Anti-Americanism. Where Does it Come From?

We cannot afford to believe anti-Americanism is something created by George Bush and that it will go away when he does. There is no doubt that our President’s personality annoys European intellectuals, but anti Americanism is nothing new. Much of it has to do with the particular structure of U.S. society and policy and some of it has to do with other people’s prejudices. I have identified seven possible sources and would like to explore some of the sources of anti-Americanism one at a time.

For some useful background, I have been reading America Against the World, which points out that people not only don't like American policies, but they often don't like us.

Let me start with simple change. Change makes people uncomfortable, no matter what they say. The paradox of American power is that the U.S. is a status quo power that engenders radical change. Most status quo powers support things the way they are. They are conservative in the original sense of opposing change. The U.S. version of the free market, in contrast is all about change. Smart business people think incessantly about how to get advantage by changing paradigms and upsetting existing relationships. The current American foreign policy seeks to transform traditional regimes in around the world. Free market Americans are truly revolutionary, unlike leftist “revolutionaries” who - despite the rhetoric - work to establish the kind of retrograde socialism or dirigisme that Louis XIV, Machiavelli or Bismarck would recognize and approve (although with some disagreement about who should be in charge.)

So what tops the list of causes of anti Americanism is simply fear of change. Globalization is changing conditions all over the world. People tend to take good changes for granted but remember what they have lost. To a great extend globalization is associated with the U.S. This is not really a fair characterization, but it is common.

Americans also fear change, but they don’t have the luxury of the facile explanation that it is the fault of the Americans. When a Wal-Mart opens in Utah, traditionalists blame Wal-Mart. If one opens in Europe they can blame Americans. When a McDonalds makes people fat in Minnesota, the locals blame McDonalds. In other parts of the world they get to blame America. We are the scapegoat of last resort.

Interestingly, we even get blamed for things others have done. In Europe I heard the U.S. criticized for crassness of reality TV like Big Brother (I believe the Dutch invented that one) and the Germans and the French tend to call unpopular reforms in their own economy “American style.”

It is hard for Americans to understand this. But we can find examples. Remember how some Americans hated the Japanese for the "crime" of selling us better cars? Or consider the recent Dubai Ports Deal. Is there anything Dubai could have done to assuage American fears? Probably not. This is the kind of thing we face all the time.

Change is natural and change is accelerating. Somebody must be to blame, right?

Posted by Jack at May 28, 2006 11:49 PM
Comments
Comment #152314

Even more perplexing:

Is the idea of “sides,” meaning an “us and them” mentality. Sure, people around the world feel at odds with the US (as evidenced by all those UN votes where the entire world votes one way and the US is the single vote in the other), but within our own culture I am truly disappointed with the idea of “Anti-American.”

In a Republican world of black and white, you are either “pro-America” or “anti-America.” There is no room to be critical of our great country and concurrently a patriot. Even more disturbing is the idea that if we criticize this particular administration we are “anti-American.”

People around the world are unhappy not simply at our conspicuous consumption and unfettered globalization, but also in our destructive foreign economic policies as manifested in the directives of the World Bank and the IMF. Until you understand what crops those policies have yielded, you won’t truly understand why there is so much animosity directed toward us.

Oh, and going to war against a sovereign nation preemptively and without a coalition of allies doesn’t help, either.

Am I “anti-American” now? Funny, I thought that wanting and expecting better things out of my country meant I cared…

Posted by: DavidL at May 29, 2006 12:08 AM
Comment #152315

you republicans put us into a mess we will never get out of. hope you are happy now. but nov. is comming up fast. you people will do anything for power.

Posted by: DAN D. at May 29, 2006 12:09 AM
Comment #152316

DavidL,

“Even more disturbing is the idea that if we criticize this particular administration we are ‘anti-American.’”

Even more disturbing than that, is the fact it wasn’t the same when the shoe was on the other foot.

Posted by: Rocky at May 29, 2006 12:12 AM
Comment #152324

Jack-

A lot of good points. However, it cannot be denied that the current administration has done very little to change the way people look at us around the world. After 9/11, the international community was fairly united, and we were in charge. However, whether you agree with the Iraq war or not, the way we went about making a case for the war and attempting to bully the UN to join us wiped out any of that goodwill.

Some will counter that if Europe doesn’t like the way we do things, well, tough for them. That is a horribly irresponsible view. A strong relationship with Europe is crucial to success in the real war on terror, not the sideshow in Iraq. For instance, Germany was instrumental in helping track and eventually capture al-qaeda cells. Do we really want to shut down the lines of communication with our allies over posturing?

Dan D-

How many Dems voted gainst the war? We had our chance to be heard when it would’ve mattered. Our shame is greater than theirs.

Rocky-

That made no sense.

Posted by: David S at May 29, 2006 12:30 AM
Comment #152329

Think David.

Clinton was under constant scrutiny and criticism by the Republicans.

Were the Republicans called anti-American when they did so?

Posted by: Rocky at May 29, 2006 12:55 AM
Comment #152335

DavidL

Interesting comment: “People around the world are unhappy not simply at our conspicuous consumption and unfettered globalization, but also in our destructive foreign economic policies as manifested in the directives of the World Bank and the IMF.”

So you think that people around the world have a right to be unhappy about U.S. consumption and blame the U.S. for globalization. And you believe the U.S. is responsible for the World Bank and IMF AND that these institutions are negatives?

DavidS

Some people liked the U.S. better just after 9/11 because we were victims. Americans do not do victim well and this was bound to change rapidly.

We made a mistake early on by not being fast enough to accept help offered by allies. This is true. But you know that most countries are unable to be of much help in emergencies, since they have no capacity to move their forces. We have kind of a trade off between what makes sense politically and what makes practical sense.

Rocky

Re other administrations, the world gave us a lot of trouble about Kosovo. Had that gone on much longer it would have been a major problem. In the case of Kosovo, as in Iraq, nobody should have been unhappy to get rid of the regimes in question and nobody but the U.S. was willing or able to do anything about it.

It is fair to criticize a president, Clinton, Bus or anyone else. But we need to understand that U.S. policy tends to be based on interests that transcend particular leaders. Clinton made regime change in Iraq an official U.S. policy back in 1998 and nobody ever took that back.

Posted by: Jack at May 29, 2006 1:10 AM
Comment #152336

if i Remember my history, the clintons and their people, referred to most of it as a Right Wing conspericery, now i also think the republicans went to far with the impeachment thing, and for the most part, it kind of backfired on them.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 29, 2006 1:13 AM
Comment #152337

Jack,

It may just be semantics, but the right had a field day with Clinton, yet the right conveiniently forgets that when they accuse people of being anti-American just because they criticize Bush.
Critics of the war in Kosovo were not called traitors or treasonous.

That’s all I was saying.

Posted by: Rocky at May 29, 2006 1:18 AM
Comment #152339

Jack, some excellant points in the article. With regards to the local vs foriegn walmart/mcdonalds, very true. I tend to disagree on a couple of points, however.


“So what tops the list of causes of anti Americanism is simply fear of change.


Globalisation isn’t stopping, and it is adding much fuel to the fire. It’s something much too complex for me to oppose or endorse, so I choose to pick whether I support individual consequences of it. Many in Europe and the US are against it, and many in India, and Asia are for it. The most interesting thing about the anti-american attitude of the world (yes, basically the WHOLE world), is how it’s grown in the last 4-6 years. I don’t have polls to back this up, maybe someone here could help with that… But it’s something I can feel. I doubt globalization is much more than a component in this trend, and a small one at that.


The obvious elephant in the room would be the Iraq war. Much of the world was against it from the get-go, for both sincere and corrupt reasons. Much of it comes from the hardball tactics used by a superpower(’s government and large corporations) to maintain it’s status at the top of the global food chain - see “Confessions of an Economic Hitman

Posted by: SilverIce9 at May 29, 2006 1:32 AM
Comment #152340

Jack, some excellant points in the article. With regards to the local vs foriegn walmart/mcdonalds, very true. I tend to disagree on a couple of points, however.


“So what tops the list of causes of anti Americanism is simply fear of change.


Globalization isn’t stopping, and it is adding much fuel to the fire. It’s something much too complex for me to oppose or endorse. Many in Europe and the US are against it, and many in India and Asia are for it. The most interesting thing about the anti-American attitude of the world (yes, basically the WHOLE world), is how it’s grown in the last 4-6 years. I don’t have polls to back this up, maybe someone here could help with that… But it’s something I can feel. I doubt globalization is much more than a component in this trend, and a small one at that.


The obvious elephant in the room would be the Iraq war. Much of the world was against it from the get-go, for both sincere and corrupt reasons. Much of it comes from the hardball tactics used by a superpower(’s government and large corporations) to maintain it’s status at the top of the global food chain - see “Confessions of an Economic Hitman. Unfortunately, even those who think everything we’ve done lately on the global stage has been justified, the consequences of a united global populace against the US could have mid and long term results that benefit nobody. Anyone notice the resurgence of Socialism in S. America? We are being locked out of their oil industry, since they’ve “govermentized” it. We are talking about people like Chavez who are elected by ripping on Bush. Granted I’m not the worlds biggest Bush fan (lmao), but regardless of who’s right on the cause of anti-Americanism around the world, I’m braced for disaster.


Are our diplomats useless? Is our country evil? Is it a global conspiracy against us? Are other countries populations less educated about issues as we are, or vice versa? Or perhaps we just need a better figurehead for out country - maybe not such a crusader.

Posted by: SilverIce9 at May 29, 2006 1:44 AM
Comment #152341

Wow. Somehow my little response got posted while I was writing it. :), enjoy the grammer/spellings/nonsense mistakes in the first post (maybe the 2nd one as well :)

Posted by: SilverIce9 at May 29, 2006 1:46 AM
Comment #152343

The sources of Anti-Americanism are numerous but vary around the world. The Europeans see us as arrogant cowboys with no respect for international law. Part of this is based on the fact that we vigorously assert our sovreignty at a time when European nations are giving it up within the context of the EU. Beyond this, I believe that the WWI-WWII experience has been so deeply ingrained into the European mentality that nothing short of direct attacks against Europe itself would rouse them.

Muslims don’t seem to like us for 2 main reasons. The first is our foriegn policies. For instance, we favor Israel and praise them for being a democracy, but have supported various tyranical regimes, to include Saddam Hussien, as long as they kept the oil flowing. Beyond this, while they may want to emulate our wealth and technology, our culture is largely abhorrent to Islamic sensibilities of morality. They despice our avarice, relativism, drug culture, and sexual abandon.

Asia is more complicated. They may want our trade, but they don’t like our meddling. China sees its human rights abuses as its own business and will thank us to keep our noses out of it. Meanwhile, South America has memories of American interventionalism from the last 150 years to inform a deep distrust. Again, we’ve allowed dictators in South and Central America so long as they were our dictators.

I’m not exactly a fan of globalism, but for reasons of nationalism. In my opinion, outsourcing is a fact of life, but we’re being stupid about it. Rather than send jobs and investment to China, which will be an enemy of unimaginable strength in the future, we should be investing in Central and South America. This would not only limit China’s economic growth, but promote it in a region that, if not exactly our best friend, is at best a valuable ally and at worst not much of a threat. Besides, this would improve economic conditions and possibly lessen our current illegal immigration problem.

Posted by: 1LT B at May 29, 2006 3:09 AM
Comment #152346

Anti-Americanism did not start with globalisation. It has a long history, going back to at least the beginning of the XIX Century. In that century, anti-Americanism was mainly in the form of ridicule. It became nastier after WWI, especially in France, and more so after WWII.

This is a complex subject, but perhaps it can be fairly summed up by noting that the European Left resented the US because of its successful capitalism, while the Right because of its successful democracy. On the plus side, there has always been a great deal of admiration for the US, and of course the continuing desire of many people to emigrate there.

Posted by: Charles Kovacs at May 29, 2006 5:38 AM
Comment #152348

Charles Kovacs:

Strange assumptions you cite.

Posted by: Aldous at May 29, 2006 5:47 AM
Comment #152350

One thing bugs me is how people comment how Western Europe changed from pro-American right after 9/11, to now.

…but without commenting how anti-American Western Europe was for decades BEFORE 9/11. The 9/11 period was understandable and anamolous. America was (uncharacteristically) clobbered, and deserved and got sympathy … even from W.Europe.

There has been W.European hate/intolerance of the US for decades. For debate are the reasons, but generally, America had been top dog on the Western totem pole in most ways, and I think this rankled those who enjoy pushing the king-of-the-mountain down a rung or two … especially from countries who fancy themselves as world-beaters/leaders based on their colonial days.

Through the ~50s, W.Europeans often were extremely thankful for what the American Greatest Generation did. Then in W.Europe, as in America, a new generation was raised that challenged and rebelled against the status quo.

America did dominate Cold War W.Europe in many respects, and this gave more grist to America haters. Their flames were allowed to go on by local gov’t, who didn’t really mind the many 100,000 person anti-American rallies (and anti-American humor on television, and American bashing by politicos and the media, and…. – think of how we were with the Nazi’s or the Soviets, and you can understand how the US was often portrayed as the bad, stupid, unsophisticated who was screwing W.Europe … even though the exact opposite was true). This is not-dissimilar to how Muslim states have not really cared about flaming, though unfair, anti-Americanism by a vocal and despondent few who love to look externally for their own failures (as individuals and as countries).

As in many places, if someone wants to dislike/hate you, they often find excuses to do so. If one repeats it often enough, it seems true — this worked for the National Socialist Nazis, the Soviet Socialist Russians, the neo-Socialist W.Europeans, and so many other Left-Wingers (the Right sometimes too, but seemingly not nearly so often or so intellectually dishonest).

W.Europeans often hated us for the ‘reason’ we were defending Europe, and had tied the defense of US-soil to W.European soil (as the demand/request/objective #1 of our W.European allies) by placing **US** nuke missiles inside W.Europe, which would result in attack against American soil, should the US launch nuke missles against Russian soil. While this was the biggest favor the US could have done to W.Europe, it was a source of blame against the US in the demagogues, who hated the US for bringing in nuclear missiles.

Some of these regions have long histories of this mentality. Obviously Nazis, too many Brits during WWII (“Yanks are overpaid, and over here”), a French cornerstone for decades, Germany in their anti-American 80s and 90s, and now maybe moreso with Chancellor Schroeder — who had the chutzpah (or sense of humor) to demagogue America/Bush as being like Nazis/Hitler respectively … while he did a wonderful Adolph impersonation that the Germans LOVED by saying that only by electing him can he unite the German people against the foreign menace threat to correct civilization (in this case, Saddam’s Iraq).

