Archive for the ‘The War’ Category

Maryland Democratic Senator Barbara Mikulski Needs Senate Censure and Anger Management Program

April 18, 2008

The still shots below make it clear what Senator Mikulski is doing. But the kicker is when you find out what she’s saying – what she’s accusing the VICTIM of doing. (A perfect example of “projection.”)

Earth to Mikulski: If you are farting, just do it. Please don’t do it while accusing the person you’re farting at of …. guess what? Farting, of course. Of all things, farting.

That’s no accident: THAT is diabolical, sweetie. And it’s an insult to our intelligence, so prepare to have your own (justly) insulted by me in return. I’m sure it’s the only language a dope like you understands.

To be specific, your description of your victim’s behavior was a perfect description of your own: “pugnacious, scolding, snarky, dismissive, outrageous” and blah, blah, blah — in a word, abusive.

That’s your favorite dirty trick, isn’t it? Misdirection, like a magician’s. So that nobody notices what you are busy doing on one hand, you point at the victim with the other to scream at HIM for being the one who is screaming.

Shame on me for calling you a bitchjust because you tried to intimidate a witness (the President’s Budget Director) by:

  • yelling in a flagrantly abusive tone at him
  • constantly shaking your fist (sometimes both of them) at him while you constantly kept thrusting your chest, chin, and lower lip out at him in a melodramatically pugnacious scowl
  • while angrily bouncing up and down in your seat as if you were so angry that he’d better watch out because you were so mad you might just go off and fly out of your seat, unable to contain yourself
  • furiously waving your arms everywhichway in the air in a perfect imitation of Adolph Hitler’s antics in one of his patented “Jew rants”
  • constantly rudely jabbing your pointed finger at him
  • badgering him with a question he had already answered several times
  • butting in and shouting him down to not let him speak by when he tried to give information that would prove you wrong.

And all for what? For his TONE! Yes, for – for of all things – HIS tone.

Very funny, bitch.

HIS tone was the very ANTITHESIS of yours!!! His tone was respectful, reasonable, even deferential, polite, calm, patient, and totally PROFESSIONAL. YOUR tone was that of a thug! And anyone not halucinating on LSD can see that in the video.

If your ugly misbehavior doesn’t make you the very pinnacle of perfection of bitch-hood, nothing could.

And, speaking of “smoke,” your “smokestacks” was “stove pipes,” you moron. He was talking about the stove-piping of funds (earmarking) instead of letting law enforcement use the grant money as they think best.

So, “stove pipe” / “smoke stack” — it’s all the same to muddle-headed you, isn’t it? Is that what happens to everything someone tries to get through your head? It all just gets mushed like that?

Where is the Ethics Committee? Since when is such thuggish, emotionally unbalanced conduct becoming a United States senator? Who votes for this surly nut? The State of Maryland, that’s who. Congratulations, people of Maryland: you’ve done yourselves proud.


Impeach Pelosi

April 11, 2008

The screwball is all mouth and no brain. Today she tipped her head back, looking down her nose at the press, and declared that the obstacle to peace in Iraq is not al-Qaeda, not the sectarian militias, not Iran, not any insurgeants, but rather the Iraqi government.

That makes it pretty clear whose side she’s on.

She is therefore the enemy of the Iraqi government, our ally. She is trying to bring down what America is trying to support.

Impeach obnoxious Nancy Pelosi, the Mouth of the House.

Iraq War

April 7, 2008

The surge has changed some things in Iraq, so that something the Democrats were falsely claiming before, from now on will be true. Namely, that Iraq isn’t the central front in the greater war against Radical Islam.

It still is, but only for a short time – until the battle in Mosul kicks al-Qaeda out of that area.

Afterwards, I think we really can say that we have done the job against al-Qaeda in Iraq and that we can count on the Iraqis themselves to mop up the remnants. The Iraqi people hate al-Qaeda. They will search out and kill the remnants.

