Goodwill towards America

[BTox]

I believe Charles is spot on here. Would be interested about the ex-U.S. opinion (this ought to be fun :D ):

"It is pure fiction that this pro-American sentiment was either squandered after Sept. 11 or lost under the Bush Administration. It never existed. Envy for America, resentment of our power, hatred of our success has been a staple for decades, but most particularly since victory in the cold war left us the only superpower."

c krauthammer essay in Time (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101031117-538977,00.html)

[Nyarlathotep]

Originally posted by BTox
I believe Charles is spot on here. Would be interested about the ex-U.S. opinion (this ought to be fun :D ):

"It is pure fiction that this pro-American sentiment was either squandered after Sept. 11 or lost under the Bush Administration. It never existed. Envy for America, resentment of our power, hatred of our success has been a staple for decades, but most particularly since victory in the cold war left us the only superpower."

c krauthammer essay in Time (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101031117-538977,00.html)

I agree with him 100%. The vast amount of the "sympathy" we got from the rest of the world was in the form of a handful of empty words from politicians and others who had a vested intrerest in staying on our good side. From the ordinary people I noticed one theme over and over again, "You Americans got what you deserved." This wasn't just from the Arab world either, or any other group that would expect to hate us, I am talking British, Canadians etc. Thousands of people dead and the rest of the world pointing and laughing like Nelson Muntz on the Simpsons. It made me angry then and it makes me angry now.

[Ian Osborne]

Originally posted by Nyarlathotep
From the ordinary people I noticed one theme over and over again, "You Americans got what you deserved." This wasn't just from the Arab world either, or any other group that would expect to hate us, I am talking British, Canadians etc. Thousands of people dead and the rest of the world pointing and laughing like Nelson Muntz on the Simpsons. It made me angry then and it makes me angry now.

Where on earth did you get that idea from? In my office, the two-minute silence for 9/11 was impeccably kept, and in my home town there was a commemoration in the town square, which was very well attended. And I live in Stafford, a small, nothing-special town in central England.

All over the country there were similar commemorations. Whatever they were doing, people stood in silence for those two minutes in a gesture of solidarity. The sentiment "today, we are all American" was deeply felt.

Of course, much of this sympathy is now spent. Bush has used the thousands of deaths in the WTC as an excuse for many more deaths in Iraq, and uses 9/11 as a battering ram every time he wants to impose himself on someone or somewhere. Human rights abuses in Iraq are used to justify the war, and yet America simply doesn't care about human rights abuses in Camp X-ray, and to cap it all, we were taken into the war with a lie. There is very little sympathy left for America, but don't assume people were gloating after 9/11. In Britain at least, this just isn't true.

[BTox]

Originally posted by Ian Osborne


Of course, much of this sympathy is now spent. Bush has used the thousands of deaths in the WTC as an excuse for many more deaths in Iraq, and uses 9/11 as a battering ram every time he wants to impose himself on someone or somewhere. Human rights abuses in Iraq are used to justify the war, and yet America simply doesn't care about human rights abuses in Camp X-ray, and to cap it all, we were taken into the war with a lie. There is very little sympathy left for America, but don't assume people were gloating after 9/11. In Britain at least, this just isn't true.

See, Charles was dead-on. Thanks for further evidence.

[reprise]

Can I ask those who are saying that there was no genuine sympathy and empathy for the US following 11 September, 2001 to please go back and look at the threads which were posted on your messageboards around that time.

I remember exactly what it was like here - the spontaneous and genuine outpouring of emotion from our population to yours was unprecedented in my lifetime. I remember feeling embarrassed by the inadequacy of the words our Prime Minister spoke to your President because they so totally failed to capture what this nation - collectively - felt. I remember the hostility which was directed towards Muslims here about an something which hadn't even occured on our soil, and I remember being so proud of us organising one of the first public events in the world which drew Muslims and non-Muslims together against this horror which didn't threaten any of us directly but which affected us all.

