Den Beste on Europe and US parties

[cema]

The main difference between the parties when it comes to foreign policy is that the Democrats are willing to smile and nod at the Europeans before ignoring them, whereas the Republicans are more straightforward in expressing their disdain.

I think he is right here.

I think that, as far as the war is concerned, whoever is in the presidential office is going to do essentially the same thing, but what he will say and how widely he will smile to Europeans is another matter. Paradoxically, this might have pushed me towards rooting for a Democratic president (to help Europe to mend its ways with the US and to soothen the scrape marks) precisely because his rhetoric would be, in a sense, counter to his actions. But I do not like politicking and do not like political hypocrisy. Plus, I happen to like the current presidential foreign team, starting with Wolfowitz and other neocons. I am indifferent to Bush, but not prticularly fond of Kerry either.

The result is: if I had been an American citizen, I would have been likely to vote for a Republican president this time.

Comments

Re: ?

[email-animal.livejournal.com]

I could also add some snide remarks about this:

Cema: Choosing allies and friends properly, as well as foes.

Re: ?

[cema.livejournal.com]

Was USSR a proper ally to the USA and the UK in WWII? I think it was. This did not make the stalinist system more acceptable.

Re: ?

[email-animal.livejournal.com]

The question USA was trying to answer was "What is the lesser of
two evils?" In case of WWII, they, no doubt, made the correct decision.
I am not so sure (in fact, I am sure in quite the opposite) about
these days.

Re: ?

[cema.livejournal.com]

We'll see.

In case of WWII, there was no choice: Germany declared war on the US soon after Japan attacked it. A better analogy might be the war with the "barbary pirates", as they are usually called, but I am not sufficiently familiar with that.