Monday, February 9, 2009 - 7:37 PM

Back to Pakistan's "get out of jail free" card for Khan, I was left again with that nagging feeling that we are headed down a familiar road for the United States, where allies we embrace for seemingly pragmatic reasons ultimately become our worst nightmares.
In fact, making a list of America's worst allies reveals a trend that suggests that the world's hyper power could easily have been cast alongside Jennifer Aniston and Scarlett Johansson in He's Just Not That Into You as one of those prototypical women who buys the line of every sweet-talking guy in town and wakes up in the morning wondering why she feels so used. Seriously, we ought to be taking relationship advice from Anne Hathaway at this point.
Let's make the list. Pick the five worst allies the United States has had in the past 100 years. Set up some reasonable criteria, things you look for in a good ally. So for example, one criterion would be advancing our national interests (or, alternatively, not dedicating themselves to our destruction). Another would be constancy (or, alternatively, not using us and then ditching us when the next best looking cause glides into town). Another, since this is a list of worst allies (all alliances, like all marriages, are imperfect and require work), would be to measure the degree of the damage they did to us or sought to do to us.
Finally, other guidelines probably need to be used -- for example, if a country underwent a coup or a revolution that changed completely its political orientation it probably ought not to be included on a list of allies who turned against us while under the same leadership that created, sought or supported the alliance.
Before listing the very worst cases of turnabout, it is worth noting a few of the countries that were candidates for various reasons. (My candidates follow, but please, offer your own suggestions.) Certainly some of you will nominate the likes of France for being allies who made it difficult for the Atlantic alliance to get anything done and which -- often for little more reason than modest economic gain -- undermined embargoes and other measures to pressure bad actors into behaving. I have no doubt that others will suggest that Israel has actually put us and our interests at risk by allowing the settlement of the West Bank and heavy-handedly keeping the Palestinians down. Some may feel that the embrace of Taiwan has caused more problems than it was worth, though it is undeniable that they were doing what many in the United States thought was in our collective interests. Still others might contend that the billions spent in Egypt or Colombia resulted in abuses or supported regimes whose interests were not always well aligned with ours. Suharto was a good "friend" except to the extent that he was behind the genocide in Timor or was breathtakingly corrupt. The Shah of Iran was a good ally for years, modernizing that country, but it can be argued that between the abuses of SAVAK, his secret police, and his lavish spending, he provoked a revolution that has upset the balance in the Middle East for years. Venezuela was once America's best friend in Latin America but now, not so much. The list goes on.
So who are the worst in modern U.S. history?
5. France
While they are not guilty of undercutting American interests in ways that are anything like the four other countries cited on this list (all of whom have gone or seem ready to go from being allies to actually being enemies), France has earned a special place on America's frienemies list for being so relentlessly difficult to deal with. They might call it tough love, but for as long as the Atlantic Alliance has existed they have been a drag on it and in numerous cases in the emerging world they tacitly or directly supported our adversaries or undercut American interests. To be fair, it is tough to pick on them for undercutting us when, especially for most of the past eight years, our policies have often been so worthy of undercutting. And furthermore, it would be unfair not to acknowledge that there has been a thaw in the air of late thanks to the more pro-U.S. attitude of President Sarkozy. Still, it is clear that the country that coined the term hyperpower hasn't quite gotten over the fact that the little band of colonies it helped midwife into existence as a nation long ago passed it in influence politically, militarily, economically and, culturally. So, in the end, they earn the special distinction of being the most dysfunctional of our more high functioning alliances.
4. Pakistan
Pakistan is number four with a bullet. (For those of you outside the record industry, that means number four but moving up the list.)
This is a country that we have supported and to which we have provided copious aid that nonetheless has become a haven for our worst enemies, a violator of the most fundamental interests of the modern world (against WMD proliferation), a host for terrorists that strike out against other allies and which seems increasingly to be a coup away from fulfilling its long-touted promise of being the most dangerous place in the world. Few countries can match their record of being so anti-American even as they were still ostensibly our allies. One of the worst foreign policy errors made in modern history was the decision post 9/11 to look the other way on the emergence of Pakistan's nuclear program and lift sanctions associated with it in order to gain tactical "advantage" in our war against the Taliban and al Qaeda in Afghanistan by shutting off escape routes into Pakistan.
Only problem: not only is it impossible to shut off those routes, but big portions of the Pakistani intelligence service and the Pakistani population were actively allied with the Taliban and al Qaeda. So much so that now they call our ally home.
