World Poll: Attitude Towards Countries - Page 4




 
--
World Poll: Attitude Towards Countries
 
February 6th, 2006  
mmarsh
 
 
World Poll: Attitude Towards Countries
localgrizzy

I Dont read the French Press, its not anti-America its anti-everything. But I find it way to critical of the USA. I dont read the far right American press either for the same reasons (of Europe), so at least I'm consistant .

Sorry to hear that. 2 things i can say about that.

1. You picked a really, really, bad time to visit. The 1960s was a bad time in France it was involved in Algeria, there was a govornment collapse, student strikes, bad economy, you name it it was a bad time. Things have changed since then, you should try again now things are much better. In retrospect the only other time worse than the 1960 for France was the Nazi occupation.

2. Yes thats true, the French had a reputation for being arrogent I dont deny that. Again this is largely changing with the younger generation thats much more pro-America culture (not foreign policy). Though this still happens in the press and in politics. The truth is the French like American tourists, I had a cab driver once (an French-arab too if you can image) who said they largely greatly American tourists than British or god forbid German Tourists (old scores to settle I guess). The point is, dont let what happened 40 years ago decide what happens today.

One annoucer on CNN described French-American relations accuratly, he said it was 40 years of marriage counseling! To this date, the French and Americans have been allies in 3 seperate wars and have never once fought a war against each other, unlike other European countries.
February 7th, 2006  
DTop
 
 
As Global World bully? I dont think so, but alot of people do. The South American triumprant (Bolivia, Cuba and Venuzula would certainly say so), as would people in the ME. Thats 300+ milllion people right there. My point is when you have got so many people repeating the samething at a certain point one must look inwards rather than dismiss it as 'jealousy'. I do believe that SOME of our economic and foreign policies cause hardship for other countries (both intentional and unintentional), so its normal in my opinion that people dont like us.
You can't possibly believe that because these avowed anti-Americans keep repeating the time worn commusnist lines, that we should start to believe it. I find it difficult to believe that every person, or even the majority, in all of those countries feels the way their outspoken leaders claim to. BTW, what is the ME? Maine, Modern Europe, Middle Earth, I give up

Lending money to people in need with fair conditions is fine, lending people at interest rates they cannot possible pay back is called loansharking. In the case of Africa, they are broke, they suffer various plagues, bad climates, and often war. Almost entire continent is suffering a misery of one form or another. Therefore if we lend them money it should be on the expectation that they most likely WON'T be able to pay us back. So either we lend the money and dont expect to get repaid, or dont lend it to them in the first place. Its the strongarm tactics I oppose, but again America isnt alone in doing this, there is blame to go around.
I contend that it would be a greater injustice not to lend them anything. That is what would happen to you if you approached a lending institution with no money and no prospect to pay the loan back. Ithink it is commendable that affluent countries loan these poor countries money to help them improve their situations at all. What you propose is global welfare, it's not going to happen. Capitalism abhors such things.

In a place LIKE America (keeping the same advantages, and perks) sure. Do I think 90% of the world wants to pack their suitcase and move there, sorry I dont. As Dorothy said "there's no place like home". I personally miss the USA because thats my home.
You're right people covet what America has. That is the very definition of jealosy and envy.

I would coerice Isreal back to negociating table, thats it. What happens after that is up to the diplomats. What I want is this issue resolved. Its been festering for 30 years its time to put it to bed. Unfortunatly thats not whats happening anymore. Unlike Clinton, Bush, and even Reagan, W has given the Isreali right wing hawks carte blanche to simply bypass negiociating. There hasnt been a single 1-1 negiociation since Barak left office. The result as been a catastophe, every single bit of progress between Isreal and the Palestineans in the past 15 years has been destroyed because of it. What we have now are the Isrealis basically making peace moves on their own (which is good), but they have only given up that which they knew they were going to lose anyway. The problem is they are about to hit a major obsticle when it comes to the West Bank, and Jerusalem as well as smaller issues like water, freedom of movement and border security. Unless the Palestineans are part of negociations Isreal will get no peace, and therefore neither will we.
You say we bully the world but you want us to coerce Israel to negotiate against their own best intetests, hmm. The problems there are certainly older than 30 years. It seems to me that Israel has recently made some huge concessions to the Arabs recently. In return there have been increased attacks and a new Hamas government sworn to destroy Israel. If we take anything form history, we should easily be ble to see that no matter what concession Israel gives to the Arabs nationalists, no lasting peace will come of it. BTW, there is no way that the radical Arab nationalists will decide to live in harmony with anyone else. They never have and it is naive to think that they will. They have always waged war whenever that could so the logical course of action would be to deny them the means to wage war.

You seem to think peace in the Middle East is not up to the Middle Eastern people but it's up to the U.S.?

Unfortuntly yes to a degree. We pull alot of strings in that part of the world Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Iraq, Jordan all these countries have powerful ties with Washington. Mind you, thats not a bad thing, because there are worse thing the Saudi Royal family and the other dictators of the region. There are even worse things than Saddam Hussein, like Iran with a nuclear weapon.
Yet every time we "pull a string" we are codemned as the interfering bully. I don't think we have as much influence as you seem to think especially when other western countries seem to oppose us at every turn.

I'd say countries that would like to rival us as a Superpower such as Russia and China (espically the later) are prone to jealousy. In other parts of the world however contempt is bred for other reasons. 'Jelousy' is simply not 99% of the problems, to say that is to stick one head in the sand and ignore the problem.
Sure, everybody wants everything we have but you say that's not jealousy? I don't know what you would call it but that sounds like a good descriptive for it to me. Maybe resentment would be better? I don't blame them but it is what it is. France for example, has never been able to admit that she hasn't been a super power for a very, vey long time and still considers America an upstart British colony.

Incidently, we France got a real treat as yesterday was the first night ever that the Superbowl was televised live on French TV.
I hope you enjoyed it. Did many people care who won or even watch?
February 7th, 2006  
localgrizzly
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by mmarsh
localgrizzy

I dont read the far right American press either for the same reasons (of Europe), so at least I'm consistant .

.
Now ya really got me confused???

If there is a far right American press, I can't seem to find it!

All of the American press that I see, i.e. Hearst, Knight-Ridder, Gannett, NY papers, San Francisco papers, Chicago and D.C. etc. are all EXTREME left-wing! All three "over the air" TV networks are far left as well.
--
World Poll: Attitude Towards Countries
February 7th, 2006  
Damien435
 
 
The Republicans, in a twist of irony, have embraced the changes brought forth by the internet and are putting most of their rants online, not on print.
February 7th, 2006  
Missileer
 
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damien435
The Republicans, in a twist of irony, have embraced the changes brought forth by the internet and are putting most of their rants online, not on print.
That takes the middle man (editors) out of the publication media. They have also tapped into the most progressive medium today, talk radio.
August 3rd, 2006  
fingolfin361
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DTop
Sure, everybody wants everything we have but you say that's not jealousy? I don't know what you would call it but that sounds like a good descriptive for it to me. Maybe resentment would be better? I don't blame them but it is what it is.
Ummm....just because i want a big house and a BMW, doesnt mean i'm jealous of the guy who does....! Envious to an extent, maybe, but jealous, no.


Interesting how this argument about OTHERS' perceptions of and attitudes towards America, and there are only Americans really debating. :P

And really, statements like 90% of the world wants to live in America, is absurd! I feel kinda offended by that statement, and I know a lot of people who would.
August 3rd, 2006  
DTop
 
 
It's a little late to respond to this. Wouldn't you say? It's been about six months since the previous post here, unless you just want to pick a fight with me, fingolfin361?
August 3rd, 2006  
fingolfin361
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by DTop
It's a little late to respond to this. Wouldn't you say? It's been about six months since the previous post here, unless you just want to pick a fight with me, fingolfin361?
whoa, no no, not at all...
didnt realise it was that old....and pick a fight... isnt that a bit much?
August 4th, 2006  
DTop
 
 
Just wondering what you're up to. Just posting? You're OK. Picking a fight on the forum? Well, let's say that wouldn't have been the best use of time or effort.
August 4th, 2006  
AussieNick
 
Clearly a world poll. I don't remember being asked.