Is Europe cut off?
I've been standing outside the rescue centre in Calais watching a strange succession of emergency vehicles come and go to the Channel Tunnel - one can set up overhead floodlights so the fire-fighters can work in the dark, there's another with heavy lifting gear and, oddest of all, very narrow coaches to take the fire-fighters to the scene of the blaze.
These slim-line coaches, built so they can operate in the tunnel, are a reminder of the conditions these men and women have been working in.
Now the fire is out, the 1000C temperatures have cooled down to just 800C. Some 100 fire-fighters from France and 100 from Britain - 200 of them in total - worked in relays, in cramped conditions. I've just been watching video released by the French fire-brigade showing them preparing to head for what must be many people's vision of hell.
If this accident is a reminder of their courage, it also makes many of us realise how much we've got used to the ease of travelling through the tunnel. Many Brits who work in Brussels are going to be very put out by the closure this weekend, and I suspect disruption for many weeks to come.
The old, and perhaps apocryphal headline read: "Fog in Channel, Continent cut off" but the fire under the channel emphasises how much traffic there is these days.
One of those whose weekend plans have been changed is the Conservative MEP and Transport Spokesman Timothy Kirkhope, who was about enter the tunnel in a train when the fire started.
He is warning that lessons must be learnt about dangerous chemicals being allowed on board. He says the accident should be a wake-up call to the regulators and asked while a lorry carrying phenol, or carbolic acid, should be allowed.
But the authorities seem both relieved that this wasn't much worse and thankful that their preparations for an emergency paid off.
I’m Mark Mardell, the BBC's North America editor. These are my reflections on American politics, some thoughts on being a Brit living in the USA, and who knows what else? My 
© MMIX~RS~q~RS~~RS~z~RS~08~RS~)
Comments
Sign in or register to comment.
Should have built a bridge. Safer and probably cheaper. I prefer to fly or use the ferry when I go to England to visit family and friends.
Complain about this comment
Isn't anyone concerned about terrorists? Suicide bombers? What if a truck was filled with high explosives?
Complain about this comment
well the tunnels are nearly 10% of the way through their design life of 150 years. Time to contemplate a 4th and 5th bore which are train-only...
Complain about this comment
#2
> Isn't anyone concerned about terrorists?
> Suicide bombers? What if a truck was filled
> with high explosives?
Americans probably are. Best to just pat them on the head and smile though.
Complain about this comment
it was a big mistake not to have a tunnel or (preferably) bridge that allowed people to drive across.
Complain about this comment
The Channel is a master feat of engineering. But when things go wrong the spotlight is naturally on the inherent dangers and the safeguards necessary to protect passengers. One has to think of the brave fire-fighters who have tirelessly given their energy, time and strength to fight the blaze. It is imperative that terrorists are never allowed to get close.
Complain about this comment
Are simple-minded emotional appeals really necessary? Brave firefighters are doing the job they are paid to do. Can their hero-worship be restricted to lofty-minded 8 year old boys with action figures?
And regarding terrorists... sigh. If you don't want to be targets, leave the middle east. That's what the "terrorists" want. That and not to have their relatives shot in the head by brave American, British, and Polish soldiers. (And I am most definitely going to altogether ignore any dimwitted suggestions that technologically backwards impoverished middle-eastern countries could in the foreseeable future pose a credible threat to anybody outside their immediate neighbors.)
But even while you are supposedly targets of *potential* terrorist attacks on account of your own damn interference in other people's lives; you are still far more likely to die from a thousand more mundane things than a terrorist attack.
Stop crying, stop whining, and stop the chicken-little warnings about the possibility.
No intelligent human being ought to be gravely concerned about terrorist attacks... which, of course, explains all to well the American contingent.
- Joember
Complain about this comment
Joember @ #7
Sorry Joember, are you really allowed to stay up this late by your mumy and daddy?
I presume from your comments that you are the lofty-minded 8 year old boy with action figures you write about in your diatribe?
Complain about this comment
benagyerek @ 5
A road tunel might be just as likely to be a disaster waiting to happen.
I refer you to the Mont Blanc Tunnel, Italy
fire of 24 March 1999.
A truck fire at 6.7Km into the Italian part of the tunnel spread to 35 other vehicles, creating intense heat and toxic fumes that killed 39 people.
The fire lasted 53 hours and caused extensive physical damage.
Admittedly there was no fire protection and no sprinklers and that would need to be addressed if the Chunnel were converted to a road tunnel.
Complain about this comment
Mark,
You are referring to the newspaper headline' Fog in Channel Continent cut-off' ( over 1200 references to the phrase in Google.)
I do wonder why no sprinkler system was installed and even more why the wagons that carry freight all have to be open to magnify the bunsen burner effect of the wind passing by the wagons during the crossing.
I also recall the there should have been a second cross channel connection according to the terms of the contract signed by Mrs Thatcher (I think.) If it had been built, as was contractually required then the continent would not be as isolated as it is today.
Complain about this comment
# 8
You seem to have a tendency to become enraged when confronted with opinions different from your own, Menedemus.
Have you got anything to say about my comments? Or were you just looking to exercise your rapier wit to the approval of your American cousins?
Complain about this comment
Happily, it seems like safety procedures went to plan and this incedent has been handled well - thanks to everyone involved, especially the designers of the structure who probably rarely get mentioned.
Of course we should look at whether the tunnel was the best place for this particular cargo (would it have been better on a ferry? much harder to rescue people from open water).
Sad to see MAII is still driven by fear in his comments. While we all have to live with that particular threat, he seems to welcome any such incidents as a chance to notch up his 'war on terror', which incidentally is a daft name, we don't have war on other emotions or states of mind, like 'war on loathing', 'war on fear', or 'war on small-mindedness'.
Complain about this comment
paulcrossleyiii
To ignore the reality of terrorism and the impact even a handful of people can have on an entire society is not a matter of bravery but of stupidity. The consequences of that mistake have been demonstrated to nations as diverse as Indonesia, Kenya, the UK, the US, even Pakistan and Saudi Arabia. And Israel has lived with it every day for over 60 years. Perhaps you would be happier if those who were acquitted this week of plotting to bomb the UK were just allowed to go free and pick up where they left off.
Complain about this comment
joember @ #11
"You seem to have a tendency to become enraged when confronted with opinions different from your own, Menedemus.
Do you know me well enough to know whether I get enraged or not? Or is that just your opinion?
I appreciate that you grant me the credit of "rapier wit". I certainly having the wit that you so sadly lack.
Perhaps you should go to bed now and be a good little 8 year old and stop trying to wind up your elders and betters.
Complain about this comment
MarcusAureliusII wrote:
"Perhaps you would be happier if those who were acquitted this week of plotting to bomb the UK were just allowed to go free and pick up where they left off."
I certainly would; they were acquitted. Whether they are guilty or not (and let's face it we all know they are) the Justice System has run its course; a system that is designed to not only protect us from them; but also them from us.
Complain about this comment
Joeember and Menedemus,
You are both behaving like children. If you want to engage in mutual insults why not swap email addresses and carry out your vain diatribes in your own time.
Btw - are you twins?
Complain about this comment
andfreedom #15
This is a fundamental difference between the way you see the world and the way I see it. I don't think that difference can ever be reconciled. I view my opinion as largely representative of my American perspective while I view yours as representative of a European perspective. Not that there aren't people on both sides of the Atlantic who would agree with the majority opinion on the other side but I think that is the exception rather than the rule. This is one reason for so much conflict between us. For example, there was almost and end to transatlantic flights when the EU refused to send personal information the US demanded in advance of airline passengers bound for America. So by your way of thinking, you would not only allow the people you are nearly certain would build and set off bombs to kill people go free, you would allow them to board airplanes bound for the US without advising America or obtaining clearance in advance. This would be reason enough IMO to end all transatlantic flights.
Complain about this comment
archie23 @ #16
And I was having so much fun playing with him!
Do I really have to come in now?
Complain about this comment
MAII, I would think that my statement: "while we all have to live with that particular threat" would demonstrate to most people (at least those who bother to listen to others) that I don't see ignoring terrorism as a good idea, let alone brave.
My point was, that in your rather glib posts, you almost seem to relish acts of terrorism. I can only assume that this is because it fuels your war on terrorism, and suggests that rather than there being a range of terrorists with different courses that there is a common enemy for you to fight.
Maybe you like wars, maybe you're just looking for a simple answer to right the wrongs in the world. I just happen to think you're wrong.
Don't misunderstand me, I'm sure in reality you don't want to see such things come to pass, that you really wouldn't wish acts of terrorism on anyone. now let's get back to the Age of Empire series, I hear it's being re-run on BBC101.
Complain about this comment
paulcrossleyiii
How far were you from the World Trade Center on 9-11-01? I was 30 miles away. I'd been there more times than I can count. It was only a coincidence I wasn't there to get killed that day myself. Do I wish there was no such thing as terrorism in this world? You bet I do. I was born in a world before anyone ever hijacked an airplane and anyone could go right up to the boarding gate without so much as seeing a policeman or a guard. But that world doesn't exist anymore and we have to deal with the one we are in. That world includes terrorists. And that means that we really do need to have a war aginst them. I think the US is getting ready to invade Pakistan where al Qaeda has been irrationally granted sanctuary for the last 7 years. At least the US seems willing to penetrate for a short time with boots on the ground as opposed to just Predator drone planes. If you represent the attitude of your government and country towards terrorists, you can be sure I won't be going there and I certainly won't be traveling on the underground.
Complain about this comment
#20
Worse things than 9/11 happen on a weekly, if not daily, basis to millions of people around the world. And in not a few of those cases, it's your people who are causing it to happen.
The sympathy America got at 9/11 was undeserved. Whatever remains of it is even more undeserved today.
How far are you, whenever a US soldier shoots an Iraqi woman or child? ... or on purpose? Obviously not nearly close enough. And why is that all happening? Because Iraqis are resisting invaders who brutalize them even worse than the psychotic and genocidal dictator they used to live under.
Complain about this comment
#21 Joember
Well, no they're not. They're getting on pretty well now, apart mainly from Al Qaeda activities. The Sunnis who used to be the backbone of the insurgency have pretty much all reached accommodations with Maliki and the USA. Sadr's Mehdi army has downed weapons and opted for politics.
I assume (correct me if I am wrong) that you would want that 'psychotic and genocidal dicatator' still to be in power. What do you think the situatuion would be like if he was ?
