|
Post by HA on Oct 15, 2004 2:21:12 GMT -5
Polls: Views of America Worsening By BETH GARDINER, Associated Press Writer LONDON - America's reputation around the world is hurting, according to a series of coordinated polls from 10 countries, including many of the United States' closest allies. In seven of the countries where the surveys, commissioned by major newspapers, were conducted more people said their view of America had worsened over the past two to three years than improved. That question was asked in nine countries. By big margins, those questioned said the war in Iraq did not aid the global fight against terrorism. And in eight out of 10 nations, those polled said — often in landslide proportions — that they hoped to see Democrat John Kerry beat U.S. President Bush in next month's election. Bush won backing from a majority of respondents only in Russia and Israel. The polls were conducted in Canada, France, Britain, Spain, Japan, South Korea, Australia, Mexico, Israel and Russia, with results to be published in the participating newspapers on Friday. Not all questions were asked in every country. On average, 57 percent of those questioned said their opinions of America had worsened over the past two to three years, compared to 20 percent who said their view had improved. That question was asked in nine of the countries, but not in Russia. Seventy-four percent of Japanese, 70 percent of French, 64 percent of Canadians and 60 percent of Spaniards said they had a worse opinion of America now than two to three years ago. Only in Israel and South Korea did more people say their view of the United States had improved than worsened in the past two to three years. In that period, which began just after the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks, the United States has led wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. While much of the international community backed the invasion to oust the Taliban, Bush's decision to invade Iraq has fueled anger around the world. However, many of those polled separated their feelings about the U.S. government from their views of the American people. Sixty-eight percent said they had a favorable opinion of Americans. Asked whether American democracy remained a model for other nations, 52 percent said yes and 42 percent said no. In Britain, Mexico and South Korea, more people thought the United States was no longer a model, while in Canada, Russia, Japan and Israel, majorities said it was. Fifty-nine percent of people questioned in seven nations — including Britain, America's closest ally in Iraq — said the war there was not helping the world fight against terrorism, while 35 percent said it was, as Bush contends. People in all ten countries were asked who they hoped to see win the White House on Nov. 2, and the result will make Kerry wish they had a vote. The Democrat was favored by healthy to enormous majorities in eight of the nations — 72 percent supported him compared to 16 percent for Bush in France. In South Korea, it was 68 percent for Kerry and 18 percent for Bush; in Canada, 60 percent to 20 percent; in Spain, 58 percent to 13 percent; 54 percent to 28 percent in Australia and 50 percent to 22 percent in Britain. Bush came out on top in Israel by a margin of 50 percent to 24 percent and in Russia, 52 percent to 48 percent. The newspapers involved were La Presse in Canada, Le Monde in France, the Guardian in Britain, El Pais in Spain, Asahi Shimbun in Japan, JoongAng Ilbo in South Korea, the Sydney Morning Herald and Melbourne Age in Australia, Reforma in Mexico, Haaretz in Israel and the Moscow News in Russia. The sample sizes in the ten polls varied from 522 people in Israel to 1,417 in Australia. Margins of error were mostly around 3 percentage points, but varied between 2.6 percentage points and 4.38 percentage points. The polls were conducted on different dates from September through early October. From story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&cid=518&ncid=721&e=6&u=/ap/20041015/ap_on_re_eu/views_of_america
|
|
|
Post by Robb Klaty on Oct 15, 2004 13:18:17 GMT -5
I for one couldn't care less if the US (or its government)is popular around the world.
Btw, if popularity were some sort of judge, Jesus and the early Christians would have to be considered utter failures. To me, a lack of popularity is a sign that you might be doing something right.
Robb
|
|
|
Post by k on Oct 15, 2004 16:21:07 GMT -5
They hate us because we are free and prosperous. Politics of envy. Actually I think we shouldn't want them to "like us but rather fear us" if they mess with us.
|
|
|
Post by Bertine Louise on Oct 15, 2004 17:21:33 GMT -5
Might be, but most of the times it's a sign that it would be wise to reconsider your steps. A completely foreign concept to Bush and his fans. I beg every American who thinks like this to get a grip on reality. When you are unpopular becos of a war you started, that's the exact reason why you're not popular. Another wake up call, America is -sorry to shock you- not the only free and prosperous nation in the world. In fact, in my situation i am much better off in the country i live in now. And I still dislike the current American govt. Ok, you got me scared now for one... And then to think the US is supposed to be a Christian nation..
|
|
|
Post by bryan2 on Oct 15, 2004 18:10:52 GMT -5
Fans? Is that how you see it?
