On Strauss-Khan and (imbecilic) American foreign policy

So the Americans have now chosen to do some foreign policy by official domestic prosecution of a French guy who's possibly had sex. Apparently, a maid is rather dismayed over his pick-up protocol. If you ship over Bush over to den Haag, we'll return the favor.

Anyway, it's not every day state prosecutors and local judges are allowed to interfere in foreign politics, but entrusting the French to prosecute DSK themselves is obviously out of the question. Also, the frogs will definately let him hide out from the long arm of American law, therefore it's best if he is "allowed" to stay in the comfortable surroundings of an American jail cell.

Hillary must be surely be extatic over the whole ordeal, it's not like the current administration has attempted to start back up cooperating. What do Europeans know about foreign policy anyway? Much better the US go at it alone - the Bush years showed the success of that particular strategy amongst their allies.

Luckily, the French have a bit of a conundrum currently going on in Libya. After their White Flag factory burned to the ground, they are in dire threat of becoming bogged down there, and sorting out Arab countries is historically at the purvey of the Americans. So no issue there.

Also, he is the Managing Director of the IMF. A job position which only credential required is not being American. That makes him fair game. The unfortunate side effect is that the job of head honcho of the IMF looks really tempting to other communist regimes than just the European ones. Such as China. The problem with perceived vs. actual communist states is that the latter generally don't quite subsribe to the newest economic theories. They think the best one was jotted down a century and a half ago by a philosopher. Investment managers who prefer a book to all the books can surely do no harm if given a few trillion dollars to play with.

DSKs plan was, of course, to step down soon and run for the French presidency. Sarkozy isn't particularly enthused about this, and Obama probably prefers Sarkozy anyway. Perhaps a better solution would indeed be to ship him back to Paris to be dealt with by Sarkozy, and give the glorified maid an extended stay at a very nice hotel overlooking the Eiffel tower while preparing for her trial testimony. It doesn't look as nice as the French statue currently planted in New York harbor, but she's probably already seen that one.

In conclusion, thank you America for your insights into foreign policy. As a European, it's nice to get yet another lesson of how your system of justice is so clearly better than ours - at least by your own standards. And in a couple of years, I hope you guys don't mind if we let Obama stand in front of our courts to answer for his potential crimes. Preferably a few months before November, as not to interfere in your domestic policies.

 

Cheers! :)

Views: 39

Comment by Heather Spoonheim on May 17, 2011 at 9:51am
Thanks for pointing this out - I missed it completely.  It is rather bizarre how dramatic U.S. law enforcement has gotten over this thing.  Anyway, here is a link to the story for anyone else who has missed it: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-13402845
Comment by Robert Karp on May 17, 2011 at 10:24am
Arcus the US has a long history of double speak especially when it comes to issues of the ICC and prosecuting people for crimes that they (the US) deems to be worth prosecution. Obama yes, but Bush, Clinton, Bush, Regan etc...should've all been held accountable for "crimes against humanity".  But as you pointed out, our foreign policy has always been do what I say, not what I do.
Comment by Arcus on May 17, 2011 at 10:37am

@Heather: Once you Canadian douchbags stop attempting to take over the, by any objective standard, Norwegian island (currently under Danish admin due to the whole Greenland thing) between your already grossly oversized country, we can start debating on how US Americans are ruining the world by their extraterritorial judicial system. ;)

@Robert: You guys did a pretty decent job at Nünberg. Not quite sure if the Dutch should be supreme court of the world either, they leave little room open for pragmatism in foreign policy, and lately they've failed as badly as the Belgains at making even a half decent government. The British are better suited in my opinion, they don't mind too much if a few of rotten eggs gets are allowed to be mistreated. I don't think they minded too much pulling a few real IRA nails in finding the ticking time bomb on the bus yesterday, and I'm quite certain a few real IRA nails were pulled out (at least metaphorically).

Comment by Arcus on May 17, 2011 at 10:38am

grossly oversized country *and Greenland.

One of these days I'll learn to finish my sentences. :)

Comment by Heather Spoonheim on May 17, 2011 at 11:22am
I have an opinion on that island (name escapes me right now) - let's have a freakin' war!  It's not anything worth dieing over though, so I'm thinking we put on American football helmets and use those big poles with the padding on each end to knock the hell out of each other - maybe 100 persons from each country laying claim.  Whichever team has a conscious soldier left standing gets the damn thing.  Are you in?
Comment by Arcus on May 17, 2011 at 11:49am

Counterproposal: One Canadian have to finish the bottle of Gammel Dansk left there, and one Dane finishes the bottle of Canadian "whisky" you guys left there. In case of of a draw, bring more supplies. Max casualties is one person. Compared to most other solutions, it's an acceptable loss. ;)

And after that, we'll get back to you on Vinland (Newfoundland) which you are currently unlawfully occupying.

Comment by Heather Spoonheim on May 17, 2011 at 12:00pm

I'll take up the drinking challenge gladly - takes about 50 ounces of 40% alcohol by volume spirits for me to lose consciousness so you may have to search long and hard for someone to beat me there.  I lay claim to Newfoundland in three ways: my maternal ancestors were there 9,000 years ago, long before any whites; my paternal ancestors sailed there over 1000 years ago, long before Columbus et al; finally, the European descendants who eventually came to occupy the place elected a Premier to their British Colony that signed them into Canadian Confederation.

 

Now, what are your claims?

Comment by Arcus on May 17, 2011 at 12:27pm

Well, 50 l oz, or ~1.5 liters in the civilized world, is generally what's referred to as a "decent pre-party" among Vikings. The party itself consits of rape, murder, pillage, and looting. Generally in that order, depending on the pre-party being decent or not, and the abundance of nuns and other Christians on Newfoundland.

As for the territory, it's like women. You have to plant your flag before having any real claim to the territory. Just because I've had a few female roomates, and they happened to have moved in before me, they are not mine. And likewise, just because a girl I date happens to live with others, it doesn't give them any rightful claim.

Leif planted a flag, your guys just happned to stay there at the time. It's clearly ours.

And just because were kinda over the actual fighting stuff when it comes to conflict, we'll win hearts and minds by offering an influx of liberal, atheist, tall, blond, and blue eyed gals and guys (not carrying guns). The cherry would be a fully funded pension system and a seat on the Peace Prize committee. 

We'll even add a maple leaf to the top left corner of our flag, because we're just that nice. ;)

Comment by Heather Spoonheim on May 17, 2011 at 12:34pm
I'm a direct descendant of Leif, as well as a descendant of the people who were there before he showed up, who were themselves the flag of the land that claimed them - not the other way around.
Comment by Arcus on May 17, 2011 at 12:46pm

Then you can have the Ministry of Native Relations.

We'll even toss in the blueprints for ocean crossing ships, basic navigation, and flag making lessons. All we want in return is a solution to our latitudal challenge which doesn't involve claiming more icy territory to the south just to have it taken away at the earliest convenience by some bigger power.

For the time being, we'll let the Americans think they control Queen Maud's land and let them sail King Harald VII sea without being shot at by our gunboats. Wineland is an easier challenge for the time bein.

Comment

You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2018   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service