Britain had widespread dislike during their heydays, as did the Romans, Mongols, and just about every other top dog.

We should do a MUCH BETTER job of minimizing this, in post Cold War world, where others will not support us as being their Leader, as we unequivocally were then.

And in fact, maybe a little resentment is boiling over. Letting off decades of steam from countries and populaces that followed US policy for so long since they NEEDED the continuing favors we were doing for them. The US getting better at working w/ others … as George H. understood, Clinton didn’t understand re Kosovo but did have the same view as W.Europe (though we really pissed off the Russians and Chinese and many others (remember, ZERO UN mandates before we bombed Serbian marketplaces during the busiest times of the day – do you think this could be considered to be War Criminal behavior?)), and as George W. I *think* only recently understands.


…sorry for the diatribe. I hope it helped with a view that seems ~never reported.

Posted by: Brian at May 29, 2006 6:20 AM
Comment #152356

I’m not quite clear what globalization is.I hear that term constantly, but don’t quite understand what it means. Was the world less global at some point? I know that Tom Freidman and Columbus’ peers thought the world was flat, but I’ve always thought that the world traded globally. I realize transport and communication have speeded up, but wouldn’t that make our world speedier not more global?

The French have never liked anyone else, aren’t they equally anti British?

As to freemarket ideas being a source of anti American rhetoric, well that is a possiblity.

I guess it’s what you define as free market ideas. The IMF and World Bank while not American exactly most know they are G-7 led and America is the strong voice within. Some people see these agencies as economic terrorist, developing resources for the first world at the expense of the third world. The race to the bottom of global companies to exploit cheap labor, like say, Kathy Lee Gifford, who until exposed, talked softly about how she cared about children. That episode did help some children at least temporarily.

Collateral Damage is another funny word that may explain some anti-Americanism. We don’t talk about the ten’s of thousands of maimed and dead in Iraq, The thousands imprisoned, tortured and killed by US installed despots, like say the Shah. If we do, we are accused of anti Americanism. If we expose the Lt. Calley’s of the world we are rushing to judgement, and we are indicting the many for the actions of a few after it turns out not to be a rush to judgement in,say like, Abu Ghraib.

I always thought most foreigners would like to be in America. I still think they do. I think most of them will never be, and many will suffer from the ugly American corporations, agents and pretenders. Does that make me unAmerican? I always thought it made me a realist.

Posted by: gergle at May 29, 2006 8:04 AM
Comment #152360

The concept of the fear of change as a basis for anti-Americanism seems valid on its face. In this country, co-authors Spencer Johnson and Kenneth H. Blanchard have built a lucrative business on the basis of their best-selling book, “Who Moved My Cheese” - a simple little treatise on how to cope with change. Back in the late ‘60’s Alvin Toffler made a more elaborate case for the impact of the accelerating pace of change on individuals in his book “Future Shock”.

For the senescent socialists in Europe, secure for fifty years under the wings of the American eagle, the threat to their cozy socialism from the rapid rise of the Chinese and Indian economies must - of course - be the fault of the arrogant Americans and their “Anglo-Saxon” economic model. These folks have just been too fat, too happy, too cosseted, and too comfortable for too long.

For demagogues around the world, particularly in Latin America, the U.S. is the perfect scapegoat. Why change their own perpetually corrupt and woefully inept systems when it is so much more politically painless to simply rail against the evil Americans?

The Arab world is being forced by technology/globalization to leap from the eighth century to the twenty-first and finding it an exceedingly difficult jump. The difficulty must be the fault of the immoral Americans with their short skirts and thick hamburgers.

The natural human tendency to fix blame on the most obvious target is exacerbated by our chief exports - movies, music, and media in general. Most foreigners see only the worst of the U.S.;that is, our entertainers and politicians. These two groups represent what are arguably the most venal, self-indulgent, superficial, supercilious, and shallow citizens that America has to offer. I’d hate America too, if I thought that these groups actually represented the country.

There will be rampant anti-Americanism in the world until there is yet another change: when the U.S. is no longer the world’s dominant power the world will stop hating us. Until then we’ll just have to order up another Big Mac, tilt the built-in massage chair back to full-recline position and dial up a little “T&A” on the plasma TV. (And, of course, maintain the world’s most powerful military.)

A post-script: someone referred to Iraq under Saddam as a sovereign nation. National sovereignty does not attach to an individual murderous thug.

Posted by: Tom Schofield at May 29, 2006 8:33 AM
Comment #152361
We cannot afford to believe anti-Americanism is something created by George Bush

Nevertheless, it’s a fact that anti-Americanism deepened during Bush’s administration — and directly in response to Bush’s foreign policy.

There are plenty of global polls that tracked that trend. The 9/11 Commission Report notes it, and here’s another one.

From the poll you cite: “Kohut and Stokes find that what pushed the world away is American exceptionalism—our individualism and our go-it-alone attitude. And it doesn’t help that Americans’ pervasive religiosity and deep patriotism are often exaggerated by America’s critics.”

It’s a fact that the Bush administration ushered in the era of American unilateralism and in-your-face “religiosity and deep patriotism”. You can believe that’s a good thing or not, but you can’t deny that President bush is responsible for it.

Posted by: American Pundit at May 29, 2006 8:40 AM
Comment #152365

Tom Schofield,

That was probably the best short article I’ve ever read on this topic, concise and to the point. You hit the nail on the head on the Europeans, Muslims, and Latin America. And especially with our entertainment industry. When the most seen images America broadcasts are stories about Britney Spear’s husband going to a strip club the day his first (legitimate) child is born and you can listen to “art” such as rap that glorifies mysogeny, violence, drug abuse, and every other anti-social behavoir known to man, its no wonder so much of the world views us with distaste.

Posted by: 1LT B at May 29, 2006 9:14 AM
Comment #152367

Jack

I think you are mis-interpreting change. Yes people fear change and change is inevitable, but the US feels it has the right to impose change on a nation based on our values and our self interests.

The US has historically opposed any form of left-wing or socilist form of governmenrt. If a country is anti-US interests or anti-US business, you will be faced with regime change. Since WWII, the US has been involved itself in over 250 countries to influence their direction to become pro-US. We have rigged elections and assainated democratic elected leaders. Here are 2 more books to read that talk about this in more detail:

Confessions of an Economic Hit Man
http://www.economichitman.com

Rogue Nation
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/1567513743/qid=1148907742/sr=2-1/ref=pd_bbs_b_2_1/102-4404327-0284949?s=books&v=glance&n=283155

GW Bush has exacerbatted the problem of anti-Americanism, His tough talk of righhtousness followed by talk of democracy, liberty and freedom is all synonmyous with regime change. It means military power followed by American style democracy that is pro-business with a pro-US puppet regime is coming.

Yes, we use democratic elections to install puppets and we over throw democratically elected leaders to protect our interets. The term coined by Neocons is “Benevolent Hegonomy” or the “Good Empire”.

Posted by: Steve at May 29, 2006 9:16 AM
Comment #152384
Anti-Americanism. Where Does it Come From?

*Imperialism
*”We’re better than you” attitude
*Spreading “democracy” by force
*Bad foreign policy
*Militarism
*”Ugly” Americans (you do remember the book?)
*CIA messing in democratically elected governments abroad and helping install brutal dictators
*”Policing” the world
*Xenophobia
*Inability to even know where other countried are on the map, let alone know anything about their history and culture or their languages
*Military bases all over the world
*Invading sovereign countries
*Speaking loudly AND carrying a big stick
*Lack of real diplomacy
*Misusing the UN and failing for years and years to pay UN dues
*Exploiting workers in foreign countries & at home
*Preaching democracy and supporting oligarchy, dictatorship, and brutal governments overseas
*IMF, World Bank support that devastates the economies of third world countries and keeps them indebted to the US and other “developed” countries
*”Bring it on”
*”Osama who?”
*Being in bed with the Saudis even after they committed 9/11 (and letting them all leave on flights out of the U.S. when U.S. citizens couldn’t fly anywhere)
*Preferential treatment of the rich while exploiting the poor
*Low support of real foreign aid
*Promising large amounts of aid (e.g., for malaria, AIDS)and then not delivering

Posted by: Lynne at May 29, 2006 10:25 AM
Comment #152398

You only need to read “Confessions of an Economic Hit Man” (by John Perkins) to understand one of the major reasons why many nations hate America.

John Perkins was a former respected member of the international banking community and describes himself as a former economic hit man; a highly paid professional who cheated countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars.

In his book (see front flap & back cover) Confessions of an Economic Hit Man he describes how as a highly paid professional, he helped the U.S. cheat poor countries around the globe out of trillions of dollars by lending them more money than they could possibly repay and then take over their economies.

True, the U.S. did not invent Globalization.
It perfected it.
_____________________

Then, there was the business in Iran and Iraq. When those nations went to war, we helped both, pitting them against each other. No wonder both hate us.
_____________________

And one of the most obvious examples of hypocrisy is the selective interventions by the U.S. in regions that have resources (e.g. oil), but the U.S. looks the other way where there are regions with no resources, with war and/or genocide.
_____________________

The biggest driving factor is a government controlled by a very few, with vast wealth and power, that are essentially unaccountable to The People, and a much larger population that is essentially ignorant of much of what goes on, and even when informed of it, choose not to believe it.

The banking community (the FED) is a part of the small group that is perpetrating one of the largest “ponzi-schemes” ever seen.

Thomas Jefferson was concise in his early warning to the American nation, “If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issuance of their currency, first by inflation and then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around them will deprive the people of all their property until their children will wake up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.”

Charles A. Lindbergh, Sr. 1913 “When the President [F.D.Roosevelt] signs this bill, the invisible government of the monetary power will be legalized….the worst legislative crime of the ages is perpetrated by this banking and currency bill.”

For the secret owners of the FED to control the volume of money and become our absolute masters, they had to get the Gold away from our grandparents. This was accomplished in 1933 with the threats of fines and imprisonments by their President (Franklin D. Roosevelt) with his aide Harry Hopkins, who said … “Elect, elect, elect, tax, tax, tax, spend, spend, spend, for the people are too damned stupid to understand”. By the way, F.D.Roosevelt was an international Banker.
_____________________

The U.S. has earned much of the hatred toward it, because of the few throrougly corrupt (i.e. the puppeteers) that abuse their vast wealth and power, and all American voters (i.e. the puppets) that repeatedly re-elect the very same corrupt, FOR-SALE, bought-and-paid-for incumbent politians .
________________________

  • Stop Repeat Offenders.

  • Don’t Re-Elect Them !

Posted by: d.a.n at May 29, 2006 11:12 AM
Comment #152402

America the beautiful (as sung by osama bin laden)
Oh,hated for your living lives,so free and full of glee, I’ll try my best to turn the world,in to a murder spree.
America,America our hatred falls on thee,
Liberties crown,does make me frown,
I don’t want you near me.
Why is there anti-american feelings in the world?
jealousy
envy
misunderstanding
non-compatable political agenda
american intervention in internal power struggles in sovereign nations.

Posted by: jblym at May 29, 2006 11:21 AM
Comment #152404

Let’s not forget these reasons:
Being the most hypocritical country in the world. This country was founded with great ideals of being a great republic and/or democracy, with all MEN being equal, while holding slaves and having taken most lands and decimated the population of Indians (the original inhabitants of the land).

The ‘all equal men’ did not even include whites who were not land owners. They too, were not allowed to vote originally.

The old cowboy and Indian movies and tv shows often had an Indian saying “White man speaks with forked tongue”. That was true and still is in US policy all over the world.

For the US to invade a Muslim country that did not attack here, while being Israel’s most staunch ally, giving Israel billions yearly,
access to the US arsenal and stonewalling for that country when the UN tries to censure it in any way indicates to me that the present administration wants to be the enemy of Muslims throughout the world and they,ve succeeded.

As for Europe, that’s another long story.

The US is now a bully nation that only attacks countries that do not have the means to fight back a country of this size and with the means to destroy the planet.

Posted by: Carolyn LW at May 29, 2006 11:39 AM
Comment #152405

Jack

“There is no doubt that our President’s personality annoys European intellectuals”

There are only a few Europeans who know the president well enough to have an opinion about his personality, so it is unlikely that his personality explains wide spread “anti Americanism.” You really need to get over the “everyone hates Bush” thing and realize sometimes he deserves every bit of criticism that he receives. Criticism of president Bush does not equal…the speaker hates Bush.

Get over the paranoia and persecution complex found throughout your post and realize that there is really a simple explanation to most of the anti Americanism we see (KISS). You said it yourself…

“Much of it has to do with…policy”

It’s the ethnocentrism and sheer arrogance of a foreign policy that “seeks to transform traditional regimes in around the world” that “annoy” the rest of the world. The rest of the world doesn’t want to be remade in our image and likeness no matter how perfect we think we are or how much better we think their lives will be if only they are a little more like us. It is not The United States’ responsibility to be the world’s policeman or designated nation builder. Our great grand children can’t afford it.

“leftist “revolutionaries” who - despite the rhetoric - work to establish the kind of retrograde socialism or dirigisme that Louis XIV, Machiavelli or Bismarck would recognize and approve”

That makes me laugh. I eagerly anticipate your next post on how that well known “leftist revolutionary” GW Bush’s “unitary executive” differs from Machiavelli’s enlightened despot. I’m sure you can get some of the staffers at the RNC to research that for you. I look forward to it.


Happy Memorial Day.

Posted by: RMD at May 29, 2006 11:40 AM
Comment #152416

“Much of it has to do with…policy”

It’s the ethnocentrism and sheer arrogance of a foreign policy that “seeks to transform traditional regimes in around the world” that “annoy” the rest of the world. The rest of the world doesn’t want to be remade in our image and likeness no matter how perfect we think we are or how much better we think their lives will be if only they are a little more like us. It is not The United States’ responsibility to be the world’s policeman or designated nation builder. Our great grand children can’t afford it.


Posted by: RMD at May 29, 2006 11:40 AM
================================================
And on this Memorial Day, it think it very appropriate that I remind you that “nation building” did indeed work in Japan and Germany. More importantly, that there should be a current Pope, former Hitler youth, who memorialized, then apologized for all Germans, not in his native tongue of German, at Auswitz death camp in Poland. Funny, I can always tell what posters are generation X’ers, the “Can’t We All Get Along” crowd, who parrot their Baby Boomer (Hippie) “Let It Be” crowd (who were so ardently anti-Vietnam and really believe to this day they ended that war?). Yes, happy Memorial Day to you too….(P.S. my dad was an immigrant AND a WWII US Army veteran)

Posted by: Kristy at May 29, 2006 12:10 PM
Comment #152418

Jack,

Interestingly, we even get blamed for things others have done.