What is our reality?
That we are in world war three and there are people out there that will do all they can to kill every last non-Muslim?
That people despise the us because of its relationship to Israel?
Please explain our reality…
The war on terror was not started by the USA…
I don’t give a rat’s ass if the USA is popular or not… Winning the war on terror has nothing to do with being popular… It has to do with ridding the world of terrorist organizations.
Better off then what or whom?
No… You dislike bush… it’s all about bush… the press/media has painted a picture of him as a evil self-serving man. I can understand why people would dislike bush when all they read and hear about him comes from bias media sources…
What makes you think that?
|
|
|
Post by Bertine Louise on Oct 15, 2004 18:48:43 GMT -5
I like to vary my wordings. 'Supporters' if you will. Don't make a big deal out of it.
Please read my statement in context. Look at the quote i was reacting to.
The war on Iraq didn't have legitimate grounds and has been most counterproductive for the war on terror.
The London-based International Institute for Strategic Studies reported May 25 that the occupation of Iraq has helped al Qaeda recruit more members.
The 9/11 commision concluded there were no Al Qaeda links with Iraq. The institute mentioned above quoted "conservative" intelligence estimating that al Qaeda has 18,000 potential operatives and is present in more than 60 countries. Do you want to (Can you?) invade 60 countries?
Don't put words in my mouth! I honestly think Bush is a darling! I would like him as a person, he's warm and friendly, I really think he has a good heart and good intentions. He's just dangerously dumb.
|
|
|
Post by bryan2 on Oct 15, 2004 19:12:03 GMT -5
I did read your statement in context and I fully understand the quote you were reacting to.. More BS… Your opinion at best… What does this have to do with the war on terror not being started by the USA? If we base our actions on whether or not they will increase Al Qaeda’s recruitment of more members, then we will lose the war on terror no matter what we do… This statement is wrong… Also it’s irrelevant since we are fighting the war on terror rather then the war on Al Qaeda. Since the estimated 60 countries are not in the business of state sponsored terrorism, I doubt we will need to invade them… Thank you for proving my point about the biased media…
|
|
|
Post by Bertine Louise on Oct 15, 2004 20:20:55 GMT -5
I did read your statement in context and I fully understand the quote you were reacting to.. Why don't you get my point then? I already explained the 'reality' i was referring to. You have to have a better argument than that... lol Oh well, maybe you think International Law is all BS. Yes, and grounded I think. I supported my claim that the war on Iraq is counterproductive with the findings of the London Institite of Strategic studies Fact remains the Iraq war was counter productive. You don't hear me say the same thing about Afghanistan. Explain why, please After 9/11 shouldn't your *main* focus be on Al Qaeda? Seems a bit out of proportion to spend so much troops and money on something that is far from the main perpetrator of the harm caused to the US at 9/11 that started this whole war on terror. Reminder: Bush' *main* reason (that convinced the American ppl) to invade Iraq were WMD's that were supposedly a threat to the US. Of which no proof has been found. Dream on Bryan:p Quit blaming the media. I hear Bush himself talk and 'defend' his policy, and it doesn't make sense to me. I'm off to bed.
|
|
|
Post by The trouble is on Oct 15, 2004 22:43:07 GMT -5
You have to have a better argument than that... lol Oh well, maybe you think International Law is all BS. You cannot argue with someone who refuses to back up their claims with a comment like BS. You can go through the effort of presenting facts but then it becomes the "biased media" with no alternative to back up any counterclaim. Oh come on Bertine - don't you know by now that any facts that you present that disagree with the narrow and fanatical opinion of Bryan must be from a biased source? Oddly enough now republicans are starting to agree with this worldview as well. Don't even question why Saudi Arabia was not the target instead of Iraq when the intellegence of the time showed they were much more in support of terrorism. Weren't 17 of the 19 terrorists Saudi nationals? But an attack on them would be a problem since the Bush administration was giving them intellegence briefings. Bertine, don't you know that history has changed and the main reason was to rid the world of terrorists? Is there any reason to think that Bush has any more than average intellegence at best? SAT scores? College grades? Ability to think on his feet? Verbal skills? General world knowledge? Ability to be a successful executive? I keep hearing he is not as dumb as people say. What would ever lead someone to that conclusion?
|
|
|
Post by HA on Oct 16, 2004 4:03:36 GMT -5
It is clearly stated in the article (I even put it in bold) that people LOVE Americans but HATE the policies of their government.
