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.