Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: michael97123 who wrote (230245)	5/8/2007 6:24:20 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

You must be younger than I am. Doubt it, unfortunately. If Charlie was so pro-Western and anti-communist, why did he pull France out of NATO? (Essentially. It retained its political membership, while withdrawing from all military obligations.) The only reason I can see is he figured the USSR had to go through Germany first to get to France and this triggered the mutual defense (military) part of the NATO treaty, that brought the US in, and France gets a free ride. Now other countries, such as Belgium and the Netherlands also had this out AND DID NOT TAKE IT! They kept their agreements. De Gaulle also got France out of its Algerian quagmire. Algeria is really better off for it, isn't it? No, he wasn't actually a communist. But he should have been honest and joined. Most democracies are multi-party with a PM. Are they failures as democracies? Canada? Australia? Britain? ........ The Presidential form of democracy is an exception. And since you wish to believe we are in one, a Presidential form of government brought you there and a good argument can be made that a parliamentary form would have stopped the march to it. If nothing else, removal of the head of government is much less complex in a parliamentary government.