Despite denunciations from the mayor of London and Houses of Parliament, and every English activist group imaginable, Donald and Melania Trump have arrived in the United Kingdom for a two-day working visit.
It's almost as though visiting heads of state take precedence over the petty virtue signaling so ubiquitous among politicians as of late.
Trump will be meet with Prime Minister Theresa May and have tea with Her Majesty before heading off to his golf course in Scotland. As with anywhere an American president goes, the security bill will be rather obscene. Though it's only when Trump is the protectee that lawmakers take issue with the security state. One Labour representative is concerned that police will not have enough time to rest between engagements.
"It is simply dangerous to ask our officers to do more and more without giving them the time to recuperate," Louise Haigh told the House of Commons.
That said, the frustration is understandable. After all, the Secret Service has a track record of making demands as absurd as getting new airstrike-resistant windows installed at Buckingham Palace (which Her Majesty rightfully rebuffed.)
Nevertheless, the relationship between the United Kingdom and the United States is an important one. Less than one week after 9/11, Mark wrote about this dynamic in an essay that appeared in The Face of the Tiger, entitled "Battle Hymns of the Non-Republics."
The foreign leader who said it best last week was the Queen, though she didn't really say a word. I have met Her Majesty from time to time (I am one of her Canadian subjects), and to put it at its mildest, for those with a taste for American vernacular politics, she can be a little stiff: the Queen stands on ceremony and she has a lot of ceremony to stand on. But on Thursday, for the Changing of the Guard at Buckingham Palace, she ordered the Coldstream Guards to play "The Star-Spangled Banner" – the first time a foreign anthem had been played at the ceremony.
The following day something even more unprecedented happened: at Britain's memorial service for the war dead of last Tuesday, the first chords of "The Star-Spangled Banner" rumbled up from the great organ at St Paul's Cathedral, and the Queen did something she's never done before – she sang a foreign national anthem, all the words. She doesn't sing her own obviously ("God Save Me"), but she's never sung "La Marseillaise" or anything else, either; her lips never move.
And at that same service she also sang "The Battle Hymn Of The Republic", for the second time in her life – the first was at the funeral of her first Prime Minister, Winston Churchill. On Friday, she fought back tears. When she ascended the throne, Harry Truman was in the White House. The first President she got to know was Eisenhower, back in the war, when he would come to the Palace to brief her father. She is the head of state of most of the rest of the English-speaking world – Queen of Britain, Canada, Australia, New Zealand, the Bahamas, Belize, Papua New Guinea, Tuvalu, etc. But she understands something that few other leaders of the west seem to - that today the ultimate guarantor of the peace and liberty of her realms is the United States. If America falls, or is diminished, or retreats in on itself, there is no "free world". That's the meaning of the Queen's "Ich bin ein Amerikaaner" moment.
Don't ask me who else you can count on. The Nato declaration was impressive, but, even as the press release was coming off the photocopier, a big chunk of America's 18 allies were backsliding. Norway, Germany and Italy said they had no intention of contributing planes, ships or men. Even as purely political support, the first ever invocation of Article Five was written in disappearing ink. The Italian Foreign Minister – speaking for Europe's most conservative government – said "the term 'war' is inappropriate". "We are not at war," said Belgian Foreign Minister Louis Michel, his nation's signature on that Nato document notwithstanding. Belgium holds the current Presidency of the EU and was last seen apologizing for slavery, colonialism, etc at Durban's recent UN Conference Against Whitey, Hymie And Capitalism.
The Royal Air Force will be alongside the USAF. The Aussies will send something. The Canadians will manage a token rustbucket like HMCS Toronto, the ship we dispatched the last time things started heating up in the Gulf. And New Zealand's recalcitrant Prime Minister may yet be forced by popular opinion into showing a bit more muscle. If these are the only active participants, so be it: in a war about "values", responsible government, the rule of law and individual liberty are essentially concepts of the English-speaking world that the rest of the west has only belatedly caught up to. Just a quarter-century ago, let's not forget, most of southern Europe – Portugal, Spain, Greece – was run by dictators. These people are used to making their accommodations with history.
