As taken from the enclosed link:

"America was born in pursuit of an idea - that a free people with diverse beliefs can govern themselves in peace.

Throughout our history, we have forged powerful alliances to defend, encourage, and promote that idea around the world. Through two World Wars, the Cold War, the Gulf War and Kosovo, America led instead of going it alone. We respected the world - and the world respected us.

Today, our leadership has walked away from more than a century of American leadership in the world to embrace a new - and dangerously ineffective - American disregard for the world. They bully instead of persuade. They act alone when they could assemble a team. They confuse leadership with going it alone. They fail to understand that real leadership means standing by your principles and rallying others to join you. "

Click link for more.........

Where have we acted alone, without any allies? Please provide an example.

RLTW

While you and I know and respect the Brit contribution to this round, as well as the able work of the Spaniards, Guatamalens, poles, etc, to many it looks like us, the brits and a bunch of hessians.

Correction- without ENOUGH allies. Or without our traditional Allies.  

BTW- cool to see the Jerries in desert camo again eh?  In afghanistan.  If they prove .1 as useful as their DAK ancestry, we are happy to have them!

There are 31 other countries in support in Iraq and Afghanistan.  If the point is the French, Germans, and Russians who opposed our action in Iraq, then consider that they were taking kickbacks from Saddam Hussein in the oil for food program.  Just a little scandal that did not get a whole lot of press in this country.  Kerry wants the French to like us... they act in their national interest and they are WRONG.  They have determined to be a counterweight to the US in world affairs.  That is hardly an ally.  Frankly, we should have a worth counterweight to the French in world affairs, I would nominate West Virginia (no offense to West Virginians).

Fuck that. The fact is that the so-called "traditional allies" of France and Germany did not cooperate with our efforts in Iraq because (newsflash here) THEY HAD FINANCIAL INTERESTS IN KEEPING SADDAM IN POWER. Those same countries, and others have been working with the Bush Admin in other aspects of the war on terrorism such as Afghanistan, the Proliferation Security Initiative, Operation Caspian Shield, cutting off terrorists funds, etc.. Don't forget that the moronic Bush negotiated debt relief for Iraq also.

This stupid claim of us acting alone can not be supported with any facts. People who keep spouting out this bullshit are either dumb-as-a-fucking-brick or purposely lying.

RLTW

-- Modified on 8/5/2004 1:34:48 PM

-- Modified on 8/5/2004 1:38:47 PM

If so, I applaud your honesty! I am a moderate, BTW, saying that there are plenty of idiots on both sides of the aisle, but little Bush seems to be proud of ant-intellectualism. He's proud of the fact that he doesn't read anything.

Such as in Afghanistan.  However, while when the actual rationale for the war was purely commercial, in Iraq, and they had financial interests that competed directly with our own, they opposed us.  As well they should have.

wEll we did act close to alone on Iraq.  I'll grant you we got help on the others.

But right now, you can't tell me it wouldn't be nice to be sharing the load with some of the larger NATO powers rather than our B Team.

And I don't think the vast majority of Euro voters were thinking of a few investments when they rejected our adventurism.  Their politicians were correctly avoiding suicide(political).

No matter how you choose to portray it, the Europeans are entitled to disagree with us on what is in their interest.  Or you can call it proper payback for our little hissy fit over Suez in '56.  They are independant voters like us.  Or you can go further and take Bush to task for not talking them into it.

You know, our leadership of NATO was not an altruistic act. It was in our interest.

The best analogy to this situtation might be the Peloponesian (sp?) war.  We are Athens, sliding from leading a coalition by example and soft influence, to force and pressure.   Athens ended up losing to Sparta through their own hubris- having aliented all their allies, and sending one expedition too many (Syracuse, if I recall).  I sure hope that does not happen- but the dissing of our friends over a legit disagreement has already.

First off, I'm not sure what "ant" intellectualism is. Aren't ants purely instinctual animals? Secondly, it's obvious that your moderate thought processes don't have the ability to recognise sarcasm.

RLTW

...the threat of it isn't real, no one wants to do harm to the U.S. homeland and we should all go back to 9/10/01 and look at the world that way.

In which case who is slippin - Oh, you !

BTW, spelling champ, what is ``inheretance'' ?


LLCAR (this signature verifies the authenticity of this important document)

The French and Germans acted in their perceived national interests (kickbacks from the oil for food program).  That is understood.  We will do the same, unfortunately, the globalists on the left equate getting along with the French and Germans and ensuring that they are on board with the correct course of action.   History will tell, but their appeasing international outlook on this will come back to bite them.  For one, I am not sure I would support bailing them out when it does.