Story: "British Prime Minister Tony Blair launched a withering attack on Thursday on what he called "mad anti-Americanism" among European politicians.
...
"The danger is if they decide to pull up the drawbridge and disengage. We need them involved," Blair said, spelling out his political vision in a pamphlet published by The Foreign Policy Center think-tank.
"The strain of, frankly, anti-American feeling in parts of European politics is madness when set against the long-term interests of the world we believe in," he said.
...
As he did during the Iraq War, he sided squarely with Washington over the conflict between Israel and Hizbollah guerrillas, angering Arab nations and European allies by refusing to call for an immediate ceasefire.
Responding to those who have criticized the White House, Blair said in his pamphlet: "The danger with America today is not that they are too much involved."
"We want them engaged. The reality is that none of the problems that press in on us can be resolved or even contemplated without them," he added.
...
Blair, returning from a trip to the Middle East, said the stand-off between Israel and the Palestinians remains "a -- perhaps the -- genuine source of anger in the Arab and Muslim world, going far beyond anti-Western feeling."
"The issue of even-handedness rankles deeply," he acknowledged.
Blair pledged to making Middle East "an absolute priority for the rest of my time in office.""
Like I've said before, Europe is a sad continent. Britian, France, Germany, Austria, Italy, Spain, and Portugal, all were once empires that spanned the globe. All were nations with a fighting spirit, nations of warriors. But in todays world, that is forgotten, with the exception of Britian. Britian, or at least Blair, understands the need the fight the terrorists in their backyards, where they will have limited abilities to strike at the innocents we're trying to protect. And since Sept. 11, its been Britian thats had the deadliest attacks.
We had the shoe bomber, the muruer in Seattle who gunned down 9 jewish ameriacans, and the muslim driving the SUV in california. But in London, the subways were bombed, and then they tried again, but were stopped. The UK is just as much at war with the Muslim Nazis as we are, and the rest of the westren civilization needs to join in.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
20 comments:
Spain did have its subways bombed too, don't forget (Madrid).
Yeah, the bombings in London were really scary, because just barely a year before that, I was in the EXACT places where the bombs went off. No joking. It was really creepy to think that I could have been there.
I think americans often forget why so many countries hate us in the first place. Yes, terrorists have killed thousands of innocent people, and we need to stop them, but we also need to realize why they are doing it. It is because america is so involved in buisness that frankly should not concern her. America has funded so many "bad" people (including Osama bin Laden) that its no wonder that we have so many enemies. America just really needs to start minding her own buisness and not getting entangled in the affairs of other nations. Unfortunally, power corrupts, and what use is power if you cannot excersize it upon someone.
It's too bad there seems to be such an ignorance of their own history in Europe. They need to read up again about Charles "The Hammer" Martel and how he stopped the Islamic invasion at Tours. Things haven't changed that much..only the technology. They'll do it again if they get the opportunity.
Spain was bombed, and look what they did. They cowered and elected a pacifist, and withdrew from the war on the nazis.
Under Mercy,
Yes, we've funded bad people in the past, and we've mad bad descions. But thats not why the muslim nazis hate us. Its because we are not followers of Allah, and we are the infedel. And along with that, we support the other 'great satan', Isreal.
If america withdrawls from the world sphere, it would be a mistake of a magnatude not known in this world. If we withdrawl from the fight against evil, then who will stand alone? Britian & Austrelia may, but alone, what can they do? The United States is the worlds lone super power, and to not use that power for good would be a tavesty, and result in a world that is covered with islamic hatred.
Solameanie, that is my point exactly. Europe bleed and died attacking the strongholds of the Sultan, and then defended every inch of ground on the way into europe. And yet, they refuse to step up and fight the evil in our world today.
And I'm not sure they will defend themselves. Germany just realsed muslims terrorists, and spain buckled.
Speaking of Spain,
I've always wondered why the French get such a bad rep for getting beaten in the WWs.
At least they tried.
Spain just sat there.
Wars are rarely, if ever, "good" vs. "evil" for example, WWII was mostly Hitler vs. Stalin. The American international presence is not all that good, in fact, we are looked on by many as bad. Yes our support of Israel does wonders to make us hated, after all, Israel will never have peace till the 1st half of the trib. But really, one must realize how far we have turned from our original international policies. We are not any longer following George Washington's advice when he said:
Why forego the advantages of so peculiar a situation?--Why quit our own to stand upon foreign ground?--Why by interweaving our destiny with that of any part of Europe, entangle our peace and prosperity in the toils of European ambition, rivalship, interest, humour or caprice?