Complain about this comment
Marcus, maybe you don't ever read what I write, or perhaps you deliberately misunderstand it so you can wirte one of your familiar rants. If that's the case, go ahead, knock yourself out.
I accept terrorism exists, I accept we must all guard against it, and I accept when I visit the USA I must endure lengthy queues in order to maintain 'security'.
Here are the things I don't accept:
1. A single terror entity that can be defeated by the conventional wars you seem so fond of.
2. You're implication that I'm either trivialising or can't understand the truly awful nature of the 9-11 attacks
I hope that clears it up for you.
Complain about this comment
Joember @21 wrote:
The sympathy America got at 9/11 was undeserved. Whatever remains of it is even more undeserved today.
You can only whine and spout the rubbish you do because of the character and freedoms inherent in, and disseminated by, Western liberal-democracies.
These freedoms we enjoy have, over the years, been protected and preserved by the blood of many thousands Americans, and the resources if millions more.
No, America is not perfect, but neither is Europe. You are, of course, at liberty to remove yourself to a country or society where your whining and childish spoutings (or even your religious or political opinions) would not be tolerated so readily.
Do pack your bags.
Complain about this comment
Certainly, this event on the Channel Tunnel was serious, and I'm sure the lessons learnt will be acted upon to reduce the possibility of such an event happening again.
We should be proud of the British and French fire fighters and Euro Tunnel staff for having in place excellent procedures to ensure that normal service can be resumed quickly and that no-one was seriously hurt. This event will not put me off travelling with Euro Tunnel again.
It is a simple fact that Britain is well and truly part of Europe, and that thousands of Britains take advantage of this fact every day by exercising their right to free and unrestricted travel between member states. I know I do.
We should be aware of the threat terrorism brings, certainly Britain has many decades of experience dealing with this threat, but we must remember that this was not a terrorist attack, that there are better ways of dealing with terrorism, and that stopping and searching every vehicle that passes through the tunnel is both impractical and no doubt a violation of our right to free travel.
Complain about this comment
Maxsceptic thanks, you posted way more succinctly than I could the kind of repsonse that para 2 of post #21 deserved.
EU brit, thanks for bringing the blog back to it's original subject, couldn't agree more with what you said (apart from reiterating that good design plays a part too).
Complain about this comment
I really do not understand this thread at all. It must be quite obvious to any reasonable human being that there are only two ways to deal with terrorism. Either you address the causes so that people no longer have any reason to attack us - not very credible in an age where there are so many conflicting issues - or you endeavour to run efficient and effective anti-terrorism services so that you foil as many attacks as possible.
What you most certainly do not do is implement a siege mentality, abandon all large scale projects which make large numbers of people vulnerable and generally batten down the hatches. To do so is to hand victory on a plate to the very people you are trying to defeat. I do not understand, MA2, why the Channel Tunnel is so much more of a risk than, say the Golden Gate bridge.
Our American friends would do well to remember that, while this is a fairly recent phenomenon to them, this side of the pond, we have lived with terrorism for other reasons for several decades. We coped then and we will cope now. I, for one, do not want to hand over hard won democratic freedoms to our political masters on the pretext of national security. There are risks as well as advantages to living in a free society. Get used to it.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
threnodio, I wouldn't blame the Americans for being extreme in their reaction to the 9-11 attacks, as you rightly point out they weren't really that used to acts of terrorism on their soil, and then to have something so horrific happen....
I do blame our own government for some of their attempts to remove democratic freedoms though, we should, as you point out, know better.
Complain about this comment
#25 My comment has been censored, because I asked if # 21 Joember was actually one of the many son's of the late non lamented Saddam. I don't know whether the fact that I dared to write that Saddam was unlamented was the reason I was banned, or whether I wrote that he had a concave forehead?
Complain about this comment
concave forehead?
Complain about this comment
haha
it always makes me laugh when I understand what kind of people are expressing strong views about what needs to be done. Everyone is an expert in everything. And they are furious. I am going to go now.
Really.
I am going and I won't say anything.
I am not here anymore.
Bye
Complain about this comment
Lots of people now like to take advantage of the exciting possibilities for freer movement that the "EU" offers. Here just a few examples:
False policemen etc.
The Austrians have had a spate of false policemen. One group waved down the wrong car. It contained two armed Austrian plain-clothes real policemen. One of the false policemen was shot dead. They were Romanians.
We recently had some false policemen in Suffolk. I informed a policeman of the Austrian experience. He informed me that we had had a spate of purse snatching in the whole of the East of England and that the culprits had been Romanian.
Portuguese: I was unemployed for a while. At the job centre I was told that anybody from the "EU" could claim unemployment pay in the UK if they had lived here for three months. My informant told me further that in Portugal there are agencies that offer Portuguese people exactly three months work so that they can then claim unemployment pay. I have further been told that we now have Portuguese drugs gangs operating in Suffolk. I imagine that some of those people are getting unemployment pay so that in fact we are actually subsidising criminals. I have met loads of very nice Portuguese people. I believe that the "EU" is resulting in us getting a negative selection.
Poles: I meet loads of nice Poles too! BUT! Polish driving licences are accepted in the UK. I am very reliably informed that one bus company employed a number of Polish bus drivers. They thought it would take one week of training before they could let them loose in the UK. It took fourteen weeks. It seems that the standard is lower in Poland and people in this company believed that at least one of them must have bought his licence. I have been told in Austria that if you cannot pass the bus or truck licence there you go to Poland. GREAT!
Russians????? Most of the Poles I meet are very friendly. I met one group who were very aggressive. They claimed to be Poles. I have heard a lot of Slav languages spoken for various reasons, but I don't speak any. I believe they were Russians. There has been a TV programme claiming that it is easy to buy a false identity in Poland. I have had reports of Russian drug gangs operating in Suffolk. GREAT!!
Italian doctors: I have seen a reports on the Austrian Radio website that medical students in Italy were bribing the Professors to let them pass exams. An Italian has told me that you have to bribe the teachers in Italy to get a good grade at their equivalent of A-levels. But Italian doctors are allowed to practice in the UK. It would seem that an Italian doctor practising in the UK could have bribed his way into university and then have bribed his way through it.
Brits: I don't want British criminals operating in other countries either. Some years ago I saw a TV programme about some Brit who had given a very well paid job to become a down and out in the South of France and scrounge off the French social system.
My point is that the "EU" is of more benefit to criminals that the ordinary person.
We don't need the "EU" and we don't need the Channel Tunnel.
Complain about this comment
Joember#20
"The sympathy America got at 9/11 was undeserved. Whatever remains of it is even more undeserved today."
From many people, those proved to be nothing more than empty words, even from people Americans thought were their allies. Unlike many Americans, I have no smpathy for the plight of people in trouble in other countries. For many of them, they made those troubles themselves anyway. The primary function of my government like any other is to protect its own people. When that function is made subordinate to any other consideration, I think it has made a grevious mistake and commited an unforgivable crmie against its own people. If your country takes actions which make it a perceived threat to mine, I expect my government to take whatever actions are necessary to neutralize that threat. My country undoubtedly has residents and citizens who trace their ancestry back to yours. Those who left yours were in all likelihood the outcasts of your society the targets of religious or political persecution or those with no hope of decent jobs or lives. My country is made up largely of the progeny of people like that. They owe the world nothing and have been far more generous than the recipients of that generousity deserved.
Iraqi women have been known to carry suicide bombs. And Islamic male Terrorists have been known to dress as women to inflict the most death. Far fewer Americans would have died in Iraq if they didn't actually care how many innocent Iraqis they killed defeating it. It may be misplaced sentiment.
paulcrossleyiii #23
I don't care what you accept or don't accept. Your opinion doesn't count. What matters is whether or not the American government's measures in preventing future attacks on Americans are effective or not. If they aren't, there will be far worse, far stronger measures put in their place. And they will be escalated until they do work, escalated without limit. These could conceiveably include imposition of marshall law throughout the United States, the kinds of internment camps we had for Japanese in WWII and pre-emptive nuclear strikes against many natons. The protection of the American nation and the American population takes precedence over protection of the Constitution and democracy. That is because without a nation, there is no future possibility of a return to democracy one day.
threnodio, the cause of Islamic terrorism is exactly what they say it is themselves, not some liberal's apology about living in poverty and hopelessness, not railing against support for the state of Israel. There are other ways to get out of poverty and the existance of Israel is a fact of life that will not go away unless the rest of human life goes away with it. Islamic terrorism is based on the notion that Moslems have a right to impose their religious beliefs on the rest of humanity no matter what the cost. There is no way to rationally compromise with that. The only thing you can do is find it and eliminate it before it has a chance to wreck more havoc on the rest of the world.
Complain about this comment
#34 - MarcusAureliusII
For once, we are in complete agreement. This is precisely why I cite good intelligence as the key element in fighting terrorism. Without it, you are simply targeting the wrong people and making the problem worse.
I also want to make it clear that I do not subscribe to Joember's view as regards sympathy for 9/11. It was a monstrous crime against innocent civilians going about their lawful business in a great city. Totally unacceptable regardless of the cause.
Complain about this comment
#35
> I also want to make it clear that I do not subscribe to Joember's view as regards sympathy for 9/11. It was a monstrous crime against innocent civilians going about their lawful business in a great city. Totally unacceptable regardless of the cause.
Monstrous?
Perhaps. Just far less monstrous than most of the things Americans do day after day. Unless, of course, the lives of brown people are worth less than that of Americans.
---
I also find it telling about Anglophone character that I have been told to get the hell out of the glorious Western Civilization because I, supposedly, do not share its values.
But to answer the expulsionist Briton's question as to what I think would be the case of Saddam Hussein was still in power? Well, past experience, including verifiable statistical data, makes it obvious that he murdered fewer Iraqis per annum than the Americans are murdering year after year.
Anglophones of late seem a larger and worse plague than Middle Eastern terrorists... primarily because the rest of the world continues to politely pretend that they are still civilized people, despite their ever worsening behavior.
Complain about this comment
#34
It seems to me that despite our deep and fundamental disagreements, we would both much prefer it if the US would pull back to the Continental United States and its few officially US-owned/-governed non-Continental territories.
If that means Islam will try to overrun Europe for a second time, I have no problem with that. They tried before and made very few inroads before eventually being driven back.
So, here's me hoping that Americans will start caring, sooner rather than later, *only* about Americans and will let the rest of the world go to hell in a hand-basket if it should come to that.
