Only two short years ago the whole world was behind us. It's amazing what you can accomplish in two years :(

I know, it really amazes me how virtually the entire world stood behind America on Sept. 12, 2001. And just two short years later that support has been turned to a general feeling of disdain and anti-Americanism. A diplomatic failure of immense proportions by the Bush administration imo.

Nope.

I think if you'll look back to posts made in the GD forum here starting just minutes after the attacks on September 11th, 2001, you will realize you're looking back through rose colored glasses. ;)

Of course I do remember kindness from that time, but there is still kindness for those who were lost. There were dissenters regarding action from the very beginning. There is a difference between being sympathetic to our loss, and agreeing with our reaction.

I get really sick of "the world was eating out of our hands" 2 years ago, because it's complete bull.

[ 09-12-2003, 02:09 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

Everyone was behind the US 100% for doing something about 9/11. They backed the notion of taking action against state sponsors of terrorism, and generally backed Afghanistan. But, they see Iraq as a non-sequiter in the crusade, a puppet project based almost completely on non-terrorist concerns for which the tragedy is being used as an EXCUSE. And, this may very well be justifiable.

Until we knew that Saddam had even lied about lying, the Iraq WoMD threat was real. Otherwise, UN inspectors wouldn't have been such an issue. We forget this often. And, it makes the Iraq situation look like it's not very connected to 9/11.

However, the asserted Iraq-Al Queda link as a justification brings shame on 9/11. Because it is so attenuated, this assertion insults those victims, their families, and our intelligence. If the tragedy of "9/11" is shouted everytime the US wants to assert its manliness with a war, it becomes trivial. It's like the boy who cried "wolf."

If you are going to go remove a dictator because he's tyrannical and abusive of his people, say so. If you think he might have WMD, well then that's fine too. But if you assert he's on the hook for flying planes into the WTC, you better damn well back up the connection with a-b-c details an idiot can follow or risk trivializing 9/11 altogether.

As for who loves us, the US current stance seems to be that of a Lannister:
It is better to have the people love you than fear you.
But, if they will not love you, it is better to have them fear you than laugh at you.

Well according to Machiavelli it's "best to be loved and feared at the same time. As this cannot be achieved it's better to be feared."
(the quote is fuzzy, it's something along this line but I can't remember the correct wording. but it's not as if Niccholo always quoted correctly :D )

It is not.

Speaking as a Canadian we were pro-action in Afghanistan and against terrorism. We agreed with your reaction there and have the largest troop contingent in Kabul and continue to work to rebuild that country. So were the Germans i recall.

We were also for action in Iraq ONLY under UN mandate. Canada also had a proposal that allowed for further inspections backed by force. It was championed by Mexico because they were a member of the security council at the time and Canada was not. Both the French/German sides and the US sides disregarded it (edit>yeah yeah old argument don't want to go there but).

We were with you after Sept. 11th. Ronn. Unilateralism - go it alone turned that support off.

[ 09-12-2003, 02:39 PM: Message edited by: Djinn Raffo ]

We can thank George Bush for setting us back years in in international relations,environmental causes,the U.S.economy,and the trust of Americans towards their government.Great job George,now take your retirement money and go home!!

<FONT COLOR=ORANGE>I can agree somewhat with what you have said, but not toally. The "Old European" powers were also looking for some reason to buck the US, because we are now seen as the only legitimite Super Power. It's only natural that some one rise to challenge us. If the European Union is to ever have any real power it must challenge the US and try to also become a Super Power. I think that is what is behind alot of the "offically" (read France, Germany and Beligium) led challenges from that quarter. BTW I don't mean anything negative by the term "Old European". It just descibes the older member states in the EU as opposed to say Poland or some of the other Eastern Block Countries that just joined.

It's my opinion that the Old NATO alliance will cease to exist, except maybe on paper in the next 25 years. I don't ever again see us being as close as we were prior to last summer.

Personally, I'd be quite happy to see the EU become a Super Power, especially if it off-sets China.

The economy was going down the tubes when Dubya took over. The Tech Stock Bubble had burst already and the whole market was on the way down. CEOs and COOs across the board were looking for ways to show a profit for their existing stockholders. So jobs got cut and companies got conservative and quit spending lots of money trying to grow their companies, which caused the economy to spirial on down even more.

As far as trust in the Government going down, you can go blame Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon and Reagan (Can you say Iran/Contra? I thought ya could.)for that. I don't think anyone really trusted the Government much after those four got done with it. Clinton didn't help much either with "I didn't inhale" (yeah right!!!) and "I never had sex with that woman" (Blew there Big Boy and got caught didn't ya). Bush just didn't help it along very much.