The great danger in Iraq now is that the sectarian factions will fight each other for power in a hurly-burly of multi-factional civil war. If they are bent on destroying themselves in this mass act of national suicide, there is only so much we can do to dissuade them.

It should be obvious that we want nothing more than we want out of Iraq and that we ARE going to leave Iraq. But never underestimate the power of anti-Americanism to delude the world. It AIN’T obvious to the Iraqis or the rest of the world that we aren’t planning to setup and run a puppet government in Iraq for control of their oil. WE MUST PROVE THAT BEYOND ALL DOUBT. IN FACT, WE MUST SHOCK THEM INTO THEIR SENSES SO THAT THEY OPEN THEIR EYES AND SEE THIS TRUTH.

We have already withdrawn the Marine Expeditionary Force, and by July we should have drawn down from 20 to 15 Combat Brigades. (Yes, Democrats, why do you keep forgetting that?)

But you can’t expect a general to recommend going lower than that, simply because a general is a general. His goal is the fulfillment of his military mission. That is not exactly the same goal as our nation has, however.

I would like to see a little cunning politics/diplomacy. I would like to see us suddenly (with minimal warning) remove another Combat Brigade before the elections in October. Just the personell, so that the redeployment can be very rapid (leaving the equipment with other Combat Brigades.)

Yes, I mean surprise the Iraqi government with this move, giving them no more notice than necessary to give them time to move their army into the area we hand over to them.

Why do I suggest this? Because this would be an object lesson: WE ARE LEAVING, so they had better FACE THAT FACT and get serious about settling their issues.

I think this is something President Bush can do to insure that those elections do take place on time = to cross any plan to come up with excuses for delaying those elections.

I also think that doing this would help our next president, giving him or her more leverage.

This move would also be psychological warfare = a show of confidence – much better than the constant hand-wringing that the bad guys will come back without us there to stave them off, which does nothing but encourage the terrorists and insurgeants by making them think they can win. It’s just common sense to ACT as though you expect success, not failure.

Then after the October elections, I’d do the same thing again in November or December – remove another Combat Brigade or two.

I can think of no better kick in the butt to make the Iraqi factions stop fighting and wake up to see that WE REALLY ARE LEAVING, that they can’t keep us there by simply refusing to own their repsonsibility for their own country…so that they stop playing games by which they try to maneuver us into backing one faction against another.

This move would also bring us down to 12 or 13 Combat Brigades deployed – a managable number that won’t break the force. We simply MUST get down to at least 15, and lower if at all possible.

Yes, there is some risk in this. But is it any greater than the risk in staying? I don’t think so.

At that point, the Iraqis either do it or they don’t.

This move would also stop Iran from causing trouble. They are childish and just do it to cause US trouble, period. They don’t really want Iraq to descend into civil war. That would be a disaster for them. So they would immediately have to stop the game-playing FOR THEIR OWN SAKE. The same with all the other useless Arab nations. The irresponsible brats would have to stop playing games and do something to quell trouble rather than keep on acting like piss-ants by causing trouble. The same with the so-called “international community” (an oxymoron). They too would have to stop the annoy-America game-playing and switch from causing trouble to remedying it.

In short, I think that doing this is the next smart step to take. We must face the fact that even the world’s only superpower can’t defeat the whole world when it decides to cross us at every turn out of sheer nationalistic anti-American envy. We need to make the neighboring nations and the UN grow up and cut it out – to become part of the solution instead of the problem.

This move would press the Iraqis to do their part. It would force the neighboring countries to do their part. It would force the international gang to do their part. Then we can continue to do our part with reasonable chance of success over the next 2 or 3 years – with steadily falling troop numbers and causualties as Iraq finally stabilizes.

Pig-Flying Moments in the Senate!

April 3, 2008

We had pig-flying moments in some Senate hearings yesterday. The Democrats actually weren’t obnoxious and lying their heads off, for once.

