Here's a nice little article concerning how the post-Sept 11th 'good feelings' about the US have changed back to 'hatred as usual.'

[size=4]Global warmth for U.S. after 9/11 turns to frost - Military plans repulse even European allies[/size=4]
By Ellen Hale  USA TODAY

OXFORD, England -- On a packed train out of London recently to this historic college town, a young American woman struck up a conversation with her seatmate, a nattily dressed older British man. They chatted amiably about Oxford until she worked up the courage to ask what was weighing on her mind:

''Why,'' she blurted out, ''does everybody hate us?''

The man paused -- but didn't disagree -- before proceeding to enumerate the reasons, from U.S. foreign policies to the seeping influence of American popular culture.

In the shock wave that followed the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, many Americans found themselves asking why so many people in Muslim countries hate the United States. But the anti-American sentiment has turned into a contagion that is spreading across the globe and infecting even the United States' most important allies.

In virulent prose, newspapers criticize the United States. Politicians ferociously attack its foreign policies, especially the Bush administration's plans to attack Iraq. And regular citizens launch into tirades with American friends and visitors.

Here in Britain, the United States' staunchest friend, snide remarks and downright animosity greet many Americans these days. It's not just religious radicals and terrorists who resent the United States anymore.

''Now, it's everyone,'' says Allyson Stewart-Allen, a consultant from California who has lived in London 15 years and heads International Marketing Partners, which advises European companies on how to do business with Americans. The sea change in attitude toward the United States, she says, has ''profoundly'' altered her advice to clients:

She now must counsel them to resist ''taking digs'' at her countrymen.

What happened, many Americans are wondering, to that wave of sympathy and stockpile of global goodwill they encountered after Sept. 11?

''It was squandered,'' says Meghnad Desai, director of the Institute for Global Governance at the London School of Economics and Political Science and a member of the House of Lords.

''America dissipated the goodwill out of its arrogance and incompetence. A lot of people who would never ever have considered themselves anti-American are now very distressed with the United States,'' he says.

Desai and others blame what seems to be a wave of new U.S. policies that they regard as selfish and unilateral, stretching back to President Bush's refusal last year to support the international treaty on global warming.

Many are enraged by Bush's support for steel tariffs and farm subsidies, his refusal to involve the United States in the new international criminal court and what is widely regarded abroad as one-sided support for Israel and its prime minister, Ariel Sharon.

The rash of corporate malfeasance and blanket arrest of terrorism suspects after Sept. 11 further fuels critics, who say the United States preaches democracy, human rights and free enterprise -- but doesn't practice them.

[b]Growing gap with Europe[/b]

In a recent article in Policy Review magazine, Robert Kagan, a senior associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace in Washington, says the divide between the United States and Europe is getting wider than ever as the continents go their different ways -- one operating on a foreign policy based on unilateralism and coercion, the other on diplomacy and persuasion.

Europeans, he says, have ''come to view the United States simply as a rogue colossus, in many respects a bigger threat to (their) pacific ideals than Iraq or Iran.''

The differences, he says, are deep and likely to endure.

''Why do people attack Americans?'' asks Tiny Waslandek, a social worker in Amsterdam, Netherlands. ''Because they have a big, big mouth and they mind everybody's business.''

Bush's plan to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein is stoking anti-American hostility to bonfire levels. In Germany earlier this month, Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder launched his re-election campaign by denouncing what he derisively called Bush's proposed military ''adventures'' in Iraq. In England, the new head of the Anglican Church and other leading bishops circulated a petition proclaiming that any attack would be illegal and immoral.

[b]Linked to Iraq and Israel[/b]

''My sense is that much of the rampant anti-Americanism we see now is very much linked to a war with Iraq and the Israel-Palestine issue,'' says Mary Kaldor, a London-based scholar on international relations.

In the popular Straw Poll BBC radio show July 26, Kaldor debated with Washington Post reporter T. R. Reid whether ''American power is the power of the good.'' She argued that the U.S. role as the sole superpower was a danger to the rest of the world.