3. Saddam Hussein
We made Saddam. We sought him as a counter-balance against the power of revolutionary Iran. We gave him aid, looked the other way when he used chemical weapons and brutally murdered and abused his people and generally wrote off the ugliness to realpolitik. Then, he literally became our enemy entering in effect a constant state of war with the United States for a decade and a half. He ultimately cost us trillions, strengthened our enemies, and invited us into a conflict that has deeply undercut our stature in the world and sapped our military strength. As in all of these twisted alliances, we bear plenty of responsibility for making the situation worse. But as ungrateful, self-serving, twisted, bad allies go, Saddam is certainly headed for a place in the Hall of Fame.
2. The Mujahideen of the Soviet-Afghan War
Yes, with our help they managed the only major defeat suffered by the Soviet Army and in so doing they probably help precipitate the decline and fall of the Soviet empire. Yes, they fought heroically against a much more heavily armed foe that employed horrific tactics. But in the end, many members of the Mujahideen kept the weapons and turned their anti-Western attitudes against the United States. From these groups came both the Taliban and al Qaeda. Among them was Osama bin Laden, who used the skill sets he developed as a U.S.-backed fighter to build the terror organization that ultimately conducted the most deadly attack on U.S. soil since Pearl Harbor. As he remains our number one enemy and a symbol to a movement that still threatens us worldwide, his place high atop this list can't be disputed.
1. The Soviet Union
There are few examples of the backfiring of the playing the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend card that will ever rival this one. The Soviets not only went from by our indispensible ally in defeating the Nazis to being the Evil Empire with which we were locked in a death struggle for almost half a century, but they for a while, they were clearly both. As World War II drew to a close, it was already clear that battle lines were being drawn for a potential future conflict with the Russians. Joint victory celebrations, laden with tension, became opportunities to divide up Europe into what would instantly become its Cold War boundaries. In the name of the "cold" conflict that followed, hot wars bled the world for decades and the planet was at the precarious edge of self-inflicted extinction throughout.
But as I say, these are off the top of my head coming out of the weekend. Better ideas are welcome, especially since I don't really like lumping France in with these really bad relationships. (Although it's always fun to tweak them.) And it feels wrong to leave out Asians or Latins.
So... suggestions anyone?
AAMIR QURESHI/AFP/Getty Images
Alliances, like friendship, are a two-way street. Naive America gives and gives and gives, but what do we receive in return from Israel? Scorn, spite, spies (all countries spy on each other right?) and and the occasional bombed elint ship. Of course David and a few of the rest of his readers would respond I don't possess a "serious" mind, perhaps a bit bitter. So be it. Beyond the vague generalizations and abstractions that they are a fellow "democracy" and "capitalist" and "free market" and share our values, just exactly what does Israel provide in return in concrete terms? I'd love to know.
America, in its heart and despite its flaws, possesses an almost naive sense of loyalty to its friends. While it may not always live up to it, we do our best and try to. I don't think Israel shares that value.
While bashing France don't forget that it is also their fault, in some sense, that the US got dragged into the mess they created in Vietnam.
Saudi Arabia should be lumped in there as well. Although they do provide the US with a large amount of our daily oil supply, their country is literally completely opposite US positions when it comes to nearly every issue of liberal democratic governance. Equal opportunity and freedom in Saudi Arabia? Not really, women can't drive or go to school. The country is named after the family that rules it for goodness sake. Lets add Saudi Arabia to the list.
I absolutly agree. Its not just one of worst the U.S. allies , its one of the worst states in the world. Saudi WAHABIA is a major destablizer of the region (if not the world) . Its a shame that the U.S. is perfectly o.k. with that , I guess when you are an obedient oil supplier you can get away with alomost anything , even the killing of American citizens. America should be ashamed of calling such a disgusting state an ally.
Are you passive-aggressively challenging us to say Israel, or did you seriously not anticipate it taking that turn? In any case, Israel. Let's hear the case that it shouldn't be on this list..
It's a little hard to "prove a negative," so to speak. Why should I defend why Israel should not be on the list when you haven't offered any reasons as to why it should?
I'd definitely put Saudi Arabia on that list as well. They've been an occasional useful oil source (and source of funding and basing for the first Gulf War), except when they weren't (like when they helped lead an OPEC oil embargo against the US after the Yom Kippur War). They've also been helpful in some issues of Middle East diplomacy.
