I vote "Love that country", because US saved Europe three times, saved Asia once (but lost the Vietnamese war) and now try to save the Muslim world (and will lose the war in Iraq), they do something, there is not a perfect society and US certainly, but don't blame them for the minor mistakes.>>

I do not hate USA. I do not like it on the other hand......

But the regime in USA is at he hands of the "darkest" people on the world. They are really bad.

USA is a country which is ruled by democratic manipulations so non-democratic. They do not have anything to export such as "democracy". If you do not have enough money to make lobby, it means that you do not have right to say in administrative and judiciary level.

Oil and arms industry are abusing American citizens, manipulate them and send them to die in dirty wars. They are also mostly controlling media.

I wonder how Bush has been reelected after being proofed that his administration lied constantly for an unfair war costing hundred thousands of life and billions of dollars.

Could any American explain me this nonsense political life in USA?

I am glad I did not have to make this poll.  I almost did recently due to all of the anti-American talks going on. 

I love the country(as most of you know), but what I can't understand is why do people hate us so much?  Is it just because of our different poilcies?

Richard XIII
but don't put Turkey in the line of non-democratic countries also.

I know we had a lot problem, but we are trying to make our democracy better.

Thegeneral

Main problem is you are most powerful country in world. and You wont let anyone to forget it.

USA is just like other countries, not better not worse.

I have no speacial hatred against USA, and have not speacial love to USA.

 I will choose Its not too bad, but thats it.

Usa, hmmmm

goverment: bad

people: good, saf

There are things both to love and hate about the US.  personally I think its unfair that peopple hate it for the reason that its so powerful, as often these are people that like superpowers throughout history.  I dont blame the US for supporting evil people either because thats sound strategy especially in the cold war.  had the Soviets won we probably wouldnt be allowed to have this discussion about the USSR.

On the other hand what I hate about the US has more to do with certain cultural sub groups that have alot more power than they should right now.  Mostly its the religious crap.  If the US could just accept that we are about liberty and capitalism and revel in our libertine nature rather than repress it, we would be so much cooler, and less like the Middle East which we claim to be enemies of but in fact are very similair to.

Kenaney,

Now, do you not like our government because it is different from your policies or just because you think its bad?

Murtaza,

Are you saying people dislike America because we are the most powerful?

Thegeneral

You are not only most powerful, you love to show it.

For ex:

Turkey, USA is never beloved of Turks, but She was not hated so much.

Do you think reason is only because Turkey is muslim?

Or because USA attacked Turkish soldier?

Why do you think arabs should love USA?

You always supported Israel against to Arabs.

Or why Iranians should love USA? Because USA help Saddam to kill iranians?

I think USA follows his benefit.

All country follow Its benefit, But they are not most powerful country of world.

I dont think goverment of France or Turkey is more honorful than USA. But I dont think USA goverment is more honorful than Turkey or france goverment too.

Tobodai
Personally I think its unfair that peopple hate it for the reason that its so powerful, as often these are people that like superpowers throughout history. 

You are right. But That superpowers also hated when they had power. I dont think people loved British or Ottomans.

Arrogance, boastfulness, lack of respect for other people, the feeling that only Americans matter - particularly that only American deaths matter, religious certitude and self-satisfaction, militarism.

5% of the world's population using 25% of its resources, and doing it on borrowed money.

That's the perceived image and under the current administration it's justified. It however doesn't apply to all Americans as individuals, probably not to the majority. I know that because I'm married to one, and I've spent about 25-30% of my time the last 20 years in the US.

Around Christmas time of 2001 I was talking with some members of the congregation at a church in Atlanta. It transpired the son of one woman was currently in Afghanistan with the special forces. I said I was glad that the British were helping out with the SAS.

She snapped at me: "We don't need any help, thank you."

That's the kind of thing gets Americans hated.

PS: Why does it say I can't vote in this poll? (I would have put other, my preferred answer being I like many things about the country, but some Americans really get my back up.)

Something tells me that perhaps you did not just say you were glad the SAS was helping.

1.  If arrogance, boastfullness, and lack of respect doesn't aply to most of the population, then why do people think of us that way?

2.  Actually we have more than 5% of the worlds population which uses most of our own resources with little importation of foreign resources, except for oil.  And I don't know where you get we use borrowed money.

3.  And how does the administration justify any of that?

Some of this stuff seems very absurd.

1.  If arrogance, boastfullness, and lack of respect doesn't aply to most of the population, then why do people think of us that way?

Because They dont know people of USA, but they know bush.

that only American deaths matter,

Should think about this. If this is true you should change it, If false you should think why people think this way. (If you care what other people think.)

Well, I truthfully don't care what people think most of the time, but I do like to know why and if it a completly wrong idea, try to fix it.