Many consequences will flow from September 11th. The reactions of Continental governments confirm the worthlessness of Cold War alliances. Collective security, far from binding the western world, has corrupted it: the "free world" is mostly just a free ride. America's "moderate" Arab "allies" will find their relationship with Washington shift, too. The FBI list of those involved in the four hijackings makes instructive reading: no Afghans, no Iraqis, no Iranians, but many Saudis and Egyptians. What's the point of having "moderate" "allies" among the region's dictators if it only intensifies their subjects' hatred of America? And what's so "moderate" about these countries anyway? On the news networks, the standard incantation is that Pakistan is "one of only three countries that recognizes the Taliban regime". No one mentions that the other two are Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. With "friends" like these...
The worst time in the last half-century was the period when the west did everything The Guardianwanted - the years after the withdrawal from Vietnam, the years of "détente", the years when dolts like Pierre Trudeau allowed Cuban military planes to refuel in Canada en route to Moscow and military adventures in Africa, when Jimmy Carter dispatched a half-hearted rescue mission to Iran that resulted in the corpses of US soldiers being gleefully poked and prodded by the Ayatollahs on Teheran TV. The more "restrained" and "understanding" the west was, the more the Soviet Union increased its power, prestige and territory, from Ethiopia to Grenada. That period ended when the British, to everyone's surprise, retook the Falklands. They had behind-the-scenes intelligence support from the US, but otherwise they did it alone. That's as it should be. When America's attacked, it doesn't need to ask permission from Italy to strike back.
That's why I thank the Queen, a non-American but, unlike so many of America's moral relativists, not one who's uncomfortable with the emblems of the great Republic that overthrew her forebear. And so at St Paul's – symbol of British resistance during the Blitz – she sang the words written by Francis Scott Key on the last occasion the Eastern Seaboard came under sustained bombardment – by the ships of the Royal Navy.
If you're a Mark Steyn Club member please feel free to weigh in with your thoughts in the comment section below. If you're not a member, we invite you to join here. And, if you're thinking of joining us for our cruise from Montreal to Boston this fall, now's the best time to reserve your cabin.
Comment on this item (members only)
Submission of reader comments is restricted to Mark Steyn Club members only. If you are not yet a member, please click here to join. If you are already a member, please log in here:
Member Login
50 Member Comments
I want to add to my message (ref. AB43 July15, 2018 10:14) that I am a Canadian that admires President Trump and very concerned that the conspiracy to remove him from office will get huge traction by his one on one meeting with Vladimir Putin.. I hope that President Trump and his advisers realize that In the current extremely poisonous atmosphere with the Democrats and their compliant media pulling out all the stops and inhibitions with an effort to derail President Trump agenda and do whatever they can to remove him from office Having this one on one meeting with Putin as scheduled might be suicidal to his Presidency and adversely effect the future of the world .
I do grasp your concerns, but why should Trump behave in such a way to cater to these corrupt and lousy losers on the Left who just want our duly-elected president gone and to belly-flop at every turn. Mark calls it giving the hecklers the vote, I think.
It's hard to make sense and keep track out of what the whack-jobs in the Democratic Party and Main Stream Media are up to on any given day. I can't, so that's why I listen to people like Mark Steyn, Rush Limbaugh, Conrad Black, Andy McCarthy, Kimberly Strossel and several other reliable conservative voices to make sense out of the mess the Democrats have made of things for this country. It helps one cut through the crap and frees one up to enjoy life the way we're supposed to. Another thing one can do is look at what Trump promised the Americans who voted for him and watch how consistently he comes through with fulfilling his promises and speaks in his rallies and tweets with bullseye truths about what he observes is the crooked and lying media. His timing is usually impeccable.
