Why Does the World Hate the US?
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 28, 2024, 08:41:49 PM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  General Politics
  International General Discussion (Moderators: afleitch, Hash)
  Why Does the World Hate the US?
« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2 3
Poll
Question: The World Hates the US because. . .
#1
Bush
 
#2
They are all misguided about the facts
 
#3
I don't think the world hates us
 
#4
Other, Please Explain
 
Show Pie Chart
Partisan results

Total Voters: 57

Author Topic: Why Does the World Hate the US?  (Read 14981 times)
Donovan
Rookie
**
Posts: 235


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« on: October 02, 2004, 07:51:56 PM »

Canadians favor Kerry 60%-30%.

Russia Favors Kerry 4 to 1

Europe favors Kerry 90%

The Middle East kills Americans when it gets a chance

"What about Poland?" I don't know, not sure what they think about us.
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #1 on: October 02, 2004, 08:07:42 PM »

Where are those numbers coming from?
Logged
zachman
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,096


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #2 on: October 02, 2004, 08:11:29 PM »

Everything that the modern day Republican leadership believes in. The War in Iraq, backing out of the Kyoto treaty, backing out of weapons test treaties, not signing the landmine treaty, SUVs, a lack of paid vacations and similar rules for workers, and being rich.
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #3 on: October 02, 2004, 08:16:46 PM »

Everything that the modern day Republican leadership believes in. The War in Iraq, backing out of the Kyoto treaty, backing out of weapons test treaties, not signing the landmine treaty, SUVs, a lack of paid vacations and similar rules for workers, and being rich.

You mean the Kyoto treaty that John Kerry voted against?

Clinton didn't sign the landmine treaty, either.

You don't think Demcorats own SUVs?
Logged
NYGOP
nygop
Rookie
**
Posts: 142


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #4 on: October 02, 2004, 08:19:02 PM »

Everything that the modern day Republican leadership believes in. The War in Iraq, backing out of the Kyoto treaty, backing out of weapons test treaties, not signing the landmine treaty, SUVs, a lack of paid vacations and similar rules for workers, and being rich.
You don't think Demcorats own SUVs?

Nearly all of the people I know that own SUV's are Democrats.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #5 on: October 02, 2004, 08:25:28 PM »


I love how the Dems make fun of that line. It really gets me. Here is the party that says we need to get approval from the global community before action in Iraq and they embrace the idea of a coalition for going to war. However, when Bush names these countries the usual response I get is "Well we need major powers." So they're sacrifice isn't notable? We shouldn't care if they aren't a major super power?

And another thing I hear is about this "unilateral" action in Iraq. How is it a "unilateral" act when we had several countries go in with us? Sorry to all the Dems out there but you're line about how we "went in alone" is false.
Logged
Tory
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,297


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #6 on: October 02, 2004, 08:37:16 PM »


I love how the Dems make fun of that line. It really gets me. Here is the party that says we need to get approval from the global community before action in Iraq and they embrace the idea of a coalition for going to war. However, when Bush names these countries the usual response I get is "Well we need major powers." So they're sacrifice isn't notable? We shouldn't care if they aren't a major super power?

And another thing I hear is about this "unilateral" action in Iraq. How is it a "unilateral" act when we had several countries go in with us? Sorry to all the Dems out there but you're line about how we "went in alone" is false.


I would rather fight beside a Pole than a Frenchman any day.
Logged
Akno21
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,066
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #7 on: October 02, 2004, 08:59:14 PM »


I love how the Dems make fun of that line. It really gets me. Here is the party that says we need to get approval from the global community before action in Iraq and they embrace the idea of a coalition for going to war. However, when Bush names these countries the usual response I get is "Well we need major powers." So they're sacrifice isn't notable? We shouldn't care if they aren't a major super power?

And another thing I hear is about this "unilateral" action in Iraq. How is it a "unilateral" act when we had several countries go in with us? Sorry to all the Dems out there but you're line about how we "went in alone" is false.

The USA has 90% of the costs and casualties. Are the contributions of Poland and Austrailia useful and nice to have, yes. Do they save us much in terms of casualties or cost, no.
Logged
Keystone Phil
Atlas Institution
*****
Posts: 52,611


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #8 on: October 02, 2004, 09:01:16 PM »


I love how the Dems make fun of that line. It really gets me. Here is the party that says we need to get approval from the global community before action in Iraq and they embrace the idea of a coalition for going to war. However, when Bush names these countries the usual response I get is "Well we need major powers." So they're sacrifice isn't notable? We shouldn't care if they aren't a major super power?

And another thing I hear is about this "unilateral" action in Iraq. How is it a "unilateral" act when we had several countries go in with us? Sorry to all the Dems out there but you're line about how we "went in alone" is false.

The USA has 90% of the costs and casualties. Are the contributions of Poland and Austrailia useful and nice to have, yes. Do they save us much in terms of casualties or cost, no.