I don't believe that America only think American lives are important.  We probally think that if a fellow countryman dies, it is more of a punch to us than if someone in another country dies, but I think that is normal in most countries.

As for bush being arrogant, boastful, and disrespectful, I have to disagree.  He may seem a little arrogant at times, but that is because is is from Texas.  As for him being boastful, I have not seen him boast at all except for him saying we are doing well in Iraq, which, depending on what you want to believe, is true.  And I have not seen him disrespect anyone at all.  Again, he is from Texas, and most people from the south tend to be very friendly, trusting, and respectfull.

And I have not seen him disrespect anyone at all.

My friend he lied All world and USA about Iraq, about the reason of war, but you still can find him trustful?

this is the one thing I realy dont understand.

How you can find him still trustful?

BUSH may not have known.  The info BUSH gets is supposed to be truthful.  The info BUSH gets does not come from BUSH.  I do not hold BUSH responsible for bad information.

One half of my brain (probably the part which is responsible for objective thought) tells me to STAY THE HELL AWAY! While the other half (subjective) tells me to make some sort of contribution.

Well I will contribute, not to vent my spleen but just to make a CONSTRUCTIVE contribution to the topic. The USA has been responsible for many great achievements, we have an abundance of technological, social, political, ecclesiastical and other benefits as a result of the vast creativity of the American nation. As part of the developed world the people of my country have been able to partake in the fruits this impressive nation has to offer. Personally I have probably only met two dozen Americans in my life, all of them from either work or university. My impression of them is mostly good, they have their fair share of flaws and virtues the same as every other people in the world. So basically I quite like Americans and alot of what their country has contributed to the world.

But there are negative points which the beginner of this post wants to learn more about. So I shall try and articulate why it is so many (and you would be surprised how many) different nations of people have a negative opinion of the USA.

Firstly there is a perceived attitude that Americans are very insular and ignorant of the outside world, a worrying trait for a people who seem to have a reach that extends to every area of the globe. I read a statistic I am not sure I can believe, that only 5-10% of American citizens have passports. Again I don't know if that is true, but if it is it's quite shocking.

Another vice is leadership. Again, I must point out I am presenting the views of many disenchanted people in the world, not my own. Yesterday I read an article in the paper which truly surprised me. In one poll Americans had ranked their favourite people and at the top of the list, right above George Washington, was Ronald Reagan. Bush Jr. was sixth on the list. Their qualities aside, these men are widely regarded as intellectual lightweights with a poor grasp of cosmopolitanism. In positions of leadership of the leading nation of the planet, it worries the people of that world that such individuals who were never credited with a deeper intellectual understanding of the globe are now in positions of immense power. I know they have been used alot but comments such as "I know what it means to put food on your family" and "imports and exports are important sources of overseas trade" do not inspire much confidence. It is easy to look up to and admire men like Lincoln and Washington on which the USA was built, but with many of the more recent American Presidents most non-Americans would rather look the other way.

Another vice many in the world perceive is one of avarice and greed. It may not be true that this is the case, but how much did Bush pledge to help Tsunami victims after the disaster? A government which claims to want to create a freer world and bring people together pledged a tiny amount compared to what it spends on its military. The tsunami was a big chance for the US government to show it had a genuine interest in the welfare of the world's people. Bush offered only a small amount (a few hundred million I think) immediately which he later raised due to pressure, while I know the Australian government immediately offered one billion dollars. It sets a poor standard for a government to justify a number of wars with the good of humanity in mind, while at the same time when a natural disaster occurs it offers a fraction of the relief made by countries many times smaller than itself.

Basically without writing a thesis these are a few key reasons why some people dislike the USA. It is perceived as having changed from what it one was. Again I like most of what America and Americans are about and I mean nobody any offence or disrespect. I am simply presenting some reasons why certain people in the world think differently.

I'd like to say something about these two points.

First of all about the leadership.  The thing with Europeans and Asians is that they are all lumped together on one continent while Americans have only Canada and Mexico and neighbors.  Thus is is much more likely that European and Asian leaders are going to be a better cosmopolitans.  It is a matter of the situation and what is needed.  I los believe that most Americans do not care what others think, and I would not be surprised if only 10% of Americans have passports; we just don't need or use them.  Europeans seem to have the need to travel, even if they don't like America

As for the tsunami, unless something has chnage, America gave the most money second only to Japan, so please don't hold that against us especially when we are in the middle of a war.

Yea very true that.

That is exactly, and all, I said in the conversation.

Because it applies to the most visible, outspoken and public section of the population.

I used 300 million and 6 billion. That's 5% but I agree it's an approximation. However, I thought the US population was less than 300 million while the world's was greater than 6 billion. Is that wrong?

Big exception. And if I were you I would look at current figures for minerals in general. It's true that the US USED to be self-sufficient in pretty well everything, but it's not true any more.