Complain about this comment
#34
> American [was: Islamic] terrorism is based
> on the notion that American [was: Moslems]
> have a right to impose their ideological
> [was: religious] beliefs on the rest of
> humanity no matter what the cost. There is
> no way to rationally compromise with that.
> The only thing you can do is find it and
> eliminate it before it has a chance to wreck
> more havoc on the rest of the world.
Clearly average Americans are ideologically closer to Islamic terrorists than they are prepared to admit.
So why not just pull back? Let the savage Islamic hordes invade Europe! If it gets too bad, you can always just nuke our whole continent... truly, you cannot lose!
Complain about this comment
#36 - Joember
You make the classic mistake which is so damaging to both sides of the argument.
Warfare is - or ought to be - military confrontation between two groups of people who are properly trained to the use the equipment supplied and who wear uniforms which clearly identify them as combatants.
Anything which involves slaughtering civilians whether it be Madrid commuters, 9/11, bombs in Delhi marketplaces or any other terrorist activity is not warfare - it is cold blooded murder. People who behave by those rules forgo any rights to the protection of the Geneva Convention or rules of engagement.
That most western societies continue, in spite of provocation, to afford offenders the opportunity to a defence in court says a great deal about the way of life we seek to protect. I have every sympathy with civilians who get caught up in the process regardless of their colour or location but to somehow suggest that this suffering somehow justifies 9/11 is way off the mark. After all, if it had not happened, there would probably have been no second Iraq war or the Afghan campaign.
Complain about this comment
#31 paulceossleyiii
concave forehead?
Alas, my friend, I've been felled too often by the moderators to answer your question. You are very intelligent, so I'm sure you will work it out.
Complain about this comment
#34 MarcusAureliusII
If I understand you correctly your belief is that it is acceptable, no compulsory, for the USA to slaughter anyone it wants without any legal process.
How do you differentiate your position, as a warmongering republican neocon Christian fundamentalist (supporter of Sarah Palin) from the Muslim fundamentalists terrorists that you so hate?
Do you really despise the rule of law and your own constitution? (I believe the fifth and sixth amendments deal with this matter - I am no expert however.)
Is there nothing in your understanding of your religion that allows you to recognise the humanity of an enemy?
How is your position compatible with democracy?
Complain about this comment
MarcusAureliusII
Oh dear oh dear are you here as well. I was just passing through and saw the text of a familiar rant checked the name and lo and behold it is thou. Still banging way I see, same old gripes.
Israel is one of your favourites though isn't it? You must explain to me some time why it is that you along with most of the US support what is clearly a very nasty and illegal land grab,is it perhaps that you got your land the same way?
Complain about this comment
Oh and many thanks to John_from_Hendon. Very succinctly put but it won't get a rational response just a change of rant. Fun though for a while.
Complain about this comment
Sorry I'm posting too much here but can't leave this alone.
SuffolkBoy2.
As a Brit that lives in France, travels all over Europe I will say very loudly and very clearly well done the EU. The channel tunnel is a wonderful bit of cooperation and the fire fighters deserve all our thanks for their efforts.
Suffolk is a very pretty place but if I had to trade the EU for it sorry but bye bye Suffolk.
Complain about this comment
#34 MarcusAureliusII
Your words are like a breath of fresh air blowing through the charnel houses of blind hate, ignorance and discrimination.
Complain about this comment
#42 TimOthy
I find various points in your posting unclear. Could you please clarify. This is a section written to MarcusAureliusII
Israel is one of your favourites though isn't it? You must explain to me some time why it is that you along with most of the US support what is clearly a very nasty and illegal land grab,is it perhaps that you got your land the same way?"
1. What exactly is the nasty and illegal land grab?
2. Do you actually have information that MarcusAureliusII has land, and are you insinuating that he obtained it by a very nasty and illegal land grab?
Thank you.
Complain about this comment
T1m0thy @42 wrote:
"Israel is one of your favourites though isn't it? You must explain to me some time why it is that you along with most of the US support what is clearly a very nasty and illegal land grab..."
Amazing how Israel always gets the blame. For anything and everything.
The Arab and muslim states (all twenty or thirty something of them) from the Atlantic Ocean to the Indian sub-continent and beyond are - with very few (if any) exceptions - socially backward, despotic and intolerant places ruled by bigots, kleptocrats, absolute monarchs or combinations of the previous three. They are engaged in continuous religious and tribal warfare among themselves or any unhappy country that they happen to share a border with (or form a significant minority in). [It is all America's fault, of course].
If Israel were to disappear tomorrow would they suddenly all become beacons of peace and enlightenment?
Just wondering....
Complain about this comment
#41 - John_from_Hendon
May I suggest you take religion away from the equation - not because I disrespect yours or anyone other belief system but because it provides an opportunity to get to the heart of the question. Scratch the surface of any apparently religiously motivated dispute and you will find another more secular layer. It is no coincidence that Christian fundamentalism was the moral veneer which thinly veiled white supremacist agenda and gave rise to KKK, for instance. If your wealth is founded on slavery, the last thing you are going to do is treat you workforce as brethren. The Jewish faith gifts territory which is already under the control of the Jewish state to the faithful. The secular Israeli state is pursuing an entirely different agenda. If anybody seriously believes that the IRA were pursuing equality for a suppressed Catholic minority, they have a very naive understanding of Irish history.
I could go on but I have made my point. Personal faith has been the motivation behind altruistic acts sometimes involving great sacrifice for many centuries yet organised and institutionalised has been behind some of the most heinous atrocities of history.
I believe that when Marx describes religion as "the opiate of the people", he is widely misunderstood. What he means is that religion is the mechanism through which you can manipulate large numbers of people simply by marrying their faith to a political objective. In this sense, Communism and National Socialism are every bit as much religions as Christianity or Islam. There can be no clearer example of this than suicide bombers. Nobody in their right mind goes out and kills themselves and many others because their political masters command it. They do so because they are genuinely persuaded that they a martyrs to a higher cause.
I do not ask people to abandon their faith but I do suggest that they leave it in the mosque, the synagogue or the church and come out into the world with a rational argument about what they are fighting for. At least they will be taking responsibility for their own actions instead of passing the buck to some deity or other.
Complain about this comment
If I may interrupt and return to the topic in hand, lorry fires seem very common and already this week one a day have been reported. I expect it is so also in other member states. So the risk of an incident in one or other of Europe's tunnels seems quite high. and bits of Europe are often getting 'cut off' while other travellers are delayed. Perhaps this is an opportunity to look at the risks and see if action can be taken to reduce them I should mention that for every 'disaster' there are likely to be thirty serious incidents (flames) brought under immediate control and about ten times as many small incidents (eg giving rise to overheating and smoke.) I assume the same occurs in the USA.
Complain about this comment
"44. At 6:30pm on 13 Sep 2008, T1m0thy wrote:
Sorry I'm posting too much here but can't leave this alone.
SuffolkBoy2.
As a Brit that lives in France, travels all over Europe I will say very loudly and very clearly well done the EU. The channel tunnel is a wonderful bit of cooperation and the fire fighters deserve all our thanks for their efforts.
Suffolk is a very pretty place but if I had to trade the EU for it sorry but bye bye Suffolk."
You can trade Suffolk for the "EU" for yourself but not for anybody else. And anyway that is a typical "EU"-lovers wishy-washy use of language.
The "EU" and the Channel Tunnel are both unnecessary and illegitimate. Give us the referendum we were promised!
You say "well done the EU." Many other don't.
We are not going to keep quiet! Give us the referendum to which we have a right or face continuous difficulties with us.
Complain about this comment
#50 - SuffolkBoy2
You want a referendum on abolishing the Channel Tunnel? Are you serious? My Gawd, I have heard it all.
Complain about this comment
MaxSceptic @ #47
"Amazing how Israel always gets the blame. For anything and everything.
"
Actually, with the anti-American dogmatists, some of whom don't know the difference between an Anglophone (which I believe you were the target of that hardly derogatory term!) and an Anglophile, having descended upon this thread, Israel has come off quite lightly in the scathing attacks.
The condemnations have distinctly been anti-American and it is American who seem to be getting the blame for anything and everything!
As the Blog article is about the Channel Tunnel Fire, it is almost laughable the way the thread has gone and I am now waiting for someone to suggest that the Chunnel Fire is part of the American plot to export it's ideology and dominate the world.
Complain about this comment
Joember #37
#34
"It seems to me that despite our deep and fundamental disagreements, we would both much prefer it if the US would pull back to the Continental United States and its few officially US-owned/-governed non-Continental territories."
I'm not sure I'd go that far but I think it is certainly not in America's interest to keep a standing army in Europe, nor to guarantee its security. It certainly isn't in the American taxpayer's interest to keep footing the bill for it.
"If that means Islam will try to overrun Europe for a second time, I have no problem with that. They tried before and made very few inroads before eventually being driven back."
Neither do I have problems with it. Europe doesn't seem to have the will to fight for whatever freedom and independence it has. America has spilled far too much of its blood and treasure defending people in Europe who will not only not defend themselves but are not even appreciative of the sacrifice made on their behalf. Therefore there is no logical reason for that sacrifice to continue.
"So, here's me hoping that Americans will start caring, sooner rather than later, *only* about Americans and will let the rest of the world go to hell in a hand-basket if it should come to that."
I have no problem with that. Those are my sentiments too. Let the rest of the world take care of itself and do what it will to each other. They will anyway, all America can do is put itself in danger, get in the line of fire.
Joember #38
#34
"Clearly average Americans are ideologically closer to Islamic terrorists than they are prepared to admit."
In one sense they are. They are prepared to take the most extreme measures and to die fighting for their cause. Many believe it is god's cause as well. That in itself makes the terrorists very dangerous, potentially as dangerous as America is. Beyond that there are no similiarities. The ideologies have nothing in common. In fact they are nearly the antithesis of each other.
"So why not just pull back? Let the savage Islamic hordes invade Europe! If it gets too bad, you can always just nuke our whole continent... truly, you cannot lose!"
My sentiments exactly, I could not have said it better myself.
Complain about this comment
John_from_Hendon #41
You are putting words in my mouth. You did not understand or say what I said. I said it is justifiable for the US government to take actions against anyone it perceives as a dire threat to its people, its interests, its territory. It does not need the permisson of anyone outside the US. It's own internal process for granting approval to the executive branch to act is always open for discussion but by and large, Congress and the President are usually one. This was certainly true in Iraq and Afghanistan although not quite so clear in Kosovo.
