Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 6/24/83 (MC840302); site mcvax.UUCP Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!sdcsvax!sdcrdcf!hplabs!hao!seismo!mcvax!steven From: steven@mcvax.UUCP (Steven Pemberton) Newsgroups: net.politics Subject: Re: Reagan's re-election Message-ID: <6204@mcvax.UUCP> Date: Wed, 28-Nov-84 19:27:29 EST Article-I.D.: mcvax.6204 Posted: Wed Nov 28 19:27:29 1984 Date-Received: Fri, 30-Nov-84 19:13:48 EST References: <6166@mcvax.UUCP> <3171@ucbvax.ARPA> <47@uwvax.UUCP> <805@ihuxk.UUCP> Reply-To: steven@mcvax.UUCP (Steven Pemberton) Organization: CWI, Amsterdam Lines: 21 Summary: In article <805@ihuxk.UUCP> rs55611@ihuxk.UUCP (Robert E. Schleicher) writes: > European criticism of US deployment of missiles in Europe is more > properly directed at the European governments (or at least the parties > in power) than at the US. Most of it is, though it may be that the American press only covers the protests that most affect the US. > If the people in Europe are so universally opposed to US missiles, why > haven't their elected representatives refused to allow US missiles in their > countries? We're not universally opposed, just most of us. Still, it's a question I too would like answered: since so many of the people they represent are opposed to the missiles, why haven't they refused them? > The answer just might be that most Europeans support the US presence in > Europe, and that this attitude is reflected by the elected governments of > the various countries. Since this is not the case, perhaps it's that democracy is not yet strong enough. Steven Pemberton, CWI, Amsterdam, Sweden; steven@mcvax.