anti american sentiments

[BeardofPants]

Where did you get the "all terrorists" quote? Palestinian suicide bombers purposely set out to murder innocent civilians. The Israeli military, in contrast, targets military installations and government infrastructure, usually that was in some way involved with the bombing. Sometimes, tragically, civilians are accidental casualties of these justified operations. When this occurs, the world media blows it way out of proportion. The fact is, accidental innocent casualities are an unfortunate reality of any military operation. It happened all the time in the Afghanistan campaign, with another incident there happening just the other day.

That is simply not true. Yes, they targeted military intallations etc, but they also target civilians. Last week a rumour spread in Palestine that the curfew had been lifted - 24/7 locked up like dogs - and they went out and did some much needed food shopping. To date, they've only been let out of their homes twice. That's nearly a million people locked up - no school, no jobs, no exercise. Anyway, as a resultant of this "rumour" 6 people were killed, shot down. Two were children. This was on both BBC and CNN.

Furthermore: to every dead Israeli, is 3 dead Palestinians.

Bush has got a point: people are either in favor of democracy, human rights, and freedom, or they are not. Someone who sympathizes with the Palestinians and bashes America is probably not someone who values liberty, justice, and equality over their own personal benefits.

Just because someone supports democracy - a bit of a rigged system, wouldn't you say? - doesn't mean it gives them an automatic pass on morality, etc. As far as I'm concerned, Israel is every bit as bad as Palestine, and to support those murderous brutes just because they're a democracy - oh and because they're jewish, and we wouldn't possibly want to get smeared with being anti-semitic - well, that's just crazy. And might I remind you that Arafat was voted in as well. And before you decry vote rigging, both the UN and EU were on hand to oversee the elections.

A final note, because I know these words will be misinterpreted by some hothead. Heck, I'll even use the caps lock. I SUPPORT NEITHER ISRAEL NOR PALESTINE. I sympathise with both, I see both sides of the story. And they are BOTH resolving the issues at hand in a bad manner.

[Earniel]

Funnily I can't let this go entirely unanswered either. Once again, I'm just trying to offer some understanding of other views, they are not necessarily my own.

Someone has to go after these rogue nations. If it's not us, who will do the dirty work?

Well then that's very petty. It's like a little kid who refuses a suggestion from his mother only to agree to the same thing when proposed by a peer. What we're doing usually is because the other countries can't handle it.

It is the world leader. Europe can't get over its lost dominance.

Firstly I think this corresponds rather well with 'the complaints' I posted earlier.

Even now, no other country has our freedoms and guaranteed constitutional rights.

Which is not necessarily a bad thing. Other countries don't have that much lawsuits either, or so it seems.

If the average Muslim person had a decent life worth living, he wouldn't strap a bomb to himself and try to go blow up someone who did.

If the Israelis hadn't destroyed most of the Palestinian economy, they probably had a decent life worth living. Now I won't choose sides in the israeli-palestinian conflict because from my 'comfy vantage point' they're worth each other. And that doesn't mean I'm anti-semitic. I prefer to look at people's actions, not race, to make up my mind about them. And I find connecting not supporting Israel immediatly to anti-semitism rather - sorry to say- small-minded. What the Israelian people go through is horrible and it's understandable why you identify with them but that does not make it okay for them to treat the palestinians that way. Also not every body sees the Palestinians as the repressing group.

How much is your country doing to promote harmony and democracy around the world? How much is your country doing to help the starving or trying to mediate an endless, nightmarish civil war? Why don't I see your country's leader on the news every night, leading a crusade against terror?

Probably not directed at me yet I can't let this go unanswered. You don't see my country's leader on the new every night, but neither see I your's doing something constructive every night. My country is a monarchy, we pay our king enough to stay out of politics. But if you haven't noticed our Minister of external affairs, I fear you're either a bit blind or that American media doesn't cover it, for which I can not blame them. Minister Michel is a workaholic, even had a fit from working too much on the last European meeting. I don't agree with all of his actions because he tends to go around and judging people a little too often for my taste (yes, we can criticise our politicians too, isn't that grand? ) but he made much work of reducing poor countries loanburdens (curse that dictionary!), he raised the Belgian aid to African countries extensively and signed a few trading treaties to help some African countries to boost their export.

Bush has got a point: people are either in favor of democracy, human rights, and freedom, or they are not. Someone who sympathizes with the Palestinians and bashes America is probably not someone who values liberty, justice, and equality over their own personal benefits.

I think there is a difference of view here because some people do not see America as THE place of democracy, human rights and freedom. So basicly America doesn't always equals freedom and democracy. Therefore not liking America does not immediatly mean you don't value liberty.

We protect you, support you, supply you with entertainment and food (which you gladly lap up), and what thanks do we get? I really cannot fathom it. I think all of your reasons boil down to the jealousy issue, or else it doesn't make sense. I think most countries would like to keep their relative prosperity and peace, enforced by the U.S., right? Why bite the hand that feeds you?

Again I think some share a different point of view. Some feel they can protect themselves quite well.

I get the feeling you look down a bit on pride and ego. But to some it means a big deal, to some it's all they have left. Politics is one thing, diplomacy is another.

And forgive a non english native speaker for asking but is 'not liking' the same as 'bashing'?

[Elvellon]

Bmilder, I just want to cast a different light on these issues, now I’m a friend of the US, so don’t think I’m here to criticise or to, how do you call it? America Bashing? But since this thread asked why one thinks America gets bad feelings I decided to add this post to my opinion of why it occurs.

Someone has to go after these rogue nations. If it's not us, who will do the dirty work? I think nearly everyone would breathe a sigh of relief if we took out Saddam Hussein, who is building weapons of mass destruction. Once those leaders are removed, it's only logical to recommend a government better suited to allow freedom and human rights.

Commendable intentions. But who should decide what nations should be classified as Rogue? Using what criteria? And should the US alone do that?

I think that a lot of people not living outside the US may become a bit concern with such an attitude, and it’s consequences. To you (and I dare say to most of us in the West) the present good intentions may be clear, but they certainly aren’t to all the world. Many will see arrogance in such an attitude (be it there or not), that’s why it is so important to have the support of other nations before that kind of action takes place. (Something Bush have neglected in the past).

Well then that's very petty. It's like a little kid who refuses a suggestion from his mother only to agree to the same thing when proposed by a peer. What we're doing usually is because the other countries can't handle it. It's a thankless job. Just because it's Big America doing something, you protest. .

Bmilder, nothing is more emotional that patriotism. Ancient powers pride can be touchy (and that of wannabe powers too), and I bet that in the day America steps down from Number One and the new superpower starts to act without taking America in consideration, America will be as touchy as they are.

Besides, they don’t see America as their mother, more like a bossy older brother or son

All nations have black stains in their history. It just so happens that America has been around for less time, and more of its existence was spent in the modern, enlightened era. European nations were inflicting horrors upon their population for millennia. However, our current system, whatever its flaws, has been the most successful, most fair governmental system in modern times. Even now, no other country has our freedoms and guaranteed constitutional rights

That is not totally accurate, BM.