From the $4 billion a day you borrow.

Not an uncommon comment from people suffering from cognitive dissonance.

[QUOTE=gcle2003]

It's true that the US USED to be self-sufficient in pretty well everything, but it's not true any more.

[QUOTE]

I should have added that the US probably COULD be self-sufficient again. It isn't because the culture is so wasteful, from the size of portions served in restaurants through energy-wasteful house designs to the proportion of SUVs and pick-up trucks being driven by people who don't need them.

i think Arabs in general dont like the US government for one main reason is that US's Blind support to Israel and not being neutral about the problem.

and i think that was one of the main reasons for the terrorest activites against the US.

its always about the Jews.

other than this i think the majority of the Arabs admire US acheivements in many feilds such as sceince.

Let me give my opinion on the USA.

It's a young country that has reached the first place in the world really fast. I admire how US people are proud of their country. They have always be prompt to give their blood to help their allies. At that time, USA are powerfull enough to protect our christian civilization, like people of the "old" Europe have done before them. May it lasts! I will never give any lesson like many do.

Hope France will have the opportunity to be at their side once again and we will pay our debt of honor.

These are the words that i was ready to write!

You mean like in 1914 and 1939 (1937 if you are Chinese)?

The US didn't join WWII until (a) the Japanese attacked Pearl Harbor and (b) the Germans declared war on them. When Europe was struggling to free itself from Napoleon, the US sided with Napoleon.

The US record has of course been better post-1945, especially in the early cold war, resisting the Soviet Union, and in Korea. But unthinking and uninformed comments about 'the US has saved Europe twice', or 'without the US Europe would be speaking German' are exactly the kind of thing that heighten resentment against the US.

'Resent' is incidentally a better word than 'hate', I think.

Yes. Like in 1917 and 1941.

"Prompt" was maybe not adequate. But I was not speaking about politicians decision but about people sacrifice. This is a fact that we have a debt.

Yes and that's making me closer to them.

Explain me why.

Tires, you are the first Frenchman I have any respect for so far!  My stance toward France seems to be changine.

Anyways, how did we side with Napoleon?  I believe we stayed nuetral and the only thing we had with Napoleon was the fact that we bought the Lousiana purchase from him.  But that was purley buisness.

As for WWII, we declared war on German and Japan before they did us.  And we did save France, Britain, Russia, and Europe from the Germans.  Whether it came in the form of lend-lease or American lives.  However you look at it we saved you.

I have to say that Europeans just seem to be so miliatily stuck up that if any country helps them they seem to try to cover it up.  But now people are going to say "Well thats why we dislike America.  You brag too much".  But it is not bragging.

so Thegeneral

did you find an answer to your Question"why do they hate us?" and i think Bush asked the same Question too.

America and its people are a complicated problem.  I do not know why people like to bash the nation--maybe its because America isn't really a nation.  An answer to those who that USA is insular would be look at the:

Italian-Americans, Irish-Americans, Arab-Americans, Hispanic-Americans, Asian-Americans, African-Americans, Jewish-Americans, Catholic-Americans, Protestant-Americans, Muslim-Americans, Atheist-Americans, Buddhist-Americans, Mexican-Americans, German-Americans, Polish-Americans, Indian-Americans (Hindu), Alien-Americans (if "The Weekly World News" is to be believed), Native-Americans and whatever-Americans.  Our view on the rest of the world is that it's welcome here to come and work.

If America is anything, it's a combination of cultures, a clash of views.   Plurality of necessity is the American way. 

But then there is Corporate America, which would have everybody believe that an American drives an air-conditoned, 800 Gazillion horse-power, gas-guzzling bright red convertable up to a pick-up window of a fast food joint for a low-cal cheeseburger, fries and drink.   This is not the truth--but is it what Americans want?  I don't know; I don't know if Americans know.  A friend of mine wants security for her family;  another friend wants a permanent job, and yet another friend wants cultural rebellion. 

Also, there is political America.  And it's politics that is polerizing the USA.  Some leave political decisions in the hands of a God and his self-proclaimed representatives.  Others are actively against this idea.  Everybody sees problems here:  corruption, terrorism, greed, debt--a massive feeling of dis-satisified dehumanization.  We can't make up our collective minds, and the politicians have to think winning an election by a single-digit percentage is a mandate.  But once somebody acts, it always seems half-hearted because someone will disagree with it.

I don't know if the world realizes all of this.  Some folks will probably see this post as arrogant, boastful, and rude.  But before criticizing America, try explaining it.  I've done the best I can do here.

Mord.

I opine that this is the case of virtually every country, just that it's more obvious in some than in others.  Some purport that their country is a continuous whole since antiquity, but in reality virtually no such country exists anymore.  Every country contains some kind of hybrid culture.