I’m sure the Iraqis know how that feels…

Posted by: Rob Cottrell at May 29, 2006 12:20 PM
Comment #152424

Jack,

First, nice topic.

There is no doubt that our President’s personality annoys European intellectuals, but anti Americanism is nothing new.

To my own surprise, many european intellectuals are these days in fact pro-american while europeans people are or neutral or quite anti-american.
While I agree that anti-americanism is nothing new, the fact that *today* it’s more popular than an elitism stance have more to do with Bush personnality - starting with showing huge selfishness “American Way of Life is Not Negotiable” at Kyoto and going unilaterral in Iraq War - than anything else.

The paradox of American power is that the U.S. is a status quo power that engenders radical change. Most status quo powers support things the way they are. They are conservative in the original sense of opposing change.

Yep, good analysis: “better them than us”, “better there than here”, “do as we say not as we do” are feelings we got sometime abroad about US foreign policy.

So what tops the list of causes of anti Americanism is simply fear of change.

I dunno if it rank #1, but indeed people don’t like to be forced to change, aka adapt. And it’s, no surprise, even worst when the enforcer clearly don’t want/plan to do itself.
More generally, people dislike being forced to do things. It’s not only a matter of change fear, it’s more a matter of freedom. People reclaim the freedom to choose between changing and not, aka the freedom of choice.

To a great extend globalization is associated with the U.S. This is not really a fair characterization, but it is common.

It’s quickly less and less the case, since China, India, and other former smaller powers have raised themselves since, both economically and politically, moving globalization change less US centric and more… world centric ;-)

Americans also fear change, but they don’t have the luxury of the facile explanation that it is the fault of the Americans.

I’m sure americans have their own set of facile explanations, right? What’s real behind “it’s all illegal mexicans/aliens fault!”, “It’s the fault of leftists/pinkies”, “Its the European fault!”, and the well known “French screw us again!”, then?

When a McDonalds makes people fat in Minnesota, the locals blame McDonalds. In other parts of the world they get to blame America. We are the scapegoat of last resort.

I tend to blend people themselves for becoming fat, not the food they eventually eat in too much amount, but I agree about US being the current scapegoat of last resort. ;-)

In Europe I heard the U.S. criticized for crassness of reality TV like Big Brother (I believe the Dutch invented that one)

Most probably because some confuse real tv with trash tv when, clearly, the second came first and from… US networks, no? Whatever, I always though that sh*t tv have been “invented” in every media businessmen minds everywhere pretty much at the same time people asked to watch some…

and the Germans and the French tend to call unpopular reforms in their own economy “American style.”

Anglo-saxon style. Aka liberal (as in unregulated) reforms. Oh, btw, calling our now killed/suspended young jobs contracts change a reform is way over the edge.

Change is natural and change is accelerating. Somebody must be to blame, right?

When you’re #1, don’t be surprised that everybody actually focus on you. For the best and for the worst. You can’t get one without the other. That’s the price of being the winner. And yes, sometime being *only* the #2 is a better position.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at May 29, 2006 12:38 PM
Comment #152428

Kristy

“And on this Memorial Day, it think it very appropriate that I remind you that “nation building” did indeed work in Japan and Germany.”

For whom?

You don’t know me. You don’t know anything about me, but when you attempt to label me you marginalize me.

P.S. My great, great, great grandfather fought in the American Revolution. Welcome to America.

Posted by: RMD at May 29, 2006 12:41 PM
Comment #152429

Carol LW
much is made of the fact we are the possessers of this vast weapons arsenal,and that no country can stand before our might.
In a world where a test tube of the right substance can deccimate a city,the playing field is all too even.

Posted by: jblym at May 29, 2006 12:43 PM
Comment #152433

did it ever occur to anyone that all this antiamericanism comes from communist prooganda. anyone that believes that communists just went away after WWII or the COLD WAR is wrong, the are here amongst us .

Posted by: sandra at May 29, 2006 12:47 PM
Comment #152437

Carolyn LW:

Can we castigate our eighteenth century founders because they thought like eighteenth century men?

Can we hold them to account for excluding women from the political process and at the same time condemn the U.S. for deposing a pschyopath who maintained rape rooms, countenanced the stoning of adultresses, and rewarded the families of suicide murderers?

Why must every aspect of U.S. foreign and domestic policy be god-like in its omniscience and flawless in its execution while jumped-up little murderers in comic opera colonel’s uniforms are accorded the status of ‘national soveriegnty’ after they have butchered their way to power?

Isn’t a sense of proportion lacking in all of this?

Posted by: Tom Schofield at May 29, 2006 12:59 PM
Comment #152439

As someone who has lived in 8 countries, traveled around the world many times and is in contact with people around the world, let me assure you that right now what is out there is not anti-americanism, but anti-Bushism and anti-US Government. People around the world love American’s they just hate our President. Given what he has done for them and against them, it is no wonder. He has wasted one of the greatest opportunities any man or country ever had to promote good and leadership and will leave as the worst U.S. President in history for having not only focused so much anti-Bushism around the world, but in this country as well. Best thing he could do is to resign and take Channey with him.

Posted by: Gary at May 29, 2006 1:27 PM
Comment #152440

Gary:

Are you indulging in a bit of what the pschyo-babblers call ‘projection’ here? Are you ascribing your own visceral hatred of President Bush onto the rest of the world? If so, I can ‘idendify’ - to maintain the pschyobabble theme. The mere sound of the word ‘Clinton’ still provokes me to purple-in-the-face, frothing-at-the-mouth rage. Welcome to the club!

Posted by: Tom Schofield at May 29, 2006 1:47 PM
Comment #152441

Tom Schofield:

The fact that the biggest demonstrations in recent history were anti-Bush (and these were in Europe) might give some credence to Gary’s premise.

Posted by: Lynne at May 29, 2006 1:51 PM
Comment #152442

Silverice

You are right about the rise of anti-Americanism. You can find it in the polling data in the Pew book I mention. It has not been one way, however. Our image is better today than it was in late 2002 in many places and in a very large country - India - it is at an all time high.

I don’t think it is Iraq as much as 9/11. I know the received wisdom is that the world was on our side after 9/11 and we squandered the goodwill, but if you look closer at attitudes in late 2001, you find a much more nuanced view. Many people felt sympathy for us as victims, but didn’t really want us to fight back. The U.S. is unpopular when it is acting. The same thing happened during the Reagan times. Now it is generally acknowledged Reagan was right, then demonstrations were bigger.

The difference between 1983 and 2003 was the presence of the Soviet Union. People in W. Europe could not get too far out because they needed us to protect them in a real and immediate sense. The smarter people understood this. Now they are not so sure.

I think globalization is a BIG part. Those same polls that show the rise of anti-Americanism indicate that people around the world associate globalization with Americanization. I think they are wrong, but perceptions matter more than reality. Think of all the anti-global folks and their antics BEFORE 9/11 and BEFORE Iraq.

I Lt

I agree with many of your points and hope to explore some of this in subsequent posts.

I think some Muslims don’t like us because we stand in the way of their goal of restoring a caliphate. It is not a workable goal, but people like Osama believe in it.

The situation in Asia is the one we forget about. Our reputation in India is excellent and much improved. Our image in China is better now than it was in 2000. Indonesia comes and goes depending on tsunami relief etc.

Charles

Yes/

Gergle

Globalization is not precisely defined, but it means generally the increasing interaction of parts of the globe. Outsourcing, imports, cultural changes etc are all parts. Experts often talk about the first globalization, which was from 1860s until 1914. The Brits insured the world order. There was the gold standard etc. Between the World Wars, globalization slowed and even reversed. After WWII we had a globalization of only the free parts. The communists and socialists, who made up more than half of the globe, where left out. Only since the collapse of the Soviet Empire have we been in the second globalization.

I would quarrel with your characterization of U.S. installed despots. It makes is sound like the U.S. is the only actor. The countries involved have at least as much to do with their own despots. We should not allow them to blame us for all their screw ups. Sometimes - often - we are just stuck with the local dictator. The alternative, overthrowing him such as in Iraq or Chile, is also unpopular.

Tom Schofield

Agree with most.

AP

Bush made the problem worse, especially in W. Europe, but it is not a straight line causality. Recall the problem we had with allies during Kosovo, or how the French et al thought about Madeline Albright’s lack of intelligence. Opinions of the U.S. have also improved since 2002, while Bush is still around.

I think 9/11 had a big effect because it woke the U.S. up. Any president (I hope) would have acted aggressively and the aggression is unpopular.

Steve

I agree with some of what you say, but I don’t think it is so clear. We do generally oppose left wing thinking, but mostly that is because left wing thinking is the old fashions dirigisme or socialism that really doesn’t work well anymore. We kind of sweep it away. I know this problem. Europeans friends have pointed out that I do it and they are right. I just assume left wing thinking is kind of like the old dirt road and I am going to replace it with a highway when we get the chance. But I don’t know how to stop this way of thinking because it is true.

Lynne

The U.S. is the biggest aid donor in the world. In addition, we tend to give a great deal more as private Americans AND U.S. aid has increased greatly since Bush took office, so this could not be a cause.

RE the Saudis and their flights, this is the Michael Moore disinformation that I know is wrong from personal experience. After 9/11, I was trapped in the U.S. Moore says that Saudis got our EARLY on 9/21 using their influence. I caught a flight to Rome on 9/17. I have no influence and they even upgraded me to business class because there were so few people. This is just a lie Micheal Moore tells in his film and others have picked up.

It will take too long to debunk your other list. Maybe some other time.

Carolyn

And in 1787 how many countries had voting at all?

RMD

They know our president as we do. How many of us know him personally. His style is one that is not popular in much of Europe. I am a supporter of the president, but I can recognize that.

The problem with a democracy or transformation agenda is the alternative. We often hear that people in this or that country don’t want democracy. The people telling us that are the rulers.

Posted by: Jack at May 29, 2006 1:52 PM
Comment #152448

Jack:

You ask a pertinent question: what is the alternative to a policy of transformation? Nothing comes immediately to mind. The combination of technology and gloablization has created a situation where the pschyopathic despot of a third world toilet, or even a collection of religious crackpots, can inflict serious damage on the civilized world. Any responsible U.S. administration would have to do everything in its power to ‘drain the swamps’ - even recognizing that it would be up to its butt in alligators all the while.

The U.S. is also forced to act largely on its own. ‘Old Europe’ insists it is still a world power but refuses to spend much of anything on the military apparatus to maintain that status. Japan has constitutional limits to its projection of military power. Russia would probably be embarrassed to reveal to the world its complete inability to project military power and China is intent on securing its energy supply. Other potential allies may have ‘willing spirits’ but their ‘flesh’ of military power is obviously weak.

That leaves the U.S. as the most visible target of the resentment and jealousy of the rest of the world. Even if all our policies were perfectly concieved and flawlessly executed; even if our president were the most genial, amiable, and likeable of men, most of the world would still hate our guts most of the time.

But as you ask: “What is the alternative?”

Posted by: Tom Schofield at May 29, 2006 2:42 PM
Comment #152449

“And on this Memorial Day, it think it very appropriate that I remind you that ⮡tion building⠤id indeed work in Japan and Germany.”

For whom?

You don’t know me. You don’t know anything about me, but when you attempt to label me you marginalize me.

P.S. My great, great, great grandfather fought in the American Revolution. Welcome to America.

Posted by: RMD at May 29, 2006 12:41 PM
================================================
FIRST: If not for US intervention during WWII, half the world would be wearing brown shirts and goose stepping, the other wearing kimonos and eating sushi.

SECONDLY: I am very grateful to your great, great great grandfather for fighting in and winning the Revoluntary War, and thus giving us this beautiful country we call America. However, you are aware some “marginalized” groups call this social, economic and military expansion, done in the name of “Manifest Destiny” (nation building) unjust and the reason for the decimation of Native American peoples. Did your grandfather do anything wrong? Should non-Native people leave America?

As cultures and governments draw and re-draw country and continent lines, there are always going to be those pleased and those not so pleased (winners and losers).

LASTLY, as an anology, just because 3% of children innoculated with the polio vaccine actually got polio, was it right to innoculate, thus cure polio for the hundreds of million of children who were saved and lived?

Posted by: Kristy at May 29, 2006 2:57 PM
Comment #152450

Anti-Americanism? Kabul, Afghanistan is in lockdown. Rioting. Here is an up-to-date first person account:

http://www.truthout.org/docs_2006/052906Y.shtml

Posted by: phx8 at May 29, 2006 3:09 PM
Comment #152451

The reason the rest of the world hates us more than ever is that most of them get their idea of our country from the self-admittedly liberal press. The Europeans read our newspapers and see our news broadcasts and think that must be how our country is. All major news media in this country have lost a substantial viewership/readership since a lot of Americans see that there is a very strong bias in the press. Too bad the rest of the world can’t see the real state of this country without coming here and living here.
BTW, Clinton lied under oath and still managed to evade impeachment thanks to the press repeating the phrase, “It’s his personal life….” If a Republican did such, he would have been run out on a rail.

Beth

Posted by: Beth Hays at May 29, 2006 3:10 PM
Comment #152453

Anti-Americanism? We backed out of an international treaty to fight Global Warming, although we are the biggest contributors to greenhouse gases, and we could have demanded any terms on that treaty we desired. Anti-Americanism? Now that is a poser. Hmmm….

Posted by: phx8 at May 29, 2006 3:23 PM
Comment #152454

Anit-Americanism? Exxon posted the largest profit for one year in the history of the world. Their last quarter also set a profit, breaking the one previously set by Exxon. The energy industry wrote US energy policy though a meeting with Cheney in 2001. Cheney refuses to make the content of the meeting public. Oil companies thrive, oil & gas prices triple since the beginning of the Bush administration, and the US refuses to participate in international treaties to address Global Warming.

Anti-Americanism? Wow. I just have no idea how that could have happened.

Posted by: phx8 at May 29, 2006 3:27 PM
Comment #152455

Three years ago US troops invaded Iraq on pretexts. 130,000 troops still occupy their country. Dozens of people died today in the ongoing violence. The government never did name Defense or Interior Ministers, because those ministeries would be able to make their Death Squads the most powerful militias of all.

Anti-Americanism? You must be kidding. Could it be the fault of the liberal media?