I remember having to walk away from the television many times because I was becoming numb to the constantly replayed images of the second plane hitting the tower and the towers collapsing. I remember at the same time being unhealthily fixated with the 24 hour media coverage, as if any minute now the plot would change and the ending would be different.

I remember that while we'd never really given much consideration to American holidays before, people went out of their way to be at the American embassy here as Thanksgiving, Christmas, and 4 July rolled around because we knew that each of those "celebrations" would be overwhelmed by your grief.

You can criticise the responses of our government all you like, but I doubt that the manner in which the Australian people embraced the people of the US in the immediate aftermath of 11 September, 2001 is something I will ever see again in my lifetime. More than that, I hope that I never see anything occur in your nation which would justify another such instinctive and collective outpouring of empathy.

FWIW, I recorded the French documentary made about the events of that day and I watch it a couple of times a year to remind myself of what it was really like when all of this happened. I revisit the threads which were posted at the time and the IRC logs, because I don't ever want to forget the reality and as time goes on it is easy to do that. Two years hasn't lessened the impact on this "outsider". I very much understand why time has not dimished the impact of that day on the American people; but I'm damned if I'm going to agree with all of your government's responses to those events just because I feel empathy for you and I would hope that in this "free world" which we all value so much, we never stop valuing dissent every bit as much as we value agreement.

[Nyarlathotep]

All I can say is that I can only go by what I see and hear on the television, on the radio and on the internet. By the time everything had quieted down about 9/11 I walked away with a distinct impression that most of the rest of the world would be quite happy to see me dead for no reason other than my nationality. It is hard not to take that sort of thing personally.

If it makes the non-US posters feel any better I am equally disgusted with the way some of my own countrymen used 9/11 for their own cynical purposes. Politicians have seized upon it to advance their interests and I seem to recall a truck commercial which implied that you needed to buy a truck or else you were letting the terrorists win. BAH!

My respect for humanity plummeted to near zero in the wake of 9/11 and it shows no sign of rising.

[DanishDynamite]

BTox:I believe Charles is spot on here. Would be interested about the ex-U.S. opinion (this ought to be fun :D ):I believe Charles is spot-off.

As others have said, immediately after the WTC attack most westerners were feeling great empathy for the US. I won't discount that there was a certain undercurrent of "finally they feel the direct pain which many Europeans have felt". But on the whole, there was great empathy. For Ed's sake, NATO declared that the musketeer paragraph, for the first time in the institution's history, was now activated!

And yet, the US spurned any such help from its allies. It spurned not only our help but our advice. It didn't need us. It could handle its problems by itself, thank you very much. Any talk of coalitions or the UN, were out of the question.

The image of a hurt friend disappeared. The supposed friend was suddenly a lone avenger, with an urge to flex his muscles. Friends were ignored and friendly advice deemed of no significance.

Hence, the goodwill disappeared. Fast.

[Jessica Blue]

From the ordinary people I noticed one theme over and over again, "You Americans got what you deserved."

I dont know how you can say that. The sympathy from ordinary people was genuine, they were shocked and horrified by 9/11. In Australia we had services, vigils, the stars and stripes seemed to be everywhere...there were tears, speeches, endless condolences.

Jeeze...

I think it's true that there is an undercurrent of resentment toward the US from other Western countries, if not for its politics then for its octupi-like cultural imperialism, but few people thought it deserved THAT. There were lots of discussions about why 9/11 happened and much criticism of the US but dont confuse this with thinking we believed you deserved what you got. We didn't.

[reprise]

Originally posted by Nyarlathotep
All I can say is that I can only go by what I see and hear on the television, on the radio and on the internet. By the time everything had quieted down about 9/11 I walked away with a distinct impression that most of the rest of the world would be quite happy to see me dead for no reason other than my nationality. It is hard not to take that sort of thing personally.

If it makes the non-US posters feel any better I am equally disgusted with the way some of my own countrymen used 9/11 for their own cynical purposes. Politicians have seized upon it to advance their interests and I seem to recall a truck commercial which implied that you needed to buy a truck or else you were letting the terrorists win. BAH!