Actually I would say most Americans know their past from their home country.  I know my parents do quite well, as do I. 

But America is probally the most diverse country in the wolrd which is one of our reasons for success. 

I never said America or Americans were a perfect combination of anything. I simply said that plurality is a necessity in the USA.  Put in other words, there is no "Common American."  As for your idea that some folks who would rather watch the super bowl, than learn anything about their ancestors, I think you are mistaken.  My own ancestors immigrated from Ireland (Kildare) in the 1840s to serve in the US Army.  During the Civil War, he was commissioned as an officer for the Union and eventually made Captain.  After the war he settled in Waukegan, Illinois, married, and had 2 sons.   Btw, I haven't watched the super bowl in years; I prefer hockey (Go Flyers!) and baseball.

The other mistake you make is that folks are still coming to America on a daily basis.  New citizens are made almost daily as well.  Can you say the same for Estonia?

Mord.

In the War of 1812.

I accept of course that from some French points of view, siding with Napoleon was a good thing.

Nope. The attack on Pearl Harbour was not preceded by a formal declaration of war, but it itself was a declaration alright. And the German government declared war on the US in conformity with their mutual defence treaty with Japan.

This is the text of Roosevelt's message to Congress on December 11 1941:

"To the Congress of the United States:

          On the morning of Dec. 11 the Government of Germany, pursuing its course of world conquest, declared war against the United States. The long-known and the long-expected has thus taken place. The forces endeavoring to enslave the entire world now are moving toward this hemisphere. Never before has there been a greater challenge to life, liberty and civilization. Delay invites great danger. Rapid and united effort by all of the peoples of the world who are determined to remain free will insure a world victory of the forces of justice and of righteousness over the forces of savagery and of barbarism. Italy also has declared war against the United States.

          I therefore request the Congress to recognize a state of war between the United States and Germany, and between the United States and Italy.

                                                                                          Franklin D. Roosevelt"

Note that he states that Germany (and Italy for that matter had ALREADY declared war on the US, and he only asks Congress, not for a declaration, but for a RECOGNITION that war already existed.

The full text of Roosevelt's message is at:

http://www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html - http://www.law.ou.edu/hist/germwar.html

The kind of distortion of the truth you engage in here helps get the US resented. As does the fact that generations of Americans have been brought up to believe an untruth.

I believe of course that FDR welcomed the fact that Germany had forced the issue, since he himself might well have entered the war earlier. But there was no way, in the political situation of the time, that he could have got a declaration of war out of Congress.

No-one I think denies that the US helped. But take a look at the numbers of soldiers and civilians killed in the war. Take a look at the numbers of troops involved (discounting here those involved against Japan). Teke a look at the size of the populations involved at the time.

Once Hitler invaded the USSR in June 1941 (at least, once it became obvious that he came as a conqueror not a liberator, which didn't take long)  Germany's eventual defeat became inevitable. Germany's sole chance of winning lay in its initial blitzkrieg being sufficient to occupy Britain - or at least cut Britain off from the Commonwealth - and take Moscow and Leningrad.

By the time US troops came into action, all of these had failed.

Of course there are a lot more detailed considerations, including especially the fact that Pearl Harbour brough both Japan AND the US into play. But essentially there's no more truth in 'The US saved Europe from the Germans' than there is in 'The US declared war on Germany'.

And the reasons for your failures?

Or doesn't the US have failures?

Ah! Our strength is our weakness.  Plurality isn't easy, and yes, we've had all sorts of failures.  Just what those failures are is a matter of political and historical debate.  Right now, the debate seems to be over morality.  Just how much hedonistic excess is allowed?  Some believe there's not enough.  Some believe there's too much. 

Mord.

You are correct that German declared war on America.  ACtually, we were the only country that Germany declared war.

ANd I'd like to point out that wars are not won by men alone.  Nor should a countries contributions to a war be messured by how many men fought and died.  America helped alot with money and matterial.  Lend-Lease helped keep Britain and Russia alive in its darkest days.  Once Russia got back on its own feet, they began to make their won matterial, but without America, they would not have had that chance.

And you wrong. For which I note you are not apologising.

Wrong again. But Mixcoatl has dealt with that one.

Why not? Because when you do that the chief contributor to beating Germany would be the Soviet Union?

It seems a not insignificant criterion. The point is that claiming 'America saved Europe from the Germans' rather implies that America made considerable sacrifices for other people and those other people should be grateful for that. Now you're complaining that, well, after all, the actiual degree of sacrifice is not all that important.

No-one is denying that. But it's a far cry from there to 'The US saved Europe'. Moreover, that hardly applies to WWI, when again, the US claims to have 'saved Europe'.

