Reply With Quote
pffffffffffffffffffffffffff. Britain would be living out the fourth reich if it wasn't for us. Obama could go over there and spit in the queen's face and they'd still be indebted to us.
Geez, she's been visiting Europe and it was ridiculous. How the heck is this ignorant woman replacing former Stanford Provost, Professor Rice??
http://www.reuters.com/article/world...090306?sp=true
Hillary Clinton raised eyebrows on her first visit to Europe as secretary of state when she mispronounced her EU counterparts’ names and claimed U.S. democracy was older than Europe’s.
(…)
A veteran politician, Clinton compared the complex European political environment to that of the two-party U.S. system, before adding:
I have never understood multiparty democracy.
(...)
The remark provoked much headshaking in the parliament of a bloc that likes to trace back its democratic tradition thousands of years to the days of classical Greece.
One working lunch later with EU leaders, Clinton raised more eyebrows when she referred to EU foreign policy chief Javier Solana, who stood beside her, as "High Representative Solano."
She also dubbed European Commission External Relations Commissioner Benita Ferrero-Waldner as "Benito."
I can only imagine if it was the former POTUS doing this kind of stuff, the press would be going bananas.
Anyway, I thought that one of the goals of the Obama administration was to promote better relationships with foreign countries and improve how the rest of the world sees America. I guess they changed their approach. For example:
http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/iain_ma...l_us_in_future
President Barack Obama just plain rude to Britain. Don’t call us in future.
The morning papers and TV last night featured plenty of comment focused on the White House’s very odd and, frankly, exceptionally rude treatment of a British PM. Squeezing in a meeting, denying him a full press conference with flags etc. The British press corps, left outside for an hour in the cold, can take it and their privations are of limited concern to the public.
But Obama’s merely warmish words (one of our closest allies, said with little sincerity or passion) left a bitter taste with this Atlanticist. Especially after his team had made Number 10 beg for a mini press conference and then not even offered the PM lunch.
We get the point, sunshine: we’re just one of many allies and you want fancy new friends. Well, the next time you need something doing, something which impinges on your national security, then try calling the French, or the Japanese, or best of all the Germans.
When even the Brits (and a newspaper like the Telegraph) are dissing you, things aren't really going very well...
pffffffffffffffffffffffffff. Britain would be living out the fourth reich if it wasn't for us. Obama could go over there and spit in the queen's face and they'd still be indebted to us.
It's not their indebtedness to us that's at issue - it's what we might need FROM them in the future.
But then again - the Messiah is going to bring about world peace, so we won't need any allies to continue our fight against the terrorists - isn't that right balli?
...with all the weapons the Bush administration has pumped into Iraq and with the troop draw-down, it won't be long till the American money runs dry and they are killing themselves again..........probably breading dozens of OBL's as we speak....
Now board Republicans want to kiss Europe's ass.
Make up your minds.
Do you know what indebted means?
OMG did anyone hear the story about her visiting her Russian counter part, presenting him with a big giant staples-esque red button, that said two words
"Reset" in english
and what they thought was "reset" in Russian.
Naturally, they got it wrong, and the word was actually "Overcharge" in Russian. The Russian guy was like "Um, actually you got it wrong"
Hillary parried with one of her strong, hearty laughs, and tried to play it off.
I'm not blaming this on Clinton, but how inept could we possibly look? Jeeze
Did Hillary start an unnecessary war this week?
I'm not even an American.
But wasn't Bush heavily criticized because of his gaffes?
This administration is even worse. Plus, having a Secretary of State who is clearly so not-ready to perform her job... I mean some of the stuff is hilarious, even the receptionist here would know better.
I'm not worried about the minor stuff that has been reported, just as I could only chuckle at Bush's little foibles -- it's the policies that matter.
CD is more concerned about their positions on the melting point of steel girders.
No melting necessary.
Just to back up what Chump said, Bush was heavily mocked for his vocal/social gaffes. He was heavily criticized for burning the world into ashes.
Good for you. but when you're a president, an some of your citizens and even partisan foreign media made it a point to discredit you over such minor stuff, you could see how this actually (along with other things) helped polarize and alienate bush supporters from true genuine dissenters. Not only that but the rest of the world saw how our own country's elite disrespected our president, causing them to not even giving our government a decent chance to show it's vision. Everything was already proclaimed worthless becuase bush was shown cutting brush, or fumbling words. When we could have used some stronger support from countries in the rebuilding effort, we were shorthanded, (although bush was to blame for not getting support) the ones that did end up supporting us did it halfway because it's public had no faith in the american govt to help stabilize iraq.
