Europe explained....

I've seen a very interesting and instructive Jerusalem Post article referenced around the web. Speaking of European, and in particular, French "attitudes" vs. "actions" the author explains....

....if you don't actually have to do something about your attitudes you're likelier to have more of them, and they are bound to be both more extravagant and more unrealistic. People who are in no position to end world hunger and bring about peace in the Middle East can endlessly carry on about ending world hunger and bringing peace to the Middle East. Doing so means only that they're declaring themselves the sorts of folk who deplore hunger and war. But statesmen who must actually wrestle with issues of cost, capacity, local difficulties and unintended consequences tend to have more realistic, and therefore restrained, attitudes.

And carrying this observation to American shores, one wonders what in John Kerry's personna makes him so hungry for European support and approval?