In both wars, America's eventual involvement hastened the end for Germany. In the first (in which it is true America declared war) the American role was truly minor, but was enough to tip the balance as support for the war fell apart in Germany itself.

In the second the role of the US was still greater, but it still only started, on the ground, when Germany had in fact been fought to a standstill in the West, North Africa, and the Soviet Union, and in the latter two cases the tide had started to turn. 

Think about it. You're making my point for me. Britain, France, the Soviet Union, the various Commonwealth countries and smaller European countries had fought for years to hold off Germany and give the US a chance to develop its war potential in safety. And even then, the US was not prepared to join the war until it was forced to (as I gather you're now willing to admit).

You don't want to count men and deaths and sacrifice as measures of a country's contribution. However, it wouldn't seem a bad idea to count the available population and mineral and other resource available, including money, as measures of a country's ability to wage war. Do that as of 1939 and Germany was always going to be beaten, unless, as I pointed out, its original superiority in war readiness and equipment, and in strategic and tactical thinking allowed it to deliver a quick knock-out blow.

It didn't do that, and it was doomed.

In war as in boxing, the good big un may not always beat the good littl'un, but that's the way to bet. 

PS If you want some safer ground, claim that the US saved Europe from the Soviet Union after 1945. There's a much better case for that.

As long of course as you don't make the mistake that I've seen recently in the US of viewing the Berlin airlift as an American operation.

"The other mistake you make is that folks are still coming to America on a daily basis.  New citizens are made almost daily as well.  Can you say the same for Estonia?"

No, of course not.

The results of this poll are irrelevant.  The United States will address its own interests without regard to the opinions of others...as ALL nations do.

Since Sept. 11, 2001, no acts of terrorism have occurred on U.S. soil.  Why?  The war has been carried to other lands where these filth will have to spend their time and resources hiding from and dodging American power.  If you don't like it, too bad.  Get over it.  We do it because we can.

I have to say that if Iraq has done nothing else it has atleast brought all the terrorists to one place for us to destroy.  It is much easier than them coming to us or us hunting for them in 20 different countries.

And Pike has a point.  America doesn't complain about what Europe does, so why do they care so much about running our government.  We are going to do things that others don't like.

"The results of this poll are irrelevant.  The United States will address its own interests without regard to the opinions of others...as ALL nations do."

Naturally not all nations, as a citizen of the US you should know it first hand as your country prevents a number of nations from doing so. Logic my friend.

"Since Sept. 11, 2001, no acts of terrorism have occurred on U.S. soil.  Why?  The war has been carried to other lands where these filth will have to spend their time and resources hiding from and dodging American power.  If you don't like it, too bad.  Get over it.  We do it because we can."

Yes, and this powerplay of America is what brought the planes into your  two towers in the first place. Also, i hardly think the terrorists have any more trouble today of coming to blow up American soil than they had 4 years ago without the Iraq War, and if it were the case, it could preferably be a political or a military instalment this time as it would bring the point of attacks closer to the public, but then again, maybe they were pissed in the first place that you had murdered their women and children somewhere innocent, and therefore gave your own medicine. Don't ban me yet for supporting and promoting terror!

"And Pike has a point.  America doesn't complain about what Europe does, so why do they care so much about running our government.  We are going to do things that others don't like."

Are you kidding, America is world power who has to have huge interests in what the neighbour continent is doing, and bitching about its politics is one way of keeping his authority.

Why do others care (although not about running your government, but how you run it), you already answered your question in the following sentence, logical... no?

"I would gladly give my life for this country whether or not its somthing i believe in as long as i die by my flag."

So you would be non-patriotic towards your ancestors is what you are saying, because i believe that your beliefs about your country have to do mostly with the democratic background of it? And you are saying that you would also die for it, if it was a communist police state?

You're mistaken. Germany issued an ultimatum demanding the 'return' of Danzig and the Polish Corridor on, I believe offhand, August 28[1]. The following day the German Foreign Ministry declared that the deadline for the ultimatum had passed.  The attack followed the expiration of the deadline.

This was the normally accepted formal way of declaring war. The British and French declared war the same way.

I don't believe there was a formal declaration of war against the Soviet Union, and I'm not offhand sure about the other countries other than Poland. But at least I've done some of my homework.

[1] Working from memory I may be a day out here.

Several of the countries mentioned had formal warning.

And you're asking why others dislike or hate America?

It's because you say things like you just said.

(And it isn't true that all nations disregard the opinions of others and act only in their own interest. I accept that that may be how you see the world, as a collection of selfish interests, bujt it isn't the reality. 

But it hasn't, has it? Not at least judging from the news from Aghanistan this week. Or Italy for that matter.

The invasion of Iraq has taken a country that had no particular ill feelings towards the US - was in fact one of the most pro-Western and secular countries in the Middle East - and turned it into one that is a hotbed of anti-US terror.