Furthermore, i hope you realize how much of a foible it is for Obama to endanger our relationship with the british. We need the british's intel now and in the future. I hope this doesn't happen but it could happen at the way obama's going. Britian is our only true ally. This is totally nuts. Not even Gerald Ford would be this naive.
Last Point, Obama's administration is already pulling out the "your either with us or against us" card. The only problem is, that when bush did it, it was like nine months into its term ( and that was towards foreign countries). Obama has done it with in 2 months and against his own citizens. He seems to already develop an enemies list. Had this been bush, there would be all this outrage on how this is so 1984 orwellian nightmare.
To claim to be independent and impartial while denying this is to be dishonest. Even worst is to also be gutless by picking on the opposition when it's the least ballsiest and easiest thing to do.
You know who you are.
(i'm not talking bout you chump on the last one.)
Luckily Obama ressurected the earths infrastructure to raise superbowl conventions and have lux inaugurals with beyonce in them.
The British aren't going to stop being out ally because of this.
And you're right. Doesn't mean that they're going to be cooperative with intelligence like in the past.
If the british see that the administration cannot be trusted, then they will have reason to withhold intelligence if they fear that our govt will sell them out.
ANd that is very crucial, yeah Obama will get invited for cu ber sandwicheas and tea, but that's all frosting and doesn't really matter in this dangerous world.
Why not?
Serious question.
just edited the reason.
Yeah, but I can't see any reason for the UK to change their policy that drastically.
Good for you. but when you're a president, an some of your citizens and even partisan foreign media made it a point to discredit you over such minor stuff, you could see how this actually (along with other things) helped polarize and alienate bush supporters from true genuine dissenters. Not only that but the rest of the world saw how our own country's elite disrespected our president, causing them to not even giving our government a decent chance to show it's vision. Everything was already proclaimed worthless becuase bush was shown cutting brush, or fumbling words. When we could have used some stronger support from countries in the rebuilding effort, we were shorthanded, (although bush was to blame for not getting support) the ones that did end up supporting us did it halfway because it's public had no faith in the american govt to help stabilize iraq.
Furthermore, i hope you realize how much of a foible it is for Obama to endanger our relationship with the british. We need the british's intel now and in the future. I hope this doesn't happen but it could happen at the way obama's going. Britian is our only true ally. This is totally nuts. Not even Gerald Ford would be this naive.
Last Point, Obama's administration is already pulling out the "your either with us or against us" card. The only problem is, that when bush did it, it was like nine months into its term ( and that was towards foreign countries). Obama has done it with in 2 months and against his own citizens. He seems to already develop an enemies list. Had this been bush, there would be all this outrage on how this is so 1984 orwellian nightmare.
To claim to be independent and impartial while denying this is to be dishonest. Even worst is to also be gutless by picking on the opposition when it's the least ballsiest and easiest thing to do.
You know who you are.
(i'm not talking bout you chump on the last one.
and that's my qualifier.
I said if it stays this way. So i see it in this regard, the british will be at unease to share things such as terror cell info; if they feel the americans cannot be trusted, and other EU countries are upset over the british methods of gathering and info while the US shows favor towards the other EU countries, Britian will see every right to withhold info and go about it in their own way.
Last edited by Ignignokt; 03-07-2009 at 04:13 AM.
Fair enough. I just don't see what realistic action by the administration could drag the US/UK relationship to that level in a post 9/11 environment.
And you're not necessarily wrong.
It's the obama's thing to loose. THe british aren't desperate to free themselves from us.
But....
Again, the british govt protects itself first like everyone else. The day they see that sharing info with the americans will be detrimental, (remember, Obama is only one man, all it takes is a rogue official to put britian in a bad place that thinks he has the green light because of the administration's new tone on the pecking order with Europe, or rather softening of the past view.) is the day that they will stop sharing crucial info that we need if they feel that it's against our own national interest.
Fixed .
I'm guilty as charged. It's too easy..
Criticizing, mocking... would Hillary Clinton be able to tell the difference?
Policies apart, there are some unwritten formal rules one expects these guys to comply to. Burke theorized about the importance of this kind of stuff. It's important to preserver a sense of dignity about the way some political ins utions behave and relate to each others. It's just a matter of formality, but it's no less important because of that. These new guys are amazingly amateurish though when it comes to this. The red button/reset episode with Lavrov was embarrassing and painful to watch even to me. This succession of episodes shows an incredible lack of competence and plenty of vulgarity.
Anyway you slice it, this doesn't project a good image of the US and this administration to the rest of the world. In every newspaper I read today, 4 of them, there was an ed. making fun of Hillary, the Dumb. And odd as it may sound, good image is an important instrument of foreign policy. Nobody wants to risk collaborating more than the min. requirements with amateurs without good-manners...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