How do I differentiate my position from Moslem terrorists? I do not want to impose my culture, my government's system on other people. If they choose to embrace it on their own, fine. If they don't, that is also fine with me. This is not the same as sitting back and watch Communists backed by Moscow gobble up the world through violent revolution, I want that to be clear.
BTW, I am not a Christian fundamentalist nor a neocon. I also have no religious beliefs. I have been an athiest all of my life. However, even I can see it is better to risk dying to protect my freedom than to try to extend my life by surrendering to those who would enslave me such as by those who would impose their religion on me. That would not be a life worth living IMO.
I do not despise the Constitution but it is not a suicide pact, nor is it absolute. In some circumstances, it is correct for it to be set aside as in times of dire national crisis. This is just such a time. We don't know when it will end.
Complain about this comment
#52 - Menedemus
Oh, come off it. There was a fire in the Chunnel, they put it out, nobody was seriously hurt, a few people were inconvenienced and it's up and running again. What else is there to say?
Complain about this comment
53 MarcusAureliusII
I don't think fundamental islamists will have to fight to take over Great Britain. The average citizen has become so docile, indoctrinated with politically correct propaganda and drugged with NHS tranquilizers that they will sit back and let their country become a fundamental state. They will moan and groan quietly, as is their way, and blame the USA for not sending a force to protect them.
America is damned if it does and damned if it doesn't.
Complain about this comment
T1M0thy #42
"Israel is one of your favourites though isn't it? You must explain to me some time why it is that you along with most of the US support what is clearly a very nasty and illegal land grab,is it perhaps that you got your land the same way?"
What an interesting comment. Do I have to remind you that when it came to nasty illegal land grabs, Europeans were by far the world champions? Remember who had an empire on which the sun never set? And France had its own version. Before that, the Pope drew a line down a ma of the world and gave half to Spain, half to Portugal. And then there was the Roman empire. Of course there were other European empires including the Nazi empire and the Soviet Empire.
When are the Europeans going to return the booty they stole? When will Britain for example return the Elgin Marbles to Greece? When will Spain return all the gold it stole to Latin America. Never of course.
It is pointless to argue with you. You already know all of the facts. You already know that three million aborigines occupied two million square miles of what became the US but as hunting tribes, they claimed all of it and would often savagely kill anyone who even passed through it let alone settled on just a small piece of it. You also know that the land Israel grabbed was used three times in war to destroy it and now serves as a defendable territory which may anger Arabs who invented the notion of a Palestinian People after it was lost to them but actually have no legitimate claim to it, no matter what the UN says. So why bother to argue over it. Neither of us will budge in our positions.
Complain about this comment
threnodio @ #52
I could not agree with you more. I do not even suggest otherwise.
However, the tone of the anti-Americanism in this thread is such that some of the anti-American rhetoric seems to me to be heading towards blaming America even for that which it is not possible to have any any influence upon.
Complain about this comment
Fellow bloggers may I return to the subject
Is Europe cut off?
In short the answer is No, but it would have been nice if there were more than two single track tunnels, as there should have been according to the agreement to create the tunnels in the first place.
What seems not to have been understood is that dangerous flammable chemicals need special handling and yet again huge damage, (but luckily no loss of life) has resulted.
If only flammable chemicals were carried about with the care we insist upon for radioactive waste!
Complain about this comment
Marcus: "Your opinion doesn't count." At least you're now admitting that you don't even bother to consider someone elses opinon before you assume you know what they think and go off on one of your rather boring rants.
What a shame it is then that since you made that comment you go on to whine at other posters for putting words in your mouth,or it being pointless to argue with them because they already 'know' the facts.
As for harking back to European history to justify the actions of the USA and other states today, can't you see how desperate that sounds?
In summary, I'd say what a good thing it is that your opinion doesn't count...for very much....within your own country. if it did I have no doubt the world would have ended long ago.
Complain about this comment
i wish they had built a road connection as well as a rail connection, because it would have been nice to be able to drive nonstop to the continent. i think it would have also made a meaningful contribition to the integration of the uk with the rest of europe, both economically and culturally.
Complain about this comment
ma2, thanks for taking this thread totally off topic. the problem fascists such as yourself have is that your central thesis, that might is right, is false on its own terms. when fascists try to nakedly exercise their might for the benefit of their nation at the expense of all others, they just end up uniting everyone else against them and losing. if america ever put you in charge it would be a disaster for your own country.
btw, i believe saddam also has an eye on the top of his head if i am not mistaken.
Complain about this comment
benagyerek, how did I take this thread totally off topic, by pointing out that the Chunnel is vulnerable to terrorism, that what was an accident could just as easily have been deliberate? Or worse? Does it bother you to consider that possibility? Good, it's valuable to know that by not taking precautions, if the worst happens it was your own fault for not even trying to stop it. Last time I went through Manhattan from New Jersey to Queens using the Lincoln and Midtown Tunnels, there were lots of police at the entrances with machine guns ready to stop anyone suspicious. And there are redundant routes in and out of Manhattan. What precautions are Britain and France taking? As I recall, it was all the British could do to get the French to close Saint Gatt.
Complain about this comment
Marcus, are you suggesting we build a second tunnel as a backup - maybe we could have one to Ireland and one to Denmark. Would that satisfy you?
Out of interest, how do those armed police identify suspicious looking people in moving vehicles?
Complain about this comment
paulcrossleyiii
I don't know how police know what is "suspicious" and what isn't. I have no idea about how counterterrorism actually works in real life. At least someone is thinking about the problem and trying to cope with it....where I live.
Should more bridges or tunnels be built? I don't know? That's for the British and those at the other end to decide between themselves. But the way the EU works, not only would they likely need permission, the EU might take control over who builds it and how.
Now what country listens to another in deciding its policies? And of all countries in the world, why should America listen to anyone let alone Europe. Europe has made one monumental blunder after another while in a mere 200 years the US has risen from total obscurity to what BBC inaccurately compares to the Roman Empire. The only thing losers have to teach winners is how not to be losers by example.
Complain about this comment
I knew you'd struggle to resist the Empire reference! Or was that for my benefit, if so thanks, you made me smile :)
Good job I never suggested that USA should listen to EU on policy, or you might just have a point there, but alas, you don't.
However, the USA is lucky indeed to have at least one of it's citizens constantly montoring the blogs of the BBC. Maybe he's there to educate those people he cares so little about, maybe he's on the look out for terrorism, who can tell.
As for all those monumental blunders, it's amazing how those Europeans seem to enjoy such a high standard of life.
Complain about this comment
Are we going to get into how the US has subsidized Europe since the second world war again? How it paid to rebuild it, encouraged large American corporations to invest there to create jobs and wealth, given it one way free access to the largest market in the world while it allowed it to remain protectionist for its domestic markets, and paid for its defense? That's largely at an end now except for defense spending (I wish the US would pull out of Europe and let it pay for its own defense) and Europe will sink to the level of its productivity and competitiveness...very soon.
Is Europe cut off? Now there's a happy thought. I'm afraid we don't have the technology for that...yet. Maybe some kind of atomic scissors.
Complain about this comment
superb! It's getting quite easy to predict and determine exactly what repsonse you'll use....
You trash Europe, I point out what a nice place it is, you say we have the Americans to thank for all that.
Leaving aside the facts for a second (I mean why would the USA give loans to help rebuild parts of Europe? -surely not for its own benefit?), even by your own weird rationale Europe certainly must have made some monumentally lucky blunders to get the dear old USA to pay for such a lavish make-over. Most of it looks in better condtion than the donor country!
Now here's a question that you usually avoid: Why do you post on here?
Complain about this comment
As An Englishman living and working in the USA, married to an American lady I met on the internet, it never ceases to amaze me of the hypocricy of the average American. They have one terrorist incident that unfortunately proved to the world that they are not invulnerable and suddenly they forget how they sponsored terrorism in the Uk prior to 9/11.
How many millions of dollars were raised in the USA for the Irish Republican Army and their terror campaign? They were as misguided in their support of the IRA as they were misinformed about the weapons of mass destruction and the ties to Al-Queda that Saddam Hussain was supposed to have.
Yet still, they persist in their comments about foreign countries and their governments being corrupt regimes. My friends America has the most corrupt politicians of anywhere else in the world. Many are prosecuted, but many get away with a lifetime of taking bribes and doing favours for their rich friends, so that they to may become rich at the expense of others.
Now don't get me wrong, most American people are hard workers who have a hard time just making ends meet. Unfortunately while they have the system of governmemt they have now with no third party to give any balance, nothing will change. Most Americans understand this and that is why they so apathetic towards politics and politicians. That is also why the politicians get away with murder. The murder of others and the murder of the American soldier who mistakenly thinks they are fighting wars against terrorism. They are not. They are fighting wars for corrupt politicians who want to make more money and control more lands and people than they already do.
The American government keeps its people down by using the age-old tactic of fear. Fear of the Russians, fear of the Vietnamese, fear of the Arab world and now the Russians again. Without fear the American government couldn't rule. Without fear big business, defence contractors and corrupt politicians couldn't live.
The monies raised for those who died, the brave rescue workers and the many civilian volunteers who helped after 9/11 has still to be distributed. The man who owned the leases to the World Trade centre received his insurance monies years ago, go figure. In the meantime, those whose health is suffering from the effects of breathing the dust in New York have to join the millions of others in America with no health insurance and no hope of getting health care.
This is a vast country with vast problems, the sooner the people of America wake up to their own apathy and do something about their rotten government, the safer the rest of the world will be.
In the meantime, closing the channel tunnel will not sto acts of terrorism in the Uk. The Irish never needed a tunnel did they?
Complain about this comment
#36 Joember
I think you mean me ? Although I don't quite understand 'expulsionist'. It sounds like one of those epithets members of small far-left parties throw at each other so I am honoured even though I don't understand it.
What you said is just not true at all and I am afraid - Chunnel fire or not - I cannot let it lie there like so much asserted Iraq War propaganda.
The Iraq War killed far less Iraqis than Saddam Hussein already had even if you count in all of those killed by the insurgents and Al Qaeda - which is about 80% of those killed. A fact often lost somehow in the western media. Iraq Body Count currently estimates a maximum 95,489 killed (http://www.iraqbodycount.org).
Furthermore, you have not answered what would have happened if Saddam Hussein had remained in power, which is what I asked.
Clues - The World is short of oil. Sudan is murdering its own population in hundreds of thousands to get it for the Chinese.