It's not even as though you're winning the campaign there.

Again, wrong. Americans bitch about what Europeans do all the time. At least whenever Europe does anything but follow the US line. It's not only true about geopolitical things like Iraq, but commercial ones like the restraints placed on Microsoft, or government support of Airbus, and legal things like issuing arrest warrants against CIA agents accused of breaking Italian law.

What was all that silly stuff about 'Freedom fries' except complaining about what Europe - France in this case - had done?

And there you go - 'we are going to do things that others don't like' - and, by implication, not care whether they like it or not.

Therefore they are going to dislike, even hate, you.

Question answered.

I think the big problem with Americans is that they are convinced that everyone wants to be like them. Their government is just a reflection of this attitude.

Though many people in America are uneasy with the current administrations methods, the vast majority are absolutely sure that others in the world have the same values as them and will eventually thank them for rescuing them from their own pitiful lives.

Nothing could be further from the truth. Outside of America, most people fear and  kinda dislike america, are somewhat full of sorrow from the americanization of their culture. While many would like to enjoy the seeming freedom of equanimity in US that allows one who is diligent and works hard to get ahead, they are also loath to give up their social structures and cultural heritage. While many admire the products of american culture such as movies and other consumer products, they are afraid that these things will mean the end of movies etc that reflect their own culture.

Pasha:

When Luxembourg has an army (a real one) a navy and an air force, several thousand nuclear warheads and the capability to deliver them anywhere on the earth, we will pay more attention to your views.

Oh, and BTW, I did NOT ask if others liked or hated America.

That is not relevant to my point.  The U.S. acts in its own interests regardless of the approbation of France or North Korea.

LOL! 

And I believe Kalev should not be here for supporting the deaths of Americans and the Coallition.

I have a question for the Europeans:  Why do you try to control what America does.  Same goes with the UN.  They always say "No, you can't do that".  But that falls under the jurisdiction of the UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT. 

Kalev:

What did you just say?

Of course democracy is important to both our population and to the government here.  You are not suggesting that we do NOT have a democratic form of government here are you?

Iraq has not had experience of democracy in the past, although it is a more sophisticated society than some in the Mid East, Egypt being another.  Maybe it will work there, maybe not, but at least we have made a beginning with the coalition and U.S. forces. 

What did Europe do?  Nothing!  What did the E.U. do in the Balkans?  Nothing again.  The capability lies in U.S. air and sea power, airlift and sealift capability, and the willingness to use ground forces where necessary.  Who else can or will?  Would it have been better to leave the Fascist Baathists in control in Baghdad?  Was it better to leave Milosevic in control in Serbia and Bosnia?

Force, when necessary, has its utility.  The interjection of Western power in the Persian Gulf and other close regions has been unavoidable because 2,973 people were murdered in New York, Washington and Pennsylvania, and those who claimed responsibility were protected by some in these regions who wish us ill.  What the hell did they THINK was going to happen?  If anyone thinks that the majority of American opinion disagrees, that is fine.  The president (who was elected by a clear majority) last week stated that our policy will continue, and I did not hear anyone here crying for him to resign.  

Since it appears to you that fighting dictatorships is so important, could you explain what the US did against Somoza, Trujillo, Reza Palvi, Mobutu, Suharto, Franco, Salazar, Videla, Pinochet, Papa Doc, the Apartheid Regime, Ngo Dinh Diem, Saddam (before 1990), Noriega (before 1988), Zia-Ul Haq, Marcos, Batista, Castello Branco, Stroessner, Banzer, Rabuka, Papadopoulos, Ríos Montt, etc. etc. Exactly, the US supported them! Even today the US support dictatorships, including Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Uzbekistan.

"Of course democracy is important to both our population and to the government here.  You are not suggesting that we do NOT have a democratic form of government here are you?"

No of course not, the government system is democratic and also the entire social structure, but when it comes to foreign politics, the word "democracry" becomes something to hide the facts under. The fact is, America uses the foreign politics as a dictatorship would, force governments into bending under their will (and that will isn't always forcred upon the infamous countries of terrorism, but against anyone who will try a different politics other than the US offers). That is hardly democratic and that is what i was saying, or thinking of - when the borders of America end, there also democracy somewhat dies, and powerplay against other countries begins in an imperialistic fashion.

"Bombing Yugoslavia, fighting Serbs, etc.

Since it appears to you that fighting dictatorships is so important, could you explain what the US did against Somoza, Trujillo, Reza Palvi, Mobutu, Suharto, Franco, Salazar, Videla, Pinochet, Papa Doc, the Apartheid Regime, Ngo Dinh Diem, Saddam (before 1990), Noriega (before 1988), Zia-Ul Haq, Marcos, Batista, Castello Branco, Stroessner, Banzer, Rabuka, Papadopoulos, Ríos Montt, etc. etc. Exactly, the US supported them! Even today the US support dictatorships, including Saudi Arabia, Pakistan and Uzbekistan."