But you guys seem to ignore the fact that we DIDN'T go in to Iraq alone and we DID have support from many different countries. So when Kerry and other Dem leaders say "We went in alone" it's flat out false.
Logged
Tory
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,297


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #9 on: October 02, 2004, 09:05:23 PM »


I love how the Dems make fun of that line. It really gets me. Here is the party that says we need to get approval from the global community before action in Iraq and they embrace the idea of a coalition for going to war. However, when Bush names these countries the usual response I get is "Well we need major powers." So they're sacrifice isn't notable? We shouldn't care if they aren't a major super power?

And another thing I hear is about this "unilateral" action in Iraq. How is it a "unilateral" act when we had several countries go in with us? Sorry to all the Dems out there but you're line about how we "went in alone" is false.

The USA has 90% of the costs and casualties. Are the contributions of Poland and Austrailia useful and nice to have, yes. Do they save us much in terms of casualties or cost, no.

In your opinion, what other nation could have been on the U.S's side that would have sent a signifigant amount of troops? France or Germany would not have sent large numbers of troops. France might have sent two hundred, Germany wouldn't have sent any. Russia and China wouldn't have sent any.

So while the USA's costs would have been less, the proportion of the troops would not have been any differant.
Logged
shankbear
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 363


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #10 on: October 02, 2004, 09:16:54 PM »

Dnonvan looks like you are falling for the old "global test" crap already.  Europe loves our money like it is going out of style.  Having spent a lot of time there in the past three years, both before and after 9-11, the continental Euros want our money.  If the U.S sneezes, they catch a cold.  If we reach for our wallets, they get their noses hurt.  France's tourist industry has been down over 25% since we decided that we didn't need their permission for crap.  It is a beautiful place and I enjoy it and they are begging for our bucks.  Great cut rate hotel deals, etc, especially in the south of France.
If you decide not to move to Canada Donovan as you posted yesterday, France would be for you.  Look out...there is 13% unemployment.
Logged
Donovan
Rookie
**
Posts: 235


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #11 on: October 02, 2004, 09:24:59 PM »

"What about Poland?" "He forgot Poland!"

Ahh, HAHAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

That is the line that makes Kerry President.

Remember Ford's statement about the Poles? Republicans and Poland just crack me up.

Thank you for not nominating McCain and going for this mentally challenged man.
Logged
Donovan
Rookie
**
Posts: 235


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #12 on: October 02, 2004, 09:27:47 PM »

Dnonvan looks like you are falling for the old "global test" crap already.  Europe loves our money like it is going out of style.  Having spent a lot of time there in the past three years, both before and after 9-11, the continental Euros want our money.  If the U.S sneezes, they catch a cold.  If we reach for our wallets, they get their noses hurt.  France's tourist industry has been down over 25% since we decided that we didn't need their permission for crap.  It is a beautiful place and I enjoy it and they are begging for our bucks.  Great cut rate hotel deals, etc, especially in the south of France.
If you decide not to move to Canada Donovan as you posted yesterday, France would be for you.  Look out...there is 13% unemployment.


Yeap, you are from Texas ain't ya?
Logged
Tory
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,297


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #13 on: October 02, 2004, 09:29:51 PM »


Someone get this poor child a mirror!
Logged
Donovan
Rookie
**
Posts: 235


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #14 on: October 02, 2004, 09:30:18 PM »

Where are those numbers coming from?

It is called a Television, also called a TV. Get one, plug it in, turn it on and watch it. PBS, NBC, CBS, FOX, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, and one of those should tell you.
Logged
Blue Rectangle
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 2,683


Political Matrix
E: 8.50, S: -0.62

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #15 on: October 02, 2004, 09:32:37 PM »

After the terrorist attacks, the world had a lot of sympathy for the U.S.  But the President squandered that good will by bombing the wrong country.  He then went even further, declaring a war against a country that posed zero threat to the U.S., without UN approval-greatly angering not only permanent members of the Security Council, but even our closest allies in NATO.

Now, before you think I’ve gone completely nuts, let me explain.  The terrorist attacks that generated sympathy for us were the embassy bombings in 1998.  The bombing of the wrong country was Clinton’s cruise missile attack on an aspirin factory in Sudan a few years after bin Ladin had left the country.  The war against a country that posed zero threat to us was the war in Kosovo, which greatly angered both the Russians and the Chinese (of course, the Chinese didn’t get really upset until we dropped a bomb on their embassy).  Greece was bitterly opposed to the war; several other NATO nations were moderately opposed to the war and refused to assist.

I saw the anger and mistrust of the U.S. first-hand in 1999 while I was working in Trieste, Dresden, and Berlin.  Anyone who thinks this began with Bush is completely ignorant of U.S./European relations or is trying to base an attack on Bush upon fiction.
Logged
Tory
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,297


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #16 on: October 02, 2004, 09:33:49 PM »

Where are those numbers coming from?

It is called a Television, also called a TV. Get one, plug it in, turn it on and watch it. PBS, NBC, CBS, FOX, CNN, MSNBC, ABC, and one of those should tell you.

Since you seem to remember the all of the information so accurately I'm sure you could also remember the name of the programme.
Logged
Donovan
Rookie
**
Posts: 235


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #17 on: October 02, 2004, 09:56:31 PM »

After the terrorist attacks, the world had a lot of sympathy for the U.S.  But the President squandered that good will by bombing the wrong country.  He then went even further, declaring a war against a country that posed zero threat to the U.S., without UN approval-greatly angering not only permanent members of the Security Council, but even our closest allies in NATO.

Now, before you think I’ve gone completely nuts, let me explain.  The terrorist attacks that generated sympathy for us were the embassy bombings in 1998.  The bombing of the wrong country was Clinton’s cruise missile attack on an aspirin factory in Sudan a few years after bin Ladin had left the country.  The war against a country that posed zero threat to us was the war in Kosovo, which greatly angered both the Russians and the Chinese (of course, the Chinese didn’t get really upset until we dropped a bomb on their embassy).  Greece was bitterly opposed to the war; several other NATO nations were moderately opposed to the war and refused to assist.

I saw the anger and mistrust of the U.S. first-hand in 1999 while I was working in Trieste, Dresden, and Berlin.  Anyone who thinks this began with Bush is completely ignorant of U.S./European relations or is trying to base an attack on Bush upon fiction.

Of course 80% of the world didn't want Clinton removed from office like they do Bush.

I don't think anyone is claiming that some people don't get jelous and angry at the US throughout history. What people are pointing out is that Bush has angered even our closest allies, even Canada. "Making Canada mad at you is like having Mr. Rogers throw a rock threw your window", as Mr. Jon Steward from the Daily Show says.

Republicans can make all the excuses they want, which they are getting good at, but world opinion about the US is at an all time low. This is why I think we are having trouble getting the commitment of other nations to help out in Iraq. Nobody wants to work with Bush. I think when he is gone, other nations will be willing to help out and work with us.
Logged
True Federalist (진정한 연방 주의자)
Ernest
Moderators
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 42,157
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #18 on: October 02, 2004, 10:04:33 PM »

A lot of the problems that the US faces in the world is due to our idealism.  We hold ideals that are very attrictive, but have often failed to live up to them.  If we want the US to be better liked we need to either start following those ideals, even when doing so costs us in the short term, or become less idealistic so that the additional leaving of hate that comes from acting hypocritically doesn't happen.  Far too often in the Cold War and now in the War on Terrorism we have tolerated and even supported "good" dictators.  For instance when he attacked Iran Saddam was a "good" dictator, while when he attacked Kuwait he was a "bad" dictator.  His actions were the same, but we objected only when we didn't like his choice of target.  Whether consistent idealism, consistent realpolitik, or our current mix is the best foreign policy for the US depends upon what you want from it.  If the goal is to be liked, it is the worst policy, but being liked is hardly the most important thing for the US to worry about.
Logged
shankbear
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 363


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #19 on: October 02, 2004, 10:21:32 PM »

You a hoser Donovan?  eh?
Logged
The Duke
JohnD.Ford
Junior Chimp
*****
Posts: 9,270


Political Matrix
E: 0.13, S: -1.23

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #20 on: October 02, 2004, 10:42:12 PM »

The reason that no one has sent the number of troops wehave is that no one has our capabilities in terms of land forces.  The only other countriesthat have our numbers in any respectable quality are India, who is busy dettering against a Pakistani attack, and China who isn't exactly our best pal.
Logged
Donovan
Rookie
**
Posts: 235


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #21 on: October 02, 2004, 11:39:07 PM »

I would rather fight beside a Pole than a Frenchman any day.

lol, what are you doing, looking to lose the fight?  Wink

j/k, and btw I agree with ya.

You are making Idaho look bad.

May I remind the both you that the Statue of Liberty is French. Perhaps that is why Republicans hate liberty so much.

Logged
opebo
Atlas Legend
*****
Posts: 47,010


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #22 on: October 03, 2004, 12:07:09 AM »

Religion.
Logged
Donovan
Rookie
**
Posts: 235


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #23 on: October 03, 2004, 12:22:55 AM »

I would rather fight beside a Pole than a Frenchman any day.

lol, what are you doing, looking to lose the fight?  Wink

j/k, and btw I agree with ya.

You are making Idaho look bad.

May I remind the both you that the Statue of Liberty is French. Perhaps that is why Republicans hate liberty so much.

You are making yourself look like and uptight moron.  For one I just had a joke in there, and two did I ever say I wouldn't fight side by side with a Frenchman?  I just said that I would rather fight side by side with a Pole.  You are preaching to the wrong person on this subject.

You know as well as I do that this was a comment meant to demean the French. I think it is wrong, and insulting to about 25% of the people living in the United States that are of French decent.

It is a common theme of Republicans to blame problems on others.

Logged
freedomburns
FreedomBurns
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,237


Political Matrix
E: -7.23, S: -8.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #24 on: October 03, 2004, 01:21:34 AM »

The French are a bunch of damn cheese eating surrender monkeys.  But their culture is so classic and their women are so beutiful that I can't wait to live there some day.  If Americans were any smarter or more worldy they would know that the not only are the French right about how to live life and what life is all about, but they are right to look down on us too.  We have acted like jingoistic hyperactive juvenile cowboys on the world stage lately.  
Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.072 seconds with 13 queries.