At the end of the program, 70% of the studio audience said it agreed with her.

Anti-Americanism is nothing new. Surveys a decade ago in Britain showed that one in four people here are what pollster Robert Worcester, a transplanted Kansan who runs the Market Opinion Research Institute, calls ''culturally anti-American.''

(According to a survey taken in 1989, one in five said they found American accents irritating.)

To some degree, the resentment against the United States is inevitable now that it's the only remaining superpower. Even so, Desai, who says that he is ''very, very pro-America'' and that people forget the United States saved Europe from itself twice in the past century, notes that America has been on top for a long time. ''So what is happening now is not the inevitable result of being No. 1.''

(Desai and many other Europeans give Washington credit for dismantling the hard-line Taliban regime in Afghanistan, which harbored Osama bin Laden and his al-Qaeda terrorist network).

In recent months, polls have shown a less-than subtle change in attitudes toward Americans, U.S. foreign policy and, in particular, the president from Texas. British newspapers reported Thursday that secret polls commissioned by Prime Minister Tony Blair revealed ''spectacular unpopularity'' for Bush among voters here.

- continued -

In April, the German news magazine Der Spiegel reported that less than half (48%) of Germans consider the United States a guarantor of peace in the world, compared with 62% who did in 1993. Nearly half -- 47% -- rated Americans as aggressive rather than peaceful (34%). And 44% called them superficial.

Meanwhile, in an April poll for the Council on Foreign Relations, based in Washington, Europeans proved highly critical of Bush and what they label his unilateral approach to foreign policy: 85% of Germans, 80% of French, 73% of Britons and 68% of Italians said they believed that the United States is acting in its own interest in the war on terrorism.

Philadelphia transplant Susan Steele, head of Forum management company in London, has noticed that many Europeans have started using the phrase ''that's American,'' which is shorthand, Steele says, for ''not taking anyone else into consideration.''

''People here were truly shocked and horrified by Sept. 11,'' says Marjorie Thompson, an American who runs the consulting group C3I in London. ''But since then, they've come to believe that the United States is using that as an excuse for a unilateral foreign policy, and they're starting to make sweeping anti-American comments.''

[b]'Oppressed opinion'[/b]

Even British pop star George Michael and tennis pro Martina Navratilova have taken swings at the United States. Last month, Michael declared he was ''definitely not anti-American'' after receiving criticisms for his new single, Shoot the Dog, which lampooned the relationship between Bush and Blair.

In June, Navratilova, a Czech native who became a U.S. citizen 20 years ago, had to defend herself after writing an article for a German newspaper in which she said that the United States now ''oppressed opinion'' and that decisions there were based ''solely on how much money will come out of it.''

That the United States is suffering an image problem abroad has become obvious at home. Two weeks ago, the White House announced it would create a permanent Office of Global Communications to enhance America's image around the world. At the same time, the House of Representatives approved spending $225 million on cultural and information programs abroad, mostly targeting Muslim countries, to correct what Rep. Henry Hyde, R-Ill., called a ''cacophony of hate and misinformation'' about the United States.

Meanwhile, the Council on Foreign Relations simultaneously issued a biting report warning the Bush administration that it urgently needs to upgrade its efforts at public diplomacy to counteract the country's ''shaky'' image abroad.

It called for a range of actions, from increased spending on polling of foreign public opinion and more training of foreign service officers to giving journalists from other countries access to top U.S. government officials.

[b]'Ominous' consequences[/b]

The consequences of neglecting such public diplomacy are ''ominous,'' warns Peter Peterson, chairman of the council and of The Blackstone Group, a New York private investment bank. He says bin Laden has ''gleefully exploited'' the United States' poor public image.

''Around the world, from Western Europe to the Far East, many see the United States as arrogant, hypocritical, self-absorbed, self-indulgent and contemptuous of others,'' Peterson says. ''This is not a Muslim country issue. It has metastasized to the rest of the world and includes some of our closest European allies.''