The oil in Iraq is in the Kurdish and Shi'a areas of the country. Saddam Hussein has already killed about 100,000 Kurds. HRW estimate 50,000 - 100,000, The Kurds estimate 182,000 killed (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Operation_Anfal#Statistics) to make the oil in the North exploitable. He has common cause with the Turks to completely 'neutralise' the Kurdish problem.
The Shi'a in the South rose up against him after the first Gulf War at the prompting of George H W Bush. They lost about 100,000 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1991_uprisings_in_Iraq#Suppression_of_the_uprisings).
All of the above was stopped only by the no-fly zones which were probably John Major's greatest success.
With the lifting of sanctions, the 'no-fly' zones will also almost certainly be lifted and Saddam Hussein will want unrestricted access to the oil. He is also a vengeful man and probably a psychopath.
Now explain what happens next.
Complain about this comment
#62 benagyerek
Back to the Roman theme.
It would not be difficult to argue that the actions of the EU nations on the Irish referendum are fascist. Not with military force, of course. Heaven forfend. Rather with political violence of a more insidious kind.
Perhaps this is more like fascism, an article from yesterday: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7613575.stm
There are isolationists in every society. They generally come from the contented part of society, the well off, usually - although I have no idea what MarcusAureliusII's situation is.
In the opposition to the Iraq War in the UK, Andrew Marr (when he was still BBC political editor) reported that the MPs who were opposed came primarily from middle class constituencies as well as those with large muslim populations.
That is in contrast to the fodder used by terrorist organisations. Although they are sometimes middle class or above - like many of the 9/11 bombers and say the Baader-Meinhof gang - many more seem to be from the poor and dispossessed.
To that extent the war on terror is a war on poverty and its exploiters.
For my own part, I do not feel the need to protect my nation's self-interest as MarcusAureliusII appears to. It seems to me to be a British (or perhaps English) trait to absorb aspects of other cultures. In the end, constant questioning of our cultural and political ideas is what will make us strong - whoever 'us' may turn out to be.
Like English, the language. The world's mongrel.
Complain about this comment
Combining this comment
"Should have built a bridge. Safer and probably cheaper. "
with this one:
"A road tunel might be just as likely to be a disaster waiting to happen. I refer you to the Mont Blanc Tunnel, Italy fire of 24 March 1999."
suggests that we should probably build a bridge over Mont Blanc.
Complain about this comment
How does Saddam Hussein enter into a debate about the merits of the channel tunnel? I really am not sure.
Complain about this comment
#73 tuairmiocht
He came up earlier. Read previous posts.
He gets everywhere.
Complain about this comment
A common theme here seems to be a naive suggestion that a bridge would be not only cheaper but safer. Can I just point out, to those who believe this, that the Channel is one of the busiest shipping lanes in the world, if you have ever flown over it in the past on a clear day, and happened to look down, you will have seen the row upon row of ships traversing England’s moat. Now imagine putting a bridge into that equation then throw in a quick storm and you will understand why the idea of a bridge, rather than the tunnel, was dismissed so quickly, not only as uneconomical, but simply too dangerous. It might also enlighten a few people to know that to enter the tunnel as a passenger requires the same style security checks as those found at an airport so the risk of terrorist attack is no different than taking the plane across.
I personally do not believe that the fire in the tunnel cut Europe off in any way, with Budget airlines such as Ryan Air, combined with the cross channel ferries, meaning that the fire was at most a little inconvenient simply lengthening journey times by a few hours. At most it shows us how much we have started taking for granted the ability to hop on a train and cross the channel in only an hour.
Complain about this comment
paulcrossleyiii #68
First of all, I didn't trash Europe, Europe trashed itself. I'm merely pointing out the stench and the eyesore. I'm now convinced having traveled a bit around Europe that tourism is the most overrated industry in the world. Far better to sit at home and watch exaggerated lying travellogues by the likes of Rick Steve and Samantha Brown than to actually go suffer the physical ordeal of traveling abroad. Although I must admit, I never would have gotten the full impact of how utterly cruel and brutal a bull fight is without actually seeing one in Madrid with my own eyes. And even more disgusting than watching the slow cruel ritual torture and slaugher of an animal was watching the spectators enjoying it including a Catholic priest in his garb. Yes there is nothing quite like being there.
America rebuilt Europe not only with loans but with all of the other sacrifices and giveaways I pointed out because it had already subjected the world to two bloodbaths in the 20th century and left to itself, it was surely headed for a third with the USSR. Besides, Americans had a cultural propensity for generousity probably due to its inherited Judeo-Christian ethic. While Europeans love pointing out that the US government gives less per capita to international charity than other developed nations do, they fail to point out than not only in absolute terms is it by far the most but that when voluntary private donations are included, unprecedented for other countries BTW, it is probably far greater than any other country. Besides, if we took the money we "donate" to Europe's defense away and let the Europeans use the money they donate to poor countries to their own defense instead, what's left to give to the poor would probably be the lowest per capita. But this is typical European hypocricy, ways of playing with numbers to hide the truth. Perhaps that will all change now that US demographics is changing and people from countries not so concerned with sacrifice to the less fortunate is not particularly important. I for one would like to see the US use its economic power more frequently as a weapon...just as it has with Cuba. I wonder how France would have voted on Iraq in the Security Council before the invasion if it were privately told it would be faced with a trade embargo by the US by getting it wrong.
deathpoet #69
Want to talk about corruption? How much did British give Saudi Princes in bribes to win 44 billion in defense contracts, 500 million? 2 billion? And why has the British government resisted every effort by its courts to investigate? "Because it would compromise British national security." Case closed, England is as corrupt as anyone. So are the rest of Europeans who made money circumventing the UN sanctions against Iraq among many other corruptions. Germany, France, Russia, a lot of them. Liars one and all. One continent, paint it with one brush.
Funny how many in America didn't consider the IRA terrorists. They considered them "freedom fighters." After all, England occupied Ireland for 400 years since Cromwell invaded and NI was an artificial construct just the way the so called Palestinian state and People are. There already is an Arab state carved from the Palestinian Mandate. It's called Jordan. There is no more a Palestinian People than there are a Northern Irish people. Of course I have no dog in that fight myself having no English or Irish blood in my ancestry. Doesn't matter to me if they go back to killing each other. How much do you suppose George Galloway got in the way of oil credits from Saddam Hussein to keep Britain from invading Iraq? As far as I can tell, if even a tenth of what the US investigators said about him in public is true, he should have been criminally indicted in the US. The only probable reason he wasn't...to maintain good relations with England.
9-11 made America aware of just how vulnerable it is to terrorism plotted abroad in the same way Pearl Harbor made it aware of how vulnerable it was to military attack from overseas. As the result of Pearl Harbor, the US built and maintains the strongest military in the world, able to resist an invasion or retaliate devastatingly against any attack from anywhere by anyone. As the result of 9-11, the US has launched a war on terror which may become a permanent feature of American policy. If America foolishly lets its guard down and is attacked again, the next installment will be much more forceful, sustained, and indifferent to the consequences of innocents. Meanwhile, US policy is that no terrorist who poses a threat to the US will be safe anywhere. Not in the caves of Afghanistan, not in the remote islands of the south Phillipines, and if it ever came to that, not in England or Canada either.
Complain about this comment
To MarcusAureliusII (67):
Dude, when are you going to start learning from previous discussions or study more economic and political history? Your whole comment about US subsidizing Europe is just completely wrong.
Myths about US and Europe:
1) Rebuilding Europe via Marshall plan is completely rubbish. The industrial capacity and major infrastructure stayed largely intact in Germany, France, Italy and in UK: in example 70-80% Germany's industrial capacity was intact after the war, and Germany was devastated along with Soviet Union most by the war. Marshall Plan was more about fixing problems started by implementation of the Morgenthau plan and preventing US economy hitting depression by creating demand for American industrial goods.
2) Encouraged large American corporations to invest in Europe? ...My god man! General Motors, Ford, IBM and etc.. operated in pre-war Germany aiding and supplying Nazi Germany's war machine. Global capitalism isn't a post-war invention, American and European companies were operating before the world in both ends of the Atlantic ocean. After the war both business continued as usual by both European and American companies spreading and investing in both hemispheres.
3) Free access to largest market in the world while allowing Europe to stay protectionist? Dude! Dude! You are mixing Japan and Europe. Just read some economic history please!
4) US paid the defense of Europe? When? I'm sorry, but European countries have always invested on their armed forces considerable number of their GDP. In cold war times it was the job of large German conscription army and their tank divisions in time of war keep the Soviets out of western Europe and eventually to make the push to the Soviet Union itself.
5) US pays the European defense still? ... Not! US spends approx 583 billion dollars on its military yearly while EU countries spend 311 billion dollars. Europe is paying for its own defense and it's paying enough. The thing just is that European countries pay only for defense, not for global military supremacy and the ability to fight in foreign countries and crush third world dictators.
6) Europe will sink to its productivity and competitiveness? Excuse me what? Productivity is in very high level in Europe, we just don't share your feeling that productivity means 16 hours working days without no payed holidays. And competitiveness? Gee... In EU countries there is more competition that in the US as the European regulators actually are doing something against illegal monopolies and business practices versus the US where the administration has largely forgotten that they indeed have something called anti-truest laws.
Why don't you sometimes take a note and start to learn and stop spreading false myths.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
Channel Tunnel fire anybody?
This blog is ridiculous. Please return to the point!
The bloggers who deliberately introduce red herrings know who they are/ he is - I appeal to those who respond to their/his lengthy rants to ignore them and return to the point.
The way the tunnel was financed and the fact that it has gone essentially bankrupt already and had to be rescued by reconstructing its finances is possibly, in my view, important in judging its handling of risky cargo.
Quite apart from breaking its undertaking in the initial agreement to build the tunnel to have already constructed a second link the lack of money has probably led to corner cutting and this may have resulted in unwise and risky operating procedures.
I would really like to know if anything is publicly known about how they tunnel operators decide on what should go through the tunnel and what should not.
Why are they still using open sided trucks to carry the lorries that congaing flammable cargo when this was one of the contributory causes to the seriousness of the previous fire?
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
#80 MarcusAureliusII
England originally took over much of Ireland in 1169-71. The monarch was Henry II. There was no simple hostile landing in the sense of the word 'invasion'. Henry used the enmities between Irish nobles the way other English monarchs have since.
In fact, Henry did not make the first approach. The prince of Leinster - one of the 5 provinces whch made up Ireland at that time and the one which contains Dublin - went to see Henry and asked him for military help against the 'High King' of Ireland.