In some ways, though, they are worse than having Israel as an ally. They've exported Wahhabism - possibly one of the nastiest branches of Islam; check out Churchill's quote on the Wahhabists from the 1920s - all over the muslim realm, including to areas like the FATA in Pakistan (where they underwrote and founded many of the madrassahs where the Taliban fighters were trained and educated with ISI assistance). Wherever you see a branch of violent sunni jihadism in the muslim world, you can almost guarantee that a wealthy Saudi jihadist has had his fingers in the pie.
Still, it is clear that the country that coined the term hyperpower hasn't quite gotten over the fact that the little band of colonies it helped midwife into existence as a nation long ago passed it in influence politically, militarily, economically and, culturally.
They've been douchebags, but I don't entirely blame them for it. Nobody in Europe really liked ending up as a prime battleground/potential nuclear playground between the US and the Soviet Union (including the Brits, who initially hoped to be the "Third Axis" in the world. We disabused them of that notion), and the French were just more vocal and willful about it. Of course, they had some issues over their loss of Great Power status, but I blame that more on the unification of Germany, which followed a thorough Prussian ass-kicking, and led to two wars (one of which Germany almost broke through the French lines, and the second in which Germany handed France its ass).
Pakistan is number four with a bullet. (For those of you outside the record industry, that means number four but moving up the list.)
That's a Cold War holdover that became a Post-9/11 Indispensable. I'm very, very curious how we had the (mis)fortune to end up as their ally in the Cold War (as opposed to India, which had ties to the Soviet Union but was more or less non-aligned). Frankly, had Pakistan been a Soviet client state, I think things in that region probably would have gone much smoother.
Then, he literally became our enemy entering in effect a constant state of war with the United States for a decade and a half.
He was a jackass (and worse, an incompetent jackass - he should have brutalized Iran when you consider that he had the superior trained military and equipment, but his micro-managing and political purges of the officer corps in Iraq helped prolong the Iraq-Iran War), but I've heard that the above was partially our fault; Saddam somehow got it into his head that we had given him the greenlight to invade Kuwait. Who knows what would have happened had that not been the case - he might be around today, and Iraq might be a wealthier dictatorship (as it was before the sanctions).
But in the end, many members of the Mujahideen kept the weapons and turned their anti-Western attitudes against the United States.
From what I've read, I don't think this is the case. The Mujahideen were farmers and herders who got trained into fighting the Soviets, and upon the Soviets' departure, they returned and tried to take up the pre-occupations. Most of them, at least; usually it was the foreign fighters' groups that went bad (such as Osama, who is Saudi).
The Taliban, however, were an entirely different animal. While many were native to Afghanistan, they grew up and were trained and prepped by the ISI in the FATA area of Pakistan (and helped finance by Saudis, of course). Most of them were young, angry, fanatical young men, with no useful education or skills other than how to fight and what they had learned in strict madrassahs. In fact, they were frequently enemies of the actual mujahideen.
There are few examples of the backfiring of the playing the enemy-of-my-enemy-is-my-friend card that will ever rival this one.
Blame that one on FDR, who despised Nazi Germany (rightfully) and generally liked "Uncle Joe" Stalin (plus the fact that the horrors of Stalinist Russia had not really come out). If only Harry Dexter White's treason had come out earlier, in 1943 or 1944, then the US would have been much more skeptical of the Soviets, and much more inclined to keep Germany all to themselves.
As is, the allies really had no choice; they needed Stalin to bleed Germany (Russia really did the major effort of breaking Germany), and Stalin needed their help.
'Difficult' allies versus 'dangerous' ones
France may have been a difficult, troublesome ally at times but has hardly stood as a major detriment to US security the way that the others on the list have. We really need separate categories of 'frenemies', namely the 'difficult', the 'dangerous' and the 'not dangerous so much as just simply embarrassing'.
In the 'difficult' category, directly behind France would be Japan. A friend turned enemy turned friend again, postwar America looked to Japan as a beloved ward, indulging it in its every economic and strategic need in exchange for its Cold War allegiance and its continuous housing of US military personnel in Okinawa and elsewhere. This ultimately allowed the Japanese government to continually demand unequal economic concessions that seriously hindered US economic interests, particularly in the 1980s.