New Yorker Julia Magnet, a journalist who just moved to London, found that out when she decided to throw a Fourth of July party for British friends. Between grilled sausages and chocolate cake, her friends launched an attack on Bush and the United States. They called Bush a ''homicidal maniac'' and ''stupid'' and the United States the ''world's biggest terrorist.''

Magnet, 22, was forgiving, and she labeled their assault ''uninformed'' and ''ignorant.''

Nevertheless, she was surprised by the venom in their words.

''What I hear from people all the time now is that we're going to go to war with just about everyone and we don't need a coalition to do it,'' Magnet says.

''It's obvious they are very, very disturbed by the power America now has.''

See article at:[url]http://www.usatoday.com/usatonline/20020814/4358473s.htm[/url]

Eric The(Azzholes!)Hun[>]:)]

Did they ever STOP hating us?
AB

Hey europe and anyone else who does'nt like the United States of America.....[b]FUCK OFF AND DIE !!!![/b]
[pissed][pissed]
Next time some dictator is kicking your shithole countries asses, don't come crying to us.
I am not an isolationist....yet... but I'm really giving it some serious thought !!
[b]AMERICA FIRST !![/b]

Who gives a rat's anus WHAT Europe thinks?  We first kicked the best they had out of America some 200 + years ago.  Again in 1812 before they really learned.  The in the early part of the 20th century during the disagreement later known as WWI we saved their ass.  20 some years after that we did it AGAIN and saved their worthless, ungrateful, appeasing, pantywaist ass AGAIN.  In fact, saved from one of the countries crying in the referenced article, one who's ass we THOROUGHLY kicked in 1945, Germany.

Screw 'em!!  We didn't need them in 1991, we don't need them now.  Oh, by the way, we don't need to send anymore aid to them and want IMEDIATE repayment of all loans, lend lease, aid and the bill for defending them form the Russian Bear for some 50 years.  THAT should add up to a good many 100 BILLION.  We want that in US Dollars or GOLD, no fucking Euros!!

Only long enough for us to save them from tyranny, TWICE..(WWI and WWII). After that, it was business as usual...

Sure...America acts in its own interests, not those of Europe.  But we all know that European countries NEVER do that, right?

First and foremost, I'm not as much of an 'american kid' as you may think. I was born, raised, and educated in Europe where, I might add, the overwhelming consensus was that a victory in WWII would not have been possible if not for the US. That's where I learned my history. If you honestly mean to tell me that, after the fall of France, England would have been able to defeat Germany without the US you are sorely mistaken. Lets not forget that England was not only surrounded, but cut off from all natural resources. It was the lend-lease program that allowed England to sustain its fight against the Germans (albeit barely at that)and it was the US that led the push through Europe into berlin. Hell, we were even kind enough to let the Russians enter Berlin first......

You have it right.

Rightfully so.  That campaign was unjustified. The Albanians didn't deserve our help, we had no real national interests there, and we pissed off the Russians for no good reason.



Well, just understand that when Iraq has its nuclear, biological, and chemical weapons online, they're not going to go after Europe.  More likely, they'll get in touch with al-Qaeda and concoct a plan to hit the US with these weapons.  As for Palestine, the US has simply become fed up trying to negotiate peace with leaders who are not interested in peace.  We are not choosing their leaders for them.  All we are saying is that after years of dealing with Arafat, it's clear he doesn't want peace.  Talking with him is pointless.  So if you want peace, show good faith by getting leaders who are serious. The farce is that Arafat was never honestly elected, and he and his cronies will assume leadership until removed by force.

We "insisted" on new leaders for Japan and Germany after WWII.  The former leaders weren't working out.  Any long-lasting, real peace could only come from new leadership.  Palestine is no different.



Yeah, and there is Bush's backpedalling on trade tariffs as well, which really bothers me.  The US isn't perfect, and the country's run by powerful and rich self-interests.  And yeah, there's a lot of hypocrisy in our foreign policy.