Henry had already asked permission from the Pope for his action which was given. This was because the papacy saw the Irish church as corrupt - it did not give allegiance (i.e. money) to Rome - and the English church probably wanted to take it over.
The history of English rule over Ireland was somewhat chequered after that.
Cromwell is certainly a bogey man in Ireland, not least due to his own propaganda about the 'massacre at Drogheda' http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Siege_of_Drogheda#Debates_over_Cromwell.27s_actions. Cromwell appears to have talked up the terror inflicted there so as to get other towns to surrender more easily. In fact, by the standards of the time, the massacre seems to have been a fairly average affair.
Complain about this comment
does anyone know if the channel tunnel is actually profitable these days?
i know it has had enormous debt problems, essentially because usage was much much slower to pick up than even in the worst case scenario forecast done in the original business plan when they built it.
but i seem to remember hearing on the news in the last 2-3 years that eurostar at least is turning a very healthy profit nowadays, helped by a more integrated management (not split betw uk/france/belgium any more), not to mention the full hour that has been knocked off travel time by completion of the two phases of the ctrl.
based on the experience of the chunnel as well as other big poltically charged infrastructure projects like the oresund bridge, i get the impression that few of these grand projects are really justified on narrow business grounds. all the same, i think it is right they go ahead because of the broader benefits to the countries involved that come from greater economic and cultural integration.
Complain about this comment
I have always been opposed to the Channel Tunnel on principle . I prefer Britain to remain an Island , cut off from the mainland of Europe .
The argument about Trade , lorries travelling to and from Europe is not so valid either . Many lorry drivers prefer to travel by ferry , because it gives them a longer break ; they can eat a good meal and have time for a sleep .
I prefer to travel by sea ferry , I would never use the tunnel .
I read a number of contributors , refering to the danger of an explosion in the tunnel . There is indeed a real danger of that ; even to the extent of it being flooded by the sea . It is not that I should want people to lose their lives , unless perhaps some terrorists .
I used to pray for the IRA to blow it up ; but now there is more prospect of some other terrorists doing it .
Hope Springs Eternal Within , Even The Inhuman breast !
Complain about this comment
@suffolkboy2
As an Italian who has lived in France, the UK, USA and China, I can safely say that Italian doctors/or rather, hospitals and generally the national italian health services are by far better than anything you get in Britain.
Complain about this comment
The channel is the busiest seaway in the world. If we had built a bridge within a year a bulk freighter would have sailed into it in fog.
We couldn't build a car tunnel under the channel either- ventilation of that much exhaust fumes in such a confined space would have been impossible. It would be a gas chamber. Equally can you imagine how hard it would be for the emergency services getting to a pile up- quite likely given us and and the french drive on different sides of the road?
A bomb could not blow it up- explosions follow the path of least resistance. All the explosive force would blast out each end like a gun barrel. Far easier for a terrorist just to blow up one of the high speed rail sections and have a train derail at 200mph. That would take about a kilo of semtex.
Complain about this comment
#77 "In cold war times it was the job of large German conscription army and their tank divisions in time of war keep the Soviets out of western Europe and eventually to make the push to the Soviet Union itself."
Wikipedia 'reforger' and 'reforger II'. The job of the German army was to delay the soviets by a week until US forces could arrive in force. We practiced this once in the early 80's and it was a cock-up so we did it again better the next year and the soviets took note.
You wouldn't believe how much European infastructure is US army funded. Gartnavel hospital- an NHS hospital in Glasgow is still subsidised by the US army and was even built to an american design. The Finneston crane on Glasgow's quayside was designed to lift steam trains onto ships. It hasn't done that for 40 years but the americans keep it maintained as its the only crane on the west coast of Scotland that can life M1A1 tanks. And its right next to a motorway for fast delivery down south.
Complain about this comment
@ MarcusAureliusII:
#34 >>"The primary function of my government like any other is to protect its own people. When that function is made subordinate to any other consideration, I think it has made a grevious mistake and commited an unforgivable crmie against its own people. If your country takes actions which make it a perceived threat to mine, I expect my government to take whatever actions are necessary to neutralize that threat."
The problem we Europeans have with that kind of policy is that it either (a) implies that Americans have a right to kill and rule other people against their will, or (b) implies that we should abandon all international treaties and let anyone go to war with anyone else for any reason.
a. If you claim that the US - and ONLY the US - has the right to invade any country it considers a threat, then you are advocating imperialism. There's really no other name for it. More to the point, it is also a completely irrational position to hold: What makes the US government so special that it has the right to police the world? Frankly, if we must have a world police, I nominate Sweden.
2. If, on the other hand, you claim that any country has the right to invade any other country it perceives as a threat - well then you're being rational and consistent, but unfortunately such a policy would be ludicrous and suicidal. It would amount to giving anyone permission to invade anyone else at any time.
#34 >>"Unlike many Americans, I have no smpathy for the plight of people in trouble in other countries."
#78 >>"While Europeans love pointing out that the US government gives less per capita to international charity than other developed nations do, they fail to point out than not only in absolute terms is it by far the most but that when voluntary private donations are included, unprecedented for other countries BTW, it is probably far greater than any other country."
Isn't there a little bit of a contradiction here? First you say you feel no sympathy for the plight of people in trouble in other countries, then you speak with pride of the charity given by Americans to people in trouble in other countries. I don't understand. Is it good or bad to give charity to people in other countries? If it's good, why do you personally oppose it? If it's bad, why do you boast about it when other Americans do it?
#67 >>"Are we going to get into how the US has subsidized Europe since the second world war again?"
That argument only works if your opponent actually supports the idea that Europe needs or needed those American "subsidies." I don't. In fact, I'd say most Europeans don't. If we neither want nor need a certain "gift" - or if we believe that the "gift" is poisoned and designed to keep us subservient to the giver - why exactly should we be expected to be grateful for it?
In fact, your argument is rather comical: Apparently you are giving us a gift which we do not want, and which you do not wish to give. And yet you're proud of giving this gift, even though you don't want to give it, and we should be grateful for it, even though we don't want to receive it.
I believe that Europe should end all military, diplomatic, and possibly economic cooperation with America. To your claims of superiority I say, "enough talk - bring it on!" I am firmly convinced that Europe can do better than America economically, socially, and politically. Unfortunately, neither my leaders nor yours seem to have any intention to bring it on. So we're rather stuck.
Complain about this comment
Who needs Brits on the continent, anyway?
The louts and football hooligans are a disgrace as are the gunball snobs.
The consultants and other political parasites who just come to Brussels to cream of are not wanted either.
The educated and decent British middle-class who do not look down on the rest of Europe have already relocated to their houses in France and Spain.
(posting may contian irony)
Complain about this comment
To Peter_Sym (86):
Your note about reforger was an interesting one. However after the opening of Warsaw pact archives in Poland we know what the Soviets expected: they expected that in the first weeks of the war they would be pushed deeply back.
However when looking at your message, the thing I object most is "You wouldn't believe how much European infastructure is US army funded" and then you go and give as an example an hospital and a crane. I'm sorry, an hospital and a crane? You do know that when we talk about infrastructure we talk about such massive things as power generation, power distribution, rail and motorway networks, telecommunication networks, water treatment etc.. Hospital or a crane are peanuts when you compare it to real infrastructure project that cost billions not millions. So, how many power plants and power networks has the US army paid? How many rail roads and motorways has the US army paid? How many telecommunication networks has the US army paid? How many water treatment plants has the US army paid?
The argument that MarcusAureliusII and many Americans have made is that Europe owns gratitude to America, because America funded and build Europe. That is just a false argument and is based on ignorance about history and economics. The more this false argument and myth is touted, the more mistakes people are going to make because of it. Just in example a book The Pentagon's New Map: War and Peace in the Twenty-First Century made in 2004 by Thomas Barnett bases more or less it's whole view on the false notation that US rebuild Europe after the second world war. This false notation has lead Barnett to suggest that US should and could take over third world countries, rebuild them and join them to the international community. Even the current US administration believed this and went ahead taking over Iraq and tried to start rebuilding program. That just hasn't and will not work, economic reality is just against it.
Complain about this comment
I think that is correct to see this event here merely as a metaphora of the real subject:
- vulnerability of European ties
- potential terrorism in Europe
I would like to add few words regarding the last.
To address the causes of terrorism maybe is too ambitious. I think the cause lays somewhere deep in fundamental nature of human being, namely in a desire to wage war.
When there is a war, there are two sides as well. We speak only about one side, the terrorism. Terrorism has to cease, should be punished, etc., as a phenomenon of evil in today's world. But there is a war machine, which is constantly running. I am afraid of feeding this machine beyond its needs, just to justify its existence. That is also producing terrorism.
The stories about honour, devotion, etc., are all connected with actual wars from the past. But this is used up. There is no honour in terrorism. The only remaining acceptable form of opposing the humans is dialog, a slogan of the civilised world.
To stop feeding the war machine is something which should not be forgotten, even when the goals are most noble of all, to stop the terrorism.
Complain about this comment
The U.S were the greatest war criminal in History, the genocide that that carried out in 'their own country' is almost unrivaled in History.
Yet so called American Patriot's have the nerve to claim the IRA were freedom fighters whilst condeming 'Jihad' on the infidel. ( A Crme which thoughout history not only Muslims have been Guilty of.)
It Supports Israel and its ghastly breaches of UN decrees, whilst calling Iran 'part of the Axis of evil'
Then show complete lack of any historical knowelde by denying that Palistine ever existed.( what do you think was there before Israel was created, possibly the greatest ever international relations mistake since the original crusades.)
I sorry but if an openly hostile 'Country' like Israel is allowed to have Nuclear Weapons..... Then why isn't one of the oldest Civilisations on the planet (Persia modern day Iran)
P.S The only Country ever to us a Nuke in anger was, yeah you guessed it the god old(no so old really hence the stupifing imaturity ) USof A
Complain about this comment
America fall's to invade another Country
Reports say nine US helicopters landed on the Afghan side of the border and US troops then tried to cross the Pakistani border. US troops from the Chinooks then tried to cross the border. As they did so, Pakistani paramilitary soldiers at a checkpoint opened fire into the air and the US troops decided not to continue forward, local Pakistani officials say.
Complain about this comment
@WEP (91)
I hope I don't have to remind you it was primarily European settlers (1492-1792) who did most of the socalled 'ethnic cleansing' amongst native populations.
