Cheneys says "Heil Bush, Nicht Kerry"

[toms]

Originally posted by txa1265

Has he? Who - France, who has always hated us?

Really, i hadn't noticed that. Why?

 

Originally posted by txa1265

Germany, with whom we've always had a dodgy relationship? And those are our *ALLIES*?!?!?

I thought the US had been pretty tight with germany since WW2?

 

Originally posted by txa1265

Russia has always been the enemy, and now they just want our money ...

Russia did indeed tend to block US actions on principle (as the US did to them) but right now putin is riding high on policies that copy bush, so i'd say he isn't that worried about bush.

 

Originally posted by txa1265

So ... China? 3rd world dictatorships? Islamafascist states that have always hated us?

The US has been courting China in a disgraceful manner over hte last ten years, turning blind eyes to numerous human rights abuses that they would invade other countries over... cos they want to get in on the market and make money.

 

From my post in the other thread:

 

"A new poll in 35 countries suggests that people around the world would prefer Democratic challenger John Kerry as US president over George W Bush.

 

Kerry scored best with traditional US allies

 

Only Filipino, Polish and Nigerian respondents clearly backed Mr Bush.

 

Most said Mr Bush's foreign policy had made them feel worse about the US since his election in 2000.

 

Meanwhile, a new survey of American and European public attitudes also suggested there had been a dramatic leap in the latter's criticism of US foreign policy.

 

More than three-quarters of Europeans surveyed in 10 countries by the German Marshall Fund of the US said they disapproved of President Bush's international actions, 20% more than two years ago.

 

The survey also showed sharp differences in how governments should respond to potential threats from terrorism and weapons of mass destruction.

 

More than 80% of Americans thought war could achieve justice - more than twice the proportion of Europeans.

 

"Only one in five want to see Bush re-elected," said Steven Kull, the director of Maryland's Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA).

 

"Though he is not as well known, Kerry would win handily if the people of the world were to elect the US president.""

 

However you look at it bush has managed to annoy many people all around the world. Both traditional allies and enemies. Even those who publicly stand with bush are mostly doing so due to pressure, so i doubt they like him that much either.

Of course, there has always been a level of anti us feeling, but Bush has managed to ratchet it up a lot, and especially among the US's usual allies.

 

Personally I don't think it makes any difference if kerry is elected now, as the resentment has already been stirred up, but it patently isn't going to make MORE people attack the US.

 

Originally posted by txa1265

our last 'friendly' president single-handedly gave nuclear weapons to a state that is more dangerous and more of a threat than Iraq ever was (i.e. N. Korea).

Huh? Really? Tell more....

[kipperthefrog]

Think about it! Bin Laden sent only a few guys with knives and he acheived his mission. Bush on the other hand sent thousands of troops, and high tech military stuff and spent billions of dollars. .. and he FAILED HIS mission! If Bush cared at ALL about getting the terrorists, he would have GOT Osama bin laden!

 

he just wanted an an exuse to take over Iraq! when he took over Iraq, he surrounded the oil fields with armies and had people dig for oil!

 

The Iraqi people saw that the oil was the only thing we were interested in!

 

He sent our boys to die. then had a party with big buisness people to discuss how much money will be made on the war!

[ShadowTemplar]

JFC! I don't belive that people can actually fall for that 'the terrorists are coming' crap!

 

You can't prevent terrorist attacks. Period. Not dubya, not Kerry, not anyone. Any reasonably intelligent teenager can make a chemical weapon in his friggin bathtub from chemicals he can buy at a convenience store! How do you propose preventing lunatics from doing that?

 

Fire the Fascist! Vote Kerry!

[Dagobahn Eagle]

txa1265, your question of who the real allies of the USA are hardly deserves a reply, but here goes:

 

Have you ever heard of NATO? What about the half-a-hundred nation that sent fighting men to fight and die alongside the UN -and the States- in Korea? What about Afghanistan? What about World War II? Geez.

 

That's all the reply you're getting from me. It's a lot more than you deserve, so don't say it's too little. Now cut the crap and move on.

 

Oh, and it's "heil", not "hiel". I see why many Americans get this wrong, but in Germanic languages like the Scandinavian tounges and German, the 'i' is pronounced like the English 'e', while the English 'i' could indeed sound like the "ei" part of "heil".

[txa1265]

Originally posted by Dagobahn Eagle

txa1265, your question of who the real allies of the USA are hardly deserves a reply, but here goes:

What I was saying is that so many are looking for us to submit to the UN, and I say that the UN is largely populated and controlled by those whose interests are either not aligned or directly opposed to ours - the majority are our adversaries or enemies.

 

It has been demonstrably been proven that while we were trying to work with the UN prior to the invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein was paying literally billions of dollars to our supposed allies of France, Germany and Russia to oppose us. And so they did.

 

That is my issue.

 

Mike

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Good points. However, I do not agree that the USA was "trying to work with the UN" as in "doing our best to stay on the good side of the UN". Bush personally critizised (spelling?) UN efforts and encouraged Americans to do the same.

 

As to "receiving billions to oppose the US", that is genuely interesting. Please do elaborate.

[SkinWalker]

Originally posted by txa1265

It has been demonstrably been proven that while we were trying to work with the UN prior to the invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein was paying literally billions of dollars to our supposed allies of France, Germany and Russia to oppose us. And so they did.

 

That is a factual problem that opponents to the UN continue to cite. Hussein didn't pay those countries, he paid individuals within those countries. Nothing beyond this has been demonstrated and anything else is pure, unevidenced speculation.

[Spider AL]

so many are looking for us to submit to the UN,

Submit? SUBMIT? It's supposed to be a democratic coalition of nations, mate. If you're working within it, you must ascribe VALUE to the opinions of the other nation states. This is the only way that any standard of international law can be maintained. Oh, I forgot. Neo-conservatives don't want international law, they're only interested in the manifest destiny of the US on the world stage. Pfft.

 

Nobody's asked the US to submit to anything, except the rule of international law. Anyone who doesn't submit to the rule of law is a criminal, like it or not.

 

I say that the UN is largely populated and controlled by those whose interests are either not aligned or directly opposed to ours - the majority are our adversaries or enemies.

Enemies? That's very emotive language. You're living in the damn cold war era mate.

 

It has been demonstrably been proven that while we were trying to work with the UN prior to the invasion of Iraq, Saddam Hussein was paying literally billions of dollars to our supposed allies of France, Germany and Russia to oppose us.

Proven? Proven by what standard exactly? The Rumsfeld standard? The Fox news standard?

 

Honestly, I'm amazed sometimes, I really am.

[Dagobahn Eagle]

Nobody's asked the US to submit to anything, except the rule of international law. Anyone who doesn't submit to the rule of law is a criminal, like it or not.

Thanks. Thanks to you too, SkinWalker.

 

I'd like for the USA to become a mostly isolationistic nation again (for its own sake). We'll have to wait and see, though.