But what really irritates me is that Europeans insist we should have their permission to act in our own interests and security, as if they do not act the same way as well.

It's wrong to support Israel?  Who attacked whom 5 times over the last 50 years?  Who initiated the latest epoch of violence?  The Zionist movement sprang up primarily because of the intolerable anti-Semitism in Europe that climaxed with the Holocaust. The world is against Israel, and in Israel's case, the world is wrong.

The world is leaping to the side of Saddam Hussein.  Poor, poor, maligned Saddam. Invade your neighbors twice in a decade, develop NBC weapons and ballistic missiles, and all of a sudden America is all over your case.  Send operatives over the the US to bomb Oklahoma City and WTC, try to assissinate preisident Bush, and now the Americans have the gall to presume they have a pretext for invasion.  Why the nerve.  Again, on the issue of Iraq, the world is wrong.

On the ballyhooed Kyoto Treaty; the US is accused of singlehandedly casuing global warming, central european floods, lack of Indian monsoons, retreating glaciers, etc.  No proof, but since the US is the biggest consumer of energy (unmentioned:also the most productive economy) IT MUST BE THE CULPRIT! PUNISH THEM! (but let third world countries like China and India pollute unhindered.

Anyway, DK-Prof, I acknowledge there's a lot of hypocrisy and harm the US causes.  But the majority of this criticism is hyperbole, rhetoric, or straight out hate of us, our values, and our success.

Germany was not the aggressor in WW1 that needed to be stopped. The German march across France was a defensive move, as they knew that Russia and France would be attacking on two fronts. Germany did not enter France until war was Declared by England on Germany-Austria. England during this period was of course Germany's biggest ally-remember that Wilhelm Hollenzollern(Kaiser Bill) was Queen Victoria's grandson. The only reason that England sided with France is because they persuaded France to move it's fleet to the Mediterranean, thus feeling guilty over a promise to guard the Atlantic coast.
Did England, Canada, the United States support the wrong side in WW1?

Iraq's case is different.

But I think those European fears are valid.  The US bombing of Serbia really crystallized exactly what you say the Europeans think:  We had no place or business in the Balkans, but bombed them nonetheless, because they would not obey us when we told them to get out of Kosovo. We told the same thing to the russians in Chechnya after bombing Serbia, but we didn't act on it.  The Russian strategic arsenal may have had something to do with our inaction.

I think the message countries around the world received from that is "Unless you like the prospect of the US waltzing in and bombing you with impunity if they decide they don't like you, develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles to provide deterrance."

The Germans beat the hell out of the Russians time after time and cost the Russians hundreds of thousands if not several million men lost to the German Juggernaut.  For example -the drive to Stalingrad cost the Russians whole armies. Go read the books from the Russian government themselves. The German equipment was better than the Russians until the Russians started getting help from... WHO?... USA! USA! USA! USA! We gave the Russians more modern equipment and the manufacturing abilities that they're system of government would not have brought forth.  You can look at much of the machines used by them and see similarities with other allied equipment or captured German machines.  The Russians eventually took a heavy toll on the Germans but at an unimaginable cost to themselves.  I think it could be put forth that more Germans fought to the death against the Russians when the tide turned because capture by the Russians was almost death anyway.  The count may very well include those that were killed after capture.   Now, for the more basic and easily observed look at it.  The Allies - before American involvement - had not been able to successfully counter the Germans at any point that really mattered. A few tactical battles won here and there but still pushed back.  In Africa Monty's troops fought bravely and well and showed their measure quite well but they still did not make that great a go of it until the Americans came and let some of their blood flow and took some pressure off the Brits.  As we all know it was a long and hard fight but you can look at the history and see the tide did not turn until WE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA came in and assisted in the fight, with our BLOOD and ALL our resources.  With our involvement the Germans started losing the resources they needed to continue the war.  And hell yes we might be a little quick to fight but I don't see that they have fared any better with their terrorist - IRA, Sept.13, Black Oct., Red Cell.   Ok you pick a damn European Country and I guarantee that they have a terrorist organization to speak about.  Maybe we just are not willing to "take it in stride" because we are supposed to feel guilty about whatever we did that just sent them over the edge.  OK I've ranted long enough but most of you guys understand my point, we the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA have done more for the rest of the world than they have done for us!  Just an example: tell me one damn farm aid package they have sent like during the 1930s or whenever! Really guys I do not know of one time that has happened.

