[Yahwe]

Originally Posted by Texan

But since the treaty has no actual value, there is no way to know if the United States would sign the treaty if it had value. Except the United States has signed many other environmental treaties that do have value.

you've lost our trust.
we do not believe that the present administration will do anything about climate change. we've seen too much evidence.

you can try to argue out of this situation if you want. but the fact is that you've lost trust.

Originally Posted by Texan

I think Blair, Chirac and Schroeder are the most influential leaers in Europe. Putin, too, if you consider Russia to be in Europe. I am not making a mistake. I am calling it the way I see it. Perhaps you see things differently. What leaders in Europe would you say are more influential than Schroeder?

German Environmental Minister Jürgen Trittin made the comments.

If you bothered to read the facts. just once, then it might make it easier for us to believe you actually have a point. as it is it looks like you are doing the standard reaction of:

someone criticised something american + i am an american = they are wrong and must be attacked

Originally Posted by Texan

I think it has been proved worng many, many times. It is only that the "school of thought" you are discussing is not really a "school of thought," but a bunch of hysterical wackos who refuse to allow facts to interfere with their "thoughts."

a bunch of hysterical wackos .... any one who dares to criticise america is instantly dismissed as an hysterical wacko.

do you have any idea what form anti american feeling takes in Britain? We don't flag burn and froth at the mouth. we sigh, we feel disapointed and we laugh at you as much as we can.

Originally Posted by Texan

Refusing to sign one lousy (and I mean very lousy) treaty does not exactly equate to never. I think you need to search out a list of the environmental treaties the United States has signed. I'm sure you are familiar with the CIA World Fact Book. You can find a list there. Or you can probably find some far left blog that claims the United States has broken every treaty it has ever signed, even though none of those treaties deal with the environment. Just missile defense, nuclear proliferation, testing and other defense-related treaties.

your argument here seems to be:
"just because we didn't sign this environmental treaty, we might sign others. we wouldn't breach an environmental treaty either. we only breach nuclear proliferation and ballistic missle treaties"

are you insane?
do you not realise, did it never occur to you, that breaking a nuclear proliferation treaty or a ballistic missle treaty is worse than breaking an environmental treaty?

so you're trying to defend america's appalling environmental policy by pointing out that your nuclear weapon and ballistic missle policy is worse???

Originally Posted by Texan

I realize you are not a far left wing nut case, but I'm sure someone will come along shortly to post a link to their favorite blog with all the "facts" on U.S. participation in environmental treaties.

'left wing nutcase'

you've got no idea what the left wing is. but you know it isn't america, so it is bad and anyone who criticises america must be a 'nut case'.

do you people ever actually want to be liked? ever ever again?