First, it is true the US is being around for less time that the old European powers, but in that short time it have already stepped on a great many number of toes. Geostrategy and economical interest have been the motivation for some less than pristine moves, specially in relation to South America, but the roll of nations with some grievance is far greater and more pervasive. And remember that nations have a long, long memory, for perceived slights.

As for your political system being the one that gives more guaranties of freedom in the world, others may disagree. A few examples, some things Americans perceive as essential individual rights, like the right to have weapons, are not seen that way by a lot of the population outside America. Your political system (specially in what concerns the election of the president) is seen by many in the West as archaic. The lack of clear separation between religion and state also causes a lot of perplexity.

It is the world leader. Europe can't get over its lost dominance.

I’ve already said something about this before.

Other than that, just remember no one likes to be bossed around. So it is not just that you are the World Leader but how you act the role.

hope it is. America is doing a decent job here of standing up for democratic ideals by supporting the democratic country against the autocratic, repressive entity. The only way to achieve peace is to pressure Palestine to become more democratic, with real elections where Arafat actually has some opposition. In fact, all repressive dictatorships, particularly those in the Arab world, need to be similarly pressured. It is my firm conviction that repression breeds discontent and extremism, leading to terrorism. If the average Muslim person had a decent life worth living, he wouldn't strap a bomb to himself and try to go blow up someone who did.

I don’t think that supporting Sharon is a real smart move. He is a warmonger. I believe that him alone have done more damage to Israel image outside the US and Israel that all the Palestinian effort put together.

The 7/24 curfew Israel have implemented in some Palestinian cities and the heavy hand used against the Palestinian population is generating some rely bad feelings against Israel, and because of it’s support of Israel, part of it is rubbing into America.

It is one thing to declare that you desire that another nation have another leader, but what was said (at first) was that the US would not negotiate with Arafat, that sounds like telling another nation who can and who can’t be their leader.

In relation with implementing democracy, again good intentions are not enough. Heavy hand diplomatic tactics usually don’t work, since they will be seen under the blanket of nationalist passion.

As for social measures to change the situation in the Middle East, yes, it could work; the trick is how to implement them.

The Israeli military, in contrast, targets military installations and government infrastructure, usually that was in some way involved with the bombing. Sometimes, tragically, civilians are accidental casualties of these justified operations. When this occurs, the world media blows it way out of proportion. The fact is, accidental innocent casualities are an unfortunate reality of any military operation. It happened all the time in the Afghanistan campaign, with another incident there happening just the other day.

Many, even in the West are thinking that what is going on is not just a few unfortunate civilian casualties. It seems to many that the Israeli army doesn’t really care about if civilians are killed during its actions against perceived terrorists. How much of this is real and how much is media doing I cannot tell, but the feeling it generates is real, and I did saw it (even many people I’ve know to have supported consistently Israel in the past are appalled with what is going on).

I cannot see how someone can morally support the US's actions to defend itself (as nearly the entire free world professed to), while repudiating Israel's actions to defend itself (as nearly the entire free world did)

It have to do with the way they are doing it. There is an interesting notion known as “proportional force” and it seems Israel have forgotten about it.

but as jerseydevil pointed out, at least we're not conquering you, like all the previous dominant nations. How much is your country doing to promote harmony and democracy around the world? How much is your country doing to help the starving or trying to mediate an endless, nightmarish civil war? Why don't I see your country's leader on the news every night, leading a crusade against terror?

There’s the old joke, why conker what you can buy?
Besides the joke (that I could not resist, sorry) you would be surprised that sometimes actions have actually been done behind the scenes by small countries. Yet they are not prone to draw the attention of the international media, since by themselves they can’t accomplish much, and when the “Big Boys” get into the picture, they usually take all the media attention.

Someone who sympathizes with the Palestinians and bashes America is probably not someone who values liberty, justice, and equality over their own personal benefits.

That is something Bush got wrong.
These are to distinct things. There is a difference from having pity for the underdog, or feeling sympathy for it, and supporting bombings or terrorism in any form.
And certainly it doesn’t mean that you are anti-American or that you don’t support the aforementioned values.

What possible gain except to one's ego can someone have by being against America? That's why I don't understand the US-bashing. We protect you, support you, supply you with entertainment and food (which you gladly lap up), and what thanks do we get? I really cannot fathom it. I think all of your reasons boil down to the jealousy issue, or else it doesn't make sense. I think most countries would like to keep their relative prosperity and peace, enforced by the U.S., right? Why bite the hand that feeds you?

Much has been told about it before on this thread, but perhaps it can be told in another way.
In Europe countries had traditionally less than amicable relations with their neighbours (something that is fortunately changing). Each country neighbouring nations are the ones whose interests overlap the most, and the ones with whom competing interests are also more clear. Now America is everybody’s neighbour .
American interests and presence is so pervasive that it can be felt everywhere, naturally it can’t be expected that all it’s actions will be well accepted by everyone, can it?


With a “trans-Atlantic” hand of friendship, Elvellon Erelion.

[Ben]

That is simply not true. Yes, they targeted military intallations etc, but they also target civilians. Last week a rumour spread in Palestine that the curfew had been lifted - 24/7 locked up like dogs - and they went out and did some much needed food shopping. To date, they've only been let out of their homes twice. That's nearly a million people locked up - no school, no jobs, no exercise. Anyway, as a resultant of this "rumour" 6 people were killed, shot down. Two were children. This was on both BBC and CNN.

Rumor? There was also a rumor in the Middle East that Israel was behind the September 11th attacks, and as proof they claimed that hundreds of Jewish workers, in on the plot, didn't go to work that day. The people who create rumors in that part of the world obviously aren't particularly smart. If they want to concoct these ridiculous rumors, and if they delude themselves in believing them, that's not Israel's fault.

I've already agreed that civilians may have been killed in operations, but no Israeli walks into a pizzeria and starts shooting noncombatants with no provocation. The difference is the actions of Israel are of a legitimate military nature. This is war, of course it's not going to be pleasant.

Years of peace talks did nothing to stop the suicide bombing. Many Palestinians admit they won't stop at anything less than the total obliteration of Israel. The Israelis finally realized that they will only respond to force. Know what? it's working! "No Israelis have been killed by Palestinians for the past 12 days," (MSNBC, July 2nd) Israel didn't just roll into the West Bank to build an empire - it was a response to years of attacks, most recently in a ghastly several months where there was an attack nearly every day. It's called a war on terrorism - this means fighting in order to stop violence against ordinary citizens. Fighting means killing, sadly, but this killing is designed to prevent future killing. See how it works?

