Is it a case of: who is happy to play me for a schmuck, take what I'm schmuck enough to give them, and just not care if I get upset?

As I've understood things so far, our dangers are from within (e.g. growing alienated "under" classes; e.g. rich elites taking too much and leaving too many without necessities--they certainly), and also from without: we are "rich"; and as America implodes or draws back, sorts out its problems, Europe will be more comfortable, maybe--I don't know, but while we fund the "big power" battles, however we fund them, we'll get targeted as "supporters of big power battles"....

So....do we have to support one them?  Should it be called "Europe", knowing what we do about the lack of basic morals involved at the high end of finance (I think the exceptions, being so exceptional...do they prove the rule?)...heh...

I would like to see a common european defence policy, but look at our "leaders"--I have to suffer Gordon Brown!  I'm watching America get its act together on renewables, and in five years there will be those countries at the forefront of the green revolution, and a brit politician will announce that, "The government has come to an agreement with Al-Knussen-Pen-Hi-Prom.  They will set up factories here.  Of course, we've said they won't have to pay any taxes."

The enemy!  Who or what is it or are they?  Ho heh.....<cough>....

Er....

hmmmmm....

(I'm listening to that piece below)

Jean Sibelius - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Like many of his contemporaries, Sibelius was initially enamored with the music of Wagner. A performance of Parsifal at the Bayreuth Festival had a strong effect on him, inspiring him to write to his wife shortly thereafter, "Nothing in the world has made such an impression on me, it moves the very strings of my heart." He studied the scores of Wagner's operas Tannhäuser, Lohengrin, and Die Walküre intently. With this music in mind, Sibelius began work on an opera of his own, entitled Veneen luominen (The Building of the Boat).

However, his appreciation for Wagner waned and Sibelius ultimately rejected Wagner's Leitmotif compositional technique, considering it to be too deliberate and calculated. Departing from opera, he later used the musical material from the incomplete Veneen luominen in his Lemminkäinen Suite (1893).

More lasting influences included Ferruccio Busoni, Anton Bruckner and Tchaikovsky. Hints of Tchaikovsky's music are particularly evident in works such as Sibelius' First Symphony (1899) and his Violin Concerto (1905). Similarities to Bruckner are most strongly felt in the 'unmixed' timbral palette and sombre brass chorales of Sibelius' orchestration, as well as in the latter composer's fondness for pedal points and in the underlying slow pace of his music.

Sibelius progressively stripped away formal markers of sonata form in his work and, instead of contrasting multiple themes, he focused on the idea of continuously evolving cells and fragments culminating in a grand statement. His later works are remarkable for their sense of unbroken development, progressing by means of thematic permutations and derivations. The completeness and organic feel of this synthesis has prompted some to suggest that Sibelius began his works with their finished statement and worked backwards, although analyses showing these predominantly three- and four-note cells and melodic fragments as they are developed and expanded into the larger "themes" effectively prove the opposite.^[1]

Hope you enjoy!

Don't fight forces, use them R. Buckminster Fuller.

Rescue us from whom? The problem is precisely that the European security apparatus is entirely predicated around depending on the US and is subordinate to US interests, not European ones.

The trans-atlantic link is responsible for that and the US has actively campaigned to keep it that way.

Remember how well we handled the Balkan conflicts until the Americans bailed us out?

Migeru:

As for Bosnia, Europe's failure there is responsible for the decision to create a European Common Foreign and Security Policy, which did not exist before. So, again, you can't fault Europe for not using a tool that did not exist before 1995.

Regarding Kosovo, UpstateNY has provided interesting insights into the less-than-helpful diplomacy conducted by the US. I shall dig up the links.

When you say

Well, and the Brits who do what the Americans tell them too.

And all the frontline states and former communist occupied states who desperately try to make the Americans happy so they'll be protected from Russia.

Anyone starting to see the problem with European security policy and institutions, and why the transtalantic link is vital?

I think the problem is the transatlantic link. When France, Belgium and Germany wanted to get some European Defence structure in place the UK insisted it not be left out, and subsequently torpedoes it because it was redundant with NATO. As for the new EU member states, they seem to want to stick it in the eye to Russia out of spite and coddling up to the US allows them to do that.

We have met the enemy, and he is us — Pogo