People are seeing this and they're laughing at how transparent and stupid the hate-Trump people in powerful positions in the media and government now appear. You pointed it out already in your comments. The orchestration is ongoing and relentless to tear Trump down. The people wanted him to be president and saw him as our only hope to upset the Leftist-Socialist Machine that got comfortable running the government and tirelessly tearing up the fabric of what great resources undergirds our economy: hardworking and freedom loving Americans. The last thing we want to see Trump do now is side-step the going when it gets tough. I just don't see Trump getting easily flustered and allowing any of those who want America to lose to knock him off his course to MAGA. Who I'm worried about now, are some of the key players in his administration that don't seem to be in any hurry to shutting down the Mueller investigation or facilitating the flow of documents to the Congressional folks trying to get info from the DOJ which they need to prosecute the criminals in our agencies behind the phony collusion charge and real coup to undercut the one thing Americans have to be a self-determining people: our elections.
AB, have to say, you called it right after all. I didn't see this negative reaction to Tump's meeting with Putin coming from conservatives at all, but there it is. Suddenly we're not interested in keeping the lines of communication open with our enemy. It's an unfathomable puzzle to me what's going on. Now, all I'm reading this morning is about Trump's big blunder.
I wish I was wrong. What I have not imagined that Trump will issue a statement that just will pour more fuel on the fire. I wonder is it a misstep or deliberate challenge to dare all never Trumpers to try to impeach him.
I think it's neither. He just said what he thinks. People aren't used to a POTUS coming along who speaks his mind. I really can't believe the level of the negativity. I expect it from the Left but it's coming from the Right, too. I spoke too soon about Andy McCarthy. I liked the attitude of Tucker and the Russian History professor he had on last night. Look, the intelligence agencies, if they were worth their salt, would have put the brakes on the Trump and Russian collusion story from the get go. Can you pull in Rush Limbaugh where you live? Or can you get Rush 24/7? He really seems to be the only talking with any common sense today.
As it turned out it was a misstep and he embarrassingly reversed himself and poured praise on the Intelligence services. If his name would have been Obama it would be a non event but since his name is Trump his detractors and the fun makers will have a field day and squeeze out of it every ounce of ridicule for quite a long time
It will help if Trump will issue a directive to freeze any assets of the indicted GPU persons and block any international banking transactions of those persons. It will have a zero effect but will show that he means business
It will help if Trump will issue a directive to freeze any assets of the indicted GPU persons and block any international banking transactions of those persons. It will have a zero effect but will show that he means business
Right, i heard he made some changes to correct somethings he said that made all the establishment monkeys fall from their vines. Your idea under a normal circumstance would be a good one, but I heard last night on The Dan Bongino Show (podcast) something Devin Nunez said about what came out with this recent accusation about the new group of Russians on Friday the 13th was that it was information they had back in March, with just a few changes in the documents and that they are presumed innocent until proven guilty and there will be no trial. This entire Mueller investigation is Grand Kabuki Theater that was put in place to cover up the misdeeds of the ring of bad actors in the FBI, DOJ and HRC and Obama himself to make sure Trump never had a chance and once elected would be stopped end ejected from office. There's not going to be any trial. All the forces in the intelligence agencies that had real power were acting in concert to impede and then overthrow DT.
Trump made it easier on his and his supporters enemies and I mean ENEMIES not opposition by what he calls misspeak. It is the same term that HRC used about her imaginary being under fire event in Bosnia but unlike Trump hers misspeech was a blatant lie his was a misstep and could be possibly even true since all what the Intel agencies have is indictment which they may not able to prove if it ever comes to trial. In any case the alleged Russian interference happened under Obama Trump just could have said that his priority to try to prevent repeat of foreign intervention in the coming election and not pursue alleged misdeeds that will be denied and can not be reversed. It reminds me that Obama lied publicly in straight face under the glare of of MSM TV to captive audience of soldiers stating no terror incident happened on his watch. It was not a misspeech it was a blatant lie and the media let it go as a non event and here we have Trump uttering something that possibly could be correct and the media and his enemies pounce on him ready to rip him into pieces allive
Let's toss this around over in the readers thread. That's where you and I can get some of the other members' feedback. I've come to a conclusion about this Russian meeting and it may just be different from yours. I'm keeping an open mind.
I meant the Clubland Open Thread: Tuesday July 17th.
There are more than a few weighing in on the Trump-Putin press conference backlash over there. Also, have you heard Mollie Hemingway's observation (brought to my attention by Adam Mill at The Federalist in his article on CNN's Chris Cillizza's outrage). Mollie observed that the CIA and FBI used one of their first briefings of Trump to engineer a hook for CNN to cover and BuzzFeed to release the HRC procured character smear compiled by Fusion GPS. It's clear to me why Trump said the things he did. But, I see wisdom in your suggestions.
One more thing that brings me back to the subject topic we strayed from: looking below at Larry Robinson's reply to Joseph Huber, this sentence he wrote struck me as one of overriding importance to both meetings with Theresa May and Putin: "Lately the biggest existential threat to Modernity (which in my opinion is a far more inclusive and accurate term than "the First World") is Islamic hegemony, as exemplified by the fall of Sweden and the not unrelated infusion of "refugees" into Western Europe."
We have bigger problems than Russia, don't we?
The vapourati/blitherati need to have their say!
I was thinking about the timing of Rosenstein's high profile announcements of Mueller indictment of 13 Russian supposedly Secret Service officers in meddling in the 1996 US election campaign. In my opinion the timing was carefully planned to set a trap for President Trump prior to his one on one meeting with Putin. It is the deep state response to the tightening noose of revealing the deep state conspiracy against candidate Trump, President-elect Trump and President Trump. As we have seen the Democrats politicians and their complacent media have no restraints whatsoever to paint Strzok as patriot hero and the republican that are trying to reveal the truth of this dirty cop conspiracy as villains they will use the one on one meeting between President Trump and Putin as a proof that President Trump is colluding with Putin to sell out the vital interests of USA. I believe that it is essential no matter how embarrassing it is for President Trump reschedule the meeting and have secretary Pompeo and chief of staff Kelly attending the meeting with Putin. Failing to do so the Democrats and their complacent media will launch an all out campaign to impeach President Trump for treason. We have to remember that President Obama was able to sell out vital interests of USA in broad daylight and that was acceptable to the Democrat and their complacent media. No matter how much personal sacrifice President Trump does to advance the interests of the USA he will given no quarters from the vicious unfounded allegations of the Democrats politicians and their complacent media.
Yes, AB, think the Deep State is alive and fighting to stay that way. But wouldn't it just be a cave to them if Trump cancelled his meeting with Putin? Really, he can't win for losing with them and the main stream media, the arm of the Deep State for a large part; therefore, since he is the POTUS, he carries on and shows the weasels in the Deep State what it means to be a straightforward speaking leader, not a wuss. These people in the Deep State are all a bunch of wusses. They showed us how not to lead for eight years. They showed us how to bring a gun to a knife fight for eight years. They showed us how to weaponize the bureaucracies of our own government against us for eight years. They use their sanctimonious attitudes to try to pitch to the rest of us who pay their salaries that they are the only patriots left in the country. They live the lie and they sneer and hold their heads up high while they do it. They must be defeated at every chance.
What bugs me far more than our fickle Brits is Germany. We have thousands of troops stationed there basically functioning as canaries in a coal mine should the unthinkable happen there. Despite all that this country which rarely supports us in the UN - like the whole of Europe and every single one of our NATO "allies" not a single country supported our embassy move in Israel. Sickening poll results show a majority of Germans have a more favorable view of Russia than America. Like in all of Europe the higher you go on the educational ladder the more they despise us. Good thing I'm not running things because I'd pull half our troops out right now and unless they pay their fair share within 12 months I'd yank the rest out. Trump could send a clear msg right now by re-assigning say 10,000 troops from Germany to Poland, a true friend of America in need of a strong US presence to fend off the hungry Russian bear.
"Nevertheless, the relationship between the United Kingdom and the United States is an important one."
It's becoming less important by the minute.
Disagree - while the UK has long been burdened by its love-hate relationship with America, it has maintained strong economic, military and cultural ties despite occasional differences. History shows that Great Britain has served as the canary in the coal mine regarding threats to the Western World since the American Revolution (which was in fact the second English Civil War) - from Napoleon Bonaparte to Adolph You-know-who.