Only the Senator from Hell, Ted Kennedy, just couldn’t help being what he is, a thug. So, he tried his old trick of starting out all smiles only to lay shock and awe on the poor witness by immediately becoming abusive with purple prose littered with buzzwords for “the little guy” (read “people who want government handouts”) to salivate over.

But, he was lazy and unprepared, starting out on a stupid line of questioning to try to bully an answer out of Bernacke with. Then rather than make a complete a complete fool of himself, he just abruptly stopped and slunk away.

This means that – be sure you’re sitting down – even Senator Schumer was decent and made sense at the hearing. (Oh, yes, the Dems took a few token licks at the President’s image, but you could see that these were bones they were throwing to the left-wing-nuts. If they were always this civil, honest, and decent, a political lick now and then would be no big deal.)

In general, the Democrats soon stopped trying to attack the Fed’s move to keep Bear Stearns from failing. They acknowledged that it had to be done, not for Bear Stearns, but for everyone, including “the little guy.”

They had reservations about the precedent set, and so did Republicans on the committee, but this is reasonable and a valid concern.

This is a pig-flying moment, because they actually HEARD and ACCEPTED a valid answer to their objection. In other words they were reasonable and honest. And I, who lay into them when they aren’t, give them credit for that today. Would they were always reasonable and that all the Republicans would always be reasonable too.

They hinted at wanting the government to bailout all those being foreclosed on, but didn’t get serious about it. They did let it through their heads that some of these people just can’t afford homes and should never have bought them or been given credit. That some are speculators who bought several homes under false pretenses, expecting that the outrageously skyrocketing home prices would keep increasing forever, so that they could sell at a huge profit. That some simply walked away from these mortages and were in foreclosure during their first year. And that some lied about their incomes to get those loans.

So, there wasn’t even a head-butting fight about the fact that the those losing their homes must be dealt with on a case-by-case basis, to help those who simply need refinancing at a level they can afford. And that you cannot steal the lenders’ money by passing a law that says the borrowers don’t have to pay those loans back.

For the idiots out there who don’t know why: think, morons, what that would do to the availability of loans. No one in his right mind will loan money if they know that the Democrats will just tear up those loan agreements to bribe votes from the lower classes.

The Democrats also behaved refreshingly in the Foreign Relations Committee. One panel was the usual foggy-brained academic “experts.” They were totally incoherent. Their garbled message seemed to be: “The US must get of of Iraq, but the US mustn’t get out of Iraq, because the US is guilty of Iraq and will be guilty of staying in Iraq or of getting out of Iraq.”

They spoke of our “moral obligation” to keep trying at what they then declared a hopeless cause AND an evil thing.

Yes, you read right. In their erratic blather they constantly contradicted themselves this way. In one sentence they declared us morally obligated to do something that, in the next sentence, they declared evil.

Ah, the intelligentsia. Hey, numbskulls: no one is morally obligated to do anything doomed to failure, let alone evil on top of it all. If you had the moral sense or even just the common sense of a seven-year-old, you’d know that.

It was so obvious that these idiot college types just relished the idea damning us if we do and damning us we don’t that Senator Biden got mad. He pointed out that they were saying it was hopeless and therefore we should bring the troops home tomorrow, right?

Duh. The idiot college professors just mouth-breathed at him.

Biden’s anger was no big surprise, but then Senator Boxer got madder yet. Which is a huge surprise.

She landed on them for characterising our support of IRAQI GOVERNMENT forces trying to clean criminal gangs and private armies out of Basra as supporting nothing but a MILITIA.

That’s right. In order to condemn everything we do, these lying, stupid, professors call the elected Iraqi GOVERNMENT and the national IRAQI ARMY a “sectarian militia.”

Therefore, no matter what we do, they will just make it evil by calling it something else. These clowns were like the Emperor in His New Clothes!

