Batz, if I came off as a preacher, arrogant and ignorant, I apologize. After rereading what I wrote I can see how it can be seen in that light. Know my intentions weren't to be that sorta person and accept my apology. Ain't afraid to give it if I err.
Even as we read the BBS the "Coalition of the Willing" has grown. This was predicted by the hawks who put forth the idea that "if the US leads the rest will follow". I think our problem here is a misunderstandng. I am talking about a continuation of doing things that are very unpopular amongst the *people* in the world, and not just talking about Iraq. Am talking about future events, and past. Kyoto deal. Refusal to ratify deal on the banning of land mines. Refusing to sign chemical weapons inspectyion/disarmament thingy. Pulling back from ABM treaty. Those thing are relatively minor and in the past. So to clarify I am talking about events where the world population by and large strongly disagrees with the US.
I don't want to sound like I am lecturing you, but one has to recognize that while lots of *states* are behind the US on Iraq, their populations ARE NOT. The govts join because 'you are either with us or against us' - ie. politically and economically NOT doing so would be very damaging. But take Spain, an ardent supporter of the US position; 80% of the population is totally against what the US is doing. Even in Denmark, more are against than for. The situation is mirrored all over the world and disagreement turns into hatred as you approach some African nations and virtually all Middle Eastern nations.
Terrorists tend to come from the population rather than the governments of nations. So this is the premise for what I've been saying. Perhaps now you will agree that it is also possible to interpret my words not as preaching, arrogant and ignorant, but rather words of caution, strongly worded.
You arent in a position to suggest foreign policy to the US. You arent in a position to know what will work and what wont. No, but I am in a position to give voice to my opinions, and I am in a position to logically come to a conclusion based on past epxperiences, deduction and so forth. And we're here on this board to discuss matters, not to run the US. Fortunately
.
You assume that the world will hold a "grudge". As soon as this passes we will wait and see. I am more likely to believe that countries that opposed us like France will be tripping all over themselves to help in the rebuilding of Iraq. Again, Iraq is just one isolated case. Am talking several situations where the US does something popular at home but extremely unpopular abroad. With regards to the Iraq situation; it can go both ways. You may gain more respect and status from the western world if things play out ok; Iraqi people see you as liberators, VMDs are found etc. But you may also come out as occupiers with no justification for a war. We don't know yet. In any case I think it is prudent in any situation to take the worst case scenario and ask: 'am I ready to risk that?' before moving on.
As for assuming that American tourist will be put off by attitudes of Europeans who are holding a grudge against the American government is laughable. You assume that those who hold these grudges wouldnt want the american money. Not just talking Europeans here. And you equal money with respect. Perhaps that is the way it is in the US - you have money and you automatically have respect. You'll have some people smiling at you (those directly dependent on US tourist dollars) but you gotta recognize that in for instance Denmark, your US tourist dollars are negligble and you cannot buy respect.
Is it a US phenomenon to think that money or might is directly equal to respect? For the money part; it is greed or necessity, which isn't respect. For might, it is fear, which isn't respect either. I think you're placing far too much value on money here; we're talking respect, not economy. We're talking a qualitative thing, not something that can be quantified. I think it IS a bit arrogant to say 'we got the money, you depend on us, now respect us'. Perhaps it is the essence of the expression 'ugly American'
As for economic codependency you over state the relationship that America has with most of Europe. France does 29 billion worth of "buisness" with the US. Guess what % of gdp that is. The US does 19 billion. Guess what % of gdp that is. Again, you gotta see the broader scope. I am not making this a EU vs US competition. I am saying WHOLE WORLD. The US does trade with the whole world. And one doesn't have to be a genius to realize that if the US starts to lose markets here and there it is bad for the economy. Let's say you lose 10% of the market you have now. Doesn't sound much. But it is in terms of unemployment, rise in poverty etc. etc.
America will come out smelling like a rose with a few grumpy old Europeans who will have no choice but to get over it.I sincerely hope this is true. Then the fight on terrorism wil be easier because of not so much recruitment material for terrorists, more world unity and if what you say happens countries like France, Germany and Russia will learn to have all facts before making direct opposition. And the economy will improve, which means I can get a decent paying job again. There is a distinct possibility you may be right; but you may also be proven wrong. I hope for the former.
Batz, I get the feeling yer a bit defensive and dug in on this. Read what I write as if we were sitting next to each other at the AH con sharing a beer. Please, do point out if ya think I am being rude or arrogant/ignorant, but it would be nice if the spirit of the conversation essentially was friendly.
