Chuck Norris is admittedly hard to beat in combat, but Bruce Schneier is NP-hard.

Chuck Norris once threw some scrambled eggs at Bruce Schneier, so Bruce unscrambled them and threw them back.

Chuck Norris was once proud, seeing his work featured at a theater. That is, until Bruce Schneier came along and showed it was security theater.

Chuck Norris once opened fire on Bruce Schneier, but nothing can ever get through Bruce's firewall.

When Chuck Norris anesthetized Bruce Schneier, he made Bruce recite the digits of pi backwards from the end.

Chuck Norris once forgot his password, so he asked Bruce Schneier to decrypt it from the "x" in /etc/passwd.

Chuck Norris once tried to use a hand grenade to blow Bruce Schneier into insignificant bits, but it didn't work because Bruce's bits were all most significant.

Bruce Schneier knows Chuck Norris' private key.

I have a deal with my wife. If something bad happens to her and Keith Richards is still alive, then I am required to take "heroic measures," no matter how dignity-defying and cruel, no matter how expensive, to keep her technically alive, even if she's a hopelessly braindead vegetable.

Only after Keith Richards is dead, may I actually use my judgement to decide her fate. She must outlive Keith Richards if there is any possible way I can make that happen.

So.. i guess they thought to themselves.. 'hey, remember that text editor that morphed into an entire operating system? Yeah, lets do that, with AI!

It was really the 50s that kicked it off, though yeah, Reagan/Gingrich were a bit of a tipping point
 
In the post WWII era when communism was starting to come up, religious leaders (who feared atheism) and capitalist leaders (who feared loss of wealth and power) teamed up and turned greed into a christian commandment

Yep, dynamic memory allocation is a big part of it, though you can do OOP without that.
 
The bigger problem is the syntactic sugar. Things like operator overloading and inheritance (not even getting into things like mixins or polymorphism) are big no-nos. All of those 'make an API that does what I mean' tends to conflict with 'this code does exactly what it looks like it does'. They want a clear direct mapping between source and object, none of this 'well, this equal sign actually jumps to this other arbitrary function that is pulled from a table stored in a class definition'

Wouldn't it be funny if the E.U. decided to model legal requirements according to the U.S. car market? For certain software categories, you as the manufacturer are not allowed to sell directly to the customer, but have to go through a local dealership. It would not affect Free Software though, because there, no sale is happening.

To your own comments?

Several people have pointed out the futility of trying to apply your country's laws to people based out of other countries, but it isn't quite as pointless as you might think. There are all sorts of mechanisms for handling this, starting with extradition treaties (where the whole idea is countries selectively respecting each other's laws), as well as working directly with banks. The US is not the only country that pulls the 'well, because your bank wants to operate in the US, they accept orders to freeze your funds'. The UK is, after all, another major banking hub that can exert that kind of pressure.
 
Now, the politics of extradition tends to be pretty expensive, so the UK would have to weigh if trying to go that route is really worth it, but ultimately all they have to do is convince US officials to go along with it.
 
Or they could outright kidnap them. That president is pretty well established by the US, it would actually be kinda funny to see some country turn it around.