As for the 'not dangerous so much as truly embarrassing', sitting atop the list would have to be America's support for the morbidly corrupt and despotic reign of Mobutu Sese Seko in Zaire (DRC). While Mobutu never emerged as an actual threat to the United States or its interests, in terms of a shocking aftermath this one ranks highest of all.
While they haven't been helpful at all in the past, I hardly think France is deserving of the #5 position on your list. Like the previous posters, I believe Saudi Arabia is more deserving of this place. No other country that I know of has its government taking aid from the US in one hand, and turning around and distributing these moneys to enemies of the US. Personally I don't think Israel is much better. The United States has been in a conundrum, trapped supporting Israel under pretty much any circumstance, thus alienating the US to the rest of the arab world.
Seriously though... France?!
The idea of this piece is worthwhile--to highlight American international mistakes and misjudgments. However, the concept is trivialized by the choices and underlying reasoning. France? A tease. And consider who's left out:
Ariel Sharon's Israel
Mubarak's Egypt
The Shah's Iran
Diem's Viet Nam
Need I go on? Instructive would be to group our blunders, distinguishing between bad regimes/leaders, say, and bad clients. Also, between overestimating allies' reliability/loyalty and underestimating their ruthlessness and stupidity. Instead, Rothkopf plays cute games. Sad.
This discussion is rather one-directional. Little stock is taken here of the allies to whom we have been exceptionally unhelpful in their various times of need.
Allies to whom we have been exceptionally unhelpful
South Korea - Impeded the country's pro-democracy movement for decades through its support for the likes of Syngman Rhee, Park Chunghee and Chun Doohwan, and stymied Kim Daejung's efforts at rapprochement with North Korea.
Guatemala - Supported the hideous dictatorship of Efraín Ríos Montt, an Evangelical Christian and friend of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell who perpetrated the worst atrocities of Guatemala's 36-year civil war.
Liberia - Created Africa's first independent republic and then left it out to dry when it dissolved into anarchy and civil war.
I don't know how to take this article... Is it just a joke or is it serious?
This must be one of the guys that promoted the "freedom fries"-name...
If you really think that France is on the top-five list of "worst allies the United States has had in the past 100 years", and consider them a "friend we could've lived without", then I am scared.
I'd guess that your friendship with Iraq wore better fruits? Or Saudi of course, which uses the US-money to educate extremists....? How about "looking in the eyes of Putin" a little more? I guess Pinochet was a friend more in the taste of Rothkopf?
So, remind me... why do so many people think that Americans are arrogant in their relations with other countries?
thank you!
That article is pretty ridiculous. Moreover, it looks like a list of "top 5 most sexy hollywood stars" or a "top 5 most beautiful legs between Rihanna and Beyonce"...
Arguments are wrong and the subject is to heavy to say "we can live without..."
Stupid!
Three reasons France doesn't deserve to be on this list:
Lafayette
L'Enfant
The Statue of Liberty
'Nuf said.
If I follow the logic applied here, USA should be at the top of the list. All those guys USA has helped and who turned against it. USA is not helping itself. Better be more careful when picking up its allies.
A complementary article could be written about countries which aren't exactly enemies, but might be better served if we had a bit more outreach. Several Latin American countries come to mind - Brazil, Bolivia - as well as some in Eastern Europe.
Then there's Russia. Friend? Enemy? Been puzzling over what Biden's statement about "rewinding" is supposed to imply.
The most noteworthy former colonies that could truly be described as "French" (i.e., held by France for a significant amount of time and not ceded to another colonial power) include Algeria, Chad, Cambodia, Haiti, Ivory Coast, Laos, Lebanon, Niger, Senegal, Syria, and Vietnam.
Those countries, while not unimportant, have hardly outstripped France proper in political, military, economic, or cultural influence. Their combined GDP by Purchasing Power Parity is one-third that of France, and combined nominal GDP is about one-eighth.
Unless you count the eastern United States, eastern Canada, and southern India--all of which do not even count for whole countries and all of which are far more British than French--it's a hard sell to say France has been outstripped by her colonies.
Not that that's any credit to France, mind you.
the author is i believe referring to the generosity it showed the US during the revolution (as a midwife?), not that given its own client states.
Actually, eastern Canada owes more to France. Canada as a whole owes more to Britian, however.
I know it is difficult to love France. Best wines, best food along with Italiens, great fashion, a real history, litterature, architecture.. Well I stop I don't want to brag.. Oh yes, I remember we also said no to your great president Bush to go help him remove all the massive destruction weapons hidden in Irak and directly linked to 9/11.. Your right we are bad friends.... I will still come and spend my summer holidays in the States because I consider Americans as my friends.
