News: Europeans Say U.S. Partly to Blame for 9/11
Results 1 to 10 of 10

Thread: News: Europeans Say U.S. Partly to Blame for 9/11

  1. #1

    News: Europeans Say U.S. Partly to Blame for 9/11

    ::Source:: Yahoo.com ::Source::

    - Most Europeans believe America itself is partly to blame for the devastating attacks on New York and Washington last September.
    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 President 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 favor 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 neighbors 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 defense 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.

    JMHO: To sum it up: Bullshit. IMHO, ever country has it's own foreign policy. If you don't like it, talk to them in the U.N or something. Don't attack them or anything like that because of a foreign policy. The people who caused 9/11 didn't do it because of that. They did it because they hate america/american's and they are terrorists. And to say, some of these European countries are helping us. Again, government likes us, people say **** about us. Weird how it works.
    Share on Google+

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    386

    Well, I'd certainly support Europe

    taking over as World Policeman. Let them lose some of their youth for a change. While we're at it, let's pull our troops out of Europe and let them defend themselves. How much do we contribute to their economy? Let's let Japan defend itself, too. They're quick to let us have bases and spend money there, but equally as quick to criticize us every chance they get.

    Europe doesn't need us. They can be nearly our equal militarily and economically. Now that they're sort of united, at least for the time being and want to play with the big boys, it's time to put up or shut up.

    France is always quick to criticize. Talk is cheap. Italy? Well, it's been a long time since Italy did much of anything. Rome fell in 476AD.
    Share on Google+

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    352
    /me waits for the Europeans to jump in
    \"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.\" -- Dom Helder Camara
    Share on Google+

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    386

    Don't hold your breath

    while you're waiting. Other than the UK, the rest are long on talk and short on action. Don't understand that, either. France has the Foreign Legion, a bunch of guys chomping at the bit to kill something.
    Share on Google+

  5. #5
    AO Soccer Mom debwalin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    2,185
    Okay, here's how I see it. The US has had it's nose where it didn't belong for at least the last fifty years or so. So we got our nose bumped for it. I don't agree with it, I don't think we deserved it, and I certainly DON'T condone the loss of over 3000 innocent lives. Something needs to be done about terrorism. However, we don't need to feel like it is our responsibility to do it all. I think that a withdrawal of economic and military support is a GREAT idea myself. Let the world get along without us for awhile, and see how things go. If it goes fine, wonderful. If it doesn't, when those who want our help come back and ask for it, then we'll see what happens. Personally, I'd like to see all American children and families have a place to live and enough to eat for awhile anyway. Wouldn't it be nice if our tax money was spent for food and shelter rather than supporting our military where they really aren't wanted? Bring 'em all home, and let them defend OUR shores. If they were all here where they belonged, no one would have the balls to attack us in the first place, and if they did, it would be fairly short work to take care of it.

    Deb
    Outside of a dog, a book is man's best friend. Inside of a dog it's too dark to read.
    Share on Google+

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Posts
    352
    We do spend too much money on the military...check the attached pic or visit this.For those just downloading the file, the amounts are in billions...


    Edit: The 2001 discretionary budget for military spending is $305 bn.
    \"When I give food to the poor, they call me a saint. When I ask why the poor have no food, they call me a communist.\" -- Dom Helder Camara
    Share on Google+

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Posts
    386

    I agree with deb. We could cut

    and besides homes and food, maybe we could even join the rest of the world and provide people with some sort of national health insurance. Even if it just covered prescription drugs it would be an enormous load off many people's backs.

    Since WW2 I would probably stroke out if I learned how much we'd spent to buy friends around the world. You don't buy friends, in real life or in politics (which is about as unreal a lifestyle as you can find).

    Let the world fend for itself. Isolationism is a dirty word, especially in Washington where some of our so-called leaders are getting rich from our current situation. I submit that it's time they started listening to the people who elected them rather than the various PACs that have their ears and contribute surreptiously to their bank accounts.

    But, I tend to look at things simplistically.
    Share on Google+

  8. #8
    Banned
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Posts
    19
    the US is a very strong super power it is expected that they will enounter protest etc from little weak countries that cant handle the way america is doing things, it is always the way the bigger you get the more resistance you encounter. jealous people will just try to destroy the greater.
    Share on Google+

  9. #9
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2002
    Posts
    5

    I don't agree

    I'm usually just a lurker, but I felt I just had to reply on this issue. Isolationism is not the way to go. There are entities in this world that hate the US and will do anything to damage or destroy it. I would rather have the battle against those forces be conducted in their own lands than have it happen on US soil. Yes, we do spend a lot on the military, and it would be nice to be able to redirect those funds to address issues within the US. However, withdrawing all our troops back to our shores is like waiting for someone to punch you in the nose before trying to block the punch. It's an old and overused adage, but it really applies here: the best defense is a good offense. And while I'm digging up old aphorisms, another that comes to mind is "those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it". Isolation is not an option for a superpower.
    Share on Google+

  10. #10
    GreekGoddess
    Guest
    They are just looking out for themselves. Unlike our country, who's only war actually fought on the mainland was between it's own citizens, many of the European countries have actually experienced the full fledged effect of what it was like to be under arms of an enemy country. They are closer to the source of the problem, and probably feel they would be more effected. I don't see anything wrong with the general European opinion, in fact, I'm in agreement that we've been somewhere that we shouldn't have been. And as Debwalin said, I'm not condoning the actions of terrorists, but at the same time, when you play with fire, what are you supposed to expect?

    Men are too often ready to jump into a war and fight, for some people, maybe that's the only way, but not every country is going to agree, nor be willing to send their own people out to lose their lives. Canada for example, is a very neutral country, but because of our position with foreign matters, we've endagered them just because they share our continent. That doesn't seem fair.

    It's not about being weak and strong....or the Europeans ganging up on the Americans, since when do countries in the UN, who help us as allies no longer have a voice to share their opinion?

    My question is...are we doing this to try and solve the problem? Or is it merely revenge?
    Share on Google+

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •