The French actually declared war on Hitler in September 1939 along with Great Britain precisely to live up to its treaty commitments, and because it was the 'right' thing to do. This is the nation that had had a substantial part of WW1 fought on its territory and had fought the Germans for four times as long as the US did during that conflict.
Ok, so they overestimated their defences and didn't understand mobile tank warfare (no-one really did outside the German High Command), but they continued to fight the Germans as best they could after their invasion in mid-1940. A full year and a half before the Americans bothered their asses to join a war they'd only joined because the Japanese and Germans declared war on them!
This is the same fighting French who gave us the words 'Maquis' and 'The Resistance'.
Coming from a country that cries when its furthest extremities are hit (i.e. Hawaii), and doesn't have to guard its national borders against anything more than Mexicans, Canucks and Siberians, you sure can be quick to dish out abuse to countries with long, actually difficult-to-defend borders.
Whether or not the tin-hattery is correct, the Muslim terrorists triggered the whole event. Even if it were a 'government operation', that's just terrorism by your own government. Regardless, it's not because some court wasn't bending over far enough for your security services!
Wow, extrapolating much? Also, that was a very multi-national target - for goodness sake, the ex-wife of Prince Andrew of Britain was nearly caught in it.
But unfortunately, you've made yourselves targets with the way you deal with other countries, with your blatant hypocrisies, and your arrogance (and not just you, the British have as well). Add to that a poorly integrated security apparatus and the most deplorably lax airplane security in the West and you had a real recipe for disaster.
And it's not even like it was the first attempt to hit the Towers!
I seem to remember Britain getting a gold medal for rifle shooting, so methinks you're exaggerating a bit there. Yes, the terms of gun control are a bit onerous on sport shooters, but we *haven't* had a gun massacre like Dunblane (or Sandy Hook, or Columbine, or...) since Dunblane. As for violence in the streets, I grew up in London and live in Glasgow - neither city known for their peacefulness. Somehow, we fail to be awash in the gun violence so beloved in 'Mericuh. Sure there are bad hotspots, but they still fail to compare.
Anyway, the Swiss gun-users actually *are* a militia, rather than an over-armed testosterone-high population. Plus, the Swiss have a generally insane regard for laws - I've heard of people speeding there being shot at!
'Overseas' wouldn't apply to any EU nationals with reciprocal health service arrangements, and wouldn't be Swedes. We'd like to be pegged somewhere closer to you between the 'canny' Scandinavians and the numpty USAers please!
Yes, but when you can only say that you *probably* won't prosecute someone who is actually doing their job correctly, which is fairly bad all by itself, but that you actually even have to say it at all - that says a lot of unpleasant things about the U$$A. Couple that with the 'illegal' detention of said journalist's partener at the incredibly likely behest of the U$ Government, and a very disturbing picture starts to build.