Please go and read again the article !!!
|
|
|
Post by HA on Oct 16, 2004 4:10:02 GMT -5
I suppose that the war on terror will be won when there are no terrorists. Now if by fighting the war on terror you make more terrorists than you kill the final result will be a world full of terrorists and you haveing lost the war. Is this too difficult to understand ?
|
|
|
Post by k on Oct 16, 2004 12:13:29 GMT -5
bertine, You want us to run down the Dutch? If you don't stop badmouthing America, it is coming honey. Like it or not.
|
|
|
Post by Bertine Louise on Oct 16, 2004 12:58:43 GMT -5
bertine, You want us to run down the Dutch? If you don't stop badmouthing America, it is coming honey. Like it or not. Bring it on baby I can take it! It's a bit paradoxal, but I'm proud of the Dutch for not being particularly (loudly) proud of themselves. We're down to earth, give ourselves credit and criticism where it is due, and give our leaders mostly criticism! Btw, I was not so much badmouthing America, but its President's policies. He's a disgrace to your 'great nation'. He has made me any many around the globe anti-american. (no, not on a personal basis) But if the Americans will get rid of him and put Kerry in office, most likely I will love America again. Not that you care (or should) care how I feel.
|
|
|
Post by Get it straight on Oct 16, 2004 15:34:52 GMT -5
bertine, You want us to run down the Dutch? If you don't stop badmouthing America, it is coming honey. Like it or not. She is not bad mouthing America pinhead. It is the fool that has been made the leader that is the cause of the comments. If you ever learn who their leader is you should feel free to say whetever you wish.
|
|
|
Post by Ha on Oct 16, 2004 17:17:59 GMT -5
But if the Americans will get rid of him and put Kerry in office, most likely I will love America again. Sorry Bertine but I must disagree with this. Bush's policies are the result of the US society as a whole and of some of the big US corporations (especially in the oil and arms business) who profit from this. I do not think that Kerry will change much - probably he will sugar the pill a bit in such a way that the corporations who are now forecasting losses because of the anti-US feelings (take for example the food industries, aka Heinz) will also make some profits. It would take a miracle to see the US changing in a radical way their international policy - they will just try to involve more countries, probably by pushing them economically.
|
|
|
Post by Bertine Louise on Oct 16, 2004 18:21:53 GMT -5
Sorry Bertine but I must disagree with this. Bush's policies are the result of the US society as a whole and of some of the big US corporations (especially in the oil and arms business) who profit from this. I do not think that Kerry will change much - probably he will sugar the pill a bit in such a way that the corporations who are now forecasting losses because of the anti-US feelings (take for example the food industries, aka Heinz) will also make some profits. It would take a miracle to see the US changing in a radical way their international policy - they will just try to involve more countries, probably by pushing them economically. Of course there are still aspects of America that I don't agree with. But the President is the main representative of a country, and the current one just really upsets me. Honesty urges me to admit that I don't have 100% faith in Kerry either. The job will be extra tough with the mess Bush made. But I would still look up to him respectfully. I just cannot look up to Bush, and I fail to understand how anyone can. For your leader you would normally want someone at least smarter than yourself. I think Bush really owes his popularity to the 9/11 trauma. But the important thing about Kerry, I think, is at least his rhetoric of the needs for America to have true allies and earn back some respect. They can't do it alone in this world. I think that's an exceptional view for an American regarding the fact most Americans have never left their country and consider the US their world. I don't blame Americans for that, it is after all a big country. But I expect from an American President that is supposed to be the world's leader, and who's policy effect other nations, to have some sense about how this world *really* works and have some respect and consideration for other nation's opinions. This President is so full of himself and America's superiority, it's scary. Kerry is the son of a diplomat and has been all over the world since childhood. He's worldwise, as well as his multi-lingual wife who would make a fantastic First Lady. That speaks to me, when seeing how this current President is completely out of touch with the real world and also doesn't give a hoot what the rest of the world thinks. Btw, he basically claims he doesn't want others to 'dictate' how the US should be governed, yet he does the very same thing to other countries! PS: Oh K, if you want to flame the dutch Prime Minister, you can join maybe a majority of the Dutch!
|
|
|
Post by bryan2 on Oct 16, 2004 18:29:53 GMT -5
I was going to take the time to respond to everything people had said in this thread since yesterday, but after reading this statement I realize it is totally fruitless... We are on two other worlds if you think THK would make a 'fantastic First Lady'... What else is there to say...
|
|
|
Post by k on Oct 16, 2004 18:34:09 GMT -5
bertine, If you are a Christian, why would you support someone who believes in Partial Birth Abortion and Gay Marriage? His voting record speaks for itself. You can't live in Europe and really know US politics. Whether you want to admit it or not. Why don't you just take care of Amsterdam and let us take care of US politics. Thank you!
|
|
|
Post by Bertine Louise on Oct 16, 2004 18:50:53 GMT -5
Actually some arguments to back up your stand would be a start.