I will say this, we can handle the verbal slings and arrows but BEWARE THERE IS A LINE THAT HAS BEEN CROSSED AND I THINK WE SHOULD ENSURE THAT THE REST OF THE WORLD (terrorist or the like) KNOWS.  WE"RE PISSED OFF AND WILL SENT THEIR ASSES TO WHATEVER HELL THEY BELIEVE IN.    
   

I saw it on a t-shirt once, said it once on the Board, and heard it from someone else on here as well, so I have no idea where it came from originally, but:

[size=4]What part of Europe are you from? The part whose Ass we saved? or the part whose Ass we kicked?[/size=4]

Says it all for me, too!

Eric The(CallTheUNTheNextTimeYouGetInvaded!)Hun[>]:)]

I am so tired of this shit!  

How much money in foreign aid has the U.S. dispensed relative to the reat of the the developed world over the last 40 yrs ????

Who save Europes ass twice in 2 world wars NOT just with bodies but with industial capacity, technology & natural resources ??
 Did the U.S. not send tons of arms/munitions and other supplies to the allies during both world wars ???

We single handedly kept England afloat during WWII (well the RAF did it's part too!)

 Was Russia shipping supplies to England & western Europe??

No, Hitler was just stupid enough to take on Mother Russia as well as western Europe while America was gearing up!

Who fought alongside the Chinese against Japanese invaders?!? (Flying Tigers)

Ever hear of the Marshall Plan ??????

Who stopped Chinese aggression on the Korean peninsula??

Who was insturmental in helping the Japanese rebuild their country?

Who burdened Germany after WWI with so much war reparations that it fostered rampant nationalism & brought the Brown Shirts to power?? (NOT the USA!)

Who (unwitting;y) took up the gauntlet after France left a mess in Vietnam ??

Who stepped in & took care of a mess in Europe's backyard in the 1990's under the auspices of NATO & the U.N. after the arrogant & conceited Europeans asked for help because they couldn't handle it themselves ?????????

FUCKING hypocritical,ungrateful S.O.B.'s!!!

They want our money in times of peace and our blood in times of war.

They need us but they hate us.

For some reason they feel we are arrogant just because we say we live in the greatest nation on earth.

But we do live in the greatest nation on earth.

THISISME

To say that U.S. involvement in WWI "made very little difference" is just plain wrong. It made all the difference. Although the U.S. did not suffer anything like what France & Great Britain suffered, it was the influx of overwhelming numbers of fresh American troops that convinced Germany that the war was lost and that they must sue for peace.

INDEED!
AB

That's funny considering they got us into it. You know sixty years ago one European country dominated the continent. Today all of Europe can't handle little Serbia without our help. Boo fucking hoo!




Of course. Kind of like our own US Senate - 100 secretaries of state. Every European country should have veto power over our actions even if they contribute next to nothing. [rolleyes]

Yup, remember it also. Feel the same way.

Well folks, I just want to say that this has been one of the most interesting forums I have every read.  Some very interesting history and views has come up.  There is always 50 sides to every story, or 50 opions to everything.  I just want to say that things have happened in the past, like "we saved so and so", and " we kicked so and so's ass".  I don't really care about all of that, cause This is me, this is my time, this is my era.  If you don't like us, F*(& off, if you wanna fight us, bring it, if we saved you yesterday, we'll fight you tomorrow.  If we fought you yesterday, and you wanna be our friend today, cool...   I really don't care about anyone but ME, MY FAMILY, and the BEST DAMN COUNTRY IN THE WORLD.  My country, and your's.....  If you don't like it here, leave... If you wanna come here and be part of our Great Nation, Enjoy......   If you don't like our View or our Beliefs, F!@# you...... Nuff Said???
Aaron

Whats that saying?