Palestinians had free entry into Israel, and dozens exploited this access to murder Israeli citizens. Why is it then surprising, that in order to stop these murders, the mobility of the Palestinians was restricted? September 11th showed a vulnerability by air. Consequently, airports beefed up security and some took a closer look at Middle Eastern passengers. Racial profiling is often foul but sometimes vital to security.

Please show me reports from reputable international news agencies (I mean BBC, CNN, MSNBC, etc. Al-Jazeera and Taliban Terrorist TV aren't gonna cut it as impartial news carriers) showing that Israelis intentionally and consistently set out to kill Palestinians with no reason. Again, mistakes have happened. An errant U.S. bomb killed dozens at an Afghan wedding the other day. These things are unfortunate, but as General Sherman put it, war is hell.

Here's a sampling of the news items I found.

Palestinian attacks:
CNN.com - Palestinian kills 5 in West Bank settlement - June 21, 2002 "Palestinian gunman killed five Israelis, including a mother and her three children, at a Jewish settlement near Nablus late Thursday, Israeli military sources said... At least one Palestinian gunman infiltrated the settlement and entered a house where a family with a large number of children lived, Israeli military sources said. A standoff and gun battle ensued, leaving five settlers dead and four wounded, according to Israeli ambulance services."

Israeli attacks:
CNN.com - Israeli missile attack kills six - June 24, 2002 : "At least six people were killed and nine wounded when two Israeli Apache helicopter gunships Monday fired four missiles at two cars in Rafah in southern Gaza. Hospital officials in Rafah confirmed the casualties and Palestinian security confirmed the attack. One car was private and the other was a taxi. Both were civilian vehicles. Israel Radio was quoted as saying the action was an apparent attempt to assassinate wanted militants."

Basically, the Israeli strike had a military purpose which is justifiable, and the Palestinian strike was just against noncombatants who had no involvement in the conflict. Find me something legitimate that proves this notion false and we'll talk.

Please tell me what you would do if your country were set with a series of demoralizing suicide bombings. I'm sure you'd just sit back and let them destroy your country, right? You should be a Jedi Knight BoP, considering your views on retaliation and punishment.

And might I remind you that Arafat was voted in as well.

Elections don't have to be dishonest to be rigged. If there is only one real candidate, it's not much of an election, is it? Dictators love doing little one-time "election" things.

Just because someone supports democracy - a bit of a rigged system, wouldn't you say? - doesn't mean it gives them an automatic pass on morality, etc.

Of course it doesn't. I guess I'm old-fashioned, but I do believe that is appropriate to take military action against terrorist havens that continue to send bombers against your nation. What's immoral about that? The point is that Israel is a country not unlike the U.S. or N.Z. It's a western democracy - they have our standard of living, or did before they were paralyzed by terrorism. These are people who share our values, and are trying to juggle a modern existence with the brutal needs of war thrust upon them.

I SUPPORT NEITHER ISRAEL NOR PALESTINE.

Then why do you read Palestinian propaganda and try to pass it off as legitimate news?

The bottom line is that if the Palestinians are coddled and their suicide bombers achieve their political goals, then... that will prove that suicide bombing works. That is a truly terrifying prospect, because then it will be only a matter of time before suicide bombings come to our own shores. It's inevitable, according to our own officials. Imagine being afraid to go to the local pizzeria, or even leave your doorstep and go about daily business for fear of being blown up. I believe it is imperative for us to demonstrate that terrorism is not an acceptable alternative to peaceful negotiation.

Don't have time to get back to the original topic tonight (America) or the rest of the replies but I promise I will reply to everything tomorrow, if possible .

[BeardofPants]

*sigh* I knew this was going to happen. Right: I DO NOT read Palestinian propaganda. I posted a dodgy link on another thread w/out checking it's veracity - my bad. I retracted AND apologised for it. Please, let it go. And tell that midget brother of yours to stop harassing me about it.

I'll say it again: I support neither Israel, nor Palestine. I think they're both approaching this the wrong way. Israel is not as kosher as you would like it to be. And Palestine are far from saint-hood. The only agenda I have, is that I want peace. And I don't want to see the US with blood on their hands, if/when Sharon screws up.

Two things. I don't think Bush has any right to (from one democracy to another) to tell Arafat to step down. Arafat might be a completely useless nutcase, but that's for the people of Palestine to work out, NOT the Bush administration.

Secondly, Israel has not acted in a completely justified fashion. Locking up (I am unsure of these figures, CNN said 1 million, BBC said 2 million) all those people under house arrest is not going to resolve any thing. Sure, for now, the bombings have been reduced, but it's a false sense of security. It will flare up again: it's not going to be the means to the end, I'm afraid.

Now, to tie this back into the original topic: America should be very wary about backing Sharon. The last thing I want to see is blood on America's hands.

And one last time: I support neither side.

[jerseydevil]

A-E - why DO you start these threads? And why didn't anyone tell me about this before. Here I am being quoted for 3 pages and HOBBIT only just told me about it.

All of what I said in the post that A-E quoted I stand by.

I do want to make some comments about some statements from earlier though. Comments about "ignorant" Americans and stuff. First - I've met and talked to MANY people around the world and hardly anyone knows anything about the US. We have gotten criticized for not knowing where countries are or all the provinces of Canada. Yet when I was in Canada I was out to dinner with my friend and her friends and one of them asked me where I lived. I told them NJ - and she said "That's in New York, right?" Now if an American said something similar in Canada - they would go "typical ignorant American". But believe me - you don't know the capitals of our states, you don't know the governors, you don't even know where half our states are. You don't even know how our government works - yet you feel educated enough to criticize it. So don't call us ignorant when people throughout the world are ignorant.

Second the French are nasty - my french teacher - who was herself from france even said that they are the most conceited people in the world. Her father still lived there too and she visited him every year. I've also talked to people all over Europe - when I tell them that the Frence hate Americans - they always say - don't worry - they hate everyone. I had met a french person at the Grand Canyon, she had been living in the US for about 20 - 30 years, she had married and divorced an American. All she did the entire time was go up to anyone that she discovered wasn't American and badmout the US. She walked up to a couple of people from India and started telling them her life story and how she was living in the god forsaken place with absolutely no culture. After hearing her talking to a couple from England, Sweden and finally India - I had enough of her and flipped her off. If it's so terrible here - the door is that way - leave the same way you came in. We don't have walls keeping people in and we have an open door policy to accepting people that come her legally. We are one of the most accepting countries in the world.

I will give anyone tours around America. The one time I flew out to LA to visit someone that I had been talking to from Russia. She was moving to LA and had never been to the US before - so I offered to go out to LA and show her around and help her. That was a 3,000 mile trip by the way. It was basically like going from Western France to the Ural Mountains. I spent the week with her - took her around LA and stuff and explaiined how to get around.

HOBBIT just told me that Ben just posted and to read what he said. Here is some additional information from ABCNews.com.


