War in Ukraine

Having just read this article, I had to post it. What would have happened?   

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2576311/Dinesh-DSouza-film-What-America-look-like-George-Washington-killed-war-lost-Statue-Liberty-Mount-Rushmore-disappear-new-movie-embattled-conservative-filmmaker.html

It's a fascinating idea, isn't it? IMO, it would have made NO difference to technology, etc....that's human imagination, not politics

If America had stayed British, there would have been no Civil War, not least because the Empire had abolished slavery decades previously.

Politically, it might have been beneficial, because whoever the PM of America was, they would have had to learn proper diplomacy and scheming in the European manner. Scheming and diplomacy would have been essential, indeed, what with the middle of the continent being French, and the west Spanish.

Oh, and the cold bit being Russian.  

Interesting idea; maybe that is what happened in one of the alternate universes Out There.

In other words, the earlier start of a bigger EU?       

Or....would the sun still be shining on the British Empire?

Probably not, as all empires fall....maybe the east coast of the US would now be part of Canada, with Ottowa as the centre of government? It's a fascinating idea.

Oh my, it is an interesting thought.

We wouldn't be confused as to how to spell words or pronounce tomato.      

Here's a thing.

What would happen if Sarah Palin decided she wanted to live in a country where the president was a patriot, the flag was respected, veterans were honoured, people were free to make as much money as possible, and the christian church was protected?

And announced Alaska should revert to Russia?

As of today's thoughts? She would be wise to move somewhere else.   

However, that is the America I knew and loved and has eroded too quickly.

I find it desperately sad, Lily, as an onlooker. I just don't recognise the current US as the same nation that saved Europe under the Marshall plan, or that was so determined to build modern democracies out of the rubble.

He had his faults, but JFK inspired people - men landed on the moon because of him. Reagan, God bless him, and Clinton, did some totally daft things, but no-one ever doubted that they were the PRESIDENT.

Does Obama have the slightest idea what message is his conduct is sending out? Does he think the wider world respects the US more for those damnable drone strikes - what is it, fifty civilians are killed for every one alleged terrorists?

But even that atrocity he might just about get away with if he showed any sign of acting like a grown up.

Compare his conduct with Roosevelt's struggling to walk into Congress after Pearl Harbour - and doing it.


I try to read as many news stories from as many different sources as I can, and I can see the despair felt by so many US citizens as the nation staggers from one mess to the next. Now, Brits are used to staggering through  messes, but here there is a limit to how many messes any one politician can cause, not least because we have more than two political parties.

And supreme power isn't in the hands of one politician.


I hope your next president puts the USA first, even if it means a period of isolationism while the country is sorted out. American citizens deserve no less.

There's another factor in this, though - the dis-united kingdom has also got a weak fool installed in Westminster. It's a very bad combination, as Cameron and Obama feed each other, then wonder why the rest of the world laughs at them.

Arrogant fools?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2576490/Are-Blackwater-active-Ukraine-Videos-spark-talk-U-S-mercenary-outfit-deployed-Donetsk.html

Interesting.........

Wouldn't surprise me in the least, and it wouldn't be the first time.

Please like me! Cameron pays out for Facebook fans and manages to double his social media following in a month
Tory Party chiefs have spent thousands on advertisements on Facebook to encourage users to 'like' the Prime Minister's page
Just over a month ago, he was almost 20,000 'likes' behind Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg's 80,000 - but now he has 127,000
Facebook would not reveal details of the advertising deal, but marketing experts say the campaign would have cost about £7,500 of party funds


http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2576414/Please-like-Cameron-pays-Facebook-fans-manages-double-social-media-following-month.html

Words fail me sometimes.

Could you imagine Churchill doing that?

I should think Churchill is one of the many world leaders turning in his grave right now. I don't actually have the words for what I think about a British PM paying for 'likes' on FB, like some teenage girly. And getting caught doing it.

Is that how low some politicians have sunk? The PM amongst them?

I suppose it gives them the false feeling that they are wonderful? Ditto looking constantly at the polls.........

No wonder he is such a weak leader.

No, I don't believe it. He can't have done. Can he?

Can you look at this:



and doubt it, Sabot?

Or this:




at Mandela's memorial service? I have bottomless contempt for the pair of them.

But that makes him a cretin if he has to buy popularity. Oh, and corrupt. Will he standing at The Polls and handing out tenners to the poor who vote for him?

Crimea goes to the polls today to decide its future:

http://news.sky.com/story/1226660/crimea-referendum-strains-east-west-relations

It's impossible to find an unbiased report on events there. The solution might be to watch Fox, then Russia Today, and finally Al Jazeerah:

http://www.aljazeera.com/news/europe/2014/03/crimeans-breakaway-referendum-201431632536796814.html

which is semi-reasonable.

If the US won't recognise the vote, I take it Obama will be apologising to HM for that very rude and totally illegal Declaration of Independence without a poll?

Russia Today is financed by the Russian State, Fox is greatly biased, best stick to Al Jazeera, they are indeed by far the most reasonable site. IMO that is. LL

Yes, AJ does seem to be longest on fact and shortest on hot air, LL. I read the two extremes, because they both leave out news that doesn't fit their own agendas.  

I may sound biased, but I wouldn't touch Russia Today if it was the only rag to read, nor the extremist Fox. LL

It has some fascinating documentaries, LL, well away from politics. And its coverage of the YES referendum has been good. I gave up on Sky a week or so ago as all they seemed to be interested in was the Pistorious trial. Which is tragic and squalid, but not really of any great importance.

I recommend Fox if you want to see Ollie North's unique interpretations of world events.  

I stopped watching Fox after some real nasty diatribe by Bill O'Reilly was aired. He's a No 1 racist sh*t IMO. LL