Olympic Games

Posted January 2nd, 2011 by Bryan

His speech to the country related to what Bush or McCain argue that the U.S. should do about Iraq: must not move from Afghanistan to ensure defeat al Qaeda and the Taliban no matter what and even if it means more and more resources. The issue was Iraq is something that France, Germany and Russia (the three great continental powers of Europe) demarcate the London-Washington axis. The trio did not support a war more calculated to the Middle East incendiary distracting the target to isolate Al Qaeda and not allow them to improve their investments in Iraq. The invasion, rather, he had lost certain contracts and concessions had to Saddam and that all reconstruction works were by American capital and to a much lesser extent, British. However, five years of the war in Iraq that issue is not as interesting observation.

In recent events in Paris, London and Washington are the same: to recognize Kosovo’s independence (although it enrage Russia, China, Spain and Serbia), more forces to Afghanistan, more harshly against Iran (turn that Sarkozy has made over the previous a moderation Chirac, more support for the Dalai Lama in Tibet. While Brown will get the leader of the Tibetan government in exile in London and the leader of the House of U.S. Representatives (Nancy Pelosi) has been to visit, Sarkozy is the world leader more than considering the possibility of boycotting the Olympic Games in China (although only was its inaugural meeting.) The hardness of Sarkozy to Beijing contrasts with the manner in which he received in Paris Libyan dictator Gaddafi (who thought NATO before his nemesis, range now occupied by Bin Laden) with whom he now France wants to encourage business and capture their petro-capital.

Comments are closed.