A Fractured Peace

Here is a listing of suicide bombings that have taken place in Israel -

Oct. 30, 2000: 16 people, including suicide bomber, killed and 130 wounded in attack at a Sbarro pizzeria in Jerusalem.
Dec. 22, 2000: Two people, including suicide bomber, killed and three injured in attack at a roadside campaign in Mehola, West Bank.
Jan. 1, 2001: Suicide bomber blows himself up, injuring 20 at an intersection in coastal Israeli city of Netanya.
March 4, 2001: Four killed, including suicide bomber, and nearly 50 wounded near bus station in Netanya.
March 27, 2001: Suicide bomber blows himself up, injuring 28 on a Jerusalem bus.
March 27, 2001: Two people killed, including suicide bomber, and 27 injured in second attack on a Jerusalem bus.
March 28, 2001: Four killed, including suicide bomber, and four injured near a bus station at Neve Yamin, Israel.
April 22, 2001: Two killed, including suicide bomber and 60 injured at bus stop in Kfar Sava, Israel.
April 29, 2001: Suicide bomber blows himself up near a bus near Nablus, West Bank. No one else was injured.
May 18, 2001: Six people killed, including suicide bomber, and nearly 100 injured outside a shopping mall in Netanya, Israel.
Aug. 9, 2001: 16 people killed, including suicide bomber, and nearly 90 injured at a Jerusalem restaurant.
Sep. 9, 2001: Four people killed, including suicide bomber, and nearly 90 injured near a train station in Naharia, Israel.
Nov. 8, 2001: Suicide bomber blows himself up in Baka al-Sharkieh, West Bank, injuring two Israeli border guards.
Dec. 2, 2001: 16 people, including suicide bomber, killed and more than 100 wounded on a bus in Haifa, Israel.
Feb. 16, 2002: Three people killed, including suicide bomber, and 30 injured in attack on a pizzeria in a West Bank Jewish settlement.
March 9, 2002: 12 people killed, including suicide bomber, in a cafe in west Jerusalem near the official residence of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. Attack also claimed by Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade.
March 27, 2002: 23 people, including suicide bomber, killed at a hotel in Netanya during a Passover Seder. The attack has been called "The Passover Massacre."
March 31, 2002: 15 killed, including suicide bomber, in restaurant in Haifa, Israel. And in another attack, suicide bomber kills himself, wounds four in a Jewish settlement in the West Bank. Palestinian Islamic Jihad also claims responsibility for attack.
April 10, 2002: Nine people killed, including suicide bomber, and dozens wounded on a bus traveling from Haifa to Jerusalem.
May 7, 2002: 16 people, including suicide bomber, killed and nearly 60 injured in suicide attack on a billiards club in Rishon Letzion, a Tel Aviv suburb.
May 19, 2002: Four people killed, including suicide bomber, in an attack at an outdoor vegetable market in the Israeli town of Netanya. The Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine (PFLP), a secular group opposed to the Oslo accords, also claims responsibility for the attack.
June 18, 2002: Nineteen Israelis are killed and 40 are wounded when a suicide bomber detonates a high-powered bomb on board a packed bus during the morning rush hour in Jerusalem.

Suicide Bombers

Those were only the suicide bombings committed by Hamas . Bombings that TARGETED CIVILIANS. As Ben said and I have said in previous posts on this board and others - Israel does NOT purposely target individuals. The site also shows the bombings claimed by Palestinian Islamic Jihad, Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigade as well as Miscellaneous/Unclaimed bombings. Yes more Palestinians have been killed than Israelis - the problem with those numbers I've discovered is that the military casualties and the civilian casualities are lumped together.

Another thing - I don't know why people think that America shouldn't worry about it's own national interests first. ALL countries do, everyone does. I bet all of you or at least the majority of you put your families interests before your friends, your friends interests before the stranger down the street and so on. Everyone and every country works for it's self interest. Just because the US doesn't do what YOU think it should is immaterial - unless of course we are going against your country. The only people the AMERICAN government has to worry about - is the CITIZENS of AMERICA. We our the ones that vote OUR president into office, that elect OUR senators, OUR representatives. THEY answer to US first - then to the world. We sign treaties with who WE want, we have relationship with who WE want.

And to criticize Bush for stating that he will not deal with Arafat if he is reelected. That is fine - IT IS OUR CHOICE who we deal with. We don't have to talk to him. We can throw up our hands in disgust tomorroow and tell the whole middle east they can go blow themselves up for all we care. Hardly any other country is trying to bring peace to that region. England does a little bit and France has recently been there and Russia has gotten involved a little bit. Other than that - everyone leaves it up to the US and then points the finger when things aren't going right.

Europe created most of this modern problem in the Middle East and Africa. Then left - packed up their stuff and now basically hides in the shelter of isolationist Europe. Well it's time to get out and clean the mess you guys created. England created Israel, Kasmir, the whole African problem. You don't like the way America is doing things - then get involved and help.

I know people think we're arrogant. We have a can do attitude. NY didn't collapse in on itself after the terrorist attacks. America is strong and we're proud of it. We have nothing to be ashamed of. The rules on American Flag Etiquette dictates that our flag is NEVER to take a subordinate position with any other flag and that is is NEVER to be bowed or lowered to any person, nation or other flag. That is why our flag is the only one that does not "bow" to the podium at the Olympic Opening Ceremonies. You may think it's arrogant. But why should we bow down to someone?

Of course we've made mistakes in our history. Every nation has. But no outsider is going to tell us what to do, how we should act or what we should say. We will protect OUR country first, our allies second and the rest of the world third. Sorry - but that is reality.

If anyone from outside America doesn't like what we do - then either petition your government - or move here and become a US citizen and vote. If you are American and don't like what the country does - then petition - write letters to your congressman, president, newspapers and get out and vote. I write letters to them all the time.

And by the way - I think the US should pull out of the UN. Oh wait - sorry that's an argument on another board.

Oh and everyone - HAPPY early 4th of July. Indepence Day the day we signed the Declaration of Independence. Of course - July 2nd - which was when I was typing this up - is our TRUE independence Day. That is when the Lee Resolution for Indepedence was adopted by 12 of the 13 colonies, New York abstained. July 4th was when it was signed by Hancock and Secretary Thomas and July 8th was the first public reading.History of the Declaration of America

[Earniel]

Ben, JD have you never ever even thought about it that the things you learn about the Israeli-palestinian conflict might be more biased due to your involvement? You basicly said all other countries' media does so to favour the palestinians but did you never thought it might be just as well the other way around in America?

Have you noticed the explosion of violence since Sharon took office? Do you that there are several (and western too) countries that consider him a warcriminal? Have you noticed how he responds to the suicide attacks with more violence, curfews, holding people locked up in their houses, using tanks to flatten houses with people still inside, not allowing palestinian ambulances to get to wounded people, not letting wounded cilvilians get to a hospital because they're palestinian? Please do not respond by saying civilians get killed in wars. Because when it's palestinian civilians I feel you tend to see it as natural in war, but when it's about israeli civilians it's apparently a crime. I wonder (again don't get me wrong in this) do you actually know the palestinian side of the story?

