 | | Re: Value of NATO? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | (...) Very few countries could seriously threaten the EU - of those that could, very few would. I'd rather my tax was spent on education. The EU and USA are aligned pretty well, so I see not need to compete with them in terms of military spending… (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Value of NATO? —Pedro Silva
|
| | | | (...) Precisely. For the time being, there is no need for an European Army - there are no threats! Although I argue there is a need to start testing its future appearance, out of precaution alone; after all, the best way to avoid wars is still not (...) (21 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Value of NATO? —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) On all 4s - he's bush's poodle. Scott A (21 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Value of NATO? —Pedro Silva
|
| | | | (...) So you've seen George Michael's clip as well, eh? ;-) Pedro (21 years ago, 30-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Poodles & Chimps [Re: Value of NATO?] —Scott Arthur
|
| | | | (...) Indeed. In the UK, Blair is often satirised as a poodle, whilst "his master" is a chimp. More often he's just a diminutive form of bush: (URL) kind of a shame, as Blair is often argued to be one of the smartest leaders there is - but I suppose (...) (21 years ago, 31-Jan-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| | | | |
