Ross Miller
- Location: London Road, Dover
- Registered: 17 Sep 2008
- Posts: 3,709
#1
"Dream as if you'll live forever. Live as if you'll die today." - James Dean
"Being deeply loved by someone gives you strength,
While loving someone deeply gives you courage" - Laozi
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#2
more worried about an election in 6 months than anything else, the netanyahu bit was just unlucky obama fell for it too.
more recently sarkozy has used the term "anglo saxon" which french politicians use when they are in a corner, blame the brits for everything and they can deflect attention from their own failings.
dave is not far away with his utterances on foreign affairs.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#3
There is an accute difference between President Sarkozy and President Obama.
The French president can exercise many foreign policies without necessarily having the broad support of French public opinion.
The American president must take into account strong and established lobbies in America when it comes to foreign policy, and he must consult very strictly with his advisers.
This is a principle of American foreign policy that all presidents have to respect.
President Obama does respect this principle, and we must never forget that America is one of our strongest and best allies.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#4
alex
you may be forgetting that the atomic energy chaps have provided mr obama with the statement that he would like to hear relevant to foreign policy.
they say that iran is nearly ready to own their very own nuclear weapon, he will be delighted to hear that as he is up for election next year.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#5
Haven't forgotten that, Howard. Too worried to bring it up, that's all.
I've researched the goings-on regards Iran, Hamas-Hezbollah, Israel's anxiety, America's dismay, and all that could effect the whole area.
I'm leaving this topic to you, Howard
, I've decided to console myself with faith in the Fair Lady and pilgrimages to Her church.
Whatever happens, I'm with Britain all the way, come what may.
Brian Dixon
- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#6
sarkozy mad no just speaks his mind,and thats how it should be.
Guest 653- Registered: 13 Mar 2008
- Posts: 10,540
#7
Being such a strong Europhile Brian, you'd support any of the main European Leaders - even over our own.
Roger
Guest 722- Registered: 23 Aug 2011
- Posts: 97
#8
Sarkozy, or rather us french tax payers, spent 37000 euros on one night in a hotel in Cannes for the G20 summit last week. Compared to only 1950 euros for a room for David Cameron.
He has lost a lot of his popularity in france.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#9
roger,it may look like that but when our leader [some unknown called david cameron] can do what our european counter parts do then i may start supporting him.untill then no.
Guest 640- Registered: 21 Apr 2007
- Posts: 7,819
#10
I doubt if Sarkozy is either mad bad or dangerous to know...he seems to have energetically taken the lead in a number of areas, in the Libya NATO attacks for example when many were glad for his lead, and also in chasing the Euro nations to come up with a solution to the financial crises. We're not quite there yet. He is quite the major player.
What himself and Obama said about Netanyahu was indicative of what people are thinking about that man. Unfortunate perhaps that their microphone was left switched on, but it was very revelatory nonetheless. When Netanyahu was re-elected as Israeli leader my heart sank, he is not a man that would ever secure any kind of peace with the struggling Palestinians. He is a total hawk and not whats needed at all in that tinterbox arena.
The other world leaders, and I suspect there are many, are uncomfortable with him in charge of such dynamite.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#11
i am thinking on the lines of what cointry is the most dangerous down there in the middle east,some say iraq but no i dont think so,israel is.suck and surounded by arab states and a dodgy pm with war mongering on his mind.the reason behind this logic land grabs and 15 foot high walls plus the bonus of ultra right sects in the jewish faith.
howard mcsweeney1- Location: Dover
- Registered: 12 Mar 2008
- Posts: 62,352
#12
i thought it was universally agreed to be iran, the rest are dangerous only amongst themselves.
israel is just one of many that are unpleasant but nothing suggests that they would attack anyone but their neighbours.
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#13
howard,thats the most dangerous kind of neighbour.
Guest 696- Registered: 31 Mar 2010
- Posts: 8,115
#14
Brian, when they found weapons made in Iran inside Afghanistan and Iraq, on the way to kill allied soldiers including British, were these missiles and explosives "made in Israel"?
By the way, Brian, the strategy to fire missiles indiscriminately into cities, such as Israeli cities, which is the proclaimed strategy of Iran, and also Hezbollah, which is armed by Iran, is actually illegal according to international law.
The Iranian leaders, and not just their president, have openly stated to other countries that their aim is the destruction of Israel.
It was, for example, the statement used officially by the Iranian government last month (October '11) to the Turkish state in order to threaten Turkey not to install a NATO radar and anti-missile shield in eastern Turkey to defend Europe against a potential Iranian missile attack.
More countries than Israel are afraid of Iran, Brian.
And to illuminate a little further, it seems that the Gulf States are also afraid of Iran.
Apparently, it has something to do with Shi'ite messianism, which Sunites don't believe in, an ideology that is similar to that proclaimed by A. Hitler, who spoke of a 1,000 year Reich to be introduced through total war.
Now don't come me with "zionism", Brian, which is not up to debate, and which has different interpretations anyway.
Declarations made by senior figures of the Iranian government clearly speak of intentions to destroy Israel in the near future.
If the Iranian government has been playing cat and mouse with the inspection teams sent by the UN to see what their nuclear activities really are, then they have played a very dangerous game. But they are a very dangerous regime.
They are hell-bent on war and total destruction of those who they feel unfit to inhabit Earth.
We may be in for a regional war, or maybe th Russian and Chinese governments see sense and demand that the Iranian government hand over the running of their nuclear sites and activities to a neutral authority from another country that manages these facilities on Iran's behalf.
And maybe if the Russian and Chinese governments told the Iranian government to stop threatening to destroy any other state, that could also help.
As it is, China is Iran's biggest supplier of weapons, including sophisticated anti-ship missiles, whereas Russia has cut down considerably on arms sales to Iran since 2008.
Let's hope and pray the Russians remain our friends!
Brian Dixon- Location: Dover
- Registered: 23 Sep 2008
- Posts: 23,940
#15
alex,just because i buy a jaffa orange dosnt mean im dangerous.
zionism dosent come with it,take it or leave it.
and futher more who ever sells what ever to who has to make a living.
the uk has nuclear arms does that make us a threet to.