I never thought I’d be in such complete agreement with Senator Boxer about anything, but she is right. (Apparantly she doesn’t like being mocked by intelectuals, either.) If that is what the foul-mouthed intellectual “experts” are going to make of us helping the duly elected Iraqi government when it tries to rid the country of private armies and criminal gangs, we must bring our people home tomorrow.

Of course, those same imbecile academic experts (Yahia Said, Dr. Stephen Biddle, and Nir Rosen) will condemn us for that too, and told us so.

The bottom line is that we can’t maintain the current rotation of 15 months on and 12 months off. Our troops will be coming out, and the only debate is how fast. Iraq will have to get its act together in a year or two. If by then, we can’t draw down to less than 50,000 troops without taking casualties (thus maintaining a “presence” as in South Korea, West Germany or Japan after WWII), we are going to wash our hands of them by pulling out entirely.

We have every right to. We gave it our best shot. The Democrats are the bad cops, calling for fast withdrawal. The Republicans are good cops, more patient. But the two sides aren’t really that far apart on the matter anymore.

I hope the Iraqi people are paying attention. They had better appreciate Mr. Bush while they have him.

Intellectual Burlesque

March 31, 2008

The Situation

Basra is Iraq’s only port. Which means that there is a river of stuff to steal flowing through it. Take away law and order from a city like that, and even an intellectual ought to be able to deduce what will happen. For four years the British faked it there, doing nothing to maintain law and order. Last summer the situation had gotten so bad that, for their own safety, they completely withdrew to the airport and let the city descend into chaos. Gangs of criminal thugs ran amok. The police were corrupt, rather like in Chicago during the days of Al Capone – part of the problem/mob, not the solution. Criminals ran amok, robbing, raping, looting to their heart’s content in broad daylight. Various Shias militias ran amok too, some of which tried to impose a Taliban-style reign of terror, murdering shopkeepers who sold alcohol, beating women alone on the street or women uncovered, killing Christians on sight, and so on. In other words, they were just a Shia version of al-Qaeda. Iran was stoking and arming this conflagration.

What happens

The Iraqi government takes action, moving in with the Iraqi army to establish law and order.

What the intellectuals do

They don’t see a sovereign government acting to rescue the populace of Basra from the Four Horsemen of the Apocalypse. They don’t see a sovereign government of Shia leaders acting to disarm private Shia armies plundering the Iraqi city that happens to be the heart of the Iraqi economy. They don’t see legitimate authority acting to bring armed gangs of thugs and terrorists under control and establish law and order so the people of Basra can dare to walk their own streets.

No, “the people who think” see some nebulous, unnamed and mysterious “violence” erupting like chicken pox here and there. Though it is Shias confronting Shias, they pretend it is “sectarian violence,” not the legitimate enforcement of law and order. They wring their hands and worry, worry, worry that Iraq is “descending into chaos.”

What it means

It means that the intellectuals think this is bad and a worsening of the situation = that the maelstrom of robbing and raping and killing and bullying the poplulace was preferable.

In short, it means that our “humanitarian” and “peace-loving” intellectuals are rank hypocrites and pseudointellctuals who don’t want law and order in Basra and Iraq. They view an effort to establish it as just (gasp) “violence” and evil.

So, whose side are they on? 

They NEVER call ANYTHING what it IS!

People who think like this belong in a psyche ward. They are so crazed, stupid, and spaghetti-brained that they think you and I are even stupider than they are = that we don’t know what their crazy irrationale means.

Earth to intellectuals: I, for one, will not let you keep on insulting our intelligence this way. I defend us by giving you the slap in the mouth for it that you have coming. Stupid and crazy is as stupid and crazy does, and that’s you.

Because the only war their kind care about is the one in Washington. To hell with how many Iraqis die – they want failure in Iraq so they can say a Republican in the White House failed.

Which is utter brutality to the Iraqi people and treason to the rest of us.

Brits Fake It in Basra

March 30, 2008

Guardian Headline: British army joins battle to control Basra.