Israel has been the victim of a very one sided UN approach, and I support Israel giving priority to defending itself against its neighbours repeated aggression (1948, 1956, 1967, 1973 amongst other dates). No country should be forced to accept biased and one-sided UN resolutions.
Speaking of serial human rights violations, look no further than pretty much every majority islam country. You couldn't name one majority islamic country where women are treated equally, or where other religions have equal status.
And Japan had it coming in 1945, after its mass murderous campaign in China, using poison gas etc against the population.
Complain about this comment
This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the House Rules.
mcdv93
'It was primarily European settlers (1492-1792) who did most of the socalled 'ethnic cleansing' amongst native populations'
In the terms of south and central America I agrree with you, However the Majority of North American Natives were killed after 1792. And why is it 'socalled' ethnic cleansing. You what women to be treated equally but don't recongise those same rights to Native Americans?
Imagine if say Gerogia in America was suddenly given to Muslims, all the Americans were thrown out of there homes and told to leave. Wouldn't that cause 'repeated aggression' from each of the other American state?
Islamic country's are hostile and aggressive because we have helped make them that way. The English and other Europeans are to blame for the in far distant History, and even upto just over 100 years ago when we put down the Macdist nation in Oman.
For some one who seems to be quite enlightened, you are completely intolerant of other countries value's if they do not match your own. Women in most Mulsim contries are respected much more than in our sex crazed Civilisation where they are paraded like Whores in pretty much every magazine you buy.
Japan were a beaten Country by 1945 it was completely unnessasary and it would have been better for America in the long run if they had kept there new weapon secret untill they really needed it.
Complain about this comment
Mark, maybe you are not a financial expert, but the ship is going down very fast..
you should look to financial issues, since Lisbon treaty is worth nothing, and is dead already.
EU is in trouble, how it will pay for its increasing energy prices, if the whole wealthfare system is bankrupt, who is going to bail out the bunkrupt governance system and society, in a time when Russia will use its strategic advantage of controlled milking of EU wealth.
Complain about this comment
#89. Those were examples that come off the top of my head. I can list dozens of others but am not sure I'm allowed to. I signed the official secrets act in the early 90's and it still counts. My point was that you wouldn't guess what the Americans fund.
Needless to say that if the US Army funded dockyard facilities and hospitals in Glasgow you can presume they do many similar things in many other European countries.
Its funny you refer to warsaw pact archives in Poland anticipating the Soviets being pushed back. If they attacked it was expected by us that the lead elements would be Polish and East German cannon fodder, with the main soviet strike force in the second wave. Clearly in attack or defence the Soviets were planning on their 'allies' soaking up most of the punishment. We should all remember that when dealing with Russians.
Complain about this comment
Two wrongs don't make a right!
Therefore all forms of Terrorism are wrong. Including Islamic Terrorism, the IRA, American Terrorism, Russian Terrorism, and Chinese Terrorism.
The world is full of Countries that use Terror to make other countries fear them. America however is like no othr Democratic country it contantly keep is own Citizens in a Perpetual state of fear, ever since Pearl Harbour. WWII Korea, Vietnam the Cold War, Two Gulf wars Afganistan War on Drugs War on Terror and now its trying its hardest to get involved in a New cold war.
For a country whos Internation policy was for so long based on Isolation there some achievments. I'm sure i've missed some but hey!
Complain about this comment
WhiteEnglishProud @91 wrote:
"... why isn't one of the oldest Civilisations on the planet (Persia modern day Iran)".
Maybe because Iran is no longer a great civilisation but led by a bunch of mad, death-loving theocratic bigots.
Complain about this comment
'led by a bunch of mad, death-loving theocratic bigots.' sure your not thinking about Bush
Complain about this comment
To Peter_Sym (97):
You just didn't get the point. Let me go further. The total value of European infrastructure is between 4 and 6 trillion dollars. Now how huge sum is this? Well European stocks are worth 10 trillion dollars, European bonds 14 trillion and European property 5 trillion. When we speak about infrastructure, the thing is that the sums are just enormous and the scales are just vast. The sums are just so vast because we have invested in our infrastructure for hundreds of years. We have spend at times huge amounts of money to do that: nowadays European countries generally spend 3% of their GDP to infrastructure and in previous times like in the 70s that was 10%.
The point is, that any investment made by the US is just a drop in the bucket and as the sums and scales we are talking about are so vast there is no chance in hell that US would or even could have funded this. If you don't agree, you better start to show examples of mega projects worth at least billions preferably tens of billions of dollars to even make a noticeable impact.
Complain about this comment
Absolute classic post from MAII above
To kick off, we have a plain failure to understand English. "First of all, I didn't trash Europe, Europe trashed itself. I'm merely pointing out the stench and the eyesore" This is trashing.
Then. a classic MAII reference that can be trotted out on any occasion and has no bearing on anything. Indeed it must be one of the few things he dislikes about the continent given how often we hear about it.
"I never would have gotten the full impact of how utterly cruel and brutal a bull fight is without actually seeing one in Madrid with my own eyes."
At least he then tries to answer a question, (rare); apparently the US did rebuild Europe to a standard better than itself out of "a cultural propensity for generousity". No question it was to their own benefit (leaving asside for a moment the questionnable impact of US loans anyway).
Then we have a classic random tangent with lots of 'probably' and no figures/evidence: "it is probably far greater than any other country", "what's left to give to the poor would probably be the lowest per capita"
And then, given what has just gone before, some pure irony: "this is typical European hypocricy, ways of playing with numbers to hide the truth"
And to finish up, a bit of a threat:
"wonder how France would have voted on Iraq in the Security Council before the invasion if it were privately told it would be faced with a trade embargo by the US by getting it wrong"
Golden stuff indeed, or should that be brown smelly stuff?
Complain about this comment
crosseyes;
As you can see, I have to be very careful how far I go in telling the truth about this clearly inferior civilization which has a superiority complex that gives it a self apppointed mission to tell the rest of humanity how to live. If I go too far, the moderators take offence and delete not merely the parts which broke the rules but all of it. Most Americans would be too polite or too ignorant to say any of this but you have to remember, I lived there and saw it first hand. But don't take my word for it. Just look at the next thread. It seems to me that the blog owner is making a comparable point, if not all of it then one example. And on Justin Webb's blog, a few weeks ago he made exactly the same point. I must say however, I haven't been able to verify the degree or severity of pubic drunkenness in Britain these two essays assert. But then again, I don't know many who are in the UK right now. I'll have to do some further investigating.
Complain about this comment
#101. I never claimed that the US funded our entire infastructure. Merely that they funded critical items for our defence.
Complain about this comment
To Peter_Sym (104):
Ok. I thought your original comment was in support of the view that US funded rebuilding Europe and it's infrastructure and defense as the message to where you replied was my comment to MarcusAureliusII on how this view with many other American myths are just totally unfounded.
Now just a small comment.. US may and probably has funded many critical items in many country's defense. However those investments haven't been for altruistic reasons. After the second world war US had considerable military presence in many European countries, but that wasn't for protecting Europe, that was for protection of USA. If Soviet Union had taken over western Europe, it would have meant that the balance between US and Soviet Union would have tipped to Soviet Unions advance: western Europe had and still has the one of the largest industrial concentrations in world. It should also be noted that the current US involvement in Europe is more about having capability to operate globally: just imagine how much American military capabilities would suffer if they couldn't access military airports, hospital etc.. facilities in Europe.
Complain about this comment
Marcy, I have a new policy when reading your posts - skip anything that is pure conjecture (some might call it self opinionated drivel), look for any evidence of you successfully arguing a point, or responding to an issue raised, and then generally, laugh (or cry) as appropriate.
I fear for you, I really do.
Complain about this comment
I'd love it if the Americans pulled everything they have out of Europe. Europe would have to defend itself and could no longer afford lavish spending on welfare programs (which it can't afford now either, with all those outsiders coming in). France and Germany can 'hide' their debts and future payment commitments (in terms of public pensions and welfare) all they want but the commitments are so high now every sane financial can see the huge problem.
Complain about this comment
@WEP (95)
I've studied the history of islam and its agression and violence (since 622 AD)significantly predates any socalled agression by either Israel (since 1948) and USA (sinds 1776). In fact, it was islamic violence and agression against non-muslims in the Middle East that eventually led to the crusades (the crusades may not have been pretty work, but they were a reaction rather than an action).
Islamic violence started right from the beginning with Muhammad in about 622 AD and the first crusade didn't come until 1095 AD. In other words, it took Europe 473 years to respond to the threat of islamic warlords. Islamic warlords genocided India long before Europeans did the same to the Americas. Islamic traders brought slavery to Africa hundreds of years before Europeans decided to do the same thing. Its a history of islam that is frequently whitewashed and denied these days, and never mentioned in history classes the way that what Europeans did is mentioned very specifically.
But it does make me think, perhaps this fella Muhammad was some kind of prophet after all! When he was busy waging wars, culturally cleansing vast areas in Arabia and robbing everyone in sight blind, he already knew that the USA would be established and Israel would be refounded. And he was not happy about that. Now it all makes sense, thanks to your explanation! Thank you for enlightening me.
And yes, you are right. I am very intolerant of the culture that comes with islam, precisely because it is a very intolerant culture. And what a ludicrous suggestion that women are respected within islam. That's like saying the nazis respected women by keeping them at home. To nazis and muslims alike, women are like cattle, inferior beings that have to do as told by the men. I do not tolerate intolerance, and neither should you.
Fact remains, most women here who pose for certain magazines do so out of their own free will. In Iran, even people who don't want to be islamic, have to follow its rules. Now that is oppression.
Complain about this comment
Getting back to the original topic, and the comments that were in line with it
Road traffic? The idea that this incident shows they should have built a road tunnel is a nonsensical idea. Road traffic is more liable to accidents than rail, particularly in tunnels.
Additional bores - a good idea, unfortunately the huge debt that Eurotunnel racked up making the original three tunnels have probably precluded it, at least as long as any company doing the tunnelling is expected to make a profit in their own right, rather than be heavily subsidised to build it (still, the cost would be rather less than Northern Rock has cost the taxpayer)
Transport of volatile chemicals - perhaps transfer to a container ship would minimise the risk to people, but I'm not sure how much additional danger the extra handling would cause.