My plead for THK (not that it matters) she's worldwise, very intelligent, idealistic and uses her fortune for a just cause.
Kerry doesn't support any of the above. He does not support partial birth abortion at all, nor abortion in general, nor gay marriage. But he doesn't want to interfere with people's personal freedom that's supposed to be so important in the USA. He would be a president of all Americans, not just the conservative Christians.
I wonder how one- as a Christian can support uncalled for pre emptive wars, deathpenalties, guns for everyone, etc. But that's just according to my version of Christianity.
I will let you take care! You will vote I won't! I'm just urging you to choose wisely ;D
|
|
|
Post by MG on Oct 16, 2004 20:35:45 GMT -5
Actually some arguments to back up your stand would be a start. My plead for THK (not that it matters) she's worldwise, very intelligent, idealistic and uses her fortune for a just cause. Kerry doesn't support any of the above. He does not support partial birth abortion at all, nor abortion in general, nor gay marriage. But he doesn't want to interfere with people's personal freedom that's supposed to be so important in the USA. He would be a president of all Americans, not just the conservative Christians. I wonder how one- as a Christian can support uncalled for pre emptive wars, deathpenalties, guns for everyone, etc. But that's just according to my version of Christianity. I will let you take care! You will vote I won't! I'm just urging you to choose wisely ;D You are a very intelligent, sensible person! I agree with most, sometimes all, that you write in your posts.
|
|
This would have been a first
Guest
|
Post by This would have been a first on Oct 16, 2004 22:48:07 GMT -5
I was going to take the time to respond to everything people had said in this thread since yesterday, but after reading this statement I realize it is totally fruitless... It is Bryan's trade mark to not respond to any questions or comments others make in response to his rantings. He also seems unwilling to put any effort into supporting his statements. When pressed there are a number of ploys he has used rather than make any attempt to support his position.
|
|
|
Post by Bush or Saddam on Oct 16, 2004 23:58:54 GMT -5
Now who is the terrorist? Bush or Sadam? I don't remember Saddam going into America and killing it's people. But I do know that Bush went into Iraq and has killed plenty of Iraqs.
|
|
|
Post by k on Oct 17, 2004 13:38:16 GMT -5
I don't remember Saddam going into America and killing it's people. But I do know that Bush went into Iraq and has killed plenty of Iraqs.
========== WHat a stupid assed comment. It was OK for Saddam to kill Kuwaitis? Or Kurds in his own country? Saddam didn't have the military might to invade the US.
Life is America is different from the Middle East. HA or Present or Bertine: Go visit those countries and see what they are like. They are hotbeds for extremism.
|
|
|
Post by Bush on Oct 17, 2004 15:28:42 GMT -5
What right of it of Bush's to go into Iraq? tell me please!! What threat was Iraq to the USA?
|
|
|
Post by Bush on Oct 17, 2004 15:32:12 GMT -5
I have visited the Middle East on several occasions. The people are no different to any where else in the world. In fact they are lovely gentle kidd hospitable people. There are extremists everywhere - it seems like the most terroists live in the USA - they are living right in their own country.
Why is Bush any different to the Muslim extremists?
|
|
Cindi
Senior Member
Posts: 311
|
Post by Cindi on Oct 17, 2004 15:43:40 GMT -5
This thread is getting really stupid.
|
|
Brenda
Senior Member
Posts: 652
|
Post by Brenda on Oct 17, 2004 17:11:33 GMT -5
especially when someone uses the name Bush instead of being honest as to who they are--
OK "BUSH" Why should I believe a thing you post if you dont have the guts to give yourself an identity?
Bulls**t to me pardon my lingo
|
|
|
Post by Bush or Saddam on Oct 17, 2004 17:52:32 GMT -5
especially when someone uses the name Bush instead of being honest as to who they are-- _____________ and is your name really BJ Lewis?
The name of the person I am talking about is Bush...maybe you are talking about someone else but I am talking about him.
I can say any name but that does not mean that is really my name. Many people here make up some name which is not their own.
|
|