Well, not exactly. If you read the article you find that the useless Brits have just lobbed a few artillery shells at a mortar position in Basra.

They call THAT engaging in the fight.

After four years of looking the other way while Basra imploded into anarchy and chaos, with gangs of thugs of every stripe robbing, murdering, and terrorizing the populace to their hearts’ content, the British do-nothings finally get shamed (by the Iraqis and Americans moving in to establish law and order) into lobbing a few artillery shells at a mortar position from a nice, safe distance way out of town.

The British army spokesman in Basra, Major Tom Holloway, tried to deny that the Brits’ were too cowardly to do anything but sit on their bums by telling the BBC that “This is something we were always prepared to do.”

Wow, willing to fire off a few artillery shells from 10 miles away – how heroic. That’s all you Great Brits are prepared to do: from the airport, many miles out of range of return fire, shoot artillery at a lone mortar position too far away to even see. 

Now, if American troops were doing that, the Guardian would be screaming bloody murder about the inaccuracy of such strikes and all the collateral damage and civilian casualities that would result. But check out the article – not a peep about that when British troops are doing it.

That’s nationalism.

In fact, it’s the same story in Afghanistan. We avoid using weapons systems that are likely to cause civilian casualties. Instead, we take on the increased risk of greater American casualties by coming in with ground troops. But not our European “allies.” They kill far more more civiilians than our troops do, and have incurred the hatred of many Afghans for doing that, because they always come in like cowards, with air strikes or some other form of overkill.

Notice the lying caption below the picture in that Guardian article, too: “A British soldier patrols the northern suburbs of the southern Iraqi city of Basra.”

Yeah, “patrolling” all right, in a helicopter.

Lie. Lie. Lie.

But neither the British planes nor helicoptors will come down low enough over the city to shoot…again, because then they could get shot back at. Yes! Even that’s too dangerous for them! Since they have artillery, and it’s safer yet for them, that’s what they use, no matter how many innocent civilians get killed.

This is the heart of the Euopean psyche: it cares about NO ONE but themselves. The “humanitarian” mask is just a cover for that odious fact about this depraved culture. They are no different than they were during the two world wars – just (thank goodness) much less powerful now, is all.

Message to the UK: Get your useless troops out of there even sooner than you had you had planned. Everything you do is a phony show.

Brits: Hurry Up and Get Out of Iraq Today

March 29, 2008

What the hell have the British been doing in Basra all this time to leave such a mess?

Faking it, that’s what:

As British troops withdraw from Basra, good men die

 This week proves our retreat from Basra was one of Britain’s great military disasters

Maybe it’s about time our so-called “friends” and “allies” began to concern themselves whith what WE think of THEM. I say it’s time to stop trying to please to the impossible to please and just write them off as what they are – “friends” and “allies” only when they need something from us.

And as for their being “humanitarian,” gag me with a spoon.

Whether you Brits like it or not, your government joined in the war; your troops were thus given a section of the country to oversee, and it was their responsibility to do so. But for all of your Rudyard Kiplingesque, vaunted-and-taunted “colonialist” past, your sorry excuses for soldiers did nothing the entire time they were there except to sit on their bums and watch complacently while Basra imploded around them. My husband, the freelance journalist Steven Vincent, was abducted off the streets of Basra in August 2005 by five men in police uniforms, held for hours, beaten and shot to death, literally two days after he had an article in the NY Times about how the do-nothing British were allowing the situation down there to spiral completely out of control. On his first trip to Basra in February 2004 he spoke with the officers overseeing things; he asked how they could just stand and watch as Christians were murdered in the streets, alcohol sellers were assassinated, owners of music and video stores had their places firebombed and were told not to re-open on pain of death, women not wearing “proper” clothing were beaten and threatened with violence and murder if they did not cover up. Their reply – “Not our problem, mate”. Great. Just great. So your government accepts the responsibility of going into a combat situation, and your soldiers spend the next 4 years wanking and drinking tea, a bunch of military Bartleby the Scriveners, saying nothing but “I would prefer not to” whenever they were asked for help. Their forerunners who died in the Battle of Britain, El Alamein, Tobruk and so many other places, to say nothing of General Montgomery, must be spinning in their graves. And whether you consider the war to be just or not, the fact remains that British inaction doomed countless numbers of innocent Iraqis, and one brave American journalist, to violence, torture, torment and death. You all ought to be ashamed.

Our Biggest Mistake in Iraq

March 28, 2008

We are learning an awful lot, albeit the hard way, in Iraq. In fact, I bet that if we could start over tomorrow, with today’s force and the lessons learned, we’d be amazingly adept. Almost as adept at pacification and reconstruction as at winning the actual war.

Before the surge, the Left Wing Harpies had us believing their song that the mere sight of an American soldier or marine was offensive to Iraqis and that we had to minimize our “footprint,” keeping our troops out of sight (and  out of mind) in bases. Though we never had anywhere near enough troops there to “occupy” the country, we allowed the Harpies to call our presence there an occupation.

Alsmost as if ashamed, our troops holed up in their bases, and from there they went on partrols and missions, most of which meant kicking down people’s doors.

THAT was exactly the wrong thing to do!

Now it’s obvious, but why couldn’t we see this before? Look at the only type of interaction our troops were having with the Iraqi people. Not pleasant ones. All they saw of our troops was when when those troops were sighting around pointed guns in search of the enemy or on a mission to discover a terrorist and weapons cache in someone’s home. Not friendly encounters.

Not that there were no friendly encounters, but they were relatively few. The result was a bad case of Borderline Personality Disorder in the Iraqi people: “I hate you! Don’t leave me!”

Yes, that characterizes the behavior of someone with Borderline Personality Disorder, and it is bewildering, disorienting to the friend or lover who gets this bizarre treatment. It played even worse here at home than it did among our troops, who understood it better.

But in just a few months, that insanity has virtually disappeared. Ask a Sunni in Falujah whom he would prefer in the White House next year, and he will tell you he wishes President Bush could run again.

Yes, pinch yourself.

What has caused this miracle? Nothing we didn’t know all along. You bring about harmony by making people work together, shoulder to shoulder, on a common goal. Works like magic.

In the surge, our troops came out of our bases and integrated with Iraqi police units, army units, local government units, and so forth. This took courage – to embed with the natives instead of remaining safe among thousands of other Americans in a well-defended base.  Nothing so humanizes a human being, even in full battle gear, as courage. That courage was seen and respected by the Iraqis our troops embedded with. It PROVED our sincerity, that we really were trying to help.

We thus helped the locals. We helped organize local councils and aided these councils in getting services from the government. When the Shia-dominated central government turned a deaf ear to appeals from Sunnis in Anbar, the marines used their influence to advocate for them. In many everyday ways, these were just Americans showing Iraqis how democracy works. How you get a government to answer to you and serve you – instead of it being the other way around.

Both sides dealt with each other as human beings now. Our troops became aware of cultural differences and were better able to keep from unintentionally insulting Iraqis (such as by looking directly at a woman). And when they did make some cultural faux pas, the Iraqis just blew it off, knowing that it MEANS nothing when a westerner does it, because we westerners have a different culture.

And when an Iraqi’s door must be kicked down, it’s better if the troops coming in are 8-to-1 Iraqis.

The next thing you know, the Tribal sheiks are rising up against al-Qaeda, and insurgents are attacking al-Qaeda instead of us. The Sons of Iraq appear to pick up the slack and help to clean up the sorry mess in Iraq. And al-Sadyr is proclaiming a truce.

This just goes to show that we should never listen to the hand-wringers. They are always wrong. We should have known right from the start that we should be bold and form a real TEAM with the Iraqi people themselves.