Europe is

Economically a player

Politically irrelevant

Militarily a worm

DK-prof,


You have some interesting veiws on history.

WW1)there was no need for the US to intervene?

The stalemate on the western front would have been broken without the addition of fresh, motivated American troops?Not to mention equipment?


WW2)You really believe that the Russian's could have beaten the Nazi's all alone.Without the US keeping Britain in the war?With no material help from the US?No convoys?No US strategic bombing campaign?No invasion of Africa,Italy and  France?

Did Denmark have a standing army around the time of WW2 or was its security guaranteed by others?


Maybe people like to wear those sorts of shirts cause all our grandfathers were there.And many of us and our fathers have been paying taxes for the last fifty years to guarantee Europe's security and freedom.

I call BULLSHIT on your knowledge of history.  Around the same time the United States entered the war, Russia was in the grips of the Bolshevik Revolution.  The Bolsheviks made a neat little agreement with the Germans that in return for Germany leaving them to do their thing they would withdraw all of their soldiers (whom were controlled by Bolsheviks by 1917).  The Germans kept up their end of the bargin, sending the [b]6,000,000[/b] troops on the Eastern front to join the [b]3,000,000[/b] troops already on the Western front.  Make no mistake about it, the British and French who had spent 3 years bleeding themselves white were in no way able to repel such massive numbers.  They would have lost if not for the superior leadership of Pershing with his expeditionary force.  We (the U.S.) succeeded to do what the British and French had been unable to do for 3 years, against far greater numbers no less.



And I suppose if the Germans had been able to send the half million troops they had in the West to Russia, they wouldn't have won, right?  Do you realize just how close the Soviets came to being completely defeated?  Those troops in the West weren't there to counter the Brits, they were there to counter the Americans.

Don't forget that we (Americans) were also fighting in the Pacific.

As European I think that the EU press opininion campaign against USA war to Iraq is due to arrogance and envy of EU govt.s.
They thinks that since USA are the "son" of Eu many Eu countries they "know" what is the best for it and they feel the need to educate it, as any parents believe.
They don't understand that USA has became, sometimes in extreme way, something different from European ancestors, and, in mi view (interacting with the people here) something better from the snobbish behaviour we have.
There is also the influence of the media, leftists in majority, that for years painted USA as a far right country with fascists tendencies, pratically a demon. France, felt and feels actually much damaged in its prestige because of the USA. There are many illuminating examples of this feeling in french movies...

As Italian I think that Italy has experimented several dominations, the worste ones were just before our independance and reunification in 1870: the austrian and the spanish ones.

Unless your constituional system and way of life about freedom is going to be corrupted by the obvious needs of security, I don't see any threat coming from USA. Instead, I see many dangers coming from European Parliament and from East...

PaoloAR15, you seem to have a handle on it.  I reject the notion of Europe treating US like their child.  That is a n attitude I find highly offensive.  Before 1776 we were their "child" but went our own way when we became independent. By the mid 1800's we were adults making our own way.  When the 20th century rolled around we were fast surpassing our "parent".  We are now vastly more powerful than Europe and quite capable of doing our own thing.  Europe is still a fragmented, left leaning group of weak countries sucking off the American tit, depending on US for defense.  Hardly the "child" any longer!  When you are the 800 LB gorilla, consulting with the sparrow is hardly needed.  It is not arrogance on our part, just jealousy on Europe's part.  They do not wish to accept the fact we have passed them by and do not need them.  

I have no problem with Italy.  I see no reason to seek their opinion but they are clearly welcome to express it as we are able to ignore it.  (Actually, I LIKE what they did to Musolinni!!)

