From: black.hole.4.spam{at}gmail.com (Don Hills)

In article , "George Sherwood"
 wrote:
>
>So why aren't they upset with their Government?   Why does this show up as
>anti-Americanism?  As you said, they have stood up to the USA before with
>the ban, why not this time also if they feel it is so wrong what the USA
>was asking?

We aren't too upset because, on the whole, they give us good Government.
They just have to be reminded that this includes giving us a country we can
feel proud of, not just one where decisions are made through expedience or
to appease big business.

>I don't think any one country could be a sole superpower and not begin to
>generate bad publicity.  As I have looked through history, I would venture
>to say that no hyper-power has acted as restrained.  The come back is that
>times have changed and people have changed, maybe so, but I don't think so
>much.  As I have read history when there has been a sole superpower,
>much of the world has been upset with them and against them.  It was just
>more localized.  Now is is spread around a much wider area.

Thet seems to be a good summary of the situation. You appear not to
understand why it's different this time.

>Also personally I don't see that we are closer to nuclear war then ever.
>If there are nukes used it is going to be by a rogue against the US not by
>the US.

When is the use of nuiclear weapons by one sovereign nation against another
not nuclear war?

--
Don Hills    (dmhills at attglobaldotnet)     Wellington, New Zealand
"New interface closely resembles Presentation Manager,
 preparing you for the wonders of OS/2!"
    -- Advertisement on the box for Microsoft Windows 2.11 for 286

--- BBBS/NT v4.01 Flag-5