Posted by: phx8 at May 29, 2006 3:30 PM
Comment #152456

Beth:

Clinton WAS impeached, but not found guilty in a trial before the Senate…if Bush were impeached currently, he would be found not guilty, too, because the Republicans are the majority in the Senate…funny how that works, hey?

only because he refuses to take any oath…this won’t be the case, as when he’s out of office, he can no longer claim executive privilege…

Posted by: Lynne at May 29, 2006 3:32 PM
Comment #152457

Anti-Americanism? Well, we support a Jewish State, and call it a democracy, though it restricts the rights of non-Jews in a modern version of apartheid. Palestinians live in a bantustan called Palestine, which has no possible way of succeeding. Israel possesses nuclear weapons and we think it might even be a good thing if they use nukes against Iran.

We oppose an Islamic Republic, and deny it has any semblance of democracy, even calling it part of an “Axis of Evil.” We believe it should never be allowed to possess nuclear weapons, and think it would be a terrible thing if Iran used nukes against Israel.

Anti-Americanism? Nah. No way. This is probably the fault of Clinton and the liberal media.

Posted by: phx8 at May 29, 2006 3:37 PM
Comment #152458

Jack:

The U.S. is the biggest aid donor in the world. In addition, we tend to give a great deal more as private Americans AND U.S. aid has increased greatly since Bush took office, so this could not be a cause.

I hear this repeated over and over…the U.S. simply does not match the percentage of GNP/GDP which other developed countries contribute to foreign aid. Our foreign aid is also given with strings attached, meaning that we’ll give you the money, but you have to spend it in our country…if you want to construct something, you have to use our construction industry, not yours…if you need food, you have to buy from our subsidized agricultural industry, not your own unsubsidized farmers…which leads to even more economic dependence on us (U.S.)…

We also attach other strings…you can’t teach birth control, you can’t have abortion available…you have to use our expensive pharmaceutical companies anti-HIV/AIDS drugs, not the generic cocktail that’s cheap and works as well if not better.

The U.S. also pledges huge amounts of money which are never sent…the campaign to wipe out malaria is one case in point…

The only aid that comes without strings is often thru international relief agencies, such as Red Cross and Medicins sans Frontieres…

No, our foreign aid couldn’t possibly be a cause of anti-Americanism!!


Posted by: Lynne at May 29, 2006 3:42 PM
Comment #152460

phx8

Are you an arch-conservative ‘partisan’ trying to gin up anti-liberal sentiment through the use of simplistic steotypes of the liberal position?

Posted by: Tom Schofield at May 29, 2006 3:53 PM
Comment #152461

Anti-Americanism? From Africa? Who cares. Wrong color, no oil. Except maybe Nigeria, and we already have their oil resources in a hammerlock.

I am pro-American, Tom, which means liberal. Are you pro-American or pro-oil, I mean, pro-Bush?

Posted by: phx8 at May 29, 2006 3:58 PM
Comment #152463

Posted by: Lynne at May 29, 2006 03:42 PM>>>

Everytime I see someone (and I don’t care if you consider yourself a liberal, conservative, or leeding heart) bemoaning the way the United States divies out foreign aide, I get seriously angry. Would it surprize you to learn, Lynne, that the U.S. Constitution expressly forbids giving out foreign aide. The reasoning behind this is the U.S. needs to stay out of the affairs of other countries, and for the very reasons you cite. You can’t please everybody; someone is going to fault the U.S. regardless of how aide is dispersed. And, as we see continuously, the hand is constantly reaching out for more and more and more aide.

I believe we need to follow the constitution to the letter and keep the money at home. Just as a child will never learn to do anything for themselves if Mommy does everything, beleaguered countries will remain static if never encouraged to help themselves. Humanitarian aide has been poured into Africa for hundreds of years. They are no better off today than they were 300 years ago. In fact, probably worse off, since much of the foreign aide is siphoned off to buy weapons for the purpose of large-scale genocide.

You don’t feel there should be strings on foreign aide? Many of us feel there should be no foreign aide at all because most of it only aides the powers that be.

Posted by: KDTEXAS at May 29, 2006 4:14 PM
Comment #152464

I’ve never understood why such simple answers always must be counched in the most complex language.

And the reason for the vehement dislike of America and Americans in western Europe is simple - and two-fold.

One, they no longer need us to protect them from 40 tank divisions massed on the Soviet side of Churchill’s Iron Curtain and, two, arrogance.

From its founding, European nations have looked upon the United States as an aberation. And the fact that we have been such a dominant force in Europe for the past 60 years eats away at their innards like a cancer.

Even at the height of World War Two, with the fate of the free world hanging in the balance, and with Nazi Germany grinding Europe under its heel, European governments considered the United States little more than a necessary evil.

For instnace, then Maj. Gen., and nut case, Charles De Gaulle, supported the idea of French troops opposing the American invasion of North Africa. Fortunantly, other senior French military officers prevailed and the specter of two allied armies fighting each other was avoided.

Later, as French president, De Gaulle would take France out of the military arm of NATO.

The French were opposed to French soldiers dying in the defense of their country, but perfectly will to let others die in defense of French soil.

And these are the people we fret over because they don’t like us.

Please!

Posted by: ulysses at May 29, 2006 4:22 PM
Comment #152468

KDTexas,
Good point about foreign aid. Founding Fathers warned us against “foreign entanglements,” and John Quincy Adams delivered an outstanding speech from the Well of the House of Representatives on 7/4/26, advocating we acta s the model for Human Rights, rather than forcing them upon others through invasion & other means.

Hoever, the US is the biggest country in the world, the most powerful, and the biggest beneficiary of trade & “globalization.” While some fear of change is natural, it is not the process of globalization, but the means it is implemented, and its outcome, which generates so much anti-American sentiment.

Because of our position, the US has a moral obligation to help our fellow human beings. In cases of drought or other natural disasters, it is incumbent upon as to help, as a matter of decency and compassion. For the same reason, it is incumbent upon us to prevent massacres & genocides if possible.


Foreign aid which exceed those bounds is definitely debatable.

Ulysses,
Great point. Different regions exhibit different forms of anti-Americanism, for different reasons. The example of France is much different that Afghanistan, where we have placed a puppet government in power, and in an act of astonishing indifference, given support to that government short shrift, in order to concentrate our efforts on Iraq. Hoo boy. But both cases begin in American self-centeredness and imperial hubris on our part.

Posted by: phx8 at May 29, 2006 4:38 PM
Comment #152469

Lynne

We give more aid than anyone else. Our government aid is not a large % of our GDP, but our GDP is so large that it STILL is thee biggest. If you want to make the comparison, our military is the most powerful in the world, BUT as a % of our GDP spent, we are not even in the top 10. Do you still want to think %.

The other important thing is the nature of U.S. society. What many do via government, we do via private initiative. Other countries (besides our cultral cousins like Canadians, Australians etc) just do not have that sort of volunteer tradition and Americans are by far the most generous aid givers in total money terms as individuals. The Bill Gates Foundation has assets of more than 20 billion. That is more than Norway (a generous and rich country) gives in aid.

Now let’s talk about effective aid. If aid itself were effective, Tanzania would be the richest country in the world. Much traditional aid has had the perverse effect of propping up failure. That is why the new Milenium Challenge program is so good.

There is absolutely no need for any American to feel ashamed of what his/her country is doing to help world development.

Take a look at this article and follow the links.

A generation ago, government aid was a key factor and it could make the biggest difference. Back then, few private organizations had big operations outside their home countries and some of the % of GDP made sense. The world had changed a lot since 1950. Unfortunately, not everyone has got the news.

You may be right that the perception of our foreign aid may cause anti-Americanism, so it is incumbent on us to dispel that dark ignorance with the light of truth. I expect you will do your duty after you have researched it and explain it to those who remain ignorant.

Posted by: Jack at May 29, 2006 4:46 PM
Comment #152473

phx8

I guess that answers my question. By your definition I am both pro-oil and pro-Bush. By my definition, President Bush is a faux-conservative who has spent us into an uncomforable corner. His foreign policy I find much more palatable.

If it was only oil we were after, why not just invade Saudi Arabia? They have more oil than Iraq and a military that the Rhode Island National Guard could roll-over in a day. Once the country was occupied we could blow up Mecca and Medina, thus removing the loci of all this Islamo-fascist clap trap. It would cost nothing to administer the country - that could be subcontracted to our good friends at Exxon-Mobil! Iraq could be awarded to a consortium of Chevron-Texaco and Conoco-Phillips. The oil companies would then drop the price of oil to $10 a barrel and snuff out all the investment now going into ethanol, biodiesel, and hydrogen fuels. I am so glad that the evil George Bush and his nefarious cabal of viscious oil companies control our imperialistic, oil-driven foreign policy - allowing me to fill my gas tank at bargain prices! Why, if the namby-pamby liberals were in charge, oil would probably be selling for nearly $70 a barrel.

Posted by: Tom Schofield at May 29, 2006 4:59 PM
Comment #152474

Tom,
Sometimes a picture is worth a thousand words:

http://azazel.smugmug.com/keyword/saudi/1/38952549

It is not about control of the oil itself. That can be managed by our kissing cousins. It is about ensuring access to the oil.

And Tom, Bush and Big Oil and not about providing you with low oil prices. They are about providing themselves with profits.

Posted by: phx8 at May 29, 2006 5:12 PM
Comment #152476

I love photoshop!!!

Jack, my question about globalization was rhetorical, but thanks.

As to US installed dictators, the Shah wasn’t elected. Why is he their fault again? I don’t think the US is a horrible, evil entity, but just pretending the past didn’t happen doesn’t make Iranians {or others)forget. Blowback is a bitch.

Again, I’m neither a US cheerleader nor hater, just a realist, who sometimes wonders about the seeming lack of memory of some Republicans. Is altzheimer’s their natural state?

Posted by: gergle at May 29, 2006 5:27 PM
Comment #152477


Anti-Americanism = Globalization = Corporate Capitalism = New World Order. Everything else is just a symptom of the cause. Keep the market economics but break up the corporations before it is to late.

Posted by: jlw at May 29, 2006 5:28 PM
Comment #152478

Jack:

our military is the most powerful in the world, BUT as a % of our GDP spent, we are not even in the top 10. Do you still want to think %.

1) To whom more is given, more is expected.

2) A Christian nation??? Hmmmmm…guess not.

3) What does a powerful military have to do with giving humanitarian aid??? We’re killing people…

4) Yes, a percentage…maybe you don’t believe in anything close to tithing???

5) Our military/defense spending is more than all the other countries in the world combined…

Posted by: Lynne at May 29, 2006 5:42 PM
Comment #152480

Gergle

The problem the U.S. has is that it MUST deal with some unsavory types. Think of the post nearby about China. Can we just oppose China because they are oppressive? Should we? W/o access to the U.S. market, China would have serious trouble. By “letting” them sell to us, arn’t we propping them up?

We have limited choices. Given the fact that we are the U.S., even a small action (or inaction) on our part can have big effects.

Action and non-action we take will always get us blamed. We see posts here blaming us for Darfur. We are working harder than anyone to reach a solution. Russians, Chinese and Arabs are opposing us and they are succeeding. What should we do?

I saw an interesting thing on CNN re N. Korean refugees being returned by the Chinese. In N. Korea they are mistreated or killed. When the producer was asked who was the bad guy in all this, he didn’t mention the N.Koreans or the Chinese. He mentioned the U.S., for not doing more to stop it. Does that make sense to you? It evidently does to many.

As a superpower we have done some things poorly and many things well. Had we not supported the Shah in 1953, what might have happened? If we HAD supported the Shah in 1979, what would have happened? It probably could not have been worse than the Mullahs, but who knows. Could proper U.S. action in either case have helped bring a better system? Maybe. But each action will cause consequences.

Posted by: Jack at May 29, 2006 5:43 PM
Comment #152482

You can criticize and not be unAmeriican. But some of the criticism you hear these days is ANTI-American because it give ammunition to the enemy, namely terrorists, and al who wish to see the “Great Experience” fail. Most of our enemies do not understand freedom of speech. They get their throats cut if they exercise it. Be glad you have it. There are soldiers dying today so you can say what you want and not die for it.

Posted by: Dan Castleman at May 29, 2006 5:56 PM
Comment #152486


Jack: what should we do about Darfur? This administration is not hesitant to use the military where they perceive a threat to us, especially a economic threat. Perhaps they should send troops in to stabilize the situation even though there is no profit in it. The people being annihilated are Christans aren’t they. Was it you that said the World will hate us if we do or if we don’t. I think if we do, some will hate us. But, I think that if we were to intervene in Darfur, we will begin to earn some of the trust (to do what’s right) we have lost with most of the world.

Posted by: jlw at May 29, 2006 6:23 PM
Comment #152487

jlw

Darfur is Muslims killing Muslims and Muslims everywhere hardly care.

Sudan would be as hard or harder than Iraq. At least Iraq has sea access. Darfur does not. The Sudanese government would resist. Arabs would object to agression against Muslims. Chinese would defend their oil interests. Europeans would decry our agression. See Kipling on the burden we would be taking. We would be left holding another bag. We would earn no trust. Our actions in Kosovo were completely unselfish. Read up on world reaction.

I am going to say something very machievellian and you can be scandalized. There is no particualar American interest here - at least WE are not the primary actors. The French have bases in Chad. The Chinese are the big oil investors. The Africans are nearby and the Arabs are committing the crimes. Any one of them is more appopriate problem solvers.

Posted by: Jack at May 29, 2006 6:35 PM
Comment #152493
Opinions of the U.S. have also improved since 2002, while Bush is still around.

The Rest of The World is not that idiot. We do know that USA will survive Bush. As the World will, too.
Hopefully.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at May 29, 2006 7:00 PM
Comment #152495


China is blocking the U.N. from doing anything about Darfur. Our corporations have no interests there. And we wonder why there is so much anti-American sentiment in the world.

Arab Muslems are killing African Muslems but, who cares.

Posted by: jlw at May 29, 2006 7:09 PM
Comment #152498

Ulysses,

From its founding, European nations have looked upon the United States as an aberation.

Oh. I guess it’s why France actually help the US to win its independence, then. Because french though US was an aberation.
Make perfect sense.

Later, as French president, De Gaulle would take France out of the military arm of NATO.

The French were opposed to French soldiers dying in the defense of their country, but perfectly will to let others die in defense of French soil.

.

Woa. Miss some history 101?
French soldiers actually died in the last 60 years, you should know.
Never heard of Dunkerque? Who was fighting (and dying) while Brits were retreated?
Never heard of Indochine? Our soldiers died in defense of French, at this time, soil. And yes, we loose Indochine. But even USA didn’t won a few years after when Indochine became Vietnam…

More recently, a few french soldiers died in Iraq during the Gulf War. And just last month, 3 french soldiers were killed in Afgahistan. Oh, BTW, in both case they were fighting along the US, not against.