My respect for humanity plummeted to near zero in the wake of 9/11 and it shows no sign of rising.

Just as I commented in another thread that the way people outside of the US perceive Americans and America is largely based on the media I suspect that the way America perceives the responses of the rest of the world to 11 September, 2001 is largely based on American media reports. This is precisely why I am asking people to go back and look at what was posted on messageboards and on IRC at the time. If what was actually happening here got any coverage at all on American television I suspect it was a 5 second spot. Of course it was; you were all concerned about further attacks, what was happening right now, and the whole anthrax thing.

How the rest of the world was responding wasn't a media priority at the time and nor should it have been, but our own public records tell the story. Hell, CNN, NBC, and ABC dominate our news coverage at the best of times, it's hardly surprising that you didn't hear about the way the people responded in other parts of the world at the time it was happening. Even if you there had been good coverage at the time, would the response of the Australian people have gained your attention at a time when you were worried about which city was going to be hit next or whether your friends and family were still alive? I wouldn't have. The outside world ceases to exist for me when I'm affected by the immediate demands of relatively predictable occurences like fire and flood. I am - however - saddened that you think the rest of the world didn't care, and I would encourage you at some point to look not at the official condolence books which various nations (including my own) sent to your government, but at the newspaper and other less formal "public records" which document how the people throughout the world responded to 11 September, 2001. You might be pleasantly surprised.

[Cain]

It's a ridiculous assertion.

Where on earth did you get that idea from? In my office, the two-minute silence for 9/11 was impeccably kept, and in my home town there was a commemoration in the town square, which was very well attended. And I live in Stafford, a small, nothing-special town in central England.

In the U.S. we regularly recognize foreign atrocities. For instance, on the morning of Sept. 11, school children on thel east coast had already spent three minutes silently mourning the military regime that overthrew Chile.

I bet it would not be too difficult to find Bush thanking the rest of the world for their support in the wake of Sept. 11.

Charles Krauthammer is one of the most dedicated liars and frauds in Washington.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by BTox
I believe Charles is spot on here. Would be interested about the ex-U.S. opinion (this ought to be fun :D ):

"It is pure fiction that this pro-American sentiment was either squandered after Sept. 11 or lost under the Bush Administration. It never existed. Envy for America, resentment of our power, hatred of our success has been a staple for decades, but most particularly since victory in the cold war left us the only superpower."

c krauthammer essay in Time (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101031117-538977,00.html)

This one always comes up, and it is always so small minded it never ceases to amaze me.

Try contemplating on these alternatives.

1) Hubris.
2) Collective pride.
3) Nationalist conceit.
4) Chauvinism.

[BTox]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite
BTox:I believe Charles is spot-off.

And yet, the US spurned any such help from its allies. It spurned not only our help but our advice. It didn't need us. It could handle its problems by itself, thank you very much. Any talk of coalitions or the UN, were out of the question.


That's Charles' point. The U.S. doesn't need anyone else. We didn't like your advice, which was to do nothing and wish evil away (which worked so well in WWII). It galls other nations that we can take care of our own business, with or without them. The disdain is the result of insignificance, I suppose...

[BTox]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


This one always comes up, and it is always so small minded it never ceases to amaze me.

Try contemplating on these alternatives.

1) Hubris.
2) Collective pride.
3) Nationalist conceit.
4) Chauvinism.

You have a penchant for tossing those around willy-nilly. Try this one for size:

Insignificance.

[DanishDynamite]

BTox:That's Charles' point. The U.S. doesn't need anyone else.Fine. I presume this means we'll soon be spared further whining by the US on the lack of international support in Iraq?
We didn't like your advice, which was to do nothing and wish evil away (which worked so well in WWII).This is exactly the attitude which removed any goodwill. Thank you for making my point.
It galls other nations that we can take care of our own business, with or without them. The disdain is the result of insignificance, I suppose... :D Can the reason for disappearing goodwill be made any clearer? Thanks, BTox.

