You misunderstood me which I don't blame you for since I was getting a bit miffed and stopped trying to make total sense for the audience, sorry about that. You can here seeking honest reasoning and I've jumped down your throat. I've been arguing with a few too many partisans lately. I apologize.
Our problem is that we believe our former allies are actively trying to undermine our security for their own self interests, namely money and a hope they will be immune from terrorist attack.
Here's the deal. At least to us Americans, we've been sensing a growing anti-American sentiment growing in other countries, which has been present long before Bush, although he did further enflame it. Because we are the remaining superpower (and I give no apologies for that) from the Cold War and because we don't embrace socialist ideaology (see Jester's comments), the aggression has been growing and is showing in the policy of foreign politicians. We had to even convince France and Germany over Afghanistan which alone shows the problem. Kyoto and the ICC are largely designed to damage American soverignty rather than help the enviroment of global justice. And now we're finding out (although we suspected for some time) about the Iraqi oil bribes across the world (including Britian's George Galloway) as well as continued illegal deals with Iraq post Gulf War I. America made a poor Cold War decision to give support to Iraq in its fight over anti-American Iran but they were not made with knowledge that our support of Iraq at the time would be a risk to our allies. We were wrong and I don't mean to condone it. However, following Kuwait and the push to disarm Iraq, the usual suspects were helping Iraq knowing it put us at risk. It's hard to consider them allies when that happens.
If when unhamped, our "allies" are going to be complicit in the support of our enemies, then we can't stand by and let it happen.
By the by, about the UN, we did give them an opportunity to help us in Iraq but the first time they got attacked, they picked up and ran to Cyprus. We have a hard time taking the UN seriously when they keep adding on to their rather instable record.
Our problem is that we believe our former allies are actively trying to undermine our security for their own self interests, namely money and a hope they will be immune from terrorist attack.
Here's the deal. At least to us Americans, we've been sensing a growing anti-American sentiment growing in other countries, which has been present long before Bush, although he did further enflame it. Because we are the remaining superpower (and I give no apologies for that) from the Cold War and because we don't embrace socialist ideaology (see Jester's comments), the aggression has been growing and is showing in the policy of foreign politicians. We had to even convince France and Germany over Afghanistan which alone shows the problem. Kyoto and the ICC are largely designed to damage American soverignty rather than help the enviroment of global justice. And now we're finding out (although we suspected for some time) about the Iraqi oil bribes across the world (including Britian's George Galloway) as well as continued illegal deals with Iraq post Gulf War I. America made a poor Cold War decision to give support to Iraq in its fight over anti-American Iran but they were not made with knowledge that our support of Iraq at the time would be a risk to our allies. We were wrong and I don't mean to condone it. However, following Kuwait and the push to disarm Iraq, the usual suspects were helping Iraq knowing it put us at risk. It's hard to consider them allies when that happens.
If when unhamped, our "allies" are going to be complicit in the support of our enemies, then we can't stand by and let it happen.
By the by, about the UN, we did give them an opportunity to help us in Iraq but the first time they got attacked, they picked up and ran to Cyprus. We have a hard time taking the UN seriously when they keep adding on to their rather instable record.