Anyway just my little ole pennies.

The majority of the world was behind the US during their campaign against terrorism to bring the guilty party responsible for 9/11 to justice. The majority of the world is still behind that campaign.

Unfortunately you just can't decide to run roughshod throughout the world attacking people who MAY be a terrorist threat, or MAY have had connections with terrorist cells, and the consequences have shown themselves.

The damage to the US from 9/11 still continues. The economic impact from Iraq is staggering, with Bush asking for another $75 billion from congress, soldiers being killed almost daily and the general turmoil within the US over Iraq. In some ways it seems that Al Queda has already beaten the US, turning them into a paranoid giant, attacking anything that moves.

9/11 was a tragedy of epic proportion, and my heart goes out to each and every person affected by those days events. You cannot however let those events cloud your judgement and lead you into a blind rage

Nobody could fail to join with the US in an expression of sympathy and solidarity over the events of 9/11.

Unfortunately we quickly diverged over how to best ensure that we minimise the chances of such an outrage taking place in future.... :(

I'd like to award Timber Loftis 50 points for intruducing A Song of Ice and Fire into a political debate. :D

Keep up the good work! http://www.ironworksforum.com/ubb/no...ons/icon14.gif

Djinn, I hear what you are saying, but I think this post really explains it all.

Yah... that's the thing with terrorism ;)

Davros stands up and applauds - well said TL, my sentiments exactly and expressed better than I could probably hope to. The Lannister thing was a nice touch too [img]smile.gif[/img]

But it is better to have people laugh at you than hate you because hate overcomes fear and drives men to desperate acts of violence...

[ 09-13-2003, 07:43 PM: Message edited by: Skunk ]

*bows* Thank you Davros and Luvian.

Skunk -- does hatred overcome that much? Maybe for fringe groups like the PLO or Al Queda whose very acts of borne of desperation to begin with. But, for other NATIONS, including all UN Nations and NATO Nations, I disagree. Those with a stake and claim already made generally succumb to fear over hatred, however vocal they may be about it, I would say IMO. I'm not supporting this US stance, btw.

precisely. Which is why it's only after we've lost everything that we're free to do anything. Forfeit the stake and claim the whole world as your own and die a glorious death in the process ;)

Nations don't hate - people do - and hatred is generally borne from personal suffering and loss of those things which make life worth living.

Point in case - most of the fireman and policemen who entered the WTC on the last day of its existence will have been afraid for their lives, most will have had lives worth living and everything to lose. And it was the fact that they entered despite that fear that made them so brave and heroic.

On the other side of the equation are the suicide bombers. We know very little about the 9/11 hijackers, so let's look instead at the Palestinian bombers. They know that the Israeli's are better armed than they are, they know that if Israel decided to kill all Palestinians they could finish the job within a week. They know when they strap on that bomb that they are certain to die either by the bomb in or in the event of discovery. They are not filled with bravery because they are not afraid - they are too filled with hate to know fear.

Oh we can fool ourselves with empty explanations that they were all religious crackpots seeking and afterlife reward, but then why hasn't there been a single suicide bomber that had a job or a single suicide bomber that hadn't lost a loved one at the hands of the government/people that they are aiming their bombs at? The truth behind these bombers is far less complicated than religious extremism. The vast majority are not members of fringe groups or even Hamas (although the latter is certainly providing the explosives and therefore taking 'credit' for their actions).

But go back to the NATIONS for a moment. Iraq certainly feared the US (for all the good it did it), Saddam Hussein and his government didn't declare war on the US - they knew that they would lose. So Iraq never attacked the US and when the US finally declared war on Iraq, half of Iraq's soldiers gave up without a fight or melted away...

But now that the US/UK have attacked Iraq, now that the country is defeated, now that so many loved ones are dead, the partially ruined country is now totally ruined, the freedom that was promised has not materialised and so many are without work or even access to water, Iraq is *far* more dangerous than it was before the war.

The same soldiers who melted away in fear of the 'awesome' military machine are now attacking it. And every time they attack the US troops they nearly always come out worse in the attack; on average, the US forces only suffer injuries while they suffer mortalities. Hatred is a powerful factor.

And of course, turning to 9/11, it has already been demonstrated that a few hate-filled individuals, armed with the right weapons can kill as many people as an entire army brigade - in less time. And, not yet demonstrated (thankfully), one lone hate-filled individual can flatten an entire city if he has access to the right weapon.

Fear is fine as a tool against intransient nations - but when it turns to hatred, it's a whole different ballgame with much higher stakes, a game where nations stand to lose far more than the individuals on the opposing team.

[ 09-15-2003, 07:34 AM: Message edited by: Skunk ]