Back to NATO, since France move out its US-led military arm have developed its own defense. There is more than just US nukes in Europe since, too.

And these are the people we fret over because they don’t like us.

Please!

Yeah, doesn’t make any sense to bother about us. After all, we’re just french, what could you expect from!?

But… was about the worldwide anti-americanism?
Since when the rest of the world is french!?!

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at May 29, 2006 7:20 PM
Comment #152501

Jack,

Can we just oppose China because they are oppressive? Should we? W/o access to the U.S. market, China would have serious trouble.

The world economics will have serious trouble. Which include the first capitalist nation of all, USA. I guess it has more to do with US not opposing China than any hypothetical caring about China possible trouble. Don’t you?

Plus I’ll bet China will very soon find new nations to buy what was sold to US, even if they have to low the price…

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at May 29, 2006 7:35 PM
Comment #152505


Philippe: I think we are already looking for a way out of China. That is why we are all of a sudden interested in electricity for India. Plus, no 51%-49% split with the government in India.

Posted by: jlw at May 29, 2006 7:58 PM
Comment #152506

Jack,
I don’t think many blame the US for Darfur, just the Hypocrasy of claiming to have invaded Iraq to free them from Tyranny and then ignoring the Sudanese.

Your supposition about the Shah is that we could do nothing about his excesses in the 25 years of his reign? We had no influence? Or was it simply short sited opportunism to block the Soviets?

As to not supporting the Shah in 1979, it was a bit late by then. Iranians tied to the US didn’t have a lot of influence. He was dying and his political strength was gone. Should we have made some moves in the 70’s? Sure, but we were a little preoccupied, I think, with Vietnam and Watergate. Hmmmm,that sounds like something from today’s politcal plate. I wonder what we’re missing today that will reach out and bite us down the road.

We failed in China to support democracy right after WWII. Probably war fatigue.

I didn’t see the CNN piece and don’t understand who was blaming the US. CNN was? I doubt that.

Yes, intervention/isolation has consequences. An ethically motivated and centered policy would serve us long term. I’m not saying we wouldn’t have to do hard and even politically underhanded things. Machiavelli wasn’t an idiot. Inspite of what many Republicans here say, that was the basis of Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy rather than short term economic rewards for politcal supporters.

If anyone can explain to me Bush’s long term middle east srategy, I’m listening.

Posted by: gergle at May 29, 2006 8:18 PM
Comment #152507

48%

Posted by: Mb at May 29, 2006 8:21 PM
Comment #152513

Philippe

We still remember Rochambeau & almost every American state has a town named Lafayette.

It is natural that American and French interests sometimes diverge. I don’t hold it against you all, I just want to figure out how to deal with it. BTW - I worry about you guys getting your economy and immigration problems. You don’t have to listen to this American, but might need a Hungarian to help you sort it out.

Re China - my point is that we sometimes have to make deals with less than savory regimes. China and the U.S. are currently co-dependent.

Gergle

We invade Iraq for a variety of reason. Most of them had to do with security. The good it did to Iraqi civilians was just one of the benefits, not the primary reason. The least self interested conflict we have been in was probably Kosovo, which we did to help out our European allies (so it was self interest once removed.)

Re the Shah, it is a sort of game theory at work. The Shah used us; we used the Shah. The Soviets played in the background. We did pressure the Shah on many occasions. w/o our pressure, he may not have fallen and/or would have used a lot more bloody methods to suppress the 1979 revolutions.

Saying we failed to support democracy in China is like saying we failed to cut down the biggest tree in the forest with a herring. We just did not have that much leverage and the lesser of two evils side we were supporting lost. If you can point out to me which of the democratic options we failed to support, I would be grateful.

Jimmy Carter’s foreign policy was not very good. We learned from him what NOT to do. He wised up by 1979, but it was too late. His emphasis on human rights was the one bright spot and we can give him credit for Camp David, although that did not result in virtuous circle we hoped.

Condoleezza Rice has explained our Middle Eastern policy on many occasions. It is actually much more ethically based than our previous policies. That is one reason we have trouble. A more realistic policy would just install some kind of strong man in Iraq. Instead we are trying to establish a reasonable democracy.

Posted by: Jack at May 29, 2006 9:07 PM
Comment #152524

Is the idea of “sides,” meaning an “us and them” mentality. Sure, people around the world feel at odds with the US (as evidenced by all those UN votes where the entire world votes one way and the US is the single vote in the other), but within our own culture I am truly disappointed with the idea of “Anti-American.”

Like when Syria was put on the human rights council?

In our own culture we have had forty years of no shame. Liberals have conditioned an entire generation that there is no right or wrong, black or white only touchy feely warm fuzzies, I’m good you’re good mentality.

Oh, and going to war against a sovereign nation preemptively and without a coalition of allies doesn’t help, either

BTW when Klinton bombed the hell out of Serbian infrastructre and civilians, I believe that was a pre-emptive military action by Nato which is a defensive force by nature. 1st for a draft dodger don’t you think, or is it something he learned in Russia after “bombing” out at oxford?

Posted by: lm at May 29, 2006 9:52 PM
Comment #152535
As someone who has lived in 8 countries, traveled around the world many times and is in contact with people around the world, let me assure you that right now what is out there is not anti-americanism, but anti-Bushism and anti-US Government. People around the world love American’s they just hate our President.

I’ve found that to be true all over Asia and India as well. When things get hostile, yelling, “Don’t shoot! I’m a Democrat.” defuses the situation. It also elicits praise of President Clinton and hopes that Hillary will get elected.

Bush made the problem worse, especially in W. Europe, but it is not a straight line causality.

Yes, it really is, Jack. The data leaves no room for debate on that.

Opinions of the U.S. have also improved since 2002, while Bush is still around.

…Again as a direct result of Bush policy. The Tsunami aid in particular marked a small rebound.

Any president (I hope) would have acted aggressively and the aggression is unpopular.

There you go again. Conflating Afghanistan with Iraq.

Jack, you know as well as I do that we targeted the Taliban as part of NATO and with the full support of the United Nations, the international community and international law. They fully acknowledged the right of the United States to retaliate against the entities responsible for an attack on US soil.

Conversely, Iraq, as Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni put it, was “a brain fart.”

Posted by: American Pundit at May 29, 2006 10:13 PM
Comment #152536

Oh, crap. I guess I just set Gen. Zinni up for some Memorial Day troop bashing by SE and his chicken hawk Republican colleagues. Well, like all of our combat veterans, I think the Gen. can handle himself against those guys.

Posted by: American Pundit at May 29, 2006 10:18 PM
Comment #152544

AP

I was overseas during Reagan, Bush 1 and Clinton. I support my president no matter who he is. I spent a lot of time defending Clinton. In the early years, the Europeans said he was inexperienced and foolish. Muslim radicals hated us because of Somalia and worse yet despised us. Later people complained about Albright, her arrogance and stupidity. (I was ashamed of Albright, so maybe I read into it) Kosovo (which I supported) nearly wrecked the alliance. At the end of the Clinton Administration, our relationship with China was at a low point. AND all of that was at a time of no particular challenge.

I think that we often get answers we seek. You as a Dem hear what you want and people tell you what they think you want to hear. The same happens to all of us BTW. I have remember being told dozens of times by well informed people that they were really relieved that Al Gore was not in the White House for 9/11. I don’t know if they believed it, but they said it. I don’t doubt, however, that I elicited some of that even if unintentionally and I remember THAT among the hundreds of other comments. I think experts call that confirmation bias.

Beyond that, people always remember things more fondly AFTER they are finished, so they THINK they like previous administrations better. I remember the absolute hatred some Europeans had for Reagan. They thought he was abysmally stupid for telling Gorbo to tear down the wall. Millions protested against the U.S. in the middle 1980s. They were SURE Reagan would start WWIII. Now it is almost impossible to find one who will admit that he ever had any doubts about the happy outcome to the Cold War. In fact, they say, Reagan didn’t go far enough.

I wish it was only Bush. That would mean the problem would be over in a couple of years. In 2008 I will be retired to the farm and may never again leave the U.S., but I fear (I am certain) that after that Americans overseas defending whoever is president will still face hostility for our actions and non actions and many will try to divide us by claiming they were on our side during the previous times.

I think Bush’s personality and delivery style annoys some in Europe. The war on terror has made us more agressive. I do put Iraq and Afghanistan in the same category. But even if you don’t, you have to remember that Palestinians danced in the streets to celebrate 9/11 and the Germans (SPD) used anti-Americanism in their 2002 election. BEFORE Iraq a member of the German government compared Bush to Hitler. Afghanistan also got more offers of aid than actual aid. And that war went much better than expected, otherwise we would have the same sort of criticism.

The 1980s were harder times for us. The difference is that we still had the Soviet Union back then. Conflict was potentially more destructive, but it was also more theoretical. Our allies could stay at home and still be allies. You know NATO defended part of Germany with a Belgian/Dutch force that was rarely up to strenth, especially on weekends or holidays. We were not really tested.

Posted by: Jack at May 29, 2006 10:53 PM
Comment #152566

I thank you for recognizing the positive aspects of Carter’s Foreign policy. I think the reason there were no long term positive results has to do with Reagan’s abandonment of his policies and a return to real politik strong men support

As to China I was refering to Chiang Kai-shek. While he was not a particularly democratic leader, it was his politics that led to the democratization of Taiwan. We failed to support him against Mao, resulting in China today.

You have said that Condeleeza has espoused our mid east policy. I’m sorry, I no longer believe in the domino theory of democracy. I was sucked into that one early, but woke up from that dream. We have engendered far more hatred than existed before.

As to security of the US in Iraq…please. Pull the other leg, it rings a bell. We are simply holding a lid on Iraq and Afghanistan until after the election. Both policies have failed miserably. “Fool me once…uuhhh..Fool me twice..uhhh…We won’t get fooled again.”

Posted by: gergle at May 30, 2006 3:46 AM
Comment #152588

Gergle

We supported Chiang to the extent practical. He just lost against a better organized and more ruthless force. And we have continued to protect Taiwan to this day.

The “who lost China” debate of the 1950s was largely incorrect and used by right wing politicans to attack Truman Administration policies. I am a little surprised you side with them.

Posted by: Jack at May 30, 2006 9:34 AM
Comment #152595

what is wrong with only property owners voting? that would solve half our entitlement programs as we foot the bill. If you don’t own property you don’t vote, you don’t get free schooling, you don’t have a say.

it only seems fair that to help govern you must own property. then you can pay school, hospital, and county/city taxes. then you can vote.

until then if you don’t like it go back to your own country and die of old age, if it suits you shut up and live else get some property.

Posted by: lm at May 30, 2006 10:25 AM
Comment #152596

A couple of points of information:

1. The “who lost China” debate was political, but its factual basis was in the Truman Administration decision to cut military aid to the Nationalists. That was the coup de grace to their hopes of fighting in the mainland. The roots of this decision go back to a pro-Communist faction within the State Department, as well as to the corruption and incompetence of the Nationalist regime. What was overlooked in the process was the murderous and ruthless nature of their foes, who later killed at least 20 million Chinese in the name of political progress.

The aid was not resumed until after the Korean War started, and meanwhile the Nationalists defeated a ChiCom invasion of Quemoy. The Nationalists learned from their defeat and are now a considerably more advanced country than China-PRC.

Someone asked what is globalization. Well, globalization is simply the free movement of goods, people (subject to immigration laws) and capital across borders. It’s not new, it was more or less the way of life before the First World War when there were some tariffs, but there was also a sort of universal currency via the gold standard.

In our day, the free movement of goods, information, and capital, has brought immense prosperity to all countries, but it has also been to the detriment of local oligarchies, cartels, and any number of special interest groups that benefited from a closed market. Hence the fuss and protests. The new element is the flow of information; there was no radio, Tv or internet before WWI. This new element has both political and economic impact, and is therefore even more controversial than the other elements of globalisation.

I think globalisation is irreversible, and on the whole a good thing. Might be worth a separate site of its own.

Charles Kovacs

Posted by: Charles Kovacs at May 30, 2006 10:31 AM
Comment #152598

A couple of points of information:

1. The “who lost China” debate was political, but its factual basis was in the Truman Administration’s decision to cut military aid to the Nationalists. That was the coup de grace to their hopes of fighting in the mainland. The roots of this decision go back to a pro-Communist faction within the State Department, as well as to the corruption and incompetence of the Nationalist regime. What was overlooked in the process was the murderous and ruthless nature of their foes, who later killed at least 20 million Chinese in the name of political progress.

The aid was not resumed until after the Korean War started, and meanwhile the Nationalists defeated a ChiCom invasion of Quemoy. The Nationalists learned from their defeat and are now a considerably more advanced country than China-PRC, and certainly a more democratic, and a freer one.

Someone asked what is globalization. Well, globalization is simply the free movement of goods, people (subject to immigration laws) and capital across borders. It’s not new, it was more or less the way of life before the First World War when there were some tariffs, but there was also a sort of universal currency via the gold standard.

In our day, the free movement of goods, information, and capital, has brought immense prosperity to all countries, but it has also been to the detriment of local oligarchies, cartels, and any number of special interest groups that benefited from a closed market. Hence the fuss and protests. The new element is the flow of information; there was no radio, Tv or internet before WWI. This new element has both political and economic impact, and is therefore even more controversial than the other elements of globalisation.

I think globalisation is irreversible, and on the whole a good thing. Might be worth a separate site of its own.

Charles Kovacs

Posted by: Charles Kovacs at May 30, 2006 10:33 AM
Comment #152602

lm,

what is wrong with only property owners voting?

First, could I ask you at which age did you become a property owner?

Also, what about people owning way more (in value or size terms) lands than others? Should they get more vote power? Proportionally? Do you agree huge farms owners getting more vote power than you?
What happened when people get divorced? The one that keep the house keep the ballot power, the other lost it? Does a rich baby, single survivor of a family line, get a vote as he inheritated his family properties?

Hurray, great capitalism at work, where ballot = $.

PS: Remember “one people, one vote”? It’s (was?) called democracy. Once.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at May 30, 2006 10:51 AM
Comment #152604

Gergle,

The French have never liked anyone else, aren’t they equally anti British?

What!? Brits are actually not americans???
Oh, now I’m embarassed!

;-)

Your frenchly…

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at May 30, 2006 10:54 AM
Comment #152606

lm:

it only seems fair that to help govern you must own property. then you can pay school, hospital, and county/city taxes. then you can vote.

Yeah, let’s not let the serfs vote…do you really think people who don’t own a house don’t pay taxes??? That’s included in their rent…rental property owners pay it, but they pass it on to the renters in higher rent payments. Plus, renters work, and so they pay tax on their incomes (federal, state, & local), plus with anything they purchase, they pay sales taxes.