Violence begets violence. If only Rabin had lived..... This would never had happened.

For your information we did send some people to the conflict, they weren't allowed to enter because Belgium cancelled cooperationtreaties with both the Israeli AND the palestinians as protest against the conflict. They weren't angry because we cancelled the treaty, they were angry because they were treated on the same basis as the palestinians. And I know this because they said so.

Too bad I probably won't be able to read the further comments on this thread because I'm leaving tonight. Sigh, it was getting interesting.

[Elvellon]

About the French; generalizations, nought but generalizations JD….

Recently I met a rather obnoxious guy at my job, (he was quite similar to you French really, only that he kept criticizing everything that was foreigner, “just because”, and didn’t bothered with whom he was speaking). It happened he was American, I don’t go and say things like “Americans are nasty” just because that single jerk, I’m certain that more can be found in America, but so what? They can also be fond everywhere, even in my own country.

I’m not French, but I know French are proud, (just like Americans) and don’t like to be secondary figures in the world stage. When they don’t agree with the Americans they say so, while others may not. Still, I just wish every “nasty” nation on Earth was like France, it would make world problems much more easy to solve.

Europe created most of this modern problem in the Middle East and Africa. Then left - packed up their stuff and now basically hides in the shelter of isolationist Europe. Well it's time to get out and clean the mess you guys created. England created Israel, Kasmir, the whole African problem. You don't like the way America is doing things - then get involved and help.

JD, I wish you would stop with Europe bashing; it seems a hobby of yours.

Of course we've made mistakes in our history. Every nation has. But no outsider is going to tell us what to do, how we should act or what we should say. We will protect OUR country first, our allies second and the rest of the world third. Sorry - but that is reality.

Very few people are really criticizing how the US deals with domestic problems, to most of us that is just America’s business and we don’t have anything to do with it.

But the way the US acts outside its borders is not just the US business; since it affects those it interacts with, directly or indirectly. So people have an opinion and feel they have a right to say it.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Eärniel
Ben, JD have you never ever even thought about it that the things you learn about the Israeli-palestinian conflict might be more biased due to your involvement? You basicly said all other countries' media does so to favour the palestinians but did you never thought it might be just as well the other way around in America?

Have you noticed the explosion of violence since Sharon took office? Do you that there are several (and western too) countries that consider him a warcriminal? Have you noticed how he responds to the suicide attacks with more violence, curfews, holding people locked up in their houses, using tanks to flatten houses with people still inside, not allowing palestinian ambulances to get to wounded people, not letting wounded cilvilians get to a hospital because they're palestinian? Please do not respond by saying civilians get killed in wars. Because when it's palestinian civilians I feel you tend to see it as natural in war, but when it's about israeli civilians it's apparently a crime. I wonder (again don't get me wrong in this) do you actually know the palestinian side of the story?

Violence begets violence. If only Rabin had lived..... This would never had happened.

For your information we did send some people to the conflict, they weren't allowed to enter because Belgium cancelled cooperationtreaties with both the Israeli AND the palestinians as protest against the conflict. They weren't angry because we cancelled the treaty, they were angry because they were treated on the same basis as the palestinians. And I know this because they said so.

Too bad I probably won't be able to read the further comments on this thread because I'm leaving tonight. Sigh, it was getting interesting.

We can never know what would have happened if Rabin was still alive. There are fringe groups within Israel (such as the settlers) that really don't want peace. There are also people on the Palestinian side that are looking for nothing other than the complete distruction of all of Israel. Generally it seems that when peace gets close at hand - some violence errupts (mostly from the Palestinians).

I'm not sure what you would have the Israelis do at this point. They've been to the negotiating table for years and years. Israel's first priority is to protect it's citizens. That is it's number one priority. I think I said this on another board. Right now America sides with Israel. Believe it or not - a couple of months ago (back around March/April) we sided in some ways more with the Palestinians. Most Americans felt that Sharon should have waited to take military action and call off of the truce after the one suicide bomber. But then more and more bombings were occurring. Now the feeling is reversed and we are siding more with Israel. I don't agree with everything that Sharon does. I think Israel needs a cooler headed leader. So - no I don't think our media is as biased - at least some of the media isn't here. I do feel that ABC has one of the best well rounded coverage of anyone. I constantly change my views on who is right or wrong based on what I here out of the middle east. Right now I strongly defend Israels right to protect it's citizens. Now if the Palestinians said - "okay - we call a truce" and there was no more worshipping of suicide bombers, no more attacks on israel and Sharon didn't pull out - then my feelings would shift again. Right now - I have a little sympathy for the Palestinians when they have parades and display huge posters celebrating people that kill innocent woman, children and men. I don't rejoice in the death of Palestinians - yet many rejoiced in the death of 3,000 people on 9/11 - people that were just going to work. Sorry - but I have a hard time having sympathy for people like that. By the way - I know not all the Palestinians do that. I wouldn't support the 24/7 curfew of the Palestinians in time of peace - but right now I feel that Israel is in a state of war. What was Germany like as the allied forces moved through Berlin?

The Israelis have a right to be angry at you - just like your country has a rigth to cancel cooperation, just as it is our right to deal with who we want. If you ended cooperation treaties with israel and the palestinians - then why were you going in there in the first place? What was Belgium's role going to be? I've heard that Israel does not trust Europe and that is probably why they didn't want to let you in.

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elvellon
About the French; generalizations, nought but generalizations JD….

Recently I met a rather obnoxious guy at my job, (he was quite similar to you French really, only that he kept criticizing everything that was foreigner, “just because”, and didn’t bothered with whom he was speaking). It happened he was American, I don’t go and say things like “Americans are nasty” just because that single jerk, I’m certain that more can be found in America, but so what? They can also be fond everywhere, even in my own country.

I’m not French, but I know French are proud, (just like Americans) and don’t like to be secondary figures in the world stage. When they don’t agree with the Americans they say so, while others may not. Still, I just wish every “nasty” nation on Earth was like France, it would make world problems much more easy to solve.

I know my comments about the French are generalisations. But also they're based on personal experiences. Quebec is the same way. I don't even hate France or the french people. I would like to go to france and visit, that is one of the reasons I'm trying to learn French. I was only commenting on the Frence because it was brought up earlier in the thread. But the French are condescending, as the whole of Europe is very condescending to America. That is where Europe show it's jealousy America. Europe still looks at America as this wayward child that won't listen. But - Europe doesn't have all the answers.

Also - Europe VERY MUCH stereotypes Americans and makes broad generalisations. For one thing - most people seem to have no recollection of how truly large our country is. The people in NJ are very different from the people in the midwest and south, who are very different from the west coast (commonly referred to out here, as the left coast). Our states are the size of European countries, and just as each country is different so are our states.