As far as Iraq, Europe is afraid.  Once again they know they are dependent on US for protection and it embarasses them.  They are more tied to the ME for oil than we are.  They are closer to the butcher of Bagdad and more fearful of what he will unleash.  Just too ignorant to realize that the madman WILL attack ALL of us if left alone because he is another Hitler wannabe.  Appeasement failed in 1939 and will fail (already has) in 2002!  Taking out Soddom is not an option but rather a necessity.  Saudi and some of the other moslem maniac states is as important a task as well.

Rikwriter wrote:


  I think it has to do with the Treaties that we are not signing.(UN STUFF) Environmentalist stuff. They hate us because we will not sign treaties that hurt Americans.

Really?  Cool, I will have to get that on a bumper sticker then! [:D]

Post from DK-Prof -

Well welcome to the United States, Son!

If you would like to enjoy your stay on our shores, leave your friggin' Eurotrash attitude in the dumpster at the airport!

Are you actually teaching American youth this poppycock?

If you are shame on yourself, and shame on us for permitting such BS to be taught in our schools!

You lost me there, Dieter!

Is this some sort of admission that Europeans are either rapists or murderers?

And you call [u]my[/u] saying silly! [:D]

Eric The(HistoricallyObservant)Hun[>]:)]

Tell us how you really feel HUN. Don't ya hold back now.

And nobody had a comment to this one?
How about die communist Bolshevik Stalinist Bastards.

Good Idea Rik !! I'll take one of those stickers and how about some shirts too !![:D]

DK-Prof...The reason the euro trash don't like us is because we don't give a shit what you think, want, or believe. If we annoy you, TO DAMN BAD !!! stay the fuck out of our country and don't come crying to us when the next dictator rolls up on your doorstep.
The U.S. does'nt need europe, it's the other way around.

Watch out for europe in the future.  They dislike us, anti-semitism runs rampant over there, and there is a HUGE immigrant invasion of Muslims to europe.  Right now we are in little trade disputes/wars with europe(which will get worse), and we've always been politically at odd's with them.  Europe is slowly coming together, financially, militarily and politically.
[url=http://www.garnertedarmstrong.ws/gtanews59.htm]Read more about it here: Creating A Frankenstein Monster!
[/url]


Ever heard the story of the [i]king of the north[/i] and his 10 nation coalition?

"Didn't fight in the European theatre in WWII? The shut the fuck up about "saving Europe" (even if it was true)."

sounds like you better hop the very next flight back to euro disney, there komrade!

"shut the fuck up" about saving europe??

my father is dead. but he would tell you to go $#%^ yourself, if he were alive. he didn't much care for eurotrash. and btw, he DID help save europe from the fascists and commies!

from north africa to italy to england to france, he was there...helping kill the ones that were enslaving europe.

you make my ass tired!

Excerpt from 'Nazi Occupation of Denmark':

Germany attacked Denmark on April 9, 1940; [b]Denmark surrendered to Germany almost immediately following the attack.[/b] King Christian and the Danish government realized that active resistance against the Nazi invasion would be useless. Denmark was a small country with an equally small military, and a battle against Germany would have been swift and violent, leading to the deaths of many Danes.

[b]Upon surrender, Denmark was afforded certain concessions not allowed in other Nazi-attacked countries.[/b] The Danish government and monarchy would remain intact, and Denmark's newspapers would continue to operate, albeit in a censored state. Germany also allowed Denmark to maintain its military; [b]the Nazis did not consider the Danish army or navy a major threat to German forces.[/b]

Why did Germany allow Denmark these concessions when Poland, the Netherlands, and other conquered countries received far worse treatment? Hitler regarded Danes as noble members of the Aryan race, and he considered it improper to violently attack fellow Aryans. Equally important, however, was Denmark's ability to furnish Nazi Germany with supplies. [b]A European "breadbasket," Denmark could provide Germany with food, as well as vital transportation assistance via railway routes into Scandinavia.[/b]

Isn't [u]that[/u] nice? The Danes were busy feeding the Nazis, who were busy shooting at British, Russian, French, and, oh yeah, American troops!

Hell, at least the French forced a 40-day battle [u]before[/u] they surrendered!

