Huh?

[mandragora]

I've just been listening to the 'Today' programme on BBC Radio 4, which is the most listened to current affairs morning programme in the UK.

US Republican Congressman Pete King was interviewed in relation to the row over Nato and reinforcements to Turkey. France, Germany (sort of) and Belgium have vetoed military reinforcements to Turkey. And Congressman King's response was to dismiss France and Germany as being 'inconsequential'.

Leading to me going WTF!

He considered countries such as *cough* Lithuania to be of more importance in Europe than France and Germany. The world's fifth and third (second?) largest economies respectively.

Uh, yeah. Right. Whatever.

Why, he said, France doesn't even have a single aircraft hangar. Which is, quite simply, wrong.

I don't know who this Pete King is, but I'm really glad he's not an elected politician in my country.

Oh, if anyone reading this has any idea why the formatting on my 'friends' page went wonky last night and now is too large for my screen horizontally, I'd be really grateful for pointers on how to fix it.

Edited, because I wrote that the name of the Congressman was Mike King, when in fact it's Pete King - didn't want to defame any Congressman Mike King out there

Comments

[mandragora1.livejournal.com]

Did you see the Mail's front page

*Shudder* No. I never read the Mail, which I consider to possibly be the most insidious paper in Britain. I mean, on the surface sometimes what is written starts out as seeming to be reasonable, but when you get to the end of the article you realise that the conclusion is just... out there. Loathe the Mail with a passion.

And, seeing as I don't have the benefit of working in a library where copies of daily newspapers are available *g*, nope. No Mail for me. Thank God, it seems in this case.

For a start, the suggestion that Britain, France, or whoever they're getting at owes gratitude to the US for 'saving' us/them during WW2 grossly oversimplifies the position.

Am I exceedingly grateful the US entered the war? Christ, yes. Do I think that the US did so out of purely altruistic motives?

Get real. Of course not. I like to think that the US would eventually have entered the war, if for no other reason than Hitler in control of the whole of Western Europe could have led to a real imbalance of power worldwide. Plus, there were undoubtedly people in the US who did want to help from mostly altruistic motives. I also can't blame those at all who were against getting involved, after the carnage that was WW1. However, the fact is that the trigger for the US becoming involved with WW2 was that the US itself was attacked. Thank God for Pearl Harbour (from a European perspective). It also ignores the fact that the people who were most responsible for Germany's defeat were the (then) Soviet nations, not the Americans, and certainly not the British. It's no coincidence that the Soviets suffered the most casualities at the hands of the Germans.

But it looks like the Mail (as usual) ignores all of that, in favour of, as you write 'vile journojism'. Sigh.