There have been many posts in the past concerning how America forces it's culture all around the world and yet doesn't take anything in. That is completely wrong. We are microcosm of the world. We even have, within the last couple of years, started to celebrate Cinqo de Mayo. Many people make the erroneow assumption that just because there are American fast food places around the world - that Americans live off of hamburgers and french fries. My friend in Italy was shocked when I told her that we eat fish. Maybe instead of having "why we hate each other" or similar threads. Maybe we should start up a thread that allows people to talk about their country (what the people are like, what you eat, what you like to do, tourist attractions, etc). That would foster a lot more understanding hopefully among people. I am interested in all countries and people. I had maps hanging in my room when I was growing up and I've always loved to meet people from other parts of the world.

Very few people are really criticizing how the US deals with domestic problems, to most of us that is just America’s business and we don’t have anything to do with it.

But the way the US acts outside its borders is not just the US business; since it affects those it interacts with, directly or indirectly. So people have an opinion and feel they have a right to say it.

You do have a right to point out your disagreements with the US - that's true. But you have to realise that America also doesn't have to do what you think it should. Europe seems to have the attitude that we should do what it wants us to do - and we're not going to. England still refers to us as "the colonies". Only sometimes jokingly considering the many situations I've heard that phrase.

Everyone that says that America follows it's own agenda - is correct - we do. We have self interest just like everyone else in this world - and we will pursue our goals. We will determine who we want to sign treaties with, who we will help, what treaties we choose to pull out of, etc. Yes - there can be an international outcry to us pulling out of the anti-ballistic missile treaty or any other descision we make. But just becuase there is an outcry from the world community doesn't mean we'll just turn around and go "Oh - you don't like that? We're sorry - we won't do it then." If it's in our best interests - we will go forward, and it's our right as a sovereign nation to do so. If we say we don't want to have dealings with Arafat - it's our right to say that. I personally don't think there is anyone else other than him to deal with at the moment - so it's really mute point.

Here are some things for anyone that just needs some new ideas on why you can hate America
911 Things To Hate About America
Things that piss me off about America - warning some language.
Anti-America by Captain Anarchy
Anti-Americanism in the classroom
Making Sense of a Deep-Seated American Hatred
America is Not Over
The Flag Burning Page
Anti-American Statements by the Palestinian Authority
Not Another Vietnam Why Students Should Support the War Effort
Yes, that Osama bin-Laden

[Cirdan]

Why has the anti-american thread turned into an isreali-palestinian thread? Ah well, one must go with the flow.

Israel and Palestine are at war now. All efforts at a brokered peace have failed. Civilian casulaties are part of war. London, Dresden, Hiroshima, Hanoi, and now Jerusalem; civilians have been targets duriong war for a long time now. There is no morality in war.

I see two combatants, drenched in each others blood, and I'm supposed to support one or the other? No way. I advise all peace loving people in the area to evacuate to a sane country until the war pigs have finished killing each other off.

On topic: America is the young man on the global scene. We are strong, making money, and confident to the point of arrogance. We have not the wisdom of those who were in this position before us. We tend to brag loudly and lack the social grace that would make our status less offensive. We always want to have the last word because we beleive we are always right. Nations like Britain, France, and Germany have all experienced this phase.

[Elvellon]

You do have a right to point out your disagreements with the US - that's true. But you have to realise that America also doesn't have to do what you think it should. Europe seems to have the attitude that we should do what it wants us to do - and we're not going to. England still refers to us as "the colonies". Only sometimes jokingly considering the many situations I've heard that phrase.

Yes, America can do what it thinks it should do, even without European support. (But not entirely, sometimes it does need small but essential things to keep her war or diplomatic machine going, things that they require from their allies).

Europeans have the belief that they are the allies of the US, and that as such they can give their opinions about relevant international issues that concern all, and more, they actually expect that their opinions are taken into consideration by the US. Are they expecting too much?

Ah yes, British humour. .

Everyone that says that America follows it's own agenda - is correct - we do. We have self interest just like everyone else in this world - and we will pursue our goals. We will determine who we want to sign treaties with, who we will help, what treaties we choose to pull out of, etc. Yes - there can be an international outcry to us pulling out of the anti-ballistic missile treaty or any other descision we make. But just becuase there is an outcry from the world community doesn't mean we'll just turn around and go "Oh - you don't like that? We're sorry - we won't do it then." If it's in our best interests - we will go forward, and it's our right as a sovereign nation to do so.

I


About international agreements:
The value of international agreements is a consequence of the good faith put into its enforcement. If a state is powerful enough it can decide when, how and if it is going to enforce a treaty. But once that state breaks its word (or if its actions are perceived as such) it looses much of its diplomatic influence. So of course the US can do as you say (no one was saying it can’t), but that would have consequences, , its up to your country to decide if they are worthy or not.

But the French are condescending, as the whole of Europe is very condescending to America. That is where Europe show it's jealousy America. Europe still looks at America as this wayward child that won't listen. But - Europe doesn't have all the answers.

So you feel we are condescending and jealous of you, but we feel you are condescending and jealous of us.

Sometimes we got the feeling that, whenever we try to show you how we see things, your rulers simply shrug, ignore our opinions, do things the way they want, and then want our support to do it. .

And of course we don’t have all the answers, no one has.

Also - Europe VERY MUCH stereotypes Americans and makes broad generalisations. For one thing - most people seem to have no recollection of how truly large our country is. The people in NJ are very different from the people in the midwest and south, who are very different from the west coast (commonly referred to out here, as the left coast). Our states are the size of European countries, and just as each country is different so are our states.

That could also be said about how Americans seem to make broad generalizations about Europe (see the way you used “Europe”? Do you know all of Europe to make such a broad generalization? We aren’t a country like the US ). We may be smaller but the variety actually IS much greater that the one you can find in America, because we had a lot more time for it to happen and because of geography.

Besides, broad generalizations about “the others” seem to be a problem everywhere, not only in the US and Europe.

Maybe instead of having "why we hate each other" or similar threads. Maybe we should start up a thread that allows people to talk about their country (what the people are like, what you eat, what you like to do, tourist attractions, etc). That would foster a lot more understanding hopefully among people. I am interested in all countries and people. I had maps hanging in my room when I was growing up and I've always loved to meet people from other parts of the world.

That is an excellent idea! I’ll have to think of what to say in such a thread.

[sun-star]

. England still refers to us as "the colonies". Only sometimes jokingly considering the many situations I've heard that phrase.

They always say Americans don't understand irony
Is that an anti-American statement?

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by Elvellon
Yes, America can do what it thinks it should do, even without European support. (But not entirely, sometimes it does need small but essential things to keep her war or diplomatic machine going, things that they require from their allies).

And we do consult with our allies - we do ask them to do things to that they might be better equipped to do. For instance - we asked Tony Blair to make the rounds around the Middle East. We know we aren't liked there and we felt that he would probably be a better diplomat for that than us sending our own people in.

Europeans have the belief that they are the allies of the US, and that as such they can give their opinions about relevant international issues that concern all, and more, they actually expect that their opinions are taken into consideration by the US. Are they expecting too much?