Both belong here before France... your logic itself here dictates why it should not be here: "So, in the end, they earn the special distinction of being the most dysfunctional of our more high functioning alliances."
I think that supporting the Taliban and doing nothing to choke out the flow of money towards Wahabbi terror groups is enough to qualify Saudi Arabia.
Besides the long term implications of our relationship with Israel, let's look at a short example: Israel's 2006 war with Hezbollah. After a brutal bombing campaign that involved dropping U.S.-made cluster bombs in civilian areas, we were (somewhat rightfully) blamed.
However, when it came time to clean up the mess and win the public relations battle with Hezbollah, which was busily rebuilding the country as best it could, who had to foot the bill? American taxpayers. Israel blew it up, we cleaned it up (along with some European allies, notably France). And our reputation suffered, nonetheless.
The Soviets were great Allies!
While the cold war did result and it's exacted a toll upon American interests, the soviet union without a doubt helped American interests in the balance. The Soviets were the principle force that stopped Nazi Germany, America was a clear second. In troops enlisted, casualties sustained, materials produced and battles won, no one came close to matching the soviet war effort. And while the soviets weren't angels, we can thank our guardian angels they were there. Because without the Soviets we would have never been able to invade France and Italy.
Clearly, the cold war was a light price to pay for that. In the balance, I'd say the Soviet Union was the BEST ally of the last 100 years. And we were allies for what, four years?
And also, France? Huh? They didn't support us in Iraq or join Nato. Neither one of those really hurt us too much. It wasn't smart for us to try to prop up the remains of their colonial empire in Vietnam, but they weren't the ones who told us to escalate that conflict. And France HAS helped us out many times over the last century both in foreign policy and as a trading partner.
And, uh, ISRAEL much? There is a case that we should support Israel because they're a democracy. But one can't possibly say it's in our interests. They are an enormous obstacle to getting anything done in the middle east. Just look at how the recent war in Gaza sullied Obama to the Arab world before he was even sworn in. Whether we want cheap oil or democracy or friendship, Israel is an enormous burden. They get more money then anyone else. They don't even share intel with us, understandable since they spy on us.
Israel doesn't give a damn about what any other country on earth thinks. They only care about their narrow self interest. Admittedly, there is the need for self preservation.
Honestly, their 60 years of associating us with the oppression of the Palestinians in the minds of all arabs alone makes them our worst allies.
Oh, plus their constantly shifting government makes them impossible to deal with.
If America didn't preemptively love Israel, they would never be considered an ally.
I was surprised not to see Saudi Arabia on the list. Since the Siege of Mecca the government has been funding extremists which of course hit us on 9/11 and then they participated in the oil embargoes against the US in '67 and '73. France may be an irritant and insulting many times, but I can't think of a time when it took demonstrable acts against our interests since WWII.
I think we really need two lists
One of our worst hyper-nationalist allies:
France and Iraq and Russia/the USSR would clearly go on there.
One of our worst hyper-religious allies:
Pakistan and the darlings of the comments thus far, Israel and Saudi Arabia, would go here.
...
I don't know, which list do we think the tough-as-nails Fighting Afghanis should go on? We can put the secular Mujahideen on the hyper-nationalist list and the Taliban/Al Qaeda on the religious one.
Dear friends, this is really all a problem of diplomacy. With the patently incompetent cowboy foreign policy of the past eight years, it really isn't that strange that the world at large hates America. France may be a difficult ally, but their government largely keeps in tune with what their voters want and feel on any given subject. Please remember that most Western European countries don't suffer from the same mind-numbing self-censorship and jingoism that we Americans are spoonfed every day on tv. France is a voice we should pay attention to, if only to remember what it really means to be a democracy. As far as enemies go, I think we need to put Russia on the list. They hate us, blame us for their economic crisis (brought on by their corrupt and incompetent system that have no more clue what capitalism truly means than did Brezhnev's crony "economists" thirty years ago) and think that diplomacy is a game of 'my daddy can beat the crap out of yours'...which of course they should be forgiven given the record of the Bush admin. But more pertinently, they do not belive in freedom, freedom of speech, of association, meeting, anything. They do not support us in any of the values we try to promote to the world (with however imperfect means, so far at least). No other state is more dangerous and volatile. Any conciliatory words from Putin or Medvedev are just so much glitter to conceal the fact that the Christmas tree has shed all its needles already.