[BTox]

Originally posted by DanishDynamite

This is exactly the attitude which removed any goodwill. Thank you for making my point.
:D Can the reason for disappearing goodwill be made any clearer? Thanks, BTox.

And also makes our point that the "goodwill" never existed in the first place. Of course, if we ever really want or need it, we'll let you know.. don't hold your breath, though! :p

[DavidJames]

"And also makes our point that the "goodwill" never existed"

I can't imagine where the arrogant American phrase comes from.
we're #1, we're #1, we're #1, we're #1, we're #1, we're #1, we're #1, we're #1, we're #1, we're #1, we're #1, we're #1,
:rolleyes:

Why don't you actually read the responses and try to understand them. It's been pointed out in many of them that there was empathy, goodwill, etc.

[BTox]

Originally posted by DavidJames

Why don't you actually read the responses and try to understand them. It's been pointed out in many of them that there was empathy, goodwill, etc.

You miss the point. No surprise...

[DavidJames]

"You miss the point."

If you have a point, please state it

"No surprise"
Grow up!

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by BTox
I believe Charles is spot on here. Would be interested about the ex-U.S. opinion (this ought to be fun :D ):

"It is pure fiction that this pro-American sentiment was either squandered after Sept. 11 or lost under the Bush Administration. It never existed. Envy for America, resentment of our power, hatred of our success has been a staple for decades, but most particularly since victory in the cold war left us the only superpower."

c krauthammer essay in Time (http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1101031117-538977,00.html)

I guess one of the biggest problems with his point of view is that it is based on such outrageous ignorance. As Cain has pointed out, there are atrocities committed around the world on a regular basis, some of them as a result of US actions. However, the only atrocities that matter are those committed on the citizens of the US, and only if they are law-abiding, god-fearing people.

Open up your eyes, for a change. Don't think that


The US is the only place that matters when it comes to actrocities.
The US hasn't had a hand in some of them.
There might be many people trying to migrate to the US. There are far more with no interest in going there.
Even admirers of the US think it has overstepped the mark this time. http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30660

[reprise]

Originally posted by BTox
You miss the point. No surprise...

No, YOU miss the point. You have effectively said that our outrage, our empathy, our fundraising was worth NOTHING because we don't agree with the response to which your government ultimately committed itself. "Our way or the highway", "with us or against us". If you don't give a toss about international opinion then why do you care how we responded?

There is not a single person here who has said "well good for them bombing you and I hope it happens more". Yes, there are people who have said AND KEEP SAYING that perhaps if the US looked beyond political expediency it wouldn't keep winding up in this mess. Since when did the US entitlement to "free speech", which you defend so vigourously - apply only to "free speech which expresses the opinions with which I agree?"

My nation is horribly flawed, but at least we are not holding ourselves out as the example by which other nations should live and not trying to justify pure self-interest as "humantiarian" concerns.

No, you do not "deserve" the bombing of your civilian population, but you sure as heck deserve your elected government and the responsibility for their actions being placed on "the people". If democracy ISN'T about the people controlling the actions of the government then please explain what "democracy" means to the average American.

[BTox]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Open up your eyes, for a change. Don't think that


The US is the only place that matters when it comes to actrocities.

Who said the US is the only place that matters?

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The US hasn't had a hand in some of them.

Such as (in the 20-21st century)?


Originally posted by a_unique_person
There might be many people trying to migrate to the US. There are far more with no interest in going there..

What relevance is this? We don't need any more people emigrating here.

Originally posted by a_unique_person
Even admirers of the US think it has overstepped the mark this time. http://host.randi.org/vbulletin/showthread.php?s=&threadid=30660


You don't seem to grasp a simple concept here. Why should we care what admirers or haters of the U.S. think of our politicians and policies? I wouldn't for one moment expect you to care what I think of your country's politicians and policies. Talk about hubris!

[BTox]

Originally posted by reprise


No, YOU miss the point. You have effectively said that our outrage, our empathy, our fundraising was worth NOTHING because we don't agree with the response to which your government ultimately committed itself. "Our way or the highway", "with us or against us".

No, I see it the other way around. Sure there was outrage and empathy after the event. But to have it evaporate because we did not follow your advice/opinion on our national security and interests shows how hollow the goodwill was in the first place.


Originally posted by reprise

If you don't give a toss about international opinion then why do you care how we responded?

I don't.

Originally posted by reprise

No, you do not "deserve" the bombing of your civilian population, but you sure as heck deserve your elected government and the responsibility for their actions being placed on "the people". If democracy ISN'T about the people controlling the actions of the government then please explain what "democracy" means to the average American.

You're absolutely right, we do deserve our elected government. And support the policies they are undertaking.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by BTox


Who said the US is the only place that matters?



When 9/11 happens, the whole world is supposed to be in shock at the horror of it. It was spectacular, for sure, but in terms of number of dead, it was pretty small scale.



Such as (in the 20-21st century)?



Cain has already given you a hint, Chile, for starters. In Vietnam they didn't count the deaths in thousands, they counted in millions.




What relevance is this? We don't need any more people emigrating here.



The constant references to envy. I don't envy the US. Neither do many others. Why is this claim always being made?




You don't seem to grasp a simple concept here. Why should we care what admirers or haters of the U.S. think of our politicians and policies? I wouldn't for one moment expect you to care what I think of your country's politicians and policies. Talk about hubris!

Once again, the self-centred view. I try to keep up with the events and opionions around the world. With a whole world happening, I can only get a shallow overview, but there are a lot of different opinions and ideas and events out there.

The only ones that matter to you are the ones that concern the US. I cannot ignore the US and it's opinions and actions. If the war in Vietnam had gone a little longer, I would have been up for the draft.

[BTox]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
When 9/11 happens, the whole world is supposed to be in shock at the horror of it. It was spectacular, for sure, but in terms of number of dead, it was pretty small scale.

Where do you get this crap from? Who says the whole world should be in shock?

Originally posted by a_unique_person

Cain has already given you a hint, Chile, for starters. In Vietnam they didn't count the deaths in thousands, they counted in millions.

Please. You left out the tens of millions dead in WWI and WWII. Surely they are also U.S. "atrocities".



Originally posted by a_unique_person

The constant references to envy. I don't envy the US. Neither do many others. Why is this claim always being made?

There you go, one unique person and "many others" out of a few billion do not envy the U.S. That settles it...



Originally posted by a_unique_person

Once again, the self-centred view. I try to keep up with the events and opionions around the world. With a whole world happening, I can only get a shallow overview, but there are a lot of different opinions and ideas and events out there.

The only ones that matter to you are the ones that concern the US. I cannot ignore the US and it's opinions and actions. If the war in Vietnam had gone a little longer, I would have been up for the draft.

I guess this is the relevance issue again. This is a paradigm that we cannot relate to, having to expend such mental energy focused on something you are not a participant in and have zero influence on.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by BTox


Where do you get this crap from? Who says the whole world should be in shock?



3,000 dead was enough to get the US the respect it deserved, for one day, from the article.



Please. You left out the tens of millions dead in WWI and WWII. Surely they are also U.S. "atrocities".



I believe I said the US was one of the perpetrators. The tone of the article clearly implies the US is the paragon of virtue, all other countries are failures.



There you go, one unique person and "many others" out of a few billion do not envy the U.S. That settles it...



You are the one making the claim.



Envy for America, resentment of our power, hatred of our success has been a staple for decades, but most particularly since victory in the cold war left us the only superpower





I guess this is the relevance issue again. This is a paradigm that we cannot relate to, having to expend such mental energy focused on something you are not a participant in and have zero influence on.

????????????

[reprise]

People do truly get the government they deserve and the consequences of voting for that government - or not. You are the people who are holding the US up as the best example ever of democracy, not us.

[BTox]

Originally posted by a_unique_person

????????????

So you don't have an advanced degree in hyperbolic topology? I guess I better head back to the science forum..;)

[BTox]

Originally posted by reprise
People do truly get the government they deserve and the consequences of voting for that government - or not. You are the people who are holding the US up as the best example ever of democracy, not us.

No arguments here.

[KelvinG]

Originally posted by BTox


That's Charles' point. The U.S. doesn't need anyone else. We didn't like your advice, which was to do nothing and wish evil away (which worked so well in WWII). It galls other nations that we can take care of our own business, with or without them. The disdain is the result of insignificance, I suppose...

The jury is still out on whether or not the U.S. can "take care of our own business" or not. Sure, you can drop a lot of bombs and smash a virtually powerless government, but the story will truly be told in the long term.

And trying to parallel the situation in Iraq to WWII is absolutely ridiculous.
Of course, which nation sat on it's hands longer than any other nation during WWII. That's right the USA. You may want to use other examples to back up your claims of American determination and superiority. Maybe Vietnam is a better example? Oh wait, maybe not.

[reprise]

Well fu!k you guys and the ICBMs you rode in on.

No, in 2001 we did NOT think that you guys "deserved it" - please explain why your particular warlord still holds power if not with the consent of the people.

17% of the US thought that electing Bush as leader was a good idea and you want to impose your electoral errors on the rest of the planet? You become the "leader of the free world" when most of your nation can't even be bothered voting for or against you?

Head 'em up, move 'em on...

[shuize]

I think Charles is spot-on as well.

Most of the points have already been covered here and in other threads as well.

As an American ex-pat, I don't view the world entirely through U.S. lenses. However, I agree with the point above that the goodwill for the U.S. lasted about as long as it took us to gear up to go after the ringleaders in Afghanistan. I know that from first-hand experience.

As noted in the article, if keeping the "goodwill" of the world means we can't go after those who organized the murder of 3,000 Americans, you can take your goodwill and shove it.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by shuize
I think Charles is spot-on as well.

Most of the points have already been covered here and in other threads as well.

As an American ex-pat, I don't view the world entirely through U.S. lenses. However, I agree with the point above that the goodwill for the U.S. lasted about as long as it took us to gear up to go after the ringleaders in Afghanistan. I know that from first-hand experience.

As noted in the article, if the keeping the "goodwill" of the world means we can't go after those who organized the murder of 3,000 Americans, you can take your goodwill and shove it.


Saddam, for all his faults, had nothing to do with 9/11. Is that what you are referring to?

[shuize]

Originally posted by a_unique_person



Saddam, for all his faults, had nothing to do with 9/11. Is that what you are referring to?

I was referring to the so-called "goodwill" post 9/11. As I stated in my last post, from what I saw firsthand, it lasted for all the time it took the U.S. to go after the ringleaders in Afghanistan. Like the article points out, empty goodwill that ties our hands in times of crisis is worthless.

[LFTKBS]

This particular American would like to point out this part of Krauthammer's wackiness:

"ill Clinton was the most accommodating, sensitive, multilateralist President one can imagine, and yet we know that al-Qaeda began the planning for Sept. 11 precisely during his presidency. Clinton made humility his vocation, apologizing variously for African slavery, for internment of Japanese Americans, for not saving Rwanda. He even decided that Britain should return the Elgin Marbles to Greece. A lot of good that did us. Bin Laden issued his Declaration of War on America in 1996--at the height of the Clinton Administration's hyperapologetic, good-citizen internationalism."

So . . . should we have not apologized for slavery, not apologized for the internment of Japanese-Americans and not apologized for ignoring genocide in Rwanda? Should we have instead insisted that those were all perfectly moral acts? Because if not, then why bring up these things?

