Article

2004-01-01 Britain

Britain Furious at Nixon Over 1973 Alert

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 2004-01-01 2:47:44 AM|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Ha! Dr Steve is teasing me, again! Heath, proudly renowned for bringing the UK into the EU Community / Common Market, was apparently a damned soft sort of Conservative. His N Ireland and labor troubles should have been enough to keep him more than well occupied - since they were his undoing. In his senility he derided Thatcher to whom he had transferred the Conservative mantle...

I say this as a prelude to the fact that how the US chose to deal with the USSR over the 1973 war and their plans to resupply Egypt and Syria was out of his purview. Support for Israel was only a matter of words for him - Nixon did the right thing and Heath, an untrustworthy ally regards Israel in particular and the USSR in general, was welcome to piss up a rope. Nixon's action proves the point rather clearly.

As for the 40km plan (!!!), what was obvious to Schlesinger 30 yrs ago finally became obvious to me only a few months ago - they were a helluvalot smarter than me! What hurts is how PCism has obviously eroded our national will in the intervening time. Compared to that SecDef, today we're a bunch of pussies and wimps. What a shame that people will have to die, ala Pearl Harbor, before the bullshit is washed away. Sad.

Posted by .com 2004-1-1 4:43:58 AM|| 2004-1-1 4:43:58 AM|| Front Page Top

#2 What's even sadder is that we've already had our equivalent of Pearl Harbor, and we're not anywhere near fully mobilised. We should have had at least two more army divisions by now, and the JDAM add-on package contractor should have had a contract tripling production after Afghanistan.

Posted by Ptah 2004-1-1 6:26:19 AM|| [http://www.crusaderwarcollege.org] 2004-1-1 6:26:19 AM|| Front Page Top

#3 Good Heavens! Some people in the U.S. considered some options 30 years ago! Whatever will we think of next... 30 years ago?

Posted by Anonymous 2004-1-1 8:20:49 AM|| 2004-1-1 8:20:49 AM|| Front Page Top

#4 Anonymous - absolutely brilliant non-comment illuminating a non-thought of astounding non-profundity. Wow!

Posted by .com 2004-1-1 11:32:52 AM|| 2004-1-1 11:32:52 AM|| Front Page Top

#5 And to think they been pumping our oil for 30 years!

Posted by Shipman 2004-1-1 3:14:20 PM|| 2004-1-1 3:14:20 PM|| Front Page Top

#6 Damn right! What a pisser!

Posted by .com 2004-1-1 5:11:43 PM|| 2004-1-1 5:11:43 PM|| Front Page Top

#7 Consider, .com, what was happening to Nixon at that time, and why, and what came afterward. Don't be so quick to commend a course of action which would likely elevate socialists in the U.S. once again. We don't have to seize the territory, only manage the rulers, which the U.S. has signally failed to do in Saudi Arabia. The credible threat of force should enough, and credibility has been enhanced of late.

Posted by Alan Sullivan 2004-1-1 6:55:02 PM|| [http://bilge.seablogger.com/] 2004-1-1 6:55:02 PM|| Front Page Top

#8 Alan - "course of action which would likely elevate socialists in the U.S. once again"

WTF? I have NO idea what you are talking about or alluding to. You must've misread my comments. Please explain where this came from?

Re: the Saudis and the idea of mere threat of force being enough -- please pardon me, but you need to pony up something other than those lean statements. I give specifics for why I think what I think -- please feel free to elaborate - extensively. Your little one-off comments above don't convey diddley-squat.

Posted by .com 2004-1-1 7:53:44 PM|| 2004-1-1 7:53:44 PM|| Front Page Top

#9 ".com"--I have no idea what Alan's talking about either, but what could have "elevated Socialists" more than deposing Nixon with Watergate?
If only the US had done this 30 years ago, we wouldn't have to do what we're doing now...
Hindsight definitely is foresight.
(And one man the Socialists hated far more than Nixon was Kissinger, whose shoes the Liberals aren't fit to lick.)

Posted by Jennie Taliaferro 2004-1-2 12:39:43 AM|| [http://www.greatestjeneration.com] 2004-1-2 12:39:43 AM|| Front Page Top

#10 Do I really have to connect the dots, folks? Have you ever heard of a guy named Newton? Action and reaction?

If the U.S. did what you recommend, what would happen afterward? World peace? Benign hegemony? Well, maybe. Then again, it might well lead to another Clinton presidency, and the shackles of obeisance to Europe.

Posted by Alan Sullivan 2004-1-2 7:37:23 AM|| [http://bilge.seablogger.com/] 2004-1-2 7:37:23 AM|| Front Page Top

11:06 Dar
07:37 Alan Sullivan
00:39 Jennie Taliaferro
00:03 Barbara Skolaut
23:56 Barbara Skolaut
23:51 Aris Katsaris
23:46 Ed Becerra
22:33 Rick
22:19 RussSchultz
21:34 CrazyFool
21:18 CrazyFool
20:46 DANEgerus
20:42 john
20:29 RW2004
20:24 Frank G
20:01 Phil Fraering
19:53 .com
19:53 Parabellum
19:45 True German Ally
19:28 Robert Crawford
19:10 Robert Crawford
19:03 Alan Sullivan
18:55 Alan Sullivan
18:40 VAMark