China has similar per capita CO2 emissions as UK - yet produces more and has a more progressive environmental policy.
Theresa May really seems to choose the wrong guys to play with - while avoiding and smearing (and even threatening) what would be much better for England.
The islamofascist Saudi dictator family has Pakistan with its nukes completely in its hands - and these two unreliable and hate producing countries are Theresa May's two most "important allies".
Is the difficult woman also the most dangerous one? And not only because of Theresa May’s willingness to launch a pre-emptive nuclear strike that could kill hundreds of thousands innocent people.
So she fits well together with what is used to be named the world's most dangerous man, "prince" (and factual leader) Mohammad bin Salman Al Saud.
How many from England have suffered from attacks induced by the islamofascist Saudi dictator family? No one keeps track on it, presumably because they are more interested in defedning the Saudis and instead smearing and threatening Human Rights defenders, so called "islamophobes". And what is Theresa May's guilt in it?
China's per capita CO2 pollution is average EU standard (but less than e.g. Germany). Hence it's quite polemical and biased to point to China being "the biggest polluter" just because it being the world's most populous country. However, U.S. pollutes more than double that of China and lies not far from the worst polluters Saudi Arabia and other sharia muslim Gulf states which don't produce almost anything except Sunni islamic sharia hate.
When Klevius back in 1979 got enough of the confused debate about environment, resources and pollution, he wrote a philosophical analysis called Demand for Resources which Georg Henrik von Wright approved on and which was first published in May 1981 as a paid for debate article (and in book form 1992). Read it - beginning from this posting.