http://www.cafebabel.com/en/article.asp?T=A&Id=1468

When asked about his policy towards the EU a few months ago, George W Bush replied that it was "Disaggregation". Such a policy, being totally at odds with the previous, EU-friendly policy of the Cold War, suggests to me a shift from viewing the EU as a stategic friend, to a potential medium-term competitor. Rumsfeld's reference to "Old Europe", and disagreements over the European Rapid Reaction Force further reinforce my impression that the current US Administration views the EU with increasing hostility.

But why? I believe that the US views EU integration and enlargement as steps on the way to another superpower, something that the US intends to prevent. I'm really not sure why Bush is so anti-European, though. Any ideas? Afrter all to unite is better than not to

Coltrane,

Like Bush, the American people should worry. As it stand the US dollar is the number one international currency indirectly and if countries switch to Euros our dollars will lessen in value and could cause crippling economic depressions to us. As long as the world place trust in the American dollar then we can continue our expansion into the world unheeded. Despite what happen out in the world, foreigner use their dollars to keep our stock exchange going and make us the #1 country for investment whether its education, business, health, etc. If this starts crashing, you will soon see what ugly American really means.

Def,

Ithink its obvious why a US administration would want europe to remain so decentralized coz acentralized europe would only compete on a large scale against the US. It would have a buying power equivelant to or greater then the US, meaning non-US/EU nations would be more inclined to trade with the EU.

- Somehow europe has gone from a bloody battlefield of angst, hatred and warfare to an open minded socialists haven. Perhaps the euros have finally gotten sick and tired of killing one another ... this does not go well for the US ... as arms dealing happens to make the US ALOT of money ... no wars to fight? No arms to deal ... no money to make. Along these lines ... if the EU were united, truely united that is, then odds are all weapons and military equipment would be more centralized ... as opposed to teh Germans having a miltiary, the French having a military, the Italians having a military ... this would save a great deal of resources for the euroes and may strengthen the bond between their nations ... or states if you will.

On Economic competition ... like I said in my first point, the US no longer builds much of anything, nor does the US provide any real service. All US does is sell weapons and buy consumer goods ... well ... what happens when someone else wants to move in on our business? What does the US do then?

Socialism its my favourite part; this is rather heavy in euro policies. An admin like the Bush one really doesnt like that. In fact to most conservatives socialism is a curse word. Automatically you are communist and fascist. Don't ask me how it goes ... An example is lastsummer when conservatives in the US were using the French death rate incaused by heat wave as an argument against state run health care ... no seriously. They avoided all facts and decide to turn a tragic situation into political gains, but I guess thats par for the course for any politician.

Ok, lost my train of thought ...

Yes, we in the US love a scattered in fighting Europe. Its easier for us as a continental country to deal with. We fought hard wars against regional blocks of European countries in the past. A unified Europe is just too much for us with all our business across the globe. With a scattered Europe, it easier for us to dominate the geopolitic agenda.

In terms of geopolitics, EU has most of Africa and the Carribean, while US has most of continental South America to provide supplies to its growing populations and sovereignty. The current fight is over the Middle East with that situation undetermined. In Asia, US has Japan. China and India are more US oreinted but they can slide to EU if the deal is good. Southeast Asia is still up for grabs.

The world is definitely become regional with falling in line with EU and US guidelines. Both EU and US have one thing in common, they wish to have the WTO to garnish more world decisions.

The US wants to continue to be number 1 superpower. And we have to do whatever we can to push this image. Of course we definitely have failures but the force has to be persistant and consistant for the world to recognize.

We have come to a point in recognizing that all the bad Bush has done to our nation we need him if we want a future with US and the world. If Bush dynasty and company goes poor alot of us common folks would go poor also. Its back to the slave house days where slave recognizes his well being is dependent on their masters well being. Perhaps that why Bush is always taking the bottom line.

The UK might be the stumbling block from EU from fulfilling its global agenda. Most policy of the US support UK and vice versa.