Lately the biggest existential threat to Modernity (which in my opinion is a far more inclusive and accurate term than "the First World") is Islamic hegemony, as exemplified by the fall of Sweden and the not unrelated infusion of "refugees" into Western Europe. Britain's people have once again rushed to the barricades, bravely defying their betters by voting for Brexit, and once again inspiring their true allies, the American PEOPLE, to avoid the "inevitable". The concept that a vote might not merely make a difference, but help make history, once again rings true in the Modern world. Hopefully all of humanity comes to realise this is the only way forward
The common British citizen's stand against the politically correct helped the deplorable American remember that freedom requires vigilance. Pax Churchill, but THIS was their finest hour. Let us not squander it.
I'll have more faith in Brexit if it ever actually happens. I had a lot of respect for them when they stood up for independence, something we did at one time, but it appears they won't have the intestinal fortitude to see it through. In fact, under May I doubt it.
I do agree through, that they have served a purpose in showing us where the open border PC path leads.
John O'Sullivan's column on the Chequers Betrayal— "It's disgruntled Brexiteers who are first to stage a departure"— is a fascinating read. And he notes on twitter that, "Almost no media attention has been given to the defense and intelligence aspects of the May Betrayal. Yet they are at least as important as the economic aspects."
A good time for a Brexit-related Steyn piece to be reposted, perhaps? Mark made a bet about member nations electing to depart the EU ahead of its eventual collapse, circa 2020-something, if memory serves. His exit prediction (years before the UK referendum), is indeed being cunningly undermined by Theresa the Appeaser, and she has plenty of support.
Also, because I am very shallow, I must comment on Melania's lovely outfits. I thought the yellow, flowing ballgown was quite beautiful and she looked great also in the Posh Spice dress as well. She's a knockout!
She has a fabulous wardrobe and is always elegantly dressed, though personally not a fan of the yellow gown; a rare exception, IMO.
Is it just me or does the "Trump Blimp" look like the shriveled gonad of a Cabbage Patch doll?
(If it's just me, don't bother to comment-just send me along to Re-Education Gulag and be done with it...)
Sadiq Khan, mayor or London, let the Trump baby balloon fly because of free speech laws, reported one of the FOX News reporters this afternoon, yet if the blimp was a similar image of a visiting president from a Muslim country, let's see, hmmm, would that ever see the light of day?
No, it's not just you. Maybe for the next Macy's Thanksgiving Day Parade there can be a new category in the parade showing those countries that disrespect our president what blown up caricatures of their leaders in diapers would look like bobbing around for all the world to see. I would give up my turkey to see that.
Fran
Ask approval for a Muslim Prophet Mohammad blimp and see everyone's gonads shrivel.
Andrew, when it comes to free speech, as Mark always would say, "we live in a bifurcated world." So what's permissible for Islam's and the Leftists' agendas and infidel or conservative-bashing fests is verboten for non-Muslims and conservatives to do and say. That, or non-Muslims and conservatives have better manners and sense of respect for others' beliefs. We are getting used to that being the normal way here in America and with regards to more than our speech; also the developments in our justice system still prove Mark was right about that sort of bifurcation. The handful of connected Leftist elites avoid prosecution and jail time, the rest of us can't.
Apparently, folks are getting accustomed to the same style of life in Britain. Whatever happened to Tommy Robinson? Did he ever get out of jail for a trial? I only get a few articles of The Sunday Times, and haven't been checking that. It does seem hard to measure how much pro-American spirit is there as the protesters against Trump make the most noise and make the ugliest blimps. Maybe the protesters just don't have anything better to do with their time. Everyone else works. Don't mind me, I'm just keeping myself pumped up until Mark gets back from assignment. I do hope and pray Britain and the rest of the freedom-loving, capitalist-thriving world have a single-minded focus to set things right.
Yes, a giant Prophet blimp overhead when (not if) Mr Khan next fronts the media to explain that Islamic terrorism is just a fact of life in big cities. And to reiterate his support for free speech, he should suggest that candles and teddy bears should henceforth be replaced by Prophet blimps on such occasions. Pigs might fly!
Fran
I did now see there was another day of a show of support for Trump and America, not as large but nevertheless, impressive It was heartening to see that.