C'mon, [b]DK-Prof[/b], how precisely did your fellow countrymen bring about the collapse of the dreadful Third Reich?

Just pretend I'm one of your students and explain to me Denmark's contribution to the war effort.

And I don't mean [u]Germany's[/u] war effort! [:D]

Eric The(Sassier'nHell)Hun[>]:)]

DK-Prof,

You should know better than to enter a discussion on these subjects, with some of these people.

You mean the ones that will annoyingly point out to you how you're wrong?

So, [b]Keld[/b], do you think as [b]DK-Prof[/b] does, that the United States was a 'better late than never' participant in WWII? and that the US troops made  'very little difference' in the war?

Let's recall his original statement:

Is that the same BULLSHIT 'tired old story' that is being taught to Danish students these days?

If so, you can be thankful that when a Danish child asks his grandfather what he did in the war, he can truthfully say, I held the Germans' coats while they had your grandmother!

Brutally frank, yes, but when you attack the honor of the American lives that were laid down to scrape the Nazi shit off the face of the planet, then do not think that your nation's honor will not be equally attcked!

It [u]is[/u] personal, after all!

Ask the survivor's of my great uncle, who never recovered from injuries in Italy after being shot by a [u]Nazi[/u] with a full belly of Danish ham for breakfast that morning!

Eric The(KizzAzz!)Hun[>]:)]

No RikWriter,

To enter a discussion with people, that feel superior to all others, that wont acknowledge that there are flaws in their own society and culture as there are in all societies and cultures.

I have no gripes with acknowledging the fact, that Denmark had something going on with Germany during WWII. And I have serious problems with the way they treated the Danish Eastern Front volunteers after the war. Our country isnt perfect, I admit it. Your country isnt perfect, either, some of you just wont admit it. Noone like being talked down to. Engaging in a serious dialog, instead of going into rethorics(sp?) would be better at this point.
Fair enough, you are a proud people, that have had many things go againt you, but there is something called denial.

That kind of people....

Yes, there are flaws in all societies.  But unlike Europeans, Americans don't care to WALLOW in their flaws...they know they're there, they try to get better but hey, shit happens.  Europeans spend DECADES whining about how awful they are...and then insult anyone who doesn't do the same.

The United States of America fought two wars - Europe and the Pacific.  I seem to recall damn little help in the Pacific save Australia.

Now the Russians did kill about 8 of 10 Germans [b]but in addition to fighting two wars we supplied Russia and Britain.  Left to their means of war goods production both Britain and Russia would have been fighting with bows, arrows and spears and eatin horseshit instead of talking it.[/b]

Fuckem if their institutional memory is faulty.

Another US v EU point:

The europeans have managed to produce the perfect 'international country club'. They believe that everything can be talked out, signed off on, and settled through diplomacy. They also have, as a group of relatively small countries, gotten used to the notion that 'everybody needs everyone else, so let's all play nice'. It's what keeps the EU together. The EU is built on cooperation.

However, The US is not organized in that manner. We are a fiercely independant nation, which (on the individual level) is only 'united' and 'cooperative' when faced with a crisis. Otherwise, it's every man, city, state, etc for itself. The government of this country operates on constitutionally restrained coercion, not cooperation. We therefore project this same outlook into our foreign policy.

Whereas 'Country Club Europe' sits around a table and talks about an international problem, we go out and fix it, by whatever means neccicary.

The next time someone from over there moans about our involvements, just say 'I don't see *your* country doing anything about it... And no, talking to them doesn't count...

I dont think so.


My grandfather was in the resistance movement for a couple of years during the war, so I guess, that one dont apply to me then.

Dave_A,


And while I ran around in Croatia and Bosnia in 92,93,94, getting shot at, and shooting back trying to help out, what was the US doing?

Enough from me, I have better things to do, like going to sleep.
Feel free to further insult everyone, not American just because we werent born there, but eventhough share most of the same views.

All right, something happened to the quotes, here andthere, but I dont bother to fix it, you know, who wrote what.
Goodnight!