Why Israel even features on this list is a mystery to me, though. A democratic country - with however erratic governments as of late...but that could indeed be said about the US, too! - struggling to eke out an existence in the midst of hostile states. Why do we only hear about the 'brutality' of Israeli military response? Do you even know what it is like there? Have you heard even one word in US media about the daily Hamas rocket attacks getting ever more frequent, accurate and with a more serious impact than is EVER mentioned even in the supposedly pro-Israeli US news sources? I thought not. This country is fighting for its survival, and if that is not always convenient for US foreign policy, so be it. A long-term engagement will never be all sunshine, but the country you truly commit yourself to will be your friend, and as of today, noone can deny Israel is the only truly democratic country in the Middle East. Amen. So kill me now.
...yeah, and Israel is democratic especially because they constantly shift governments. They don't have our retarded presidential system where one lunatic can set the policy for the entire country, their foreign policy is actually set by the people who vote forth the government. But I guess that is too incomprehensible for people from a two-party-one-person system. Save us all from this ignorance...
Global comity is the most strenuously demanding of relationships, promiscuous and problematic. Aside from nationalistic vagaries, the resident persons-in-charge of these plethora of governments change the dynamics with amazing alacrity or animosity. The Whims of Change, more aligned to the Theory of Chaos than inclined to breathing the Air of Reason, are often stoked by them. RE: France - having lived in France, I can attest that French reactions to our foreign policies are not anti-American. Their "anti" Americanism stems from the fact that our unilateralism is despotic, out of balance with France's ideals "equalite, liberte, fraternite" sensibilities." It's that simple and complex. My number one on your list would have to be Israel. Though a Jew, I abhor Israel using its jingoistic national mindset to spin doctor its aggressive and inimical dysfunctional politics as regional prerogative. This is pure propganda that America can well not afford to support. The other 4 frienemies, in comparison, may be fractious but are in no way as provocative as the out-of-control wrecking ball Israel continues to be.
and Biden's comment about rewinding has been gleefully taken to mean (here in Russia) that the US admits that is was wrong, that we admit the economic crisis is all our fault, that we will now repent and give overdue respect to the safekeeper of worldwide order, i.e. Russia. People here are even more anaesthesized by the media than Americans, they believe anything th government tells them and the government has TOTAL control of all news sources. It is DANGEROUS to placate Russia in any way, the politicians here are all old USSR hangovers and don't understand how the world works, they still think they are in the right and the modern tragedy is that nobody understands how great Russia is. They will stop at nothing, NOTHING to prove that they have power and nuclear weapons at their beck and call and I am in a position where my employer's censoring my reports because they think I'm too alarmist. I have lived here for eight years and I understand how people think, but western politicians and diplomats still believe Russia is a civilized country we can negotiate with. And noone wants to know how bad it really is. Russia is an ENEMY and we need to be prepared.
This is a list of current frenemies (I have left out historical ones such as Saddam's Iraq).
1) Israel - US support for Israel is too unconditional - apparently the issue of the expansion of Israeli settlements is never really discussed between the US and Israel. Amazing.
2) Saudi Arabia - 19 of the 9/11 attackers and its export of a disgusting religious doctrine.
3) Pakistan - What a mess! Nucleur weapons, the Taliban, Kashmir and the ISI.
4) Russia - Is this a current friend? Dedicated to limiting US influence - even if that means going against its own (i.e. Afganistan and Islamic extremism).
5) China - Again not sure if this quite qualifies as a friend - However it regular blocking of security council votes (Sudan/Zimbabwe), competes for mineral resources and is biding its time in respect of Taiwan.
As for including France on the list - C'mon.
On a separate note - in respect of an earlier commenter who noted that the US came a clear second in defeating Nazi Germany. I'd say a clear third. The UK fought alone for over a year and provided more troops than the US until well after Normandy. It was also the Artic convoys which helped Russia keep going (admittedly many with US materiel) and the US would have had no foothold in Europe were it not for the Brits.
David Rothkopf is the CEO and Editor-at-Large of Foreign Policy. His new book, "Power, Inc.: The Epic Rivalry Between Big Business and Government and the Reckoning that Lies Ahead" is due out from Farrar, Straus & Giroux on March 1.
Read More
(30)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE