Where's the love?

[Zulu Elephant]

Europeans dont hate America, they hate american conservatism.

I dont know a single person who had a major problem with Clinton but as soon as Bush became president, people in Europe started to hate him.

The spy plane in china
The gobal warming treaty
Steel tariffs
Ruining Europe's peaceful efforts to engage Iran with his whole "Axis of evil" thing

The list goes on...

The reasons that European opinion has turned against america are have nothing to do with its wealth or the size of its military (although i think that maybe a lot of americans would find it comforting to to blame it on jealousy) and everything to do with Bush's brand of "America First" conservatism



PS
If anyone starts talking about Reagan or Bush Snr, may I remind them that they occupied the White house during thye Cold War - Europeans were much more willing to support self defence of western sovereignty rather than defence of western dominance

[Bosh]

"Unilateral policy" is probably one of the biggest lies I have ever heard of when people talk about the US....

So you are saying that it would be a bad thing for the US to have a foreign policy where they went out and did things like invaded countries without the baking of our allies in Europe and we do not act unilaterally, right?

the same ignorant path of some Europeans who are only paving the way for future terrorist attacks. THEY ARE THE ONES SUPPORTING TERRORISTS!

Now we have condemnations of Europeans for not following US lead right, thus forcing the US to be unilateral in its foreign policy.

Kepler, I assure you my people are not whining about what the US does, we are behind them every step of the way. And the same with Italy.

Ah so now it only Europeans from places that Gian's family doesn't come from. I'm sure these fine people will be very surpised to discover they don't exist:

http://italy.indymedia.org/

If you hate the US so much mind your own business.

Aaaah now he's telling Europeans that if they should let the US act unilaterally and not back the US up, something which he characterized above as "SUPPORTING TERRORISTS" and would result in the us persueing a course of action that he labelled above as "the biggest lie."

We don't say "oh maybe they will go away because of our ignorance" like some Europeans

I'm sure that these:

http://www.worldsocialist-cwi.org/Index2.htm?eng/2002/06/25Spain.html

people will be equalled saddened by their non-existance.

I never said you all were terrorist supporters.

THEY ARE THE ONES SUPPORTING TERRORISTS!

This is one confused squirrel...

[tandeetaylor]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
...and you try and tell me that the US administration is doing it for 'the right reasons'.

Yeah, most Americans I know feel a heartfelt sorrow for the people of Iraq...

Even if they did, American soldiers don't have a responsibility to be taken to another country to fight and die for the welfare of its citizens.

[Pekka]

Besides, it can be close we too join the wars the US fights, if we join the NATO. It's gonna be a close call though, there might be a voting. It's not that easy. We don't have 1000 fighters fueled up and ready to go. We don't have ships ready to sail the seas, they're here to stay and defend. If we had more.. then I don't see any reasons why not participating. And if we join NATO, then that's what we'll do, get more.

Plus since we don't have big professional armys, you know it would suck ass, since I myself could get drafted, wanted or not. I'm all for fighting them evil-doers, ready to go, but it would still suck. And many of my friends would agree.

And if US has the right to attack Iraq, then we surely have the right to say our opinions about it?

[loinburger]

Threads like this would be a lot more interesting if certain posters were simply ignored.

[tandeetaylor]

Originally posted by Fez
Geez... this is too much...

I know! All this logic and reason in the face of your ill-founded opinions. Moderators!

[Provost Harrison]

This is true tandeetaylor, and it surprises me that they think the Gulf War was over anything other than oil. Iraq would have forced an increase in the price of oil...Kuwait's invasion was very convenient.

[finkian]

Originally posted by tandeetaylor

Even if they did, American soldiers don't have a responsibility to be taken to another country to fight and die for the welfare of its citizens.

NO, they don't have to. Unfortunately, the conflict with Iraq is rooted not just in our desire to help with the citizens of Iraq, but saddam's regime does indeed prove a threat to America's interests-- both in economy and in security. He's a loon. And when someone who has shown an affinity to use chemical weapons on their enemies refuses to allow the UN to inspect their chemical arsenal, then that is a threat. A threat that has been there for too long.

[Pekka]

I believe saddam is ready to let the inspectors back?
But then again he could be just fishing. He would be plain stupid to let inspectors, they are potential spies and since it's gonna be a war no matter what, why would he let them come there?

[Pekka]

Then again he could be letting them back, restricting their jobs and places to visit, just to play more time and get things organized.

[finkian]

In fact, I agree with you. There will be war no matter what. He is a madman in a highly unstable area in which the US has too many interests. So we gotta get him and his regime out of power.

[orange]

Newsflash: Fez is NOT the ruler of Spain.

Stop speaking about Spanish citizens as if they were your subjects, and Spain as if you control it. Moreover, you don't even live there, so be a good lad and shut the fuck up.

[tandeetaylor]

Originally posted by finkian


NO, they don't have to. Unfortunately, the conflict with Iraq is rooted not just in our desire to help with the citizens of Iraq, but saddam's regime does indeed prove a threat to America's interests-- both in economy and in security. He's a loon. And when someone who has shown an affinity to use chemical weapons on their enemies refuses to allow the UN to inspect their chemical arsenal, then that is a threat. A threat that has been there for too long.

[Hi fink! I've missed you. ::kisses:: ]

I understand this point. I was more responding to Fez's use of the plight of the Iraqi people to justify an American attack of Iraq.

I still disagree though. Let's all remember that Saddam has never attacked the US, nor has he attempted to. He may be a horrible person, but he's not a complete idiot. Self-preservation is important to him, witness his attempts to appease Bush by offering inspector access, which hasn't even been on the table with him for quite some time.

And if we're going to attack every crazy person who may or may not be a threat to us, then we'd better get going, the road ahead is long.

[orange]

On Topic: very timely article

This is one American who is just as upset with America as the Euros are. Sometimes I'm embarrassed to refer to myself as an American because of the thoughts and actions of some of our leaders.

We need to start practicing what we preach!

[Grandpa Troll]

Originally posted by loinburger
Threads like this would be a lot more interesting if certain posters were simply ignored.

Loinburger, please let your opinions fill the voids of the reply page and dont let anyone tell you not to post!

Its ok, not everyone ignores you!!

Troll