There are few people in this world who would defend Gaddafi as a sane and viable leader of Libya; but I think there would be even less that would see the logic in the U.S selling guns to someone as psychotic as him and then parading about as world police.

It's the equivalent of a sheriff giving an outlaw a six-shooter and then acting surprised when he starts popping off the town folk. 

The second one U.S plane gets shot down by one U.S surface-to-air missile, all the military big wigs should get together and make a decision once and for all - "we have to stop shooting at tyrants we've given guns to".

What do you think about Libya? What do you think about the obvious contradictions in U.S foreign policy and how do you think they should be addressed? Tell us and remember...Disqus!  . . read more

Almost exactly a year ago- as the global financial crisis was at its most threatening- a friend and I went to a talk at the Adam Smith Institute.

The main speaker- a very forgettable Conservative MP- extoled the value of the free market and market liberalisation while most sensible pundits and politicians were dipping into socialist economics for capitalism's salvation.

After the talk we stayed around to drink champagne, eat canapes and talk to some girls but we were interrupted by some cartoonish toffs.

They (and then the director of the institute) continued the discussion about the virtues of the free market, with the director almost pleading with us to believe that this was a credit crisis and not a failing of his beloved theory. 

Looking at Obama's banking reforms, it seems Mr Free Market is looking even more the fool.

Obama has sought to separate investment and commercial banks, and is trying to strip 'too big to fail' from the corporate lexicon. 

It seems in the land where the free market was the closest to conquering sense, that sense has finally hit back. 

And hopefully is set to stay.   . . read more

It's popular to say that as China, India and the rest of the world grow in political and economic strength that the relative superiority of Uncle Sam will wane- giving it less power to mould the institutions that govern the world.

In Barack Obama's State of the Union address there was cause to suggest that maybe his language shows that shift. At one point he talked about infrastructure asking:

"Why should China and Europe have the fastest trains?"

And then when talking about the bigger problems of US politics:

"Meanwhile China isn't waiting to revamp its economy. Germany isn't waiting. India isn't waiting. There nations aren't standing still."

It might be a small point, but where's the Reagan-esque, America is number one and always will be?

And for the rest of the world, is this the beginning of the US finally realising that there is something rotten in the state of their union? . . read more