Complain about this comment
Why a tunnel? They are dangerous and if the fire had been bad, we would have had a calamity. The problem is that commerce and economic interests always rule over safety and common sense. Thus the attitude by authorities that everything is fine. And of course when a disaster finally hits, the ones responsible will either be gone or shift blame. But in a democracy, i have to blame the people for their own greed and lack of civic and moral responsibility.
Complain about this comment
The Tory MEP also suggested on air on the BBC that afternoon that lorries were being allowed to brig anything they wanted into the UK without regulation (continuing the Fear Factor and scarmongering about all things EU) - it would appear now that the UK was sending this 'danger' the other way.
Regulation is perhaps needed, but a 'them and us' approach is never helpful.
Complain about this comment
"Is Europe Cut Off?"
That's the topic of this blog. What an ironic way to turn a phrase. Is Europe cut off...from Britain? I'd bet if you asked anyone on the Continent about the impact of the Chunnel not being available they'd look at it as Britain being cut off from the rest of Europe. The way it is put tells me that the British still have a superiority complex about the rest of Europe and the world. After all, who else ever had an Empire on which the sun never set? But they are hardly alone in their attitude. I'm sure most or all of their European neighbors feel the same way about their own countries. You know the French feel they are best and they will not hesitate for one second to tell you France is paradise on Earth, a veritable Eden. And what self respecting Italian would admit to playing second fiddle to France? I'm sure they feel they are clearly more civilized. The Swiss probably feel they are the smartest. While the Germans have been quiet about it since their last lesson 63 years ago, I have a sneaking suspicion that quietly, secretly they still feel the same. Russians feel superior, they just feel that an unfortunate turn of events and unfair treatment has temporarily robbed them of their rightful place on top of the list. That is why they love Putin, they think he will put it "to rights" as you Brits say. Of course there can be only one "best" country and we all know which one it is :-)
Complain about this comment
Yeah Australia
Complain about this comment
Canada?
Complain about this comment
Surely you don't mean......Urg
you can't be serious
I feel so sick
Complain about this comment
I always new you were an Iranian Agent trying to get us to hate the U.S.A with you other infusiastic Hatred of the rest of the world.
Complain about this comment
What? Have not combustible and flammable materials been banned from being transported through the Chunnel since the earlier fire or even before it was first opened?
Obviously, such items could/should be transported by ferry where the risk of fire is more easily contained and extinguished.
We still do not know the extent of damage and duration of repairs now necessitated by this event. Do we?
Who should now be held accountable?
Complain about this comment
threnodio wrote:"Our American friends would do well to remember that, while this is a fairly recent phenomenon to them, this side of the pond, we have lived with terrorism for other reasons for several decades. We coped then and we will cope now. I, for one, do not want to hand over hard won democratic freedoms to our political masters on the pretext of national security. There are risks as well as advantages to living in a free society. Get used to it."
I must have missed the part where the UK was attacked in one day and had almost 3000 killed and tens of billions of dollars in damage both immediately and long term. To compare the IRA with the fanatics we are dealing with now is a laughable. These people would nuke your cities if they had the chance! Open your eyes, but first get your head out of the ground!
Complain about this comment
Yes that is right 118, terrorism did not exist until you had it. Before that they were 'freedom fighters' whose guns you paid for and your government twisted arms to get them out of prison.
You get YOUR head out of the ground. The WTC was a significant event in history but far from the most dramatic and just so you know, the IRA killed more people than that.
Your loss was our gain. You woke up and realised what it was all about and there were no more Noraid tins in Boston bars. We do know more about it because we have lived it for a long time whereas you tragically got caught out
Complain about this comment
newScrollock
You are of course correct. The Europeans are utterly clueless. One of their many shortcomings is that they are slaves to dogma. They spend their lives inventing or trying to figure out which dogma, which doctrine is best and then follow every letter of every law and clause in it slavishly no matter what. This inevitably leads them to disaster as they are not practical people, will not swerve from a course no matter what consequences it brings with it, and when they finally concede that they have been wrong, only abandon one dogma for another to make the same mistakes over and over again. None of this bothers me except when they tell us how we should run our own country. The US government has assumed dictatorial powers in some regards in the past suspending parts of the Constitution for national security reasons in a national emergency. This is such a time when it is necessary as we are in a war for our survival even if it isn't apparent every day to all of us. They also meddle in our affairs. Sometimes I wish they would just shut up but then I remember that we never pay any attention to their prattle anyway. Where we really screw up such as in our sub prime lending fiasco, they didn't have a clue either, never saw it coming any more than we did. The fact that they love Obama and want him for our next President tells me on the face of it that if for no other reason, McCain is the better choice by far. I think on the strength of that alone, I'd vote for McCain.
Complain about this comment
All you people who are hell bent on saving the world with your pseudo intellectual rant.
Do you think that resorting to insults and name calling gives credence to your diatribe? I don't, it just weakens your argument and strengthens my resolve. Rather than convince me, you harden my heart. I believe that that was your intention all along.
And what proof do you have of what is going on other than what you read in the newspapers? Newspapers try to give facts, they don't always give reasons or other important information. Reporters are subject to the same subjective thinking that we all are. They fill in the blanks with their own spin-fears, hates, compassion, what ever. If you don't believe this, read news articles from different countries on the same subject. On important issues, there will be differences, sometimes big differences. It's a human condition.
It says a lot about us when we can take a simple story about the channel tunnel and turn it into world war 3.
And it says a lot about us that many of you will blow this off as just another rant
I'm out of here.
Complain about this comment
loch-me-up-raving
I get a lot of my news from BBC. Whose reporters do you get yours from? Al Jazeera?
Complain about this comment
Marcus, is the only time that you stop contradicting yourself to tell us stories about The Age of Empire?
Complain about this comment
crosseyes
"America Age of Empire" was an extremely valuable tool. It gives me great insight into the workings of the European mind. It deals with a subject I know well as seen through the prism of the European mindset. That gives me an understanding of how that prism works, how it filters everything else.
Think if these blogs as a laboratory for me. I make a statement and provoke people. Then I see how they react. See where their hot bottons are and what happens when I push one. And I must say there are a lot of them. Europeans seem very ready to criticize the rest of the world but cannot endure any themselves, especially from an American. And the closer I get to the truth with them, the madder they get. They can dish it out but they sure can't take it.
Each time I say something critical about Europe, I can practically count on at least one European to react. They feel compelled to defend their civilization as though I was some sort of invader attacking the ramparts of their intellectual castle, the psychological fortress they have invented for themselves. Even when they migrate to the US and have lived in it for a very long time, they feel compelled to defend Europe.
What is so much fun about it is that it is so easy if you have read even a smattering of European history. Europe is probably more vulnerable to justifiable criticism than any other place in the world. What's more, the sheer hypocricy of it and the underlying reality of it makes it so irresistable to me.
Watching the reactions to the current American Presidential election campaign on Justin Webb's blog gives me similar insight. That was a lot of fun too until it got too overcrowded. The number of postings on each thread has become rediculous. Too many Americans on it too. Their opinions don't interest me, I can get that on CNN, MSNBC, FOX, and C-SPAN. Seeing how anxious Europeans are that Obama wins is most amusing. If he does, I wonder how long it will take them to realize that he is no more European than McCain is, no more sympathetic to their point of view. After all, he sees the world through the same American prism the rest of Americans do. His angle is just slightly different but not by much in any matters of concern to Europeans. If anything, he may prove to be from their point of view even worse.
Complain about this comment
Marcus, a simple "yes" would have sufficed.
Never mind, your response demonstrates the usual hypocrisy and arrogance, so I guess it serves some purpose.
Complain about this comment
Crosseyes, that's what I love about you Brits. In a mere hundred years, you lose an empire on which the sun never sets, you lose three world wars, you give up your sovereignty to a foreign European Union you have no control over, you allow your nation to be invaded and occupied by countless people from everywhere who do not assimilate your culture and many of whom would probably like to turn Britain into an Islamic Republic and you still think you are smarter than everyone else. I'll be sure to carve it into Britain's tombstone after I read its eulogy. RIP Britain.
Complain about this comment
Marcus, a simple "yes" would once again have sufficed.
At what point did you realise you were right about everything and stop listening to anyone else. 5 years old, 25 years old, or 105 years old?
It must be a very dull life you lead
Complain about this comment
crosseyes, it dawned on me slowly as I grew up that Europe isn't what it pretends to be and what many Americans were intellectually intimidated into thinking it was. Then when I lived there, I saw with my own eyes how truly dumb it is. I for one will not miss it when it is gone. It's nothing more than a place where lazy pompous self absorbed people, man of them jealous and vindictive live among the museum like ruins of a civilization that thrived and went into decline centuries ago. It has the appearance of an endless relic of an ancient past not only physically but mentally and socially. BTW, I don't find it quaint and I am satisfied to look at these ruins on a Television screen and a computer screen now, I don't feel any need or reason to see them first hand anymore. That strikes me as the dumbest waste of time, effort, and money I could imagine. I've visited my last village overlooking the Mediteranean, my last castle, my last statue, my last European art museum. Even the way the Prado displayed its paintings so that you couldn't stand far back enough to see them was dumb.
Complain about this comment
Marcus, a simple "I prefer to trot out the same old nonsense" would have sufficed. Or you could have answered a question for a change.
Complain about this comment
Wow, interesting debates go on in here...
Its been neat to read your back and forth...But I had to comment after reading
[quote]
I don't care what you accept or don't accept. Your opinion doesn't count. What matters is whether or not the American government's measures in preventing future attacks on Americans are effective or not. If they aren't, there will be far worse, far stronger measures put in their place. And they will be escalated until they do work, escalated without limit. These could conceiveably include imposition of marshall law throughout the United States, the kinds of internment camps we had for Japanese in WWII and pre-emptive nuclear strikes against many natons. The protection of the American nation and the American population takes precedence over protection of the Constitution and democracy. That is because without a nation, there is no future possibility of a return to democracy one day.[/quote]
That has got to be one of the most un-American statements I have ever read...And as a proud American would prefer the death of our country before we fell to such a horrible fate as he describes.
Our country was unique because of the principles upon which we were founded. And giving up those principles in the name of preservation would make us no different then those we sought to seperate ourselves from, or from those who we fight today. And I am ashamed to hear a fellow citizen say such junk.
Complain about this comment
leifmeister, don't worry too much he's in a minority of one, and some people believe a purely ficticious character invented bythe BBC to provoke reaction.
Personally, I think the BBC would do a better job and come up with a wider, more interesting (occasionally correct) range of anecdotes on which to draw.
Complain about this comment
View these comments in RSS