Poll: In wake of Iraq war, allies prefer China to U.S.

Thanks, Dubya!

 

Remember all the good will the world had for us after 9-11? And how did this administration spend that good will?

Did they form an international coalition to fight terrorism?
Did they use this good will to make allies who could help us?
Did they make the world realize the importance to dismantialing the WMD's from the former USSR.

No we invade one country that actually had terroists but before we finish that job we invade another country that had no terrorists had nothing to do with 9-11 but did have the 2nd largest oil reserves in the world and now has destablized the whole region and created a rallying point for anti-american sentiment, which is the same sentiment that created 9-11 in the 1st place.

now people all over the world including our allies like britain have a more favorable view of that human rights disaster that is CHINA!

Nice work George.

 

I'd like to see poll results pre- Iraq war and pre- 9/11. I'd bet there was already plenty of anti-American sentiment.

 

I've seen them before. If I recall we were up above 65% even in the lowest rating. If I can I will try and find the actual results.

 

I remember they got a bump after 9/11. I'd like to see pre- 9/11 as well. If I remember correctly, being anti- US has been a big issue in Europe the past several years.

 

As someone said here before:

the 19th Century belonged to the British
the 20th Century belonged to the United States
the 21st Century will belong to China

Everybody wants to make friends with the popular kids.

 

Mr. Clutch:

http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=165

US favorability ratings in 2000 and 2002:

Germany: 78% to 61%
UK: 83 to 75
Italy: 76 to 70
France: 62 to 63 (!!)

This also covers some other parts of the world, but those were the only Western European countries listed.

 

The Iraq invasion was in '03, so support was already dropping bigtime before then? Maybe France went up because their support was already relatively low.

 

This poll was near the end of 2002, which is when the debate was already in full gear about the Iraq war, so it includes both the spike from 9/11 and the initial fall from people upset that the US was planning on invading. The initial time frame people suspected for attacking was fall 2002 to spring 2003.

Unfortunately, the initial post in this thread shows some of those trends continuing. If you include 2005, then you have (2000/2002/2005)

UK: 83/75/55
France: 62/63/43

 

I think the perceived march toward war by GW Bush at that time started the declin early.

The figures I have found now show as of March 2004. Compare that to where the opinions were in 2000.

GB - 57%
France - 37%
Germany - 38%
http://people-press.org/reports/display.php3?ReportID=206

 

Nonsense, I am putting my money on the cockroaches.

 

What that means is, if China ever becomes militant, they rather have the US to kick its ass than China succeeding.

India and Russia have to deal with China's growing influence. These polls sheds more light on fear and perception of the most influential power than actual preference.

 

From Victor Davis Hanson at: http://www.nationalreview.com/hanson/hanson200506240756.asp

"When Western liberals today talk of a mythical period in the days after 9/11 of "unity" and "European solidarity" what they really remember is a Golden Age of Victimhood, or about four weeks before the strikes against the Taliban commenced. Then for a precious moment at last the United States was a real victim, apparently weak and vulnerable, and suffering cosmic justice from a suddenly empowered other. Oh, to return to the days before Iraq and Afghanistan, when we were hurt, introspective, and pitied, and had not yet "lashed out."

and

"If President Bush were a liberal Democrat; if he were bombing a white Christian, politically clumsy fascist in the heart of Europe; if al Qaeda and its Islamist adherents were properly seen as eighth-century tormenters of humanists, women, homosexuals, non-Arabs, and non-Wahhabi believers; and if Iraq had become completely somnolent with the toppling of Saddam's statue, then the American people would have remained behind the effort to dismantle Islamic fundamentalism and create the foundations to ensure its permanent demise.

But once the suicide murdering and bombing from Iraq began to dominate the news, then this administration, for historical reasons largely beyond its own control, had a very small reservoir of good will. The Islamists proved to be more adept in the public relations of winning liberal exemption from criticism than did the administration itself, as one nude Iraqi on film or a crumpled Koran was always deemed far worse than daily beheadings and executions. Indeed, the terrorists were able to morph into downtrodden victims of a bullying, imperialistic America faster than George W. Bush was able to appear a reluctant progressive at war with the Dark Age values of our enemies.

And once that transformation was established, we were into a dangerous cycle of a conservative, tough-talking president intervening abroad to thwart the poorer of the third world — something that has never been an easy thing in recent American history, but now in our own age has become a propagandist's dream come true."

 

gwayneco,
do you see what mr. hanson is doing here? the old cloud and confuse routine.

He starts out talking about, in this order mind you,:9-11, Taliban, and afghanistan an Iraq. In these 4 paragraphs (i know you did some cutting and pasting) he makes tries to make the connection in the 1st paragraph with afghanistan to iraq, after that all he is talking about is Iraq. Why? America was united in going into afghanistan. So this slick little fellow is trying to play that old game that afghanistan and iraq are the same, which of course is not true. Even the administration has said that iraq had nothing to do with 9-11. He does it only to play on people emotions about 9-11 which isn't the issue at all.

 

The goodwill the author mentions existed going into Aghanistan. We had support of the French, Germans, Russians, etc.

The goodwill stopped when our president decided to start a war against a nation that was not a threat, and used war when it was not the last option, and other options still existed.

The goodwill continued to erode when our president put into policies that would lock people for an indefinite amount of time without a way to defend themselves, only punished people on the lowest level concerning murder and other human rights abuses, etc.

As Losttexan pointed out. He tries to tie Iraq and 9/11 together. The only connection there was not natural but a made up one, by this administration.