Posted by: Lynne at May 30, 2006 11:02 AM
Comment #152608
I have remember being told dozens of times by well informed people that they were really relieved that Al Gore was not in the White House for 9/11.

That as authoritative-sounding-yet-meaningless statement if I ever heard one. Millions and millions of well-informed people in this country think that Bush is a lousy president.

Not that I disagree with your larger point about selective memory…

Posted by: Woody Mena at May 30, 2006 11:11 AM
Comment #152609

It is people such as Sen. Murtha and the ultra-liberal media who help to spread Anti-Americanism throughout the world. As a case in point, the Marines accused of wholesale murder of innocent women and children in Haditha. Murtha and the media have tried and convicted these men before they have even been charged with the crime, and have broadcast this to every Islamic nation on Earth! This plays right into the hands of Osama bin Ladan, the Hamas, Iran, etc. They have such a hatred for America that they will gleefully grab each and every such incident and use it for propaganda in their war against the US, whether it is true or not. As for the US standing with Israel, take a close look at a map.. Israel is roughly the size of Rhode Island, and growing smaller with every concession of land to Palestine. It is surrounded on every side by hostile Muslim’ nations whose avowed goal is totally obliterate Israel fron the earth. Why should we NOT defend her? SOMEONE has to help Israel, and no one else will! Is this cause for Anti-Americanism? Sure appears to be! Bill Clinton was a liar, an adulterer, a cheat, and yet it seems as though everyone liked him and found it easy to forgive him, including foreign nations. George W.Bush is a solid family man , Christian, trying to do his best, and yet he is reviled not only by foreign lands, but his own country. No wonder Anti-Americanism is on the rise, when a President’s own Congress will not uphold him, and calls him a liar to the world’s press! Where is our patriotism, our loyality to our flag and nation? Has it gone forever in the rise of ultra liberalism?

Posted by: Angel 1 at May 30, 2006 11:14 AM
Comment #152610

Angel 1,

“It is people such as Sen. Murtha and the ultra-liberal media who help to spread Anti-Americanism throughout the world. As a case in point, the Marines accused of wholesale murder of innocent women and children in Haditha. Murtha and the media have tried and convicted these men before they have even been charged with the crime, and have broadcast this to every Islamic nation on Earth!”

Do you read or do you only get your information from Fox News and Hannity?

We were the last to get this news. Every Islamic Nation on earth knew about this when it happened.

“Has it gone forever in the rise of ultra liberalism?”

Is that a retorical question?

Posted by: Rocky at May 30, 2006 11:26 AM
Comment #152617

Wow Jack,
You bring up anti-Americanism and American’s immediately bring up just how bad their country is because of who is the President.
It couldn’t be any other country’s fault, it has to be their own country’s fault, because of who is President.
I really could care less about foreign anti-Americanism, its the domestic anti-Americanism so many “Americans” blatantly practice to forward their own political agendas.

Where does it come from? From the exact same people who will choose to look the other way again when its their party in power, just as they did in the 90s.

Posted by: kctim at May 30, 2006 11:51 AM
Comment #152619
I really could care less about foreign anti-Americanism, its the domestic anti-Americanism so many “Americans” blatantly practice to forward their own political agendas.

I would have to believe that the person who posted this quote is unable to distinguish between anti-Americanism and anti-Bushism…our country is NOT to be equated with its chief executive. That said, Americans are sad, angry, and disgusted that the image of our country has been tarnished by said chief exective and lament what the U.S. seems to have become under his regime…that is far from anti-Americanism…it is, in fact. being so pro-American that one wants their country to return to its image as a “good” country, a non-agressive country not given to preemptive “guesses” about what another sovereign country might do…

Since when is wanting to have one’s country live up to its Declaration of Independence, its Constitution, its good world image, and its “government for the people, of the people, by the people” anti-Americanism? This is true patriotism, true love of country!!

So quickly do people forget the torment that the Republicans caused for all 8 years of the Clinton presidency, keeping the country in turmoil for political gain, not approving nominated judges nor passing anti-terrorism legislation…they perhaps cannot see what they did in the past because of the huge plank in their eye blinds them as they try to scratch out others’ eyes searching for a tiny splinter.

Posted by: Lynne at May 30, 2006 12:06 PM
Comment #152621

kctim,

You seem to confuse anti-americanism with anti-bushism. They’re two distinct things.
I’m, for example, not anti-american (hence why I came here in the first time) but could be called an anti-bush.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at May 30, 2006 12:15 PM
Comment #152636

Lynn, PH
Anti-Bush: Disagreeing with the President’s policies. In your case, probably just because he is a Republican.

Anti-Americanism: Disagreeing with American policies so much that one is willing to tear down their own country in order to make their point or to forward their own political agenda.

“Americans are sad, angry, and disgusted that the image of our country has been tarnished by said chief exective and lament what the U.S. seems to have become under his regime…”

Actually, half of “Americans” can be described in that manner, you know, the ones who place party before country.

“Since when is wanting to have one’s country live up to its Declaration of Independence, its Constitution, its good world image, and its “government for the people, of the people, by the people” anti-Americanism?”

IF only that were true.
You want our country to live up to what YOUR party thinks is a good world image and you want it to be a “govt for the people” (that think like you and agree with you) “of the people” (who are willing to let you dictate how they live) “by the people” (the people like you who know whats best for the rest of us)

“This is true patriotism, true love of country!!”

No, true love of country is respecting the Constitution and being willing to die for it.

“So quickly do people forget the torment that the Republicans caused for all 8 years of the Clinton presidency”

Ah yes, 8 years of torment by people who did not agree with the illegal activities of a President. Funny how the very people who choose to look the other way then and called those who questioned “nuts” “conspiracy theorists” and “loonies” now expect to be taken seriously and called “proud Americans.”
So tell me, why were their questions and worries so “trivial” but yours should be taken as the word of God?

“You seem to confuse anti-americanism with anti-bushism”

No Philippe, I am not confusing the two.
I am anti-Bush, I do not agree with alot of what he has done. But I would NEVER place another country above my own for political gain. I would NEVER side with another country over my own. I would NEVER take the word of a dictator over that of my own Presidents simply because of his party. I would NEVER think of US troops as being brainwashed mindless drones.
And I would NEVER get satisfication out of the fact that a conflict was going bad because it would benefit my party in the coming elections.

Its easy to be anti-Bush without being anti-American, one just has to love country more than party. Something that no longer exists in America.
Thank god the left hasn’t been able to take away all of our guns, yet, because we will soon need them.

Posted by: kctim at May 30, 2006 12:51 PM
Comment #152638

Charles,
Thanks for the info on the Nationalists, and it was me who asked about globalism, although my question was rhetorical and tongue in cheek. My point was that globalism is really nothing new, just a speeding up, if you will, of transport and communications.

Phillipe, Again, I was being slighty sarcastic in my comment about the French. Although they do have reputation for slightly xenophobic nationalism. My point was they are no more anti-American than they are anti-anything not French. I like the French personally, I even took French in High School. Of course, that may have been due to the fact that I was one of two guys in a class full of georgous young women. Ah, such fond memories. One of the French teachers was hot, too. Ooo, La La.

Posted by: gergle at May 30, 2006 1:04 PM
Comment #152641

Woody

My point is about selective memory, but also about how people tell you things they think you might agree with. I was not exaggerating about the Bush/Gore thing. Now the last time I lived in Europe was 2003, so the latest opinions are probably not the same. Opinion change in both directions, BTW. Consider Ronald Reagan.

After seeing Al Gore’s latest antics, I still am really happy he was not elected thanks to the wisdom of the founding fathers and their electoral college.

Rocky and Angel

Rocky is right that it was common knowledge. Angel is right that Murtha made a big deal of speculating about the worst scenarios. Why he wants to do that, I don’t know.

Philippe and Lynne

It is convenient to call these things anti-Bush, but it is wrong. Bush’s style annoys European intellectuals, but what is happening now is a long term trend and nothing new.

And you don’t have to hate the U.S. to be anti-American. I don’t always blame foreigners. If rap music & violent movies were coming at me from a foreign country, I might be mad about it too.

Philippe, you remember what Vedrine called the U.S.

If you want to read about American dominance or maybe effort to resist American hegemony follow those links. After you are done reading, check the dates. (Bush became president in January 2001 and the Iraq war started in March 2003, BTW).

Posted by: Jack at May 30, 2006 1:14 PM
Comment #152643

Kctim said,

“Its easy to be anti-Bush without being anti-American, one just has to love country more than party. Something that no longer exists in America.
Thank god the left hasn’t been able to take away all of our guns, yet, because we will soon need them.”

So you are the only non partisan left in America? It must get lonely at night for the lone ranger while he cleans his guns and talks to God.

I suppose this is hyperbole. If it isn’t. Woah. Careful Kemo Sabe.

I don’t know if you noticed, but I actually agreed with you on another post. But you are definitely on your own with this one.

Posted by: gergle at May 30, 2006 1:19 PM
Comment #152647

No, Rocky, I do not get all my information from Fox News, or Hannity , but neither do I accept as true the news coming from Muslim countries that hate everything the United States stands for! I would much rather believe in the honor of our Marines until they have been PROVEN guilty, rather than blindly accept the word of Islamic news reports. Do you never listen or read anything other than liberal press or TV? Or listen to foreign countries’ reports about The Great Satan, America? Have you talked to any of the men involved in the so-called massacre? Or to anyone who actually KNOWS anything about it? If not, then are we really competent to judge these Marines? Not until the truth is made known can we say “Guilty” or “Not Guilty”. Until then, why not give them the benefit of the doubt, instead of listening to and accepting the Islamic and liberal version of the incident!

Posted by: Angel 1 at May 30, 2006 1:29 PM
Comment #152657

The “anti-American” people just don’t get it; probably never will either. Disagreeing with the President is not anti-American; in fact, it’s healthy and done in every administration. It’s the “Blaming America First” and “not giving our soldiers (the ones they “claim” they support) the benefit of the doubt in war” that are the anti-Americans. Now, you show me Republicans that fall into those two categories and I’ll (aptly) label them as anti-Americans. Until then, don’t even go there with the Republicans and Clinton were the same as Bush and the (unhinged) liberals. No comparison at all.


And, just to catch some of you before you do it, don’t even give me quotes of Republicans in 1999 talking about Bosnia; b/c that’s (certainly) NOT an example of anti-Americanism (at all!), they were disputing Clinton’s reason to go to war (Sex scandal), not blaming our troops.

Posted by: rahdigly at May 30, 2006 2:14 PM
Comment #152672

we are a constitutional Republic, Unlike a pure democracy.a direct democracy was very much opposed by the Framers of the United States constitution, and some signers of the declaration of Independence, they saw a Danger in Majorities forcing their will on minorities. as a result they advocated A Constitutional Republic, over A Direct Democracy. mr James Madison in Federalist no. 10. Adovcates a Republic over Direct Democracy, precisely to protect the INDIVIDUAL from the will of the Majority. HE SAid: a Pure Democracy can Admit no cure for the Mischiefs of Faction.A common passion or interest will be, felt by the Majority, and there is nothing to check inducements to sacrifice the Weaker party, hence it is, that Democracies have, been spectacles of turbulence and contention and ever been found incompatible with personal security or the Rights of Property. and have in general,been as short as short in their lives as they have been in their Deaths. James Madison.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 30, 2006 2:53 PM
Comment #152680

Thought this article might add to the conversation.

http://www.oriononline.org/pages/oo/sidebars/America/Jackson.html

Posted by: Tim Crow at May 30, 2006 3:05 PM
Comment #152685

gergle
“So you are the only non partisan left in America?”

Never claimed to be, but it does feel like it sometimes.

“It must get lonely at night for the lone ranger while he cleans his guns and talks to God”

Don’t believe in God, so I don’t talk to him.
Not afraid of guns and your stereotype of everybody who believes in the 2nd amendment is a cowboy who sits around cleaning them and stroking them is just more typical leftist BS.
I thought using the fear of the few to take away rights was a bad thing? Or does that fall into the “its ok to do so for rights you believe in?”

Posted by: kctim at May 30, 2006 3:11 PM
Comment #152689

Rodney
“we are a constitutional Republic”

We used to be a Constitutional Republic. We are now a democracy with two party’s fighting over whose interpretation of the Constitution is best.

Posted by: kctim at May 30, 2006 3:37 PM
Comment #152700

Kctim, the original writings are still avalble today.

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 30, 2006 4:19 PM
Comment #152705

sorry, AVAILABLE. : @ )

Posted by: Rodney Brown at May 30, 2006 4:24 PM
Comment #152724

Very true Rodney.
Can you name one public servant, from the two parties in power, who still respects them?
I sure as hell can’t.

Posted by: kctim at May 30, 2006 5:02 PM
Comment #152818

kctim,

If being Anti-Bush and Anti American no longer exist in America and yet you still are, doesn’t that make you the sole non partisan? It’s seems that was what you claimed to me. Perhaps you didn’t really mean what you said.

If the words, the left hasn’t taken away all our guns yet cause we’ll soon need them, isn’t a veiled threat, what is it?

I was teasing a little, but frankly those words are a bit on the fringe. By the way, which guns did someone take away from you?

Posted by: gergle at May 30, 2006 9:22 PM
Comment #152819

KCtim,

I’m also curious why you think Constitutional Republic and Democracy are antithetical?

Posted by: gergle at May 30, 2006 9:27 PM
Comment #152877

It would please many people if all our problems as a nation could blame it all on george!Mr murtha is no hero infact he is an a 1 jackass whom seems to forget just like mr kerry that it was a democratic ashole that cost 57 thousand lives in nam mr kerry had to go and filmit and turn trator like his girlfreind jane fonda!remember william kalley!well i did my time and come to be spat upon and cursed and wesley clark can kiss my george washington ass and we as a nation sent our children over to iraq to do what the the milatary does kill people or be killed then we want to charge them with murder while we sit here with blood on our hands and point fingers at each other!and murtha can stick his medals up his a-hole because hes no more a hero than our kids on the line right now all we have in battle is the man or women beside you fact!!!

Posted by: allen stephens at May 31, 2006 2:16 AM
Comment #152891

Allen,

… what the the milatary does kill people or be killed

Doesn’t the military aim is to defend the country, its constitution and its people?!?
Killing people is not its mission, just a dramatic result that, we all hope, should be avoid as much as possible.

When the military clearly didn’t tried as much as possible, like when soldiers coldly kill civilians, that’s not anymore their duty but just plain murder, period.
Nobody is above the law, not even soldiers.