Mixcoatl is quite right - the United States has supported and put up just as many terrorist governments as it has overthrown them, so not so good work at clearing the world of terrorism there.  

"I think 2973 people having been killed is rather a result of the interjection of western power in the Persuan Gulf and other close regions."

True, 9/11 was no surprise to anyone who knew anything about American foreign politics in reality. You messed with them first, and now make the world believe that you are the victims of a totally "out of nowhere" attack.

So might is right?

As it happens though, while I live in Luxembourg, and have done for nearly 20 years, I'm English.

Did my views suddenly get more important? 

And incidentally, at least Luxembourg is not deeply in debt - monetarily - to the rest of the world the way the USA is.

I yield!....I yield!!!!

This is a discussion and not a war.

And also, all... ALL of us are decadant, unclean infidels to these guys.  Just because you don't like the U.S. and our policies, does not mean that any of us is immune from their acts.  In the New York attack, there were citizens from 256 countries among the victims. 

So, people hate America because we don't care what others think?  That seems like people were desperate for a reason to hate us.

pikeshot1600

My friend your war with iraq returned Turkey with another terorrist attack.

I am sure USA have not meet a new terrorist attack, because It was Turkey and spain that meet with these attacks.

Do you realy think, you will stop terrorism, with killing iraqians?

But they see me as an infidel due to your arrogance in their homelands.

US monetary debt is principally to the American public. 

I'm talking about the debt owed by the US government AND corporations and private individuals to foreigners. The US government alone owes more to foreign countries than has ever been owed by any country in history, and it is borrowing a few billion every day (a) to finance the burden of its existing debt, and (b) to increase it.

Some 40% of US government debt is owed to foreigners (so your comment with regard to government debt is correct), but that figure is already huge and is magnified considerably by the amount of debt owed abroad by corporations and individuals.

And this in a country that only 25 years ago was the world's biggest CREDITOR.

That's a desperate comment. Of course being intent on pursuing your own interests, disregarding the effects on others, is going to make people, even those who once were predisposed to like Americans, or like me have personal reasons to do so, resent you.

Don't you feel that way about schoolyard bullies? Most people do.

It seems that most of the virulent opinion against America comes from Luxembourg (via Britain which mostly is supportive), Costa Rica and Estonia.

So who cares?  It doesn't matter... we have got the "chops" and you don't.

And, as far as the action against Serbia, the U.S. navy and air force were the deciding factors, not the forces of the E.U.  The Europeans were too concerned with football matches and who was next to get photos of Princess Di. 

Europe is wimped out......you people spent four decades debilitating yourselves with winless wars (1914 to 1945) and fantasy ideology, and other than the U.K., you have not been able to successfully defend any of your vital interests, other than to sell pate, chocolate and wine.  Get a life.

Your countiies are the ones most threatened with Moslem immigration and its consequences.....ask the Dutch, who, in addition to the British, are the only ones with any guts.  You are pathetic, clinging to the fading memories of past greatness.  In the 21st century, no one else cares.   

"We have not overthrown any democratic governmets.  We put them in place of dictatorships.  Do you by some chance live under a rock?"

Well yea, you live under an entire cliff i see, and this shows you know little, or block out most of what your government has done to democracy in many places. Anyone here who could bring a few examples, i really have a bad memory on that spot right now?

"Europe is wimped out......you people spent four decades debilitating yourselves with winless wars (1914 to 1945) and fantasy ideology, and other than the U.K., you have not been able to successfully defend any of your vital interests, other than to sell pate, chocolate and wine.  Get a life."

Maybe we just don't like going around the world using "smart" weapons and killing civilians among a few armed people for the sole powertrip of it. And what is it with suddenly coming at Europe from nowhere for only a few bitter reasons of your own supremacy?

"Your countiies are the ones most threatened with Moslem immigration and its consequences.....ask the Dutch, who, in addition to the British, are the only ones with any guts.  You are pathetic, clinging to the fading memories of past greatness.  In the 21st century, no one else cares."

What fading memories, putting words in our mouth maybe?

Name Allende mean anything to you? Or Mexico in 1914 or 1916? Of course if you define 'democratic' as 'pro-American' then the US hasn't overthrown any democratic governments.

Mostly where the US has got rid of a dictator it didn't like (which isn't too many of them) he was replaced by a different, more pro-American, dictator. Check out Vietnam, the Philippines....

At least he appears to have read some history.

Now there, in answer to the originator of the thread, is a great example of the negative side of America.

Now that IS ridiculous. The biggest consumers of pictures of Princess Diana were and are the Americans.