Just saw this from a quick search:
"Articles about the arrest and subsequent imprisonment of independent journalist and activist Tommy Robinson are being rapidly scrubbed from the internet after the British government put restrictions in place banning any reporting on the matter," reported Cassandra Fairbanks of the Gateway Pundit." I'm assuming he's still in jail.
Might "Scuttle Hymns of the Bureaucratic Supremacists" work better?
Just a sudden thought.
"But she understands something that few other leaders of the west seem to— that today the ultimate guarantor of the peace and liberty of her realms is the United States."
Indeed. One of those few leaders is the Australian (former) PM— and Steynophile— Tony Abbott. A few excerpts from his superb speech to the Heritage Foundation in Washington (on the eve of Trump's admonition to the NATO "backsliders") are worth repeating:
"As more weighty US allies are likely to find at the NATO summit, Trump is mightily reluctant to help those who don't pull their weight, even "family" like Britain, Canada and Australia. And who can blame him? America has been the world's policeman: the guarantor of a modicum of restraint from the world's despots and fanatics."
"No other country has had both the strength and the goodwill for this essential task. And its thanks for seven decades of watchfulness and prodigious expenditure of blood and treasure has been condescension from the intellectuals whose freedom America has protected, and commercial exploitation from competitors that the American-led global order has created."
"As PM, I wanted to be a welcome change from those visitors to the White House seeking what America could do for them, offering instead what we could do for America."
"America has disproportionately shouldered the burdens. Others have disproportionately gained the benefits, so enough is enough and there will be no more one-sided alliances."
And plenty of his fellow Australians wholeheartedly agree with the sentiments expressed! Perhaps Mark can interview Tony Abbott at some point in the future?
Or as those weary of always failing manmade virtue and empires would have it: the ultimate guarantor, under God, of peace and liberty on earth today is still (God help us) the United States. The critical thing is the animating spirit of a nation.
From singing our national anthem to flying a balloon of our President in a diaper.... seems the relationship has changed somewhat.
Makes me think of the line about "with friends like these....,' but i think they finally did bring it down today. (Can't tell you how hard that video clip from 'The Three Amigos" made us collapse into hysterics. It's times like that I'm glad when people break the posting-a-link rule. It was the best laugh we had on the entire vacation, except for one other time when we were trailed by some guy coming out of the restaurant/bar with the hiccups. We didn't dare want to laugh out loud until he passed us by but it couldn't be helped and we doubled over before he was out of earshot).
I am proud that my country (Australia) came to assist after the terrorist attack on America. I, along with Mark, have always appreciated John Howard's words "This is no time to be an 80 per cent ally".
I wondered at the time whether countries which supported us would conclude in the long run that it had been worthwhile. Without a doubt, I think. I vividly recall the Masai tribe in Kenya donating cows to the United States after seeing the towers fall on 9/11. I remember our big allies who stepped up, but I also remember smaller ones who made contributions, as Poland did.
I was a staff officer at Central Command headquarters (MacDill AFB, Tampa) during and after the 9/11 attacks. I worked in a capacity that gave me visibility of the contributions of other nations, including working on/with the "coalition village" that we formed in the former main parking lot (brought in trailers to serve as office spaces) to accommodate liaison teams from various friendly/supporting/allied countries.
One striking feature of most of these supporters was their lack of any capacity to make a meaningful contribution. Some former Warsaw Pact countries could offer only flyover rights, maybe landing rights for our military aircraft at some airport of theirs, and maybe a small field hospital unit that could be deployed to the zone of operations ... if we transported them there and supported them once they were there (think food, laundry, shelter, supplies, etc.)
While optics can be important, the list of countries who were capable of offering any meaningful operational contribution was very, very small - not even a large single-digit number.
"Coalition village" liaison teams were mostly very small - one to three personnel - whose main activity was visiting the BX ("Base eXchange" for the uninitiated - the DoD version of K-Mart) and trying to get their chronic medical issues addressed at the base hospital. It actually got to the point where foreign nationals were prohibited from using the hospital for anything but bona fide emergencies.
And then there was the Russian liaison officer that I picked up at the airport, transported to his quarters and took to dinner the day of his arrival. Note: At no time did I collude.