No that isn't too much to ask - but we also have a right to go ahead if disagree with you. That is our right as a sovereign nation. .

About international agreements:
The value of international agreements is a consequence of the good faith put into its enforcement. If a state is powerful enough it can decide when, how and if it is going to enforce a treaty. But once that state breaks its word (or if its actions are perceived as such) it looses much of its diplomatic influence. So of course the US can do as you say (no one was saying it can’t), but that would have consequences, , its up to your country to decide if they are worthy or not.

Yes - but our treaties our between us and the countries we make them with. It was between the US and Russia as to whether we removed ourselves from the Anti-Ballistic Missile Treaty or not. We didn't just pull out of the treaty and we didn't want to break the treaty - we discussed our intentions with Russia and it was agreed - we then signed another agreement to reduce our nuclear weapons.

[quote][b]
That could also be said about how Americans seem to make broad generalizations about Europe (see the way you used “Europe”? Do you know all of Europe to make such a broad generalization? We aren’t a country like the US ). We may be smaller but the variety actually IS much greater that the one you can find in America, because we had a lot more time for it to happen and because of geography.

I realise that Europe is very diverse in thoughts - just look at the problems that the EU is currently having. Each countr has it's own agenda within it and nationalism is making a comback in European countries.

Actually this is very untrue that you have a greater diversity than the uS. If you come to the United States - especially the east and west coast - you'd see that we have a much greater variety of ethnicity. Germany is still very much only "German", France is still very much just "French". The US is a microcosm of the world as I've said many times. IN NJ and NY you walk down the streets and you see a sea of people dressed in all different ethnic outfits, from Ascetic Jews to Muslims to Chinese to Russians. That's even in the small towns like where I live. Every language is spoken within the US.

This is a view of what the school population looks like in Plainsboro/West Windsor. This is a relatively small area too - this isn't even city. Yet - 33 languages are spoken in our school system.

The population of West Windsor-Plainsboro High School North and High School South reflects the growing trend toward pluralism in American society. Students represent all major racial and cultural groups (59% White, 30% Asian, 6% African American, 4% Hispanic, and 1 % American Indian/Alaskan Native). Our students speak 33 languages. The new students who enrolled in the high schools for the 2000-2001 school term represent a multitude of countries and states. This diversity affords students excellent opportunities for intercultural understanding and provides them with a global view of world states.

West Windsor-Plainsboro Schools

Besides, broad generalizations about “the others” seem to be a problem everywhere, not only in the US and Europe.

I agree. To say that Africa is all the same (which was the attitude of England that caused a lot of the problems in Africa today) is completely wrong. There are tribes and factions that have very different histories. That was all ignored in the making of the modern African country borders. A lot of those countries now have problems because warring factions are forced into the same political boundaries and they're all vying for control.

[afro-elf]

A-E - why DO you start these threads?

well since mathron does't debate any more ....

but the truth is the anduril made me do it

[jerseydevil]

Originally posted by afro-elf


well since mathron does't debate any more ....

but the truth is the anduril made me do it

I thought maybe it was because you were stuck in a country that represses free thought and this is where you get your fix.

It wouldn't even help to have "reasons to love America" thread - it would probably just turn into a flame fest.

[mirrille]

JD, I think you are right.
He does things like that, to be perverse.

Woah! now this is more interesting. But why does this always turn into a Middle East topic? Does everything always turn into a Middle East topic eventually?

But I think some people are getting carried away. The original question was - why is there anti-american sentiment?
The simple answer is that America from time to time pisses other countries off. Examples have been cited already.
The question is not - is America right/justified/evil/stupid in doing these things? That's a whole other debate. A debate that people seem to be gleefully taking to right now.
But back to the original question, the thing to think about is - how do these actions/statements make people in other countries, or people in other countries, feel? At least, this is the question to ask if you really want to understand the"why?".

This is the secret trick: putting yourself in someone else's shoes. It's a little hard at first, but with practice, becomes easier.
As an exercise, take any scenario that has been mentioned, imagine you are the non-american, an average person, affected, and ask yourself, "how does this make me feel ?"
That might provide some insight. I won't list examples, because that's been done already. But if your response to every single situation is "I would feel all warm and fuzzy towards America and whatever they do must be right.", then you're not trying hard enough. It's ok to say that for some scenarios, because it might be true, but not every single one. Unless you really are that easy-going. Real people aren't.
Previously, someone implied that this anti-American sentiment was largely incited by bad governments to use USA as a scapegoat. That may be true in some extreme cases. I'm trying to say that even ordinary people might have some understandable objections.
That's all. America isn't magic. It's got good points and bad points. They are just like any other country, and can offend people from time to time. To me, this is no surprise. The amount of power they have can magnify the perceived offensiveness. But that's expected too.
Remember: it's the perception that will make the difference. We are talking about emotions here.

Now, on a tangent:
Earniel mentioned that the current president is not making the situation any better. This is also my feeling. "Speechless, and not in a good way", is happening to me with frightening frequency these days, and I hardly even care about what the big guys are doing. Even though his approval ratings are shooting through the roof in the USA, international approval on the USA took a nosedive as soon as he started opening his mouth. It was really quite amazing. But of course, it's not for any of us to tell them to pick someone different. Maybe in 30 years I can look back and laugh, but it's interesting how these things work.

[Arathorn]

I've finally decided to share my views now that mirille has refined the question.

Most of the people I know do not hate americans. Anyone who comes here and doesn't act in a condescending way or shows off will probably be shown more hospitality than even your own relatives will give you when you stay with them for the holidays.

Regarding the american government, I feel that the views are more varied. Mine is that as a govt. of the american people, it is expected to act in the interests of that people in whatever it does (like any foreign country). The difference is that it has a huge impact on many people's lives here. The biggest amount of business comes from the US and almost every filipino has relatives living there. Almost everone here learns english in every school level and also learns it from TV and the FM radio stations. But there has always been a view on the back of everone's minds that any change in government has been partially influenced by washington at most or its fence-sitting at the very least. The most outspoken critics (which are quite few) are leftist isolationists. They call it american imperialism and accuse the rest of us of being "brown americans". I used to tell one such guy how squeaky clean he keeps is Nike Airs. LOL.

[jerseydevil]

I have looked at it from the others point of view. As a matter of fact it wasn't long ago when it looked like Japan was going to be the economic powerhouse and it was being said that America was going to be taking a back seat to them. People in the US started complaining that Japan was "buying up" this country. Then Japan hit it's recession, the bank bust and every other financial problem under the sun. They no longer "threaten" America as the economic powerhouse.

Now the EU is hoping to take America's place as the economic center of the world. They would like the Euro to take the dollar's place as the central currency of the world. They have a lot of work to do because currently they're suffering from nationalistic tendancies and there is a back lash against the EU.