Hiding from them and coming out of our bases only when absolutely necessary was a huge mistake. It didn’t enable us to really PROTECT the Iraqi people. Now they see our troops PROTECTING them at every turn, and they respond like normal people will to that.

The Status of U.S. Efforts in Iraq

March 27, 2008

I saw a Center for Strategic & International Studies “expert panel” today on “The Status of U.S. Efforts in Iraq.”

Guess who the “experts” were. Two reporters: Rajiv Chandrasekaran, national editor at the Washington Post and Nancy Youssef, Baghdad Bureau Chief for McClatchy Newspapers. And CBS’s Bob Scheiffer ran the show.

Youseff actually did say something that wasn’t blather, when she explained how US troops have come out of their bases and embedded themselves among the Iraqi people in the surge, so that this close interaction between them has born fruit in good relations and a better understanding that helps our troops do their jobs better.

But otherwise, the reporters just blathered off the tops of their heads answers to every question. Some “experts” – I could usually have answered better than they did.

When they were finished blathering,  then the only real expert, Anthony Cordesman, gave the correct answer while apparantly trying his best not to embarrass them by making them look stuipid and ignorant.

This was my favorite part: Someone in the audience asked why the Russians don’t seem to care very much if Iran gets nuclear weapons.

You should have heard the blather and wild stretches for reasons they grasped at like straws. Even Cordesman didn’t get this one, though he looked disgusted by then and may have just held back because he couldn’t stand it anymore. 

Hey, you numbskulls: The Russians don’t care because it makes trouble for us and those nuclear weapons won’t be aimed at Russia. They’ll be aimed at Jews and sent to the United States in suitcases.

Ah, the intelligentsia. What a think tank!

French President Insults British Parliament

March 27, 2008

Wow, them Europeans lay it on thick. You needed hip boots to wade through it all.

But someone please tap the President de la Republique on the shoulder and tell him that the British Parliament and Prime Minister are not flattered by a description of Britain’s history as “full of sound and fury.”

I kid you not. Yes, you’d have to be French to think that is a compliment 😉

Mais, mes amis, when quoting Shakespeare, it’s best to read the whole sentence…

“…full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

In other words, President Sarkozy just told both Houses of Parliament and the Prime Minister today that all of British history is meaningless (babble) 😮

Not exactly what he intended with the ripest display of pure, unadulterated, flattery I’ve ever seen. The Speaker of the House of Commons was briefer but no better, being a Scott (and therefore traditionally allied with the French against the English).

The way these Euros go on and on and on and on and on and on … about history way back into medieval times. Like they haven’t got anything else to talk about!

I think they just do it to avoid having to say anything. Anything meaningful, that is, anything relevant to the matter at hand. It’s just a way of babbling and reminding themselves of Europe’s grandiose past.

But in the bath of fetid flattery Sarkozy heaped on the British today, there were two surprises.

First, nothing less than a new alignment in Europe. The fornication of France and Germany (brought about by Chirac and Schroeder) is ended. France is now seducing the UK instead.

And he did everything but come right out and say that this amounted to France drawing nearer to those the Brits have a “special relationship” with. You know, like Canada, Australia, and — come on, we know who he really meant: US = U.S.

But he didn’t come with only his hat in his hand. He offered passionate thanksgiving for Britain’s aid during World War II (to which Parliamentary pates were nodding “Yes, that’s the right thing to say! Give us more of that!”) and reminded the Brits that France is a nuclear power too.

Oooh. Count ’em – one, two, three nuclear powers in league could really boss Europe, Russia, and the Middle East around!

Ah, la gloire. No more nasty demonization of the “anglosphere” from France. For awhile at least. France is a turncoat that changes sides constantly.

So, it’s basically good news, I guess, but nothing to put any stock in.

Sarkozy also promised to actually send more than ten men in the back of pickup truck to Afghanistan as well. But let’s wait till we see it to believe it.