It's sad really but the biggest sighs of relief when Diana died came from the British.

'Clinging to the fading memories of past greatness' is a pretty good description of too many Americans (as, I agree, it still was in Britain and France in the fifties and sixties).

Ironic coming from a country which doesn't dare offend the Chinese, because it's too dependent on China picking up the tab at the Treasury bill sales every month. And that a couple of years ago found it could no longer outbribe or outhreaten Europe and China in handling the Security Council, as it always used to be able to do.

The Pew Global Attitudes Survey of sixteen countrie conducted recently (and widely reported including in the US Press) included a question asking what would be the best country to emigrate to have the best chance of leading a good life.

The most popular were easily Australia and Canada: China, France, and the US said 'Canada', Britain and Canada said 'Australia', and in Germany and the Netherlands, Canada and Australia tied.

Britain and Germany were chosen by two countries: Britain by Poland and Spain, Germany by Russia and Turkey.

India chose the USA;  Indonesia Japan; Jordan the United Arab Emirates; Lebanon France; Pakistan: China.

Hardly an indication of a world-wide desire for the United States.

Of course third world people on the whole feel they will be better off in the US than at home: but they only go there if they can't make their preferred destinations. It is of course EASIER to get into the US, illegally especially, because the US continues to rely, as it always has, on the exploitation of cheap immigrant labour.

(And Carey and Anderson would naturally choose to work in the US because the television and film industries flourish more there. And, I suppose, they can't speak Hindi). 

Excluding China and the US themselves, in 11 of the 14 other countries more people had a favourable opinion of China than of the USA.

The exceptions were India, Poland and Canada. Even in Britain China is now viewed more favourably than the US.

It isn't exactly restricted to Luxembourg and Estonia.

I guess that's honest at least, though based on an unrealistic assessment of the US's strength. Repulsive, but honest.

So, I gather, you're willing to give up the claim that the US is any 'better' than anyone else?

Komnenos:

A load of "politically correct" drivel.  I guess I hit a most sensitive nerve.

My post was harsh, but a lot of you guys are good at criticism, and not very good at accepting any.  Especially annoying is the cutting and pasting for selective comment.

I think we  will be able to survive that without much difficulty.  Let's realize that policy makers don't read the All Empires History Forum.

Most of your posts are pretty harsh there, guy.  I think the idea that the Bush Administration "exporting" terrorism off US soil to some place else in the world has got to be the most cynical thing I've read in a long while. So tell me, all these efforts to for "homeland security" are nothing more than window dressing?  When was the last time you went to a major airport?  Security there may not be perfect, but the restricitons are very tight--try waiting in various lines simply to catch a shuttle plane for a business meeting here on the East coast.  Sure, homeland security has its problem, but don't tell me not to take it seriously.

Secondly, what makes you think exporting is going to work?  Just this morning on TV (of course, you will dismiss this source, because we all know there is a media conspiracy against the Bush Administration and the US in general) I watched a report that pretty much stated to US has a negative image in the World.  Some are gamlbing that this bad image is the product of a "fickle" world population--if we want democracy, then that population will have an effect upon world politics.  The violent exportation of terrorism out the US will only recruit for the terrorists.

Thirdly, if we invaded Iraq to export terrorism--then what about all the reasons given for the invasion?  Did Bush lie? 

Fourthly, terrorism is a global problem.  Terrorist networks are global--ignoring this fact will not work; eventually attacks will be attempted upon US soil.  It's up to us to see that they don't suceed.  

I think you have not explained your ideas fully and I wish you would. I'm not saying your wrong, but it take a lot more than a few sentences to even understand terrorism and the US stratedgy about it than what I've seen or even written here.

Mord.

Actually a lot of facts you seem unable to challenge.

Better than cutting everything without responding to it, and simply descending a level. I haven't noticed you being particularly good at accepting criticism.

If you have some particular aspects of another country's behaviour you want to criticise, then do so by all means. You might be suprised at how much we agree with you. Certainly Britain and France have in the past been guilty of bad - and selfish - behaviour.

That would be better than simply saying that Europeans except possibly the British and the Dutch have no guts. I could think of a zillion examples of, for instance, French bravery, but Dien Bien Phu would be a start.

It was certainly a braver affair than anything the US has done in Iraq. Though I hasten to say that there are also lots of brave episodes in US history; for just one instance geographically near me the defence of Bastogne in December 1944 certainly qualifies.

The truth of the matter is that bravery and cowardice seem to be rather evenly distributed around the world. We all have our heroes and the things we are ashamed of (or should be).

Simply accusing people - whole nations - of cowardice because they disagree with you is, again, reminiscent of schoolyard behaviour.

You're correct that the danger to America doesn't come from this forum. Neither does it come from its critics.

It mostly comes from Americans' blindness to their own weaknesses.