However, to return to my main point, there are very, very few countries capable of making any meaningful operational military contribution to any given contingency. While it's politically useful to count a large number of supporters, when it comes to kinetics - putting ordnance on target - there's us and three or four allies.
And in true bureaucratic fashion, it took the Americans five years to actually accept the cows as a gift! https://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/11/world/africa/11kenya.html
And that was probably the express chute. What an example of pure generosity.
That's interesting to hear, from the ground. I recognize that the operational military and practical support was meager from many of the smaller "coalition nations" against Iraq and Afghanistan, but since a country's support potentially encompasses all its people, there may be intangibles and under-the-radar contributions - foreign language skills, as an example - that countries can provide. But it seems to be bigger than that, when a people whose national affairs are arranged so that their elected officials representing them have committed the whole nation to a cause.
I wonder how differently history might be had the very small number of Germans, that included Dietrich Bonhoeffer, succeeded, as they very nearly did, in assassinating Hitler. Few in number and with resources that were not extensive, they came very close. Only an oddly designed plinth, supporting the table that absorbed the massive explosion saved Hitler, seated two yards from the bomb.
I learned somethings new about the Queen here. That she sang "The Star-Spangled Banner" and "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" at St. Paul's Cathedral after 9/11 moves me deeply. That she had "The Star-Spangled Banner" played at the Changing of the Guard at Buckingham Palace by the Coldstream Guards warms my heart. That she fought back the tears for "The Battle Hymn of the Republic" endears her to me more than ever before. I can hardly get to the word "glory" in the first line and I'm a goner. Now if we can get all of our NFL players to at least stand tall for our national anthem, I think it would do wonders to rekindle the great pride we all felt across the land just after 9/11. Thank for posting! Best to Mark Steyn and his endeavors!
How many snowflakes on the Left could possibly survive and persevere through the barrage, onslaught, tsunami, hurricane or whatever you may call it, of negativity endured by the Trumps and continue on with a smile and conviction? The Queen, certainly could do it, and has to some degree, but she is no snowflake. She put her defined purpose ahead of her personal desires. Donald, we know by now, is energized by the negativity. Melania said during the early days of Stormy Daniels that, "I can handle anything." And she has. It's like a Rosa Parks moment, when she knows she is going to face incredible opposition and possibly even bodily harm, yet she knows it is right to sit wherever she wants to on the bus and so she did it, taking the heat for the just cause. The Trumps continue on the path of what they see as righteous and good for the people of the United States. Maybe I'm making too much of it with my comparison but to triumph and stay the course of your convictions in the face of incredible adversity is admirable and something we used to try to instill in our children. Now we teach everyone that they are victims and oppressed, in order to achieve political gain and to their own detriment.
The key phrase here is "Don't ask me who else [we] can count on", in relation to NATO. NATO is based on the premise that an attack on one is an attack on all 29 members. This includes some of whose members can contribute relatively little because of their size (Latvia, Estonia) but nonetheless are much more likely than others to need protection beyond their ability to give aid, since they are former Soviet states or nearer to Russia when Crimea 2.0 occurs.
The big question is Mark's -- "who can we count on?" The likely answer is probably few. Most NATO countries are probably only members with the assumption that Uncle Sam and perhaps the Brits will handle the bulk of the duty and they get the war guarantee's protection for nothing. But the answer is already there. "Will they fight?" is more easily answered by "Can they fight". If nobody is spending their 2%, the answer is obviously "no". Germany cannot simply order jet fighters from Amazon Prime when it hits the fan. You either have the military capability now or you don't. A war guarantee by Latvia or Hungary is like a $1 million promissory note from me -- unable to be honored no matter how much I want it to be when given.
Thank you, Mark. God save the Queen
God save the Queen indeed! That was very touching Mark.
I miss Mark but I sure have enjoyed reading some of his older material! Hurry back!
The new, improved animatronic Mark should be ready by Labour/Labor Day. As you know, everything's pretty much off-the-shelf these days, except for his pesky Birmingham/Toronto/London/north-woods accent: they're still running the permutations hoping to find a near-match.