- in his farewell address George Washington
It is alliances that turn little wars bewteen two countries into world wars.
The terrorists only have one thing on their minds, to kill the infidels meaning anyone who is not a Muslim. That's it. And why is it that these animals decide to kill civilians who are unarmed? It is because they are cowards themselves and are not MAN enough to fight soldiers. They take on cheap targets like women and children in the market place.
If we continue to allow them to succeed by not getting involved like the cowardly Spanish pacifists, then they will continue to cause more bombings. This is cuz they see no consequences to their actions. If we attack them, then they will know their cowardly actions will have consequences.
If these muslems are "animals" and "cowards" because they "take on cheap targets like women and children" then you would also have to say (assuming your pro-life) that everyone who supports or gets an abortion is an "animal" and a "coward". If this were true, then america would be filled with "animals" making her not much better than these muslims.
I am not saying that america should be pacifist, just that she should stay out of other countries problems that do not concern Her. Yes, on the individual level this may be an unchristian principle, but for a nation, it is neither unchristian nor impractical.
And by the way, ALL men are created in the image of God.
Jason: Yeah, Spain and the swiss were coward, afraid to stand in the face of evil. France gets a bad rap because they were one of the world powers at the time.
Under Mercy,
War may not always be good vs. evil, but it is at this moment. In one corner, we have the good, the freedom loving peoples of the United States, The United Kingdom and Austrelia. In the other corner, we have the Nazis of Islam, those who wish to see us die, or live under a variety of oppression not seen since the days of the Soviets.
This is indeed a war of Good Vs. Evil.
World War II was not Hitler vs. Stalin. Hitler invaded several smaller nations, and eventually poland, before the Nations of the West took a stand. Sadly, the US paid no attention and took no action. Then, France was over run, and Britian besiged. In 1941, Hitler attacked Russia, and over ran the red army into the streets of Stalingrad. Enter the winter of 1942, where Japan opened fire upon the sleeping giant, the United States of America. We declared war on Germany, Italy, and Japan. The In 1944, we recaptured France, and together with the British, the Soviets, and the remnants of France, we took down Germany. As for the war in the pacific, Russia played almost no part, and it was a war carried almost solely by the power of the United States Navy and Marine Corps.
Our support of Isreal is the right thing to do, no matter what the international opinion of it may be.
George Washingtons advice relates to a world more then 200 years ago, when it took months to cross an ocean, and wars over a small nation could take years to sort out. We live in a different world, with different enemies. In Washingtons time, it would have been unthinkable to intentionally burn a city of a nation you are not at war with, in todays time, our enemys attack without warning. It is better to attack our enemies before they attack us.
Alliances may have created world wars, but they have also kept the two greatest evils of the last century contained and defeated, The Nazis/Fascist, and the Soviet Union.
Sorry, that took me forever to write, and it was refered to the post right above Mercy Nows'.
The main fronts of WWII may be considered to be the Eastern front, Pacific Theater, Western Front, North Africa, Italian Campaign, Southeast Asia, and the Balkans. Three-Fourths of all the deaths in the war were on the Eastern front alone, an estimated 28 million of a total estimated 36 million.
FDR announced he was taking sides with Stalin on June 24, 1941. Five months before Pearl Harbor, not exactly a good way to stay neutral. Now imagine if America had managed to stay out of the war. Yes, England might have fallen, but the “two greatest evils of the last century...The Nazis/Fascist, and the Soviet Union” would have fought each other out, leaving both crippled. Who was really the worst threat? In 1940 the United Kingdom controlled 22% of the world; the Soviet Union controlled 16% of the world, and Germany, never more than 4% throughout the whole course of the war. The end of WWII left Germany crippled, but the Soviet Union whole and Stalin at the height of his power.
A few interesting statistics.
From:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/World_War_II_casualties
Allied Military Deaths:
Soviet Union: 64% (10,700,000)
China: 24% (3,000,000)
United States 2% (407,300)
United Kingdom 2% (382,600)
Axis Military Deaths:
Germany: 64% (5,500,000)
Japan: 24% (2,000,000)
Italy: 4% (306,400)
From:
“Death by Government” by Rummel.
WWII government murders (not warfare casualties, but murders):
Allies:
U.S.S.R.(Stalin) 42,672,000
China(Chiang Kai-Shek)10,214,000
Axis:
Germany (Hitler) 20,946,000
Japan (Tojo) 5,964,000
Just cause we bug other people about this,
What are your sources?
Hey man, congrats on being in World! Talk exposure!