The powerful always throw there weight around, whether it's on the playground or on the larger scale of world politics. We do go to our allies and discuss things. But people from around the world have to accept and understand that the US will look after it's self interests first. I wouldn't expect anything less from any other country.

People complain about the US subsidizing industries - I'm against this (it destroys the free market economy)- but other countries subsidize their products against Americans. Also sometimes it's necessary to protect an industry that has an affect on us being able to defend ourselves in time of war, such as the steel industry. A lot of what people complain about with America - their own countries do. Japan was dumping electronic goods on our shores - actually even taking a loss on them.

Now I would suggest that others outside the US do the same thing that you asked us to do. Put yourselves in America's place. Would you expect your countries to be entering into treaties that weren't in your best interests, or to be doing other things that were against the best interests of your countries? Kyoto treaty lays most of the requirements at America's door, that's why America is against it. Everyone thinks that just because America is stronger and wealthier - we should spend more to clean up everything. Less is asked of the developing countries because it's felt they can't afford it as much. The world of course accepts most of these types of treaties - since most of the responsibility is put on America and less on their own countries. Then of course they can take the high road when America refuses to be used in that way - and they just scream - "See we care about the environment - but America doesn't". Most people don't know what environmental laws the US has or anything like that. The same thing dealt with the world criticism of us walking out of the South African summit on race relations (I can't remember what the official name was). The idea of the US paying retribution for slavary was an outrage - we weren't even a country when it was instituted and soon after we did become a country - we were working to abolish it. It wasn't that we didn't feel strongly about humanitarian aid and race relations - but we're not going to be the world's whipping boy and fountain of money to support other countries agendas.

I would be very happy if the rest of the world took a more active role in world affairs - both militarily and diplomatically. I think Washington should take a break from the middle east diplomacy for a while and ask europe to deal with it. For one thing - everyone thinks that we're there because we need the MIddle East oil - that's actually not the case - the majority of our oil comes from South America and domestically. That is not the case with Europe however - they get over 50% of their oil from the Middle East and Japan gets over 70%. Europe is also geographically a lot closer to the Middle East too - so basically they would be working in their own back yard. Plus a lot of the problems that the US is dealing with our direct results of the colonialism of the past powers - particularly - France and England.

You've mentioned in a previous post how we basically force our culture on people. That's not the case - because our culture works under a supply and demand principal. If people didn't go to McDonalds or go see our movies - then we wouldn't be importing those things into your countries. As Ben said - our movies make most of thei money overseas.

I was on a "why we hate america" website and they indicated that we have "America" in every other movie title. You know what? - the movies are made for Americans first. People don't have to go see those type of movies if they don't like them. I liked "Sum of All Fears". I was just upset that they changed it from the book because of political correctness - they changed the terrorists from Middle East to Neo-Nazis which didn't make as much sense. However, I personally want to see MORE patriotic movies at this time. The US currently runs the entertainment business - although what is funny is that so many of our movie studios our owned by foreign companies - such as Sony. Many bands, singers and actors feel they've "made it" once they break out into the American audience.

Other people should be proud of their countries as much as Americans are proud of our country. The patriotism has been increased after 9/11 - the US is always thrown closer together after an attack on our country. Even my friend in Oregon - who would not even let her kids play with toy guns - was talking about fighting back. Believe me - the US government restrained itself much more than what people think. If the American PEOPLE had their way - we would have bombed the entire middle east and asked questions later.

I know that Bush took a lot of flack from the world community because he said that the Palestinians need to elect a new leader and that it shouldn't be Arafat - and if he was - we wouldn't deal with him. This seems to be the type of "rhetoric" that the world community has a problem with. But what is so wrong with that? We're not going in and instituting a leader. I'm not sure if Bush should have actually have stated it out loud for the rest of the world to pick that sentence apart. But it was meant to tell Arafat that we're not fooling aroudn anymore. Now I think that the Palestinians will just say - "we'll show you - we'll vote for him just because you said not to". But actually except for Arafat, there isn't too many people better - and no one that has the approval ratings that could beat the leaders of Hamas at this moment. So either they're going to choose Arafat again or a member of Hamas. I personally would rather have Arafat - at least we know what we're dealing with. We'll have to deal with the outcome of the elections when and if they take place.

Then of course there was the "either you're with us or against us" speech. But why shouldn't we say that? you know - if terrorists had flown planes into the CN Tower or the Eiffel Tower- we would have been right there next to you. Instead we got a lecture on "well you know, maybe you should change your policies". Why should we change our policies under threats? I'm sorry - the terrorist attacks had the exact oppisite affect on the general population. Instead of it wanting to make us talk and negotiate - we are going to get the people that did this. A lot of military action that Americans wouldn't have supported a year ago - we're now calling for.

America and Canada share the longest unguarded border in the world. That has only somewhat changed since 9/11. And I know that you guys feel you live in the shadow of the US and you do. We're like the older brother, but that doesn't mean that the US is going to change. We'll still be there at a drop of a hat if any of our allies need help. Instead after all the cryiung and "we're sorry" from Europe - there were meetings among the European countries asking - does this event constitute an attack on the US that would cause the NATO doctrine of "An attack on one is an attack on all" to go into affect. If America has to stand alone in this we will.

America won't be a world power forever. At some point someone will take over the role - and they'll be hated by the world over. I'm hoping that I don't live to see that day - I like being in the drivers seat. Sorry - but Canada would like to be in that position too - but no one likes to constantly have everyone always pointing out their mistakes, their misteps.

And Happy 4th of July to everyone.

[Draken]

Originally posted by jerseydevil

I agree. To say that Africa is all the same (which was the attitude of England that caused a lot of the problems in Africa today) is completely wrong. There are tribes and factions that have very different histories. That was all ignored in the making of the modern African country borders. A lot of those countries now have problems because warring factions are forced into the same political boundaries and they're all vying for control.

As you seem to keep coming back to the recurrent problems in Africa due to European colonisation - which are true enough - it's worth pointing out that you seem to be missing something closer to home.

When a civilisation with steel and black powder met civilisations with stone tools or (at best) iron spears, only one thing was going to happen, I'm afraid. A very clever American called Jared Diamond summarised it nicely in his book "Guns, Germs and Steel".

However, the European Old World empires were trading empires. They wanted raw materials for their factories at home and a captive market place - actual colonisation was on quite a small scale.

The New World empires were different - they were about acquisition and settlement. True enough, Britain, France and Spain started this trend in North America, but it accelerated AFTER the formation of the USA as a separate nation.

Yes, the Europeans left a mess in Africa and the Middle East when they dismantled their empires. The New World empires were never dismantled though - sure they called themselves republics and broke ties with Europe, but I'm not sure how much solace that was to the indigenous populations. Certainly the USA is a multicultural society - of peoples originating in the Old World. Not very many indigenous Americans though, are there?

So while European involvement DID cause many of the problems in the developing world...at least when they left the indigenous peoples were still there to HAVE problems!