On Wed, 05 Nov 2003 01:45:24 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy" wrote:

Alan Minyard wrote in
news
On Mon, 03 Nov 2003 23:05:41 GMT, "Bjørnar Bolsøy"
wrote:

Most europeans know Bush, and his administration, as
responsible for misleading the United Nations, falsifying and
manipulating intelligence information in order to gather
support for the most radical action any nation can undertake
- acts of war against another nation.

Hogwash! His persona in Europe as a "cowboy" predated 9/11/01.
Try again....

Again, I don't know what you mean by "cowboy", but I do know
Bush's image, be it right or not, suffers from his
inability to communcate with a clear sense of depth, wisdom
and well articulation compared to some other US presidents,
or officials. Clinton didn't, Bush senior didn't, Gore didn't..

We rather like having a "cowboy" as President.

Perhaps you should say that to the families of all the
US servicemen who are going to loose their lives because
their president seems perfectly oblivious to the fact
that he has sent them to war:

http://www.informationclearinghouse....rticle4173.htm

That is an incredibly stupid article, as is your comment
above. The President is an ex-fighter jock who cares
deeply for US Service People. However he, and the families
of those killed and injured, recognize that sometimes you
have to be willing to take casualties in order to preserve
freedom. Europe has become too cowardly to see the
truth.

The fact that
he refuses to sell out US National Security in order to make
some europeans "feel good" is exactly what we want.

It ponders my mind what "national security" you feel
the US has in Iraq.

The prevention of some terrorism, the elimination of
terrorist training camps, the prevention of the Iraqis from
acquiring special weapons, etc.


Though much of that perception is completely overshadowed
by the recent scandals. Because that's what it is, scandal. :^/

The "scandal" was europe continuing to support Saddam
right up to the end.

Lying and deceit is not acceptable any way you look at it.

"The United States, as the world knows, will never start
a war. We do not want a war. We do not now expect a war.
This generation of Americans has already had enough -
more than enough - of war and hate and oppression."

John F. Kennedy

Different era, the threat of the old SU was quite a bit different
from the threat posed by Iraq. I would think that that was
rather obvious. The US, unlike europe, does not live in
the past


In some ways the US image is that of an extremly competent
offencive machine, but lack the ability to resolve deep
routed cultural or religious conflicts. If nothing else,
then aparently on the basis that they let their own national
interests, or shortsightedness, come in the way for a
real understanding on how to approach something like that.

And europe is sooooo good at that. Remember the Congo?
India?, etc.?

Exactly, and one should expect the US to learn from that.
Europe did.


The US is not europe. We were not a colonial "power" (aka thief).

Oh it could be worse of course, but some people should also
start giving way to the though that neither the US nor
europe can manage this problem alone, not even together -
it's a team effort with the rest of the world playing.

Europe has nothing to contribute (excepting, of course, the UK,
Poland and other decent countries). We are not about to sell out
our National Security to some silly, stupid, "international"
team. I believe that it is called the UN, one of the most
useless constructs in all of history.

You are either grossly misinformed about international
history and politics or deliberatley trolling. Suffice
to say the UN has played a crucial role in maintaining
peace and security and promoting human rights, economic
and social development and human rights ever since its
incarnation.


The UN maintains "peace and security"? Oh, you mean like
in the balkans, or Algeria, or like the Iran Iraq war, or Chechnia???????

And "promoting human rights? Oh, you mean like Cambodia,
or Iraq, or North Korea, etc????????

Economic and social development? Oh, you must mean
sub-Saharan Africa, or India, etc??????


The US is an important member, which seems to indicate
its importance to US politics as well.

The US is very near pulling out. We stay in as a counter
balance to the leftist thugs.


I have served in the US Navy, and routinely visited europe.
Other than the RN, their naval forces were a joke (they still
are).

This should be elementary, but you can't compare an offensive
force with a defensive one, which most of the eurpoean nations
is based.

In this case, defensive = cowardly.

And you shouldn't be so quick in dismissing the effectiveness
of "small and agile" against "large and bulky" in the right
set of conditions, during an exercise the 80s an outdated
Norwegian Kobben sub outsmarted the carrier group defence
and "sunk" the USS Nimitz.

Regards....

That is because the ROE are designed to let, rpt let, the sub
get into a position where they can do an approach. They did
not "outsmart" anyone. "Small and agile are buzz words
for inadequate.

Al Minyard