"Muslim Nazi's" is not an accurate descripeion. Nazi has a specific meaning, which does not fit here.
U.S.S.R.:
Land Mass: 8,649,538sq. miles From: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Soviet_Union
X / 100 (what percent) * 52, 677,000 (total sq. miles of habitual earth) = 8,649,538 (total sq. miles of U.S.S.R.)
=
8,649,538 / 526,720 = X
=
16.4199% of habitual earth (does not include Antarctica)
United Kingdom:
Land Mass: 14,300,000sq. miles From: http://www.answers.com/topic/british-empire
X / 100 (what percent) * 52, 677,000 (total sq. miles of habitual earth) = 14,300,000 (total sq. miles of United Kingdom in 1921, it was as close as I could find)
=
14,300,000 / 526,720 = X
=
27.149% of habitual earth (my 22% estimate is lower due to England’s diminishing international control)
Germany:
Land Mass: 1,420,000sq. miles From: http://www.hostkingdom.net/earthrul.html
X / 100 (what percent) * 52, 677,000 (total sq. miles of habitual earth) = 1,420,000 (total sq. miles of Germany)
=
14,300,000 / 526,720 = X
=
2.6959% of habitual earth
FDR announcing he was taking Stalin’s side:
WORLD WAR II DAY BY DAY, by Donald Sommerville, Dorset Press, 1989, p. 86.
Ok, so the control is based on Land mass, rather then population. Makes sense, as the reasources we fight over is also based upon land mass.
"The main fronts of WWII may be considered to be the Eastern front, Pacific Theater, Western Front, North Africa, Italian Campaign, Southeast Asia, and the Balkans."
Works for me, we now have 7 fronts in a world war.
On the eastren front, the Russians suffered terribly, with the Red Army taking over a million deaths in Stalingrad alone. But it was because of the poor armaments, stratigic planning, and disregaurd for life from the Soviet leadership that lead to this. But while the Soviets lost upwards of 20 million, the Germans lost around 4.3 million.(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_Front_(World_War_II)) So while the loss of life was disprotorionatly high, it was due to poorly trained and prepared armies on both sides.
FDR may have taken diplomatic sides, but it did little. Until the United States entered the war, the situation looked bad for the allies.
And because FDR decided to support the allies economoically, that is not a provocation for the Japanesse to attack.
If america had stayed out of the war? England would have fallen, the Jews would have been wiped off the face of the earth by the germans, as would the chinese and other asians by the Japanesse. Italy and the others would have had free run through africa and asia minor. While the Soviet land mass and population were huge, it wasn't until America entered the war did they have a breather, in which they revamped the Red army into a steamroller. Germany and Russia would have fought for years on the eastren front, and with the german scientific advances coming into play in a few years. Eventually, one side would turn to chemical warfare, and without having to worry about Britian or the US, Germany would have more reasources to pursue the Atomic Bomb, and with the hatred that was flowing between the two groups, it would have been used. Then, either russia surrenders or makes a final push into germany, only to be destroyed. Either way, we now have a Nazi Superpower, with atomic weapons. The united States stands alone as a beacon of freedom, because the rest of the world has been swallowed by the axis filth. We have almost no standing army, no atomic bomb, and no world standing, except for our navy.
The allied victory is much better.
And yes, Stalin did murduer many. But the Soviets were by far the lesser of two evils, at the time. No scathing racial hatred, no visercal plans for world domination, and they were attacked by the nazis just as France was.
Myshkin, thanks.
l'aigle:
I will call them Musilm Nazis, Islamic Nazis, Muslim Terrorists, Islamic Jihadists, and nazis. Thats what they are.
If you feel that those are not accurate descriptions, please tell me why.
yup...
Stalin was a great role model for equality.
He killed indiscriminately.
Palm Boy-- This is my first time visiting this sight, but just reading through your statements and responses here, let me say something.
If you want to make a good point and perhaps even persuade people that you are right about something, CHECK YOUR GRAMMAR AND SPELLING, FOR GOD'S SAKE. I'm a former language teacher, and I constantly told my students no matter what the message was that they were trying to convey, the manner in which it's presented counts for just as much as the content. If you can't take the time to spell correctly, people will either assume you're intelligence is rather low, you're ignorant, or you just plain don't care.
oops, so sorry about that. Yes, I agree the discussion has little point now, except maybe for the idea that America should cut down its global protection.
Stacy, sorry if my grammar, spelling and punctuation has offended you.
Under, withdrawing from much of our 'humanitarian aid' from the world probably wouldn't hurt.
Post a Comment