ucodegen, if your research is correct, maybe this is a gotcha moment for you. You can inform FOX that the Washington Post lied and you’ll be famous. You can then go on the talk circuit making speeches to conservatives.
Don’t want to inflame the radicals. I consider it a possible typo until otherwise proven. Also take a look at what they consider the 110th Congress on McCains bio page under roles in congress.. “· 110th Congress: Senator, Arizona, Republican. Jan. 4, 2007, to Jan. 3, 2011.” Huh? http://projects.washingtonpost.com/congress/members/m000303/
Though I may inform the Washington post to double check their numbers and correct the page.. make it ‘pages’ since that last one is repeated several times for different senators.
Correct term is had. Most of it is gone/used up. It was located in the disputed territories between France and Germany, which I believe France now possesses. From what I remember, it was Anthracite/High Bituminous and not Lignite. The new coal reserves that you are pointing to, brown coal, is not as desirable except for possibly gassification. It also has less than half the energy content than ‘black’ coal and the water content makes extracting all of that energy difficult. If you notice, most of these exploratory areas are located in the ‘east’ Germany area that was finally returned to Germany from Russian control.
The fact that Germany is a signer of the Kyoto Protocol, brings question as to how effectively they may be able to exploit these reserves. (And also noted by the article you also referenced.)
Maybe it’s just me, but if the Europeans don’t want us to preemptively defend them from Iraq, we shouldn’t do it then bitch that they don’t appreciate it.
As I said before, and why I mentioned that it would be interesting to see what happened if we didn’t. I’m also not ‘bitching’ that they don’t appreciate it. Other than some lack of economic stability, it might have been worth not getting involved. Again, that is one of the ‘what-if’s..
France has a pretty good military as well, perhaps even as good as the Brits.
They are not even close to the Brits. I have seen both practice at Red Flag @ Nellis. There is a world of difference in attitude they bring. The Brits are all business and the French use it as a dating tool when off base. The condition that they keep the jets in is completely different. I have seen French Mirage(s) with indications of damage from after-burner blowouts used on exercises, with the replacement panels still not painted. I also saw yellow segments in the afterburner flames indicating poor fuel regulation to the afterburner (which can also cause blowouts) on the French Mirages when they throttled up on the line for takeoff.
As far at NATO is concerned, we contribute the most (25-30% as I recall) but not the bulk of the defense organization’s budget and troops.
Was recently 25%, now 22%.
US = 22%, Japan=16.624%, Germany=8.577%, UK=6.642%, France=6.301%, Italy=5.079%, Canada=2.977%, Spain=2.968%, China=2.667%, Mexico=2.257%, all others=23.908%
This is only contribs to the budget and does not include peacekeeping force.