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by shuize


I was referring to the so-called "goodwill" post 9/11. As I stated in my last post, from what I saw firsthand, it lasted for all the time it took the U.S. to go after the ringleaders in Afghanistan. Like the article points out, empty goodwill that ties our hands in times of crisis is worthless.

What was the crises that Saddam was causing the US to experience?

[Ian Osborne]

Originally posted by shuize
As an American ex-pat, I don't view the world entirely through U.S. lenses. However, I agree with the point above that the goodwill for the U.S. lasted about as long as it took us to gear up to go after the ringleaders in Afghanistan. I know that from first-hand experience.

As noted in the article, if the keeping the "goodwill" of the world means we can't go after those who organized the murder of 3,000 Americans, you can take your goodwill and shove it.

Where are you? Most in the UK thought the war in Afghanistan was entirely justified, though America was rightly criticised for several trigger-happy mistakes, such as strafeing that wedding party.

[Ian Osborne]

Originally posted by BTox
We didn't like your advice, which was to do nothing and wish evil away (which worked so well in WWII).

You are aware that Europe was two years into the war before America joined in?

[The Fool]

Originally posted by Ian Osborne


You are aware that Europe was two years into the war before America joined in?
Probably not.

[ingoa]

What's "goodwill"?

The US got and still get support in Afghanistan. Thousands of NATO soldiers are currently in Afghanistan. Even the Germans.

That you didn't get support for the Iraq invasion shows that there is no "goodwill" left? Bloddy heck! "Goodwill" does not mean a suicide pact! Why should Germany or France or Russia join an adventure that in their opinion is neither justified nor likely to succeed?

I believe many Americans get their perspective messed up. The Europeans (as far as I can see) are strongly opposed to the dealings of the American government and the American military. Does that mean they are "anti-American". Not so, Sir! We can distinguish between the people and their executive powers. Every few years or so, you have a limited influence on the politics of your country, same here. But in between the influence of the people is quite limited.

It is really annoying for non US-citizens that any, yes any!, criticism is labelled "anti-Americanism". Envy?! Why should we? Our lifestyle is similar comfortable. Our social system is cosy enough for us. We are different, but not worse (in our opinion, you might see it different... :) ) Okay, granted, the USA are probably as powerful as most of the rest of the World together, but might doesn't make right!

Europe for example has to negotiate neccessarily, because Europe lacks the power to enforce unilaterally anything. We have fared very well during the last 50 years by this. Every time a government thinks they can get away with it, it will be done. Unfortunately my country was a prime example for that. This is different in Europe now. They can't impose their will anymore. (OT: Don't think France and Germany could break the rules of the EU stability pact easily. In order to overcome it they would have the convince a majority of the smaller countries at well. Negotiation again...)

So your elephant in a porcelain shop president tries to force other nations into a coalition in order to attack Iraq. And when people (not only governments) question the rationale behind that, Rumsfeld talks about "Old Europe"... To be clear: no sane person or country would write a blank check to anybody else. Neither to Bush nor to any other government. This is prudent, but sure no lack of "goodwill". Try to explain what you (the US government) want and in case of doubt we always would favour you. The USA are not a dictatorship and we Europeans remember all the help we got. But a blank check? No! If that is lack of "goodwill", so be it. But I learned the definition differently.

/end of rant

[Supercharts]

According to this item from a UK paper the citizens of the UK support the United States in Iraq.
http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,1087545,00.html

"Protests begin but majority backs Bush visit as support for war surges

See the ICM poll in full (pdf)

Alan Travis and David Gow
Tuesday November 18, 2003
The Guardian

A majority of Labour voters welcome President George Bush's state visit to Britain which starts today, according to November's Guardian/ICM opinion poll.

The survey shows that public opinion in Britain is overwhelmingly pro-American with 62% of voters believing that the US is "generally speaking a force for good, not evil, in the world". It explodes the conventional political wisdom at Westminster that Mr Bush's visit will prove damaging to Tony Blair. Only 15% of British voters agree with the idea that America is the "evil empire" in the world."

Does Halliburton own the Guardian?

:D