bombing.

When I last year made a post criticising Israel and Netanyahu for celebrating the bombing and deaths of civilians I got told I was anti-semitic, racist and (of all things, though god knows what it had to do with anything) pro-Hamas.
This is the history of the post that "Johnney Red Bull" had a go at me for as I madea post recently stating that as a mod in IN I would not clamp down on criticism of Israel and would make sure those who wanted to do that - could. Somehow that makes me anti-semetic...............

 

Well its been a week. Any word on when The View is going to have a physics (structural engineering) expert on to prove that fire has never ever melted steel before nor could fire even weaken it to the point of failure?

 

Silly Ham, don't you know that Rosie is a celebrity and thus an expert on all things that she wants to pontificate on? Not only that, she's a dyke and lots of them are made of concrete and rebar. Rosie looks like she might have a fair amount herself. She could probably moonlight as a traffic barrier.

 

"Any dumb potato-head who's dragged those rotten ancestral quarrel to his new home in America deserves no better than to get a British laser bomb targeted on his south Boston bar." --PJ O'Rourke

I think actually you'll find a correllation between those who have supported our actions in Afghanistan and those who would be embarrased by the support that Catholic extremists have received in this country. It is true Ronald Reagan never said boo about this travesty, but that was at a time when the likes of Tip O'Neil and Ted Kennedy had much control over the Democratic Party and Congress and therefore the government...

 

I like the quote. I'm going to use that.

Over here (as I am sure you can understand) the IRA issue transgressed political afiliations as it affected everyone. It is actually surprising when you think about it that at a time when the two leaders of our countries were possibly at their most dominant (Maggie and Ronald) they were furthest apart on the IRA issue. Which is always confusing. Over here there is a general dislike of the Irish American part of the Democrats that let NORAD and it's ilk fundraise etc.

 

Not just the Dems. I remember when the issue was prominent, in the 80's, Pat Buchanan defended the IRA fugitives, too. But for the most part, it was the Irish Dems in New England.

 

So are you conceding that having US troops referee a civil war is a bad idea?

 

Oh I agree that Biden has his head up his ass most days, but was curious as to whether you agree that what is happening in Iraq is a civil war.

 

So what motivation does the Iraqi gov't have to get their shit together if we're willing to station 150-200K troops there indefinitely? Bush has been saying "we'll stand down when they stand up" for almost two years now, and they're no closer to standing up. There has to be an end date.

 

This is why even conservatives like Smiley consider this to be the greatest foreign policy disaster for decades and decades: we can't stay, and we can't leave.

 

All of those other wars had different end points and different goals. Right now, it's not clear that the goals are in Iraq are anymore, other than to stabilize a country that is pulling itself apart.

 

Mission Accomplished, as they say.

Fine. Now if only Bush would define exactly what that is and how he intends to get there (and "send more troops" is not a reasonable answer), we could get moving. Having 170K combat troops walking around around Iraq with a "kill me" sign on their backs is not a strategy. And despite all this BS coming from McCain and Lieberman, things are definitely not improving. Just check the news this morning.

The goal would be to stop the genocide, not necessarily end the civil war; that must be a negotiated settlement between the parties, and does not require military action. In any case, that mission requires a true coalition, as opposed to the US, the Brits and 70 of Tonga's finest water treatment specialists.

 

If it doesn't require military action, what's stopping him from going over there and stopping the genocide on his own?


Oh wait, lemme guess, it requires a show of force and the threat of military action, right?

Of course, the lesson for those fighting in Darfur right now is that all they would have to do is be patient and send kids with explosive vest into some troop, err... i mean peacekeeper, convoys on a semi regular basis and everyone will be calling for withdrawal where they'll be able to go about killing each other again.

 

We seem to be a little preoccupied right now. If Senator Biden believes only 2,500 troops would fix Darfur perhaps he could get the free-riding Europeans send some folks?