Report/Overview of Bush euro visit

[Pekka]

I agree that the atmosphere is much due to who the president is, not what the US is. I feel there's just so much anti-Bush sentiment, it doesn't matter if his number two man was Jesus, people will still hate Bush. People would argue that since he is the number one man of the US, it's the same as hating US, but that's not really true except in the laalaaland where you marry your sister and call it true love.

But then again, there weren't MASSIVE protests either. Hey, maybe Europe is the place he can be most secure. In the US, we've seen the protests.. those were HUGE. Your own country hates him maybe more than Europe does . In here, bunch of protestors have showed up, but they would always show up even if it was DOokey the Monkey Man visiting some village. Try that in ME, and you have a dead president. Try that in.. well maybe there are parts in Asia that he would recieve more welcome.

Just face it. He is a hated man, that is the truth and there's nothing we can do about it. THat's the way it is. His image is FUBAR. We don't have to like it, but it's the trtuh. I don't hate the man afterall, but I'm stating the obvious. It doesn't really matter what the reasons to it are, but it means, that when people go down and moon to the president, it doesn't necessarily mean, and very unlikely these days means, that they're mooning for the people of the US, though of course tehre are always those people as well. So you should take comfort of this post rather than anything else. PLUS the anti-Bush sentiments have cooled off a little bit anyway.

[child of Thor]

Pekka

Yeh the potential irony of it is priceless.
Dubya - hated much at home, hated more in the UK, hated least in Europe(?).
Maybe he should be removed as president of the USA and become president of a new united europe instead

[The diplomat]

Who cares if the popular masses did not come out to cheer Bush's arrival? Who cares if a bunch of leftist wackos, who have no influence whatsoever on American politics, "hate" Bush. The only thing that matters is what kind of agreements Bush can reach with the leaders of Europe. From that perspective, the trip was not all that bad: Germany will do more to help train Iraqi security, France agreed with the US to demand that Syria withdraw from Lebanon, and Russia agreed to several important measures to help prevent nuclear terrorism.

[child of Thor]

Its very difficult to make agreements on the behalf of the people who voted you in, if your so at odds with whom your meant to be representing.
God bless democracy - thats about all i agree with bush on, although in the long run and wider context he may well change his mind on that one
It will be interesting to see what happens in the UK's upcoming elections, it will be a good litmus test to many things.

[BeBMan]

Could George W. Bush Be Right?

[alva]

Originally posted by The diplomat
Who cares if the popular masses did not come out to cheer Bush's arrival? Who cares if a bunch of leftist wackos, who have no influence whatsoever on American politics, "hate" Bush.

You mean the "rest of the world" here, don't you.

The only thing that matters is what kind of agreements Bush can reach with the leaders of Europe. From that perspective, the trip was not all that bad: Germany will do more to help train Iraqi security, France agreed with the US to demand that Syria withdraw from Lebanon,

all agreed upon before he came, it's not like he clinched those deals personally or that without him being here they wouldn't have happened

and Russia agreed to several important measures to help prevent nuclear terrorism.

That's an old treaty, not a new one AFAIK.

[DinoDoc]

Given that he wasn't able to make any headway on several important issues chief among them being the China embargo and getting Russia on board wrt Iran the trip gets a big meh from me.

[child of Thor]

I think it was all about a smoke and mirrors exercise, one of the principles of the neo-con ethos

It had nothing to do with actualy doing or being about what was stated. Nothings changed in any real sense.

Bush doesnt like anyone else and no-one likes him back - so yes it was a wasted trip from both sides, but it was always meant to be.

I think he was mearly trying to stop any worries back in the USA about the US becoming too isolated in the world, a show of 'we are all in this together' for the flag waving masses.

[Last Conformist]

Impressions often trump realities in foreign policy. If people think the US and EU are closer as a result of Bush's trip, they are closer.

[pchang]

I could have sworn at their join press conference that Bush and Putin agreed "No Nukes for You!" to Iran.

[alva]

I think he was mearly trying to stop any worries back in the USA about the US becoming too isolated in the world, a show of 'we are all in this together' for the flag waving masses.

Like I said in the other thread, we gave something like 300.000$ to train Irak officers and in return the US gave us 4.000.000$ to train officers in Congo but now Bush can go home claiming all nations (including Belgium) support the program.

[The diplomat]

Originally posted by alva

Originally posted by The diplomat
Who cares if the popular masses did not come out to cheer Bush's arrival? Who cares if a bunch of leftist wackos, who have no influence whatsoever on American politics, "hate" Bush.

You mean the "rest of the world" here, don't you.

no. The fact is that the whole world does not hate Bush. The European Left hates Bush. That is not all of Europe. There were large supportive crowds in Slovakia to listen to his speech on democracy.

These protests we see in Gemany or France are organized by the Left. Some European countries like France and Germany have very active and strong socialist parties which mobilize their members to go out and protest Bush because he is on the "right". Heck, these protests are routine. When I lived in France, I saw lots of protests by labor unions and other groups everytime a law or policy was proposed that they did not like. It's no big deal.

We can hardly say that the whole world hates Bush.

The only thing that matters is what kind of agreements Bush can reach with the leaders of Europe. From that perspective, the trip was not all that bad: Germany will do more to help train Iraqi security, France agreed with the US to demand that Syria withdraw from Lebanon,

all agreed upon before he came, it's not like he clinched those deals personally or that without him being here they wouldn't have happened.

That's normal procedure. You don't think that foreign leaders actually sit down and write the treaties themselves, do you? There is always a lot of behind the scenes negotiations with diplomats doing the detailed work. The summits between foreign leaders are usually photo ops anyway.

and Russia agreed to several important measures to help prevent nuclear terrorism.

That's an old treaty, not a new one AFAIK.

Even if it is an old treaty, it's still a good thing.

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by pchang
I could have sworn at their join press conference that Bush and Putin agreed "No Nukes for You!" to Iran.

I put as much stock in that as Putin's claims to love democracy at the same press conference until it is backed up by something (anything!) of substance.

I think ...

Since when?

[JohnT]

I'd like to go to Mainz. Is Gutenbergs first press still extant?

[GePap]

Originally posted by The diplomat


no. The fact is that the whole world does not hate Bush. The European Left hates Bush. That is not all of Europe. There were large supportive crowds in Slovakia to listen to his speech on democracy.

These protests we see in Gemany or France are organized by the Left. Some European countries like France and Germany have very active and strong socialist parties which mobilize their members to go out and protest Bush because he is on the "right". Heck, these protests are routine. When I lived in France, I saw lots of protests by labor unions and other groups everytime a law or policy was proposed that they did not like. It's no big deal.

We can hardly say that the whole world hates Bush.

You must be one of those deluded Fox Watchers, cause Bush global popularity is pretty low.

here you go:
://www.publicdiplomacy.org/41.htm

Summary
In public opinion polls conducted in 21 countries following the re-election of George W. Bush, majorities in 16 of the 21 countries view Bush's re-election as negaive for world peace and security. Only in two countries (India and the Philippines) do majorities consider Bush's re-election in positive terms. In two other countries, a plurality (but not majority) view the re-election negatively, and in one (Poland) a plurality but not majority consider the re-election a positive step. The most negative overall opinions were recorded in Western Europe, Latin America, and Islamic countries. Nearly half of those surveyed now view the U.S. influence in the world as mostly negative. Although still a minority, growing numbers now consider the American people in negative terms and none of the publics surveyed, even those with favorable opinions of Bush's re-election, support sending their own troops to Iraq.

Highlights
In a poll of 21,953 people in 21 countries, conducted between November 2004 and January 2005, a solid majority (58%) view President Bush's re-election as negative for world peace and security. Only about a quarter of those polled (26%) call the re-election a positive step.

The results indicate some traditional US allies are most negative about Bush's reelection including all western European countries polled—Germany (77% negative), France (75%), Britain (64%), though Italy is by comparison moderate at 54 percent negative. Those with strongly negative opinions also include Canada (67%) and Australia (61%). Japan, however, is noncommittal, with a plurality negative (39%), compared to 15 percent positive, but about a third (31%) saying it makes no difference 31%.

The surveys recorded majorities of negative opinion in Islamic countries and Latin America as well. In Turkey, although nominally a US ally, an overwhelming 82 percent are negative about Bush’s reelection—the highest of all countries polled. Also negative are Indonesia (68%), and Lebanon (64%). In Central and South America, which has not been a high-profile focus of U.S. policy, Argentines are 79 percent negative, as are 78 percent of Brazilians, 62 percent of Chileans and 58 percent of Mexicans. Others with majorities considering the re-elction a negative for world security include Chine (56%), South Korea (54%), and South Africa. In Russia, as in Japan, a plurality but not majority consider the re-election in negative terms, 39 to 16 percent.

Only in two countries do majorities feel good about President Bush's re-election. Strong majorities of Filipinos and Indians - 63 and 62 percent respectively - consider the re-election a positive step for world security. In Poland, a plurality but not majority (44%) view the re-election in positive terms.