Jump to content
TSM Forums
Sign in to follow this  
Guest TJH

Europeans...

Recommended Posts

Guest TJH

LONDON (Reuters) - Most Europeans believe America itself is partly to blame for the devastating attacks on New York and Washington last September 11.

 

 

According to a new poll, which questioned more than 9,000 Europeans and Americans about how they look at the world one year after the attacks, 55 percent of Europeans think U.S. foreign policy contributed to the tragic events.

 

 

The highest percentage of those who thought Washington should blame itself for the attacks was in France, at 63 percent, while the lowest was in Italy, at 51 percent.

 

 

Now, however, a large majority of Europeans -- 59 percent -- think America's overseas conduct since the attacks which killed some 3,000 people is aimed mostly at protecting itself, rather than enforcing its own will around the globe.

 

 

The survey also found that while Europeans are more critical than Americans of U.S. President George W. Bush's handling of foreign policy, the two continents' views on the wider world as a whole are quite close.

 

 

"Despite reports of a rift between U.S. and European governments, our survey finds more similarities than differences in how the American and European publics view the larger world," said Craig Kennedy, president of German Marshall Fund of the United States (GMF), which undertook the survey in conjunction with the Chicago Council on Foreign Relations (CCFR).

 

 

The findings showed that on Iraq, where the Bush administration has made repeated calls for "regime change" and is arguing its case for a military strike against President Saddam Hussein, both Europeans and Americans support a U.S.-led invasion -- but only with international approval and support.

 

 

Only 20 percent of Americans think the U.S. should go it alone, while 65 percent of Americans and 60 percent of Europeans favour intervention with U.N. approval and allies' support.

 

 

"When presented with various scenarios for a U.S. attack on Iraq, Europeans' support for their country's participation is most heavily influenced by the presence or absence of a U.N. mandate," said the survey, which was released in Europe on Wednesday.

 

 

AMERICANS BEGIN TO LOOK OUTWARDS

 

 

Interest in international news, which had been declining steadily in the United States to near record lows in the 1990s, has now jumped to its highest levels ever recorded since the CCFR began surveying foreign policy attitudes in 1974.

 

 

Sixty-two percent of Americans say they are "very interested" in news about U.S. relations with other countries, the same percentage as those interested in national news.

 

 

International terrorism tops the list of threats identified both by Europe -- where people in France, Germany, Britain, Italy, the Netherlands and Poland were questioned -- and the United States.

 

 

The threat of Iraq developing weapons of mass destruction comes next, with 86 percent of Americans and 58 percent of Europeans naming that as of great concern.

 

 

In the U.S, 67 percent those surveyed named military conflict between Israel and its Arab neighbours as a threat, while Islamic fundamentalism was listed by 61 percent.

 

 

Looking at the balance of power between the two continents, the survey found Europeans ready and willing to take on a more prominent role, eager to match America's status as a superpower.

 

 

"When asked if the United States should remain the only superpower or the EU should become a military and economic superpower like the United States, 65 percent of European respondents opt for the latter," the survey said.

 

 

Highest support for this idea was among the French at 91 percent and the Italians at 76 percent, and a majority of those who supported it also said they would back increased defence spending by their own governments if it were needed to get to superpower status.

 

 

"Of those desiring the European Union to become a superpower, nine out of 10 indicate they support this as a way for Europe to better cooperate with the United States, not compete with it," the survey said.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Insane Bump Machine

Your headline is wrong. We don't say that the US are directly responsible, we say that the US foreign policy contributed to it. That's a big difference. Where do you think the hate against the US in many arabic countries is coming from, of course it has to do with america's foreign policy.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Vern Gagne

Simple jealously. Europe doesn't hold the power and once did on word affairs. They can't seem to except that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest danielisthor
Simple jealously. Europe doesn't hold the power and once did on word affairs. They can't seem to except that.

Europe can barely get out of its own way, let alone try and dictate anything on world affairs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest big Dante Cruz

I know I posted it elsewhere, but what would Europe be saying if the flight that was planned to hit Big Ben on 9/11 hadn't been grounded by US authorities?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest danielisthor
I know I posted it elsewhere, but what would Europe be saying if the flight that was planned to hit Big Ben on 9/11 hadn't been grounded by US authorities?

Actually, it probably wouldn't have mattered. Remember, these are the same people who actually negotiated with Libya to get the suspects for the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland.

 

in all likelihood, the would probably blame the US for it as well.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Ozymandias

The "UK" is really just an extension of U.S. policies at this point, so they would have had nobody to blame for it but themselves.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney

The UK? It's a country? I always thought they were sort of like an American missile base or something.

 

Next you'll be telling me Canada isn't the 51st State...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest danielisthor
Next you'll be telling me Canada isn't the 51st State...

If only President Madison had succeeded in taking Canada back in 1812.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Michael Joel Benoit

I happen to agree with that notion. The U.S. goverment's forgein policies did contribute to 9/11.

 

Here's proof:

 

It all goes back to the Persian Gulf war. Never mind the fact that Saddam Hussein had killed his own people for years. The moment he invaded Kuwait and wanted to take over the world's oil supply then we jumped up and went to war.

 

Why? Big Oil.

 

Then after the war is over, despite the fact that the U.S. never overthrew Saddam, the goverment places sanctions on Iraq and army bases in Saudi Arabia which pisses of the Muslims (including a certain Muslim named Osama Bin Laden).

 

Meanwhile, the sanctions killed thousands of innocent people because of the limits of the sanctions.

 

Then in 1993, U.S. troops are sent to Somalia, where they kill more innocents futher pissing off the Arabs and Bin Laden.

 

Then while our "great" goverment is busy prosecuting Bill Clinton for what he does in bed, Bin Laden bombs the U.S. Embassy in August 1998. That is just part of the master plan that was 9/11. The U.S. fires missles to try and kill Bin Laden but miss.

 

Cut to Bush stealing the election in 2001 and this Conservative actually gets us ready for the attacks.

 

He backs out of the nuclear arms treaties with Russia. Continues with the prosecutions with Iraq.

 

And, sadly, MET WITH BIN LADEN'S FAMILY 5 WEEKS BEFORE THE TERROIST ATTACKS!

 

Bottom Line: I wasn't that suprise when the first plane hit the World Trade Center. I just had a dirty feeling inside of me that it was going to happen sooner or later. And when it did happen, I was more piss at the goverment.

 

And maybe, just maybe, if the goverment just ignored Monica Lewinsky and just, oh I don't know, protected the PEOPLE of the United States like they were suppose to, than maybe they would have been smart enough to relize the master plan early.

 

And the U.S. CREATED the monster Bin Laden. The CIA taught him all he needed to know when they were fightning the Russians. So it is sort of like Frankenstein coming back to kill its creator.

 

And the U.S. wonders why they were attacked? It wasn't because the terroists were jealous of us, it's because of what the goverment had done to the Middle East.

 

Fuck George Bush. Fuck the army. Fuck the CIA. Fuck the FBI. FUCK THE U.S. GOVERMENT!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KoR Fungus

Not that I support Bush or anything, but...

 

<<<Cut to Bush stealing the election in 2001 and this Conservative actually gets us ready for the attacks.

 

He backs out of the nuclear arms treaties with Russia. Continues with the prosecutions with Iraq.>>>

 

I'm sorry, but what does that have to do with anything? Do you actually think bin Laden cared that Bush "stole" the election? Or that he backed out of the nuclear arms treaty with Russia? I didn't exactly see Gore expressing much interest in dropping the sanctions against Iraq either. Bush or Gore, 9/11 would still have happened. Bin Laden certainly didn't care who was in the White House.

 

I think US foreign policy contributed to 9/11 in that if the US had stayed completely out of all Middle Eastern affairs, 9/11 probably wouldn't have happened. Of course that doesn't mean that the US is to blame. The US for the most part has acted responsibly in the Middle East. Bin Laden just doesn't like it, because he doesn't want any "infidels" "corrupting" his people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Michael Joel Benoit
I think US foreign policy contributed to 9/11 in that if the US had stayed completely out of all Middle Eastern affairs, 9/11 probably wouldn't have happened. Of course that doesn't mean that the US is to blame. The US for the most part has acted responsibly in the Middle East. Bin Laden just doesn't like it, because he doesn't want any "infidels" "corrupting" his people.

My point exactly. We should just have stayed out of the Middle East all together!

 

And yeah, the reason Bin Laden didn't want us there in the first place was because we were "infidels". But we did do things that pissed him off even more!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KoR Fungus

<<<Fuck George Bush. Fuck the army. Fuck the CIA. Fuck the FBI. FUCK THE U.S. GOVERMENT!>>>

 

Oh for God's sake, shut the fuck up. It's nice to see another non-conservative poster on this board, but damn, do you have to end every one of your posts with this immature bullshit? I strongly dislike Bush too, but saying "FUCK BUSH~!" about everything just makes you look like a total moron. No one takes you seriously anyway, but they'd be much more likely to do so if you at least tried to express your viewpoints maturely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KoR Fungus

<<<My point exactly. We should just have stayed out of the Middle East all together!>>>

 

Yeah, but that wasn't my point. I said the attacks wouldn't have happened if we stayed out, not that we should have stayed out. We had every right to be there, hell we even had UN approval for the Gulf War, and overall I feel we've acted responsibly there (there are major exceptions, but that's another topic). We shouldn't base our foreign policy on whether it might upset a lunatic terrorist.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest big Dante Cruz

By the way, the reason we didn't interfere in the whole Middle East thing until Iraq invaded Kuwait was because of the fact that one country had violated the sovereignty and forcibly taken over another country. That's why we stepped in, and we had most of the world behind us.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney
U.S. troops are sent to Somalia, where they kill more innocents
Okay, asshole, now you're starting to piss me off. 18 American soldiers died in Somalia and 73 were injured. And why the hell were we there in the first place? To capture a brutal thug who butchered his own starving people in their thousands. To FEED those ungrateful bastards. And for that awful crime we had to watch those vicious inhuman barbaric filth butcher and mulilate our soldiers while a shitty Commander in Chief refused to send in the tanks, armoured cars, and gunships we needed, and then refused to let the Army finish its job, making all those casualties not only horribly painful but completely pointless to boot. And now you have the brazen gall to sit in your goddamn chair on your goddamn fat ass and denigrate the dead. What really gets me is that you'd be on that same goddamn high horse screeching that the US doesn't care about poor dying Africans if we HADN'T tried to do what we did.

"Fuck the army?" Fuck you, scum. Fuck you and everyone who thinks like you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Michael Joel Benoit

You just don't get it. You actually believe what the goverment saids happen? How about seeing it from a different point of view.

 

Black Hawk Down: Hollywood and the Pentagon rewrite history

 

What really happened in Somalia and why?

 

On December 12, 1992, the US sent 28,000 soldiers into Somalia under the auspices of the United Nations in a supposed ‘humanitarian operation’ to bring food to starving people. TV photo opportunities included a staged D-Day style landing on the beach, to waiting cameras, and copious news coverage of hungry Somalians receiving food courtesy of the ‘international community’. What we didn’t see was the other major activity of the US forces of ‘Operation Restore Hope’: the almost daily gun battles in heavily populated neighbourhoods which resulted in the deaths of over 10,000 Somalis in only ten months. Resistance to the US presence in Somalia, which rapidly became widespread, was brutally repressed.

 

Journalist Richard Dowden, not to be confused with Mark Bowden, on whose book the film is based, discovered that the US army started killing Somali civilians right from the outset of its mission. ‘In one incident, Rangers took a family hostage. When one of the women started screaming at the Americans, she was shot dead. In another incident, a Somali prisoner was allegedly shot dead when he refused to stop praying outside. Another was clubbed into silence’. The human rights group Africa Watch stated that the United Nations’ troops ‘have engaged in abuses of human rights, including killing of civilians, physical abuse, theft…’ The abuses included turning machine guns on unarmed protesters and the firing of missiles into residential areas. The report concluded that "UNOSOM has become an army of occupation."

 

Why did the US intervene in Somalia?

 

By 1991, the pro-US President Siad Barre had leased nearly two thirds of Somalia to four US oil companies. When he was overthrown, the US needed another way of guaranteeing their interests. Initially they chose a local leader, Mohammed Farrah Aideed, but when he proved unreliable, they intervened directly. And when the US intervenes, it means business. A few days before the troops hit the beach, the US embassy set up shop in oil company Conoco’s corporate compound. At the same time, Colin Powell, then chairing the US military’s Joint Chiefs of Staff, described the invasion as a ‘paid political advertisement’ for the Pentagon. Powell opposed calls to spend more money on the pressing needs of health, housing and education, taking the opportunity to argue instead for continued military spending.

 

Now, as this movie whitewashes the role of the US military in Somalia, Colin Powell, George W Bush and the US army are casting about for new countries to invade as they continue their ‘War on Terrorism’. Somalia is again high on the list.

 

What better way to prepare people for this new aggression than a movie that, in the words of New York Times critic Elvis Mitchell, ‘converts the Somalis into a pack of snarling dark-skinned beasts…’

 

How does New Zealand fit in?

 

Here in New Zealand, the government was quick to commit SAS soldiers and other military resources to the ‘War on Terrorism’. Who knows whether they will be deployed to kill Somalians this year, just as they were sent to kill the Afghan people last year? There was money immediately available to beef up the SIS and send troops to far flung corners of the globe, but if we want our kids to get a good education or an operation at hospital, or if nurses want a pay rise, we’re told the coffers are empty. There’s something wrong when it’s easier to get extra funding to join an international bombing attack on the world’s poorest and most defenceless countries than it is to fund a hospital.

 

‘The first casualty of war is truth’

 

The US military cooperated intimately in the making of this film, supplying staff, expertise and equipment to make the action look as realistic as possible. But that’s not the same as "showing what really happened". Before the film was released, the Motion Picture Association of America held a private screening for senior White House advisers, allowing them to make changes to the movie. What chance was there that they would allow the depiction of helicopter gunships firing indiscriminately at people in the streets and markets of Mogadishu? What chance was there that they would allow US soldiers to be depicted, as most interviewed by Mark Bowden described, firing ‘on crowds and eventually at anyone and anything they saw’?

 

But at least while we watch the film, we can admire the personal courage and morality of the individual soldiers involved, right? Well, unfortunately no. It’s no surprise that they gave a new name to Ewan McGregor’s character, Company Clerk John Grimes for the film. The real John Grimes, John ‘Stebby’ Stebbins, is now serving a 30-year sentence in Fort Leavenworth military prison for raping a 12-year-old girl.

 

If you’re looking for a true story, you’re as likely to find it in Lord of the Rings as in Black Hawk Down. We hope you enjoy the film, but remember to treat it as you might any other action fantasy. Also bear in mind that the ‘heroes’ of Delta Force are actually the soldiers of an invading army, and the forces of the ‘evil Somali warlords’ are actually defending themselves and their country from an entirely unprovoked attack. And in Somalia today, people are bracing themselves for Black Hawk Down 2, only that will be real, and New Zealand should have no part in it. o

 

 

Produced as a leaflet by the Middle East Information and Solidarity Collective, PO. Box 513, Christchurch

 

Also circulated by the Anti-Imperialist Coalition

 

www.geocities.com/anti_imperialist_coalition

 

Meets every Wednesday 7.30pm Trades Hall, 147 Great North Road, Grey Lynn, Auckland

ph 025 2800080

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KoR Fungus

Wow, if it's from those sources, it must be true!

 

Seriously, there are enough liberal leaning newspapers out there that if most of this was actually true, some real source would have broken it. The fact that you can't find a better source than some geocities webpage does not give me much faith in the story's validity.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Kingpk

How about you try something called "expressing your own opinions" instead of posting crap articles?

 

I echo Marney's last statement.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest J*ingus

SKBF, are you aware that Marney works for the American government in a military intelligence capacity?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Michael Joel Benoit

This is my favorite part: if you’re looking for a true story, you’re as likely to find it in Lord of the Rings as in Black Hawk Down. We hope you enjoy the film, but remember to treat it as you might any other action fantasy. Also bear in mind that the ‘heroes’ of Delta Force are actually the soldiers of an invading army, and the forces of the ‘evil Somali warlords’ are actually defending themselves and their country from an entirely unprovoked attack.

 

See? Don't believe everything you hear especially if its from the U.S. goverment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest bob_barron

Who wrote this article?

What credentials does he have?

 

and the bottom line-

Why should I give a flying fuck what he has to say?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest KoR Fungus

<<<See? Don't believe everything you hear especially if its from the U.S. goverment.>>>

 

See what? We all think the story is bullshit, so pulling a quote from the bullshit story out as a counterargument isn't going to get you anywhere.

 

And what is it with these ultraradical liberals and quoting stories. The conservatives here at least come up with their own arguments. The socialists all just seem to take their arguments from someone else.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest J*ingus

Fan, your example is an article on a Geocities site, written by an anonymous author? That's not proof. And like I said, Marney actually works for the government, so you're going to need some pretty hard facts to argue with her.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Cancer Marney

I actually don't know anything about the 1993 Somalia incident other than what I read in a couple of nonclassified debriefings I dug up and the same news stories you all read and saw. But that's plenty. I don't want to know more. What I know already will haunt me for the rest of my life.

I'd like to see people like SKBF go up to one of the surviving Rangers and tell him to his face that he was in Mogadishu killing innocents at the bidding of an imperialist government only interested in oil. They'd be in traction for years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest big Dante Cruz

While we're at it, let's post a review of the X-Files movie and proclaim the government is hiding connections with aliens! Or Independence Day, since the government knows aliens exist and even has one of their ships!

</sarcasm>

</end cliched joke>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×