Article

2003-02-16 Europe

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve White 2003-02-16 08:42 am|| || Front Page|| [11129 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Has somebody pointed out to the moral conscience of the world, Louis Michel and his prime minister Verhofstadt, that
1) NATO headquarters are in Brussels and employ quite a few Belgian civilians ?
2) GM, Ford and Ford's subsidiary have car assembly plants in the country despite the extremely high labor costs, while certain countries in Eastern Europe are not averse to American investments ?
3) A not inconsiderable number of American chemical companies operate in the port of Antwerp ?
4) A port called Rotterdam is quite nearby and very willing to do all kinds of business with American costumers ?

Those sound like good questions to me.

Posted by Peter 2003-02-16 06:17:47|| 2003-02-16 06:17:47|| Front Page Top

#2 Ford's subsidiary is Volvo. The dog ate that word in my original comment.

Posted by Peter 2003-02-16 06:18:52|| 2003-02-16 06:18:52|| Front Page Top

#3 I think that it is very important that the evolution of our relationship with the various European countries continue. France, Germany, and Belgium have shown their true colors. Let us not accommodate those that have stabbed us and Turkey in the back. Make the changes and adjustments and protect our friends as we have and we should. Walk away from our fair-weather friends and get on with it.

Posted by Alaska Paul 2003-02-16 13:02:03|| 2003-02-16 13:02:03|| Front Page Top

#4 Rule #2 in war: act with resolute unity of purpose. Last September President Bush announced that the U.S. would have no role in the "social policies" of the post-Saddam Iraq. Curiously, he did that only days after his Texas meeting with Saudi Prince Bandar. Please read the following, and ask yourself if Bush is not handing Iraq to the Wahabis:
http://www.arabview.com/article.asp?artID=55
If the Saudi controlled Gulf Co-operation Council has wanted Saddam Hussein out for at least 7 years, then would not the GGC (read: the House of Saud) want the dictator removed without getting Muslim hands dirty?

Bush has been trumpeting counter-terror, while placing American resources in the hands of the two largest terrorist states in the world: Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Where is the resolute purpose in this?

Posted by Anon 2003-02-16 13:06:41|| 2003-02-16 13:06:41|| Front Page Top

#5 Pace #1, I'd say it's time to move NATO headquarters. How about Prague?

Posted by YankInParis 2003-02-16 13:44:11|| 2003-02-16 13:44:11|| Front Page Top

#6 --not paving the war(?)y for a military build-up???

What, 9(?) carriers, 150K++ men and machines in that arena, yet putting stuff in Turkey means we're going to war?

So, Turkey's got to agree to get hit first and then use the stuff? Oh, yeah, I want to join this.

They need to lay off the cocoa.

Posted by Anonymous 2003-02-16 14:31:31|| 2003-02-16 14:31:31|| Front Page Top

#7 I think NATO will move to London.

The UN will move to Geneva.

Posted by john 2003-02-16 14:32:18|| 2003-02-16 14:32:18|| Front Page Top

#8 I propose that the UN move to Pyongyang.

Posted by RW 2003-02-16 14:40:44|| 2003-02-16 14:40:44|| Front Page Top

09:41 liberalhawk
14:02 Fred
09:55 Frank G
06:30 raptor
06:18 raptor
00:32 TJ Jackson
00:29 TJ Jackson
00:22 Tresho
00:22 TJ Jackson
00:02 Anonymous
23:39 Meryl Yourish
23:33 Meryl Yourish
23:31 Meryl Yourish
23:26 Quana
23:24 Tresho
23:03 Kirk
23:02 Alaska Paul
22:56 Steve White
22:54 Hugh Jorgan
22:50 Jon
22:21 Ben
22:21 Hermetic
22:18 Fred
22:15 Fred