Only your current administration seems to place itself above the law. Take responsability to allow them to do it.

PS: please provide us fact about John Kerry / Jane Fonda love affair, could be interessing…

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at May 31, 2006 5:28 AM
Comment #152915

kctim:

We are now a democracy with two party’s fighting over whose interpretation of the Constitution is best.

We have a democratic republic…we are not a true democracy…if we were a democracy, we would be voting on all the laws ourselves…however, we have elected representatives & senators to pass laws; if we were a pure democracy, we would directly vote for the president, but we actually elect electors (electoral college) to elect the president for us.

Posted by: Lynne at May 31, 2006 9:09 AM
Comment #152916

Jack:

And you don’t have to hate the U.S. to be anti-American.

That’s the very definition of being anti-American…that you hate the U.S. …

If you allow our Constitution to be trampled and support the very people who are trampling it, then YOU are anti-American because you obviously hate what our country has stood for for over 200 years.

Posted by: Lynne at May 31, 2006 9:12 AM
Comment #152923

kctim, “You don’t believe in God so you don’t talk to Him” How lonely YOU must be! Why is it, that in times of need, people scream for our military to come save them. Afterwards, they don’t want to know us! The treatment the Vietnam Vets received will remain a black stain on Lady Liberty’s face for all time. I lived on many military bases during that era, and was a witness to the shameful treatment those young men and women were subjected to when they came home! Just children, most of them, their lives and bodies shattered, to be greeted by people such as Hanoi Jane Fonda, and Donald Sutherland,crowds screaming filthy curses, throwing bags of garbage and human waste on them, calling them such terrible things that many of these maimed children went home—-and blew their brains out! And they were only following orders! No way did they deserve this! And there is no way the American public who did this to them can ever make amends! But the treatment they received from their OWN countrymen was the catalyst that STARTED the Anti-Americanism that has now become the world’s favorite sport—-Blame the United States (and Israel, don’t forget our little friend) for every evil on earth!

Posted by: Angel 1 at May 31, 2006 9:43 AM
Comment #152955

LindaH

Maybe you get more emotionally involved with things than I do. I don’t have to hate to oppose or want to get rid of something. Or maybe to NOT want something in a particular place.

I am anti-Democrat, but I don’t hate them. In fact they sometimes are necessary. Even an an American, I can see times when we exercise too much or negative influence.

Liberals seem to have a problem with nuance.

Posted by: Jack at May 31, 2006 11:17 AM
Comment #152982

Angel1,

they were only following orders! No way did they deserve this! And there is no way the American public who did this to them can ever make amends!

Ask such amends from the people who give them these orders, they’re the one who deserved this, not the soldiers.
Unfortunatly it’s was always more easy for the masses to spat on little guy than on the guy’s boss…

Soldiers that were spat on should have forwarded the spits on their hierarchy. And we all know where it will/should have stop.

Posted by: Philippe Houdoin at May 31, 2006 12:33 PM
Comment #153002

G.W. Bush and his henchmen and women are moved by the same financial group of investors and institutions, which have ran this country since world war ll.

Chase bank, Wells Fargo, Bank of America, Wachovia bank and any other who can pass the secret initiations.

They’re Masonic/Christian policy is to create a one world government, controlled by these sick old heartless & financially over-gloated sociopaths and their new young first degree comrads. I believe G.W.Bush discribes it as “were right on track”!

If this seems familiar; remember the world Hitler and his henchmen were “DREAMING ABOUT CREATING”! Also remember MORE, the fall out and collateral damage, in deaths and property, to the rest of the world and it’s underclass citizens with no representation.

Look further, or stop quacking; Marvin

Posted by: Marvin Q. Cotter at May 31, 2006 1:48 PM
Comment #153087

MY point is and was hind site is 20/20!the left said george bush told lies! but in fact he was given falty intel. it would seem logical to place your anger towards the provider of the bad intel.AND MR MURTHA should state his thoughts in the office where it belongs not to the local tv news crews in an election year for brownie points and i do not respect him 1 bit nor mr kerry and absolutly wesley clark!And at the same time george needs to grow some and stop placating these people get tuff and stay tuff if we flinch as a nation the next cloudy day might be a mushrom cloud where new york once stood!and these same men and wemen are hipocrites as they also voted to send our kids there and they are there still bleeding and dieing we left em hangin in korea and we left many to die in nam we did the same thing and let the whole world knows that we as a nation are not with honor and our nation is only as strong as our weakest link and terorist do no not serve any one but there own greed and they wear no nations uniform.and you might wonder why they call us infadels!

Posted by: allen stephens at May 31, 2006 4:52 PM
Comment #153315

I agree, Allen Stephens. Those of our government, both current and past, who go to foreign nations, and here at home, and screech about our President being a liar, our military being murderers, our America being the most evil nation on earth, are traitors to our country! They are as bad as Tokyo Rose, or Hanoi Jane. Kerry, Murtha, Al Gore, Bill Clinton, Jimmy Carter, (who, by the way, has ties to Osma Bin Ladan),Hillary Clinton, never has anything good to say about America. And THESE are the people who wish to take control of the UNITED STATES’ government!? God forbid this ever happens! There would not BE a United States within four years!

Posted by: Angel 1 at June 1, 2006 10:11 AM
Comment #153377

“Anti-Americanism. Where does it come from?”

After pondering this question for several days, I have finally come up with an answer.

It’s the tooth fairy’s fault.

Angel1:

“And THESE are the people who wish to take control of the UNITED STATES’ government!? God forbid this ever happens! There would not BE a United States within four years!”

Would you like a side of hashbrowns with that hysteria?

Posted by: Tim Crow at June 1, 2006 1:09 PM
Comment #153529

Angel1,

“Jimmy Carter, (who, by the way, has ties to Osma Bin Ladan”

So does George Bush, what’s your point?

Posted by: Rocky at June 1, 2006 6:53 PM
Comment #153530

Tokyo Rose wants to take control of America?

Posted by: Rocky at June 1, 2006 6:54 PM
Comment #153543

Never been hysterical in my life, except when watching ‘The Rocky Horror Picture Show”, thank you!As for Tokyo Rose, she had her shot at America in the 40’s, and missed! My point is, we need people in government who ARE for the people, for a change! Wouldn’t YOU like to see a ceiling on gas prices, more factories opening in the U.S. with decent wages for the workers, fewer illegal immigrants sneaking across the borders every night, adequet housing and schooling for all of our kids, better insurance at affordable premiums, our Military better equiped, and the rest of the world told to kiss our collective behinds if they don’t like the way we protect our nation? I WOULD! Aren’t you tired of hearing our own Senators and Congressmen/women screaming to the world how evil and corrupt our country is? I AM! I would love to see loyality and patriotism return to America, the way it was when I was a child. Is that too much to ask? Does that make me HYSTERICAL? Or am I just a common, ordinary, garden variety American who wishes the best for our nation!

Posted by: Angel 1 at June 1, 2006 7:37 PM
Comment #153556

Angel1

Unfortunately the door was left open by this Congress.
The only way to reacquire those things you speak of is to become totally isolationist, and even then the corporations will continue to leave to find the cheaper workforce.
I work in the electronics industry as a field tech.
Very few of the American companies that were bastion of this field exist anymore, let alone make their products here, and the service guys will just tell you to buy a new one, because it’s cheaper than fixing the broken one.
I recently bought a laptop from HP. I got to watch it ship via FedEx from Shanghai.
Companies like WalMart buy virtually everything in China, and sell those products at competitive prices here in America.
This country has become Sales and Service oriented.

Posted by: Rocky at June 1, 2006 8:17 PM
Comment #153692

Rocky, unfortunately, you are right. Every time I pick up an item in Wal-Mart, the sticker on it reads ‘Made in China’ ‘Made in Taiwan’ Made in Mexico’. It has been far too long since I have seen a sticker that said ‘Made in the U.S.A. But things have gone too far to be turned back now. Part of the blame must go to certain unions that demanded $35 to $45 an hour, while the rest of us had to struggle along on $5.35 an hour. Quite a wage span, right? Now, everyone must suffer. High taxes, high gas prices, high cost of living, health care, insurance ,and the wages do not raise in proportion. So where do we go from here? No one seems to have a solution, but every has a gripe!

Posted by: Angel 1 at June 2, 2006 11:40 AM
Comment #184808

ASIAN ELECTRONICS COMPANY LTD.

OFFICE ADDRESS: 10, LIVERPOOL STREET APAPA
LAGOS NIGERIA.
BOBBY BUMPER
E-mail: mobilelaptopdealer7@yahoo.com
TELL: +234-8038259271
+234-8050494074


WE ARE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SOUTH KOREA COMPANY,UK,MALAYSIA,FINLAND, HUNGARY, CANADA AND USA.

WE ARE SELLING LOTS OF MOBILE PHONES AND LAPTOPS FOR VERY CHEAP PRICE AND THESE PHONES ARE THE LATEST PHONES ALSO THEY SELLS A LOT IN MARKET SO THEY ARE AS FOLLOW””””””’

SONY VAIO A217S— 100GB— 512MB RAM— XP HOME——————-$320
SONY VAIO B1VP— 40GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP PRO———————$290
SONY VAIO T370P/L— 60GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP————————$320
SONY VAIO A215Z 60GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP—————————$400
SONY VAIO A397XP— 80GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP————————$450
SONY VAIO B100B08 60GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP———————-$280
SONY VAIO B100B08 60GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP———————-$300
SONY VAIO FS295VP 80GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP———————-$250
SONY VAIO FS215Z 100GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP———————-$350
SONY VAIO A417M 80GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP————————-$300
SONY VAIO B1VP— 40GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP PRO——————-$200
SONY VAIO T370P/L— 60GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP PRO—————$360
SONY VAIO LAPTOP— VGN-A117S—————————————————$420
SONY VAIO LAPTOP— VGN-S1XP——————————————————$400
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP————————————$260
APPLE G4 POWERBOOK 1.5GHZ SUPERDRIVE WITH 15 INCH DISPLAY—$350
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 2.0GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER——————-$520
APPLE G4 POWERBOOK 1.5GHZ SUPERDRIVE WITH 17 INCH DISPLAY—$410
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 2.5GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER————-$100
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP— P20-102—————————————$260
APPLE 5GHZ SUPERDRIVE DESKTOP COMPUTER WITH 20 INCH MONITOR-$310
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP PACK WIFI VERSION-$280
OQO MODEL 01 ULTRA PERSONAL COMPUTER (XP PRO)———————$270
TOSHIBA SATELLITE PRO A60 40GB— C2.8GHZ— 15INCH— DVD/CDR$320
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI— GPRS— BLUETOOTH— 1GHZ (BLACK)——$270
FUJITSU SIEMENS LIFEBOOK P7010 60GB— P4 1.1GHZ— 10.6INCH— DVD/CDRW
$600
ASUS A4744K-LH AMD64 POWER WORKSTATION LAPTOP————$360
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI— GPRS— BLUETOOTH— 1GHZ (RED)———$380
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI— GPRS— BLUETOOTH— 1GHZ (BLUE)——-$290
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP————————————$300
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI— GPRS— BLUETOOTH— 1GHZ (YELLOW)—$230
TOSHIBA TECRA M2 40GB— PM 1.5GHZ— 14INCH— WIFI— DVD-CDRW——$310
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI— GPRS— BLUETOOTH— 1GHZ (SILVER)—-$270
TOSHIBA PORTEGE R100 40GB— 512MB— XP PRO—————————$450
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP— M30-742———————————————-$550
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 1.8GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER———————$500
HP PAVILION LAPTOP— ZD7145EA—————————————————-$500
HP PAVILION LAPTOP— ZD7255EA—————————————————-$500
APPLE CINEMA HD 23-INCH TFT LCD MONITOR——————————-$500
SONY VAIO LAPTOP— VGN PCGK21 5Z——————————————$500
SAMSUNG LAPTOP— X30 LWC 1500————————————————$500
G4 POWERBOOK 1.33GHZ SUPERDRIVE WITH 12 INCH DISPLAY-$600
SONY VAIO PCVW2 DESKTOP——————————————————-$450
HP PAVILION LAPTOP— ZX5151EA PHOTOSMART—————————-$400
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP— M30-832——————————————$400
HP PAVILION LAPTOP— ZT3215EA—————————————————$550
SAMSUNG LAPTOP— M40 HWM 745————————————————$500
MOBILE PHONES.
VIEW OUR PRICE LIST BELOW — ALL BRAND NEW UNITS:

Pamtero 600====140 USD,
Pamtero 650====150 USD,
Treo 650====130 USD
Treo 700====180 USD
Digital camerra
Acer cs-5530 digital camera=$150
Canon ixus 700 digital camera= $200
Canon ixus 750 digital camera =$160
Canon ixus i zoom digital camera (jet black)=$210
Canon ixus i zoom digital camera (Sahara)=$200
Canon power shot s80 digital camera = $220
Casio exilim ex-s500 digital camera (orange, )= $230
Digital blue qx5 digital microscope= $170
Fuji film finepix f10 digital camera =$150
Nikon d2x digital camera (body only)=$140
Olympus fe-100 digital camera.
SIDEKICK
Sidekick II Cell Phone for 120usd
T-Mobile Sidekick 2 NOW with Service for 100usd
T-Mobile To Go Prepaid Sidekick II for 120usd
Sidekick II for T-Mobile with new service Plan 130usd
T-Mobile Sidekick II T-Mobile Replacement Phone for 110 usd
1996 Transfer Case: Sidekick 1996, and 1997 automatic….$140 usd
Sidekick Basic Kit…………………………………$150 usd
Sidekick II T-Mobile Cell Phone with Color Screen……..$130 usd
T-Mobile Sidekick 2 Danger Cell Phone………………..$130 usd
T-Mobile Sidekick II TMO to Go Prepaid Phone………….$140 usd
Mobile Sidekick II…………………………………$110 usd
ProTop 2 Piece Hardtop Suzuki Vitara / Chevy Tracker…..$150 usd
Protop 2 Piece Hardtop for Sidekick / Tracker ………..$160 usd
Original Extended Carbox Package 1989-1998……………$140 usd
Original Extended Carbox Sidekick/Tracker 2 &…………$130 usd
T-Mobile Sidekick 2 Danger Cell Phone………………..$130 usd
Siemens M55 ====120 USD
Siemens SL55 ====125 USD
Siemens SX45 ====155 USD
Siemens SX1 ====180 USD
Motorola V70=====105 USD
Motorola V80=====115 USD
Motorola E398=====125 USD
Motorola MPX200=====180 USD
Motorola V750=====125 USD
Sony Ericsson P900=====150 USD
Sony Ericsson P910i=====200 USD
Sony Ericsson K700=====180 USD
Sony Ericsson K300i=====150 USD
Sony Ericsson W600i=====180 USD
Sony Ericsson W800i=====200 USD
TELEVISION
Panasonic TH-42PD50U Television…..$600USD
Panasonic TH-42PX50U Television…..$1000USD
Panasonic TH-50PX50U Television…..$1500USD
Panasonic TH-42PWD6UY Television….$500USD
Panasonic TH-42PD25U/P Television…$400USD
Panasonic TH-42PHD8UK Television….$450USD
Panasonic TH-65PHD7UY Television….$2500USD
Pioneer PDP-5050HD Television…….$1000USD
Panasonic TH-37PX50U Television….$500USD
Panasonic TH-42PX500U Television…$800USD
Sony KLV-32M1 Television………$400USD
Sony PFM-42V1/S Television………$500USD
Sony KDE-61XBR950 Television……$5000USD
Sony KDE-42XBR950 Television……$1000USD
Sony PFM-42X1/S Television…….$500USD
Sony KDE-42XS955 Television……$550USD
Sony FWD-50PX1/S Television…..$1200USD
Samsung HP-R4252 Television……..$500USD
Samsung LN-R328W - LCD TV - 32….$500usd
Samsung LN-R408D - LCD TV - 40….$800usd
Samsung LT-P326W - LCD TV - 32….$650usd
Samsung LTM 225W - LCD TV - 22….$500usd
Samsung PPM63H3-plasma panel 63…$2000usd
Samsung HP-P5071 50-inch 1366X768 HD Plasma TV Ref…..$800usd
Samsung HPP5031 - plasma panel - 50…$1000usd
Pioneer PDP-5050HD Television…….$1000USD
Sharp 32” Aquos HD-Ready LCD TV….$500usd.
Ipods
Apple 20 GB iPod Nano====90 USD
Apple 4 GB iPod Mini Pink M9435LL/A====70 USD
Apple 40 GB iPod photo====120usd
Apple 4 GB iPod Mini Silver M9160LL/A====70 USD
Apple 60 GB iPod Photo M9830LL/A====100 USD
Apple 60 GB iPod photo ====120 USD
Apple 30 GB iPod Photo M9829LL/A====115 USD
Apple 512 MB iPod ShuffleMP3 Player====70 USD
Apple 4 GB iPod Mini Blue M9436LL/A====100 USD
Apple 2 GB iPod Nano====110 USD
30gb black ipod video…..$140
60gb ipod video………$160
Apple 60 GB iPod Video====200 USD
Apple 30 GB iPod Video====160 USD
and many more……………
LAPTOPS
Dell Latitude C640 1.8GHz P4 Laptop w/CD-RW……$350USD
Dell Inspiron XPS M140 Notebook Computer for Home…..$480USD
Sony VAIO FS540P - Pentium M 730 1.6 GHz - 15.4” TFT…$500USD
Sony Intel Pentium M 100GB Notebook Computer with DVD+/-R/RW
Drive…$550USD
ThinkPad G40 2389 - C 2.5 GHz - 14.1” TFT IBM…..$580USD
Panasonic Toughbook 18 Touchscre……$500USD
HP Compaq Business Notebook nc8230 - Pentium M 760 2 GHz - 15.4”
TFT…$950USD
HP Compaq Mobile Workstation nw8240 - Pentium M 760 2 GHz - 15.4”
TFT…$780USD

NOTE: ALL PHONES ARE IN FACTORY SEALED BOXES, WITH
CHARGERS, ACCESSORIES, MANUALS INCLUDED.
FOR MORE INFORMATIONS PLEASE CONTACT US HERE.

E-mail: mobilelaptopdealer7@yahoo.com
TELL: +234-8038259271
+234-8050494074

BOBBY BUMPER
SALES AND MARKETING DEPARTMENT MANAGER.

ASIAN ELECTRONICS COMPANY LTD.
THANK YOU.

Posted by: BOBBY BUMPER at September 28, 2006 4:10 PM
Comment #184809

ASIAN ELECTRONICS COMPANY LTD.

OFFICE ADDRESS: 10, LIVERPOOL STREET APAPA
LAGOS NIGERIA.
BOBBY BUMPER
E-mail: mobilelaptopdealer7@yahoo.com
TELL: +234-8038259271
+234-8050494074


WE ARE IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SOUTH KOREA COMPANY,UK,MALAYSIA,FINLAND, HUNGARY, CANADA AND USA.

WE ARE SELLING LOTS OF MOBILE PHONES AND LAPTOPS FOR VERY CHEAP PRICE AND THESE PHONES ARE THE LATEST PHONES ALSO THEY SELLS A LOT IN MARKET SO THEY ARE AS FOLLOW””””””’

SONY VAIO A217S— 100GB— 512MB RAM— XP HOME——————-$320
SONY VAIO B1VP— 40GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP PRO———————$290
SONY VAIO T370P/L— 60GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP————————$320
SONY VAIO A215Z 60GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP—————————$400
SONY VAIO A397XP— 80GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP————————$450
SONY VAIO B100B08 60GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP———————-$280
SONY VAIO B100B08 60GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP———————-$300
SONY VAIO FS295VP 80GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP———————-$250
SONY VAIO FS215Z 100GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP———————-$350
SONY VAIO A417M 80GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP————————-$300
SONY VAIO B1VP— 40GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP PRO——————-$200
SONY VAIO T370P/L— 60GB HD— 512MB RAM— XP PRO—————$360
SONY VAIO LAPTOP— VGN-A117S—————————————————$420
SONY VAIO LAPTOP— VGN-S1XP——————————————————$400
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP————————————$260
APPLE G4 POWERBOOK 1.5GHZ SUPERDRIVE WITH 15 INCH DISPLAY—$350
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 2.0GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER——————-$520
APPLE G4 POWERBOOK 1.5GHZ SUPERDRIVE WITH 17 INCH DISPLAY—$410
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 2.5GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER————-$100
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP— P20-102—————————————$260
APPLE 5GHZ SUPERDRIVE DESKTOP COMPUTER WITH 20 INCH MONITOR-$310
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP PACK WIFI VERSION-$280
OQO MODEL 01 ULTRA PERSONAL COMPUTER (XP PRO)———————$270
TOSHIBA SATELLITE PRO A60 40GB— C2.8GHZ— 15INCH— DVD/CDR$320
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI— GPRS— BLUETOOTH— 1GHZ (BLACK)——$270
FUJITSU SIEMENS LIFEBOOK P7010 60GB— P4 1.1GHZ— 10.6INCH— DVD/CDRW
$600
ASUS A4744K-LH AMD64 POWER WORKSTATION LAPTOP————$360
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI— GPRS— BLUETOOTH— 1GHZ (RED)———$380
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI— GPRS— BLUETOOTH— 1GHZ (BLUE)——-$290
ALPHASMART DANA PALM POWERED LAPTOP————————————$300
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI— GPRS— BLUETOOTH— 1GHZ (YELLOW)—$230
TOSHIBA TECRA M2 40GB— PM 1.5GHZ— 14INCH— WIFI— DVD-CDRW——$310
FLYBOOK NOTEBOOK - WI-FI— GPRS— BLUETOOTH— 1GHZ (SILVER)—-$270
TOSHIBA PORTEGE R100 40GB— 512MB— XP PRO—————————$450
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP— M30-742———————————————-$550
APPLE G5 POWERMAC 1.8GHZ DESKTOP COMPUTER———————$500
HP PAVILION LAPTOP— ZD7145EA—————————————————-$500
HP PAVILION LAPTOP— ZD7255EA—————————————————-$500
APPLE CINEMA HD 23-INCH TFT LCD MONITOR——————————-$500
SONY VAIO LAPTOP— VGN PCGK21 5Z——————————————$500
SAMSUNG LAPTOP— X30 LWC 1500————————————————$500
G4 POWERBOOK 1.33GHZ SUPERDRIVE WITH 12 INCH DISPLAY-$600
SONY VAIO PCVW2 DESKTOP——————————————————-$450
HP PAVILION LAPTOP— ZX5151EA PHOTOSMART—————————-$400
TOSHIBA SATELLITE LAPTOP— M30-832——————————————$400
HP PAVILION LAPTOP— ZT3215EA—————————————————$550
SAMSUNG LAPTOP— M40 HWM 745————————————————$500
MOBILE PHONES.
VIEW OUR PRICE LIST BELOW — ALL BRAND NEW UNITS:

Pamtero 600====140 USD,
Pamtero 650====150 USD,
Treo 650====130 USD
Treo 700====180 USD
Digital camerra
Acer cs-5530 digital camera=$150
Canon ixus 700 digital camera= $200
Canon ixus 750 digital camera =$160
Canon ixus i zoom digital camera (jet black)=$210
Canon ixus i zoom digital camera (Sahara)=$200
Canon power shot s80 digital camera = $220
Casio exilim ex-s500 digital camera (orange, )= $230
Digital blue qx5 digital microscope= $170
Fuji film finepix f10 digital camera =$150
Nikon d2x digital camera (body only)=$140
Olympus fe-100 digital camera.
SIDEKICK
Sidekick II Cell Phone for 120usd
T-Mobile Sidekick 2 NOW with Service for 100usd
T-Mobile To Go Prepaid Sidekick II for 120usd
Sidekick II for T-Mobile with new service Plan 130usd
T-Mobile Sidekick II T-Mobile Replacement Phone for 110 usd
1996 Transfer Case: Sidekick 1996, and 1997 automatic….$140 usd
Sidekick Basic Kit…………………………………$150 usd
Sidekick II T-Mobile Cell Phone with Color Screen……..$130 usd
T-Mobile Sidekick 2 Danger Cell Phone………………..$130 usd
T-Mobile Sidekick II TMO to Go Prepaid Phone………….$140 usd
Mobile Sidekick II…………………………………$110 usd
ProTop 2 Piece Hardtop Suzuki Vitara / Chevy Tracker…..$150 usd
Protop 2 Piece Hardtop for Sidekick / Tracker ………..$160 usd
Original Extended Carbox Package 1989-1998……………$140 usd
Original Extended Carbox Sidekick/Tracker 2 &…………$130 usd
T-Mobile Sidekick 2 Danger Cell Phone………………..$130 usd
Siemens M55 ====120 USD
Siemens SL55 ====125 USD
Siemens SX45 ====155 USD
Siemens SX1 ====180 USD
Motorola V70=====105 USD
Motorola V80=====115 USD
Motorola E398=====125 USD
Motorola MPX200=====180 USD
Motorola V750=====125 USD
Sony Ericsson P900=====150 USD
Sony Ericsson P910i=====200 USD
Sony Ericsson K700=====180 USD
Sony Ericsson K300i=====150 USD
Sony Ericsson W600i=====180 USD
Sony Ericsson W800i=====200 USD
TELEVISION
Panasonic TH-42PD50U Television…..$600USD
Panasonic TH-42PX50U Television…..$1000USD
Panasonic TH-50PX50U Television…..$1500USD
Panasonic TH-42PWD6UY Television….$500USD
Panasonic TH-42PD25U/P Television…$400USD
Panasonic TH-42PHD8UK Television….$450USD
Panasonic TH-65PHD7UY Television….$2500USD
Pioneer PDP-5050HD Television…….$1000USD
Panasonic TH-37PX50U Television….$500USD
Panasonic TH-42PX500U Television…$800USD
Sony KLV-32M1 Television………$400USD
Sony PFM-42V1/S Television………$500USD
Sony KDE-61XBR950 Television……$5000USD
Sony KDE-42XBR950 Television……$1000USD
Sony PFM-42X1/S Television…….$500USD
Sony KDE-42XS955 Television……$550USD
Sony FWD-50PX1/S Television…..$1200USD
Samsung HP-R4252 Television……..$500USD
Samsung LN-R328W - LCD TV - 32….$500usd
Samsung LN-R408D - LCD TV - 40….$800usd
Samsung LT-P326W - LCD TV - 32….$650usd
Samsung LTM 225W - LCD TV - 22….$500usd
Samsung PPM63H3-plasma panel 63…$2000usd
Samsung HP-P5071 50-inch 1366X768 HD Plasma TV Ref…..$800usd
Samsung HPP5031 - plasma panel - 50…$1000usd
Pioneer PDP-5050HD Television…….$1000USD
Sharp 32” Aquos HD-Ready LCD TV….$500usd.
Ipods
Apple 20 GB iPod Nano====90 USD
Apple 4 GB iPod Mini Pink M9435LL/A====70 USD
Apple 40 GB iPod photo====120usd
Apple 4 GB iPod Mini Silver M9160LL/A====70 USD
Apple 60 GB iPod Photo M9830LL/A====100 USD
Apple 60 GB iPod photo ====120 USD
Apple 30 GB iPod Photo M9829LL/A====115 USD
Apple 512 MB iPod ShuffleMP3 Player====70 USD
Apple 4 GB iPod Mini Blue M9436LL/A====100 USD
Apple 2 GB iPod Nano====110 USD
30gb black ipod video…..$140
60gb ipod video………$160
Apple 60 GB iPod Video====200 USD
Apple 30 GB iPod Video====160 USD
and many more……………
LAPTOPS
Dell Latitude C640 1.8GHz P4 Laptop w/CD-RW……$350USD
Dell Inspiron XPS M140 Notebook Computer for Home…..$480USD
Sony VAIO FS540P - Pentium M 730 1.6 GHz - 15.4” TFT…$500USD
Sony Intel Pentium M 100GB Notebook Computer with DVD+/-R/RW
Drive…$550USD
ThinkPad G40 2389 - C 2.5 GHz - 14.1” TFT IBM…..$580USD
Panasonic Toughbook 18 Touchscre……$500USD
HP Compaq Business Notebook nc8230 - Pentium M 760 2 GHz - 15.4”
TFT…$950USD
HP Compaq Mobile Workstation nw8240 - Pentium M 760 2 GHz - 15.4”
TFT…$780USD

NOTE: ALL PHONES ARE IN FACTORY SEALED BOXES, WITH
CHARGERS, ACCESSORIES, MANUALS INCLUDED.
FOR MORE INFORMATIONS PLEASE CONTACT US HERE.

E-mail: mobilelaptopdealer7@yahoo.com
TELL: +234-8038259271
+234-8050494074

BOBBY BUMPER
SALES AND MARKETING DEPARTMENT MANAGER.

ASIAN ELECTRONICS COMPANY LTD.
THANK YOU.

Posted by: BOBBY BUMPER at September 28, 2006 4:11 PM
Post a comment