is it a safe assumption to say the leaders in 3 of Europes biggest countries, France Germany and Great Britain, lead by Nicolas Sarkozy Angela Merkel and Gordon Brown respectively, all share one common trait. this trait is that all are trying to are trying to break away slightly from America, and want to focus more on National issues rather than International issues with the US
2007-09-04 12:24:23 · 9 answers · asked by thedecline341 2 in Politics & Government ➔ Politics
Those three countries have been getting out of the foriegn scene for awhile. For instance they are slashing their military so much, that France needed help from the U.S. to get to Saudia Arabia in the first Gulf War and now people are saying Norway's navy is larger than England's.
The EU plans to have a 100,000 reactionary force. That would be smaller than the Iraqi military force.
There is a large desire to work on the domestic front.
Europe is suffering unemployment that hasn't been seen in the U.S. since the Carter administration and the unemployment would actually be higher if those filler workers weren't needed because of those 3 week plus vacations. Western Europe is so poor, that if Europe was a part of the U.S., it would rank under Mississippi for money per capita. There are way more union strikes in Europe than in the U.S.
French police are under siege by violent immigrants, Germany and Italy have twice the death rate per 1,000 than that of Iraq. More French and British per 1,000 than that of Iraq. So many people in England do illegal drugs that the Thames river tests positive for cocaine.
While people in the U.S. are wanting universal healthcare, Europe is complaining of long hospital waits and doctors leaving for the U.S. because of the better pay.
2007-09-04 12:31:07 · answer #1 · answered by gregory_dittman 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, to a extent. GB doesn't really need to work on strengthening its relations with the US. Germany and France both have large internal problems ranging from large poor Muslim populations to stagnant economies. But Germany and France in the last year with the election of Merkel and Sarkozy have reached out olive branches to the US and we've accepted. As it stands now, Iraq is still a thorn in relations, but they are improving.
2007-09-04 12:30:42 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
No it is not. But they do have hugely ballooning national problems, a retiring and aging population that will be milking their social welfare programs dry. A huge population of young people, 18-45 that are on welfare and do not and will not work, thus putting their entire economy on a blitz to destruction, a greater problem with terrorism from within than we have right now and a population that will not fight for anything other than the next handout from the government so as they do not have to do anything.
On international issues they will except the US to handle and then they can condemn it. Pacifist have caused more destruction in t e world than all wars put together. Perhaps because they cause the wars from their inability to act and stand for anything other than ....peace brother peace.
2007-09-04 12:33:06 · answer #3 · answered by kickinupfunf 6 · 2⤊ 1⤋
I disagree with that analysis. Merkel (barely elected) and Sarkozy (elected easily) are both are working harder to repair US-European relations than their predecessors did. Brown is moving away, but that's in reaction to the unpopular policies of Tony Blair.
2007-09-04 12:32:04 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Nope. Both Merkel and Sarkozy are significantly more pro-US than their predecessors.
2007-09-04 12:29:51 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
precise around the tip of WWI. WWI confirmed that financial power had shifted to the US in a definitive way. the US became into able in the process the conflict to produce far extra beneficial quantities of fabric at than the the remainder of the international. the end results of the wear and tear to the ecu states and their economies additionally enable to American financial dominance and could the recurrence of hostilities in WWII could be sure the persevered dominance into mid twentieth century. We proceed to be fairly able to producing fairly a lot of fabric and as such can field and grant an invaluable military. this mix of econ mic and protection rigidity power supplies usa of america the area. in spite of the fact that, it is going to be observed that American supremacy is slipping as a results of fact the the remainder of the international is beginning as much as out do us on fee and high quality.
2016-10-17 23:27:44 · answer #6 · answered by hussaini 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Good for them because only a moron would support what we are doing internationally right now. We should take example from these countries because they are far more politically mature then the United States
2007-09-04 12:31:24 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 1⤋
no,they are getting closer to the USA. europe has no armies to protect them.islam is just around the corner.
2007-09-04 12:53:59 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
I don't see it that way, but then again, what do I know?
2007-09-04 12:43:20 · answer #9 · answered by Bumblebee711 5 · 0⤊ 0⤋