OT: Rising Anti-americanism

cyberhippie

I'm scared to comment as anything I say may construed as anti semetic!!
Oh and seraph get over yourself America did indeed help free Europe during the second world war but it could equally be said the American administration's sitting on the fence cost many lives and prolonged the war.
Oh and there were a few Poles, Canadians, French, Indians, British, etc who also laid down their lives in this black spot in history.
The article is a joke lets call it for what it is!! Many people abhor GWB and co but most of us are smart enough to draw a distinction between politicians and ordinary Americans.
Most of us understand that at least half of America agrees with our criticism of American foreign policy and of Israel's excesses though again the ever growing peace movement (anyone heard of this? Probably not as it doesn't make for good TV) in Israel doesn't see eye to eye with Sharon either.
The author is I think paranoid in the extreme and as for Europe being a hot bed of anti semeticism well that has been the retort to every criticism of Israel for years.
So all you Americans out there, be proud you have plenty to be proud of and realise that when the newspapers here in Europe go after Bush and co that we are not putting down ordinary folk of America.
I think that goes for all countries, I find it kind of sad that more and more Americans are becoming paranoid as they travel the world, thinking that people from other countries want to hold them responsable for the actions of a few dumb politicians!!!
We don't!! How can you dislike a country that gave us music like the Doors Hendrix, Dylan, and more pressure groups than you can shake a hat at.
I've always thought of America as a country of extremes but many of the "extremes" have had a positive impact on humanity.
Remember people like Rumsfield Cheney and the glove puppet Bush are not representative of Americans in general nor do they really serve ordinary Americans

seraph

I'm not a fan of bandying about the epitaph "anti-semitism". It is only anti-semitic if it holds Jews to a different standard than it holds others around the world.

It's funny to me how America is conveniently blamed when it acts and also conveniently blamed when it does not act.

No one said that there weren't. The point was that this was the basis of that "special relationship" mentioned in the article. It is a relationship that was sealed on the battlefields of Europe.

Yes, most people can see the difference, but obviously some can't. Perhaps the author is paranoid, but the rantings of people like brianct make me wonder. As they used to say in Soviet times, "Just because I am paranoid does not mean that no one is following me."

I have not only heard of the Israeli peace movement, but have been actively involved in it. Sometimes I think it would be nice if there would be a Palestinian peace movement as well.

Yes, that is why I do not like to bandy this term or other terms such as "massacre", "genocide", "racist", "terrorist" etc. about. By over-using a term, it loses all meaning. I think it would be a form of anti-semitism if Israel were singled out as the only country in the world that could not be criticized. Sadly, quite often the opposite is the case.

I know why Arab countries like to keep the spotlight on Israel's excesses. I suspect that I know why Europeans, who have many reasons to feel guilty, also often like to single out Israel (and America for supporting it).

Clearly, this can quickly devolve into a shrill shouting match. I am ALWAYS open to dialogue, but have little patience for people who are convinced that only they are right.

There are two kinds of people in the world - those that divide everything into two and those that don't.

Seraph

cyberhippie

Seraph
I don't think were as far apart on this as you might think.
My comments on your statement about Americas role in the second world war was a fair one.
And a view held by many people. Including American jews!!!
I'm glad that you take part in the Israeli peace movement, my sarcastic statement was aimed at a bias press that rarely sees fit to air programs about the peace movement.
Preferring to stick with the dramatic, you know pictures of buses and body parts, tanks rolling in, enraged palistinians marching amongst the ruins of their country, shocked civilians looking for friends and family after a bomb blast!!
You mention that you think Europeans single out Israel unfairly, I think the press in Europe criticises both sides as the need arises and I would certainly not say the press or indeed the people are biased in favour of Palistinians.
These days you may even find the opposite is true!!
The press and Europeans will call it like it is though, resulting in difficult times for Sharon when they overstep the mark of civilised nations
Much of the criticism of America is aimed at the blind acceptance of an American administration who continue to fund Israel no matter what and always stop short of criticising Sharons excesses!!
Let us not forget America yeilds a fairly big stick here and is in position to influence events much more than they do!!
I agree totally with you that it would be nice to see a Palistinian peace movement and I'm quite sure there would be a lot of people who would join such a cause!! Like Isrealis utterly sick of living in fear of the bomb or a stray bullet!!
Lastly I'm no anti semetic but I hate the way that some people use this as an cover all excuse as do you it seems.
Many Israelis try to avoid criticism under the guise of "that's just your anti semeticism showng through"
I agree if you judge Jewish people differently from other people that's being anti semetic, but to criticise a state that happens to be Jewish for crimes against humanity is not anti semetic!!
One things for sure this eye for eye philosophy prevelant in this part of Asia cannot go on. Since neither side is going to dissappear it would seem some meeting of minds in neccessary!!
I sometimes wonder if Arafat Sharon or Bush really want this, but I'm sure thousands on all sides would gladly welcome it!!
Seraph I wish you a pleasant day and remember some people are just humanists

Edit
This is my last post on things political, I seem to be getting bogged down in these subjects and I'm often misunderstood as batting for one ideology or another.
I don't bat for anyone in particular, I would describe myself as a realist, aware of the problems of mankind but not really sure how to tackle them without creating yet more problems for the world at large.
My opinions are those of a caring human being nothing more, if I try to change minds it's done with these principles at heart.
Yet I find myself in conflict with so many people for expressing my opinions so the best thing for me is to just stop end of conflict

I'll get back to talking about India there at least I shouldn't offend anyone!!

timmy

Thanks to US "involvement" in the Middle East and particularly Israel we have a so-called war on terrorism that would have otherwise never happened. Every time the UN has tried to admonish Israel the US has vetoed it. And note that, Americans, it's a war on *terrorism* -- you can't have a war on terror any more than you can have a war on any other emotion. I hate the policies of both the Israeli and US governments as it is they that have placed the western world at the biggest risk since the end of the cold war.

__________________
Read my India Travel Blog from late 2004, or look at my Photo Gallery from my last two trips.

brianct

the special relationship toady is between us and israel. That is what is fueling the middle eastern wars, and the revulsion of the europeans.

---------------
early last century, US was determined to stay out of the european wars. That had been the intention of the us founding fathers. Did the dough boys collectively want to die in a european war? or was it there leaders like Woodrow Wilson who led US into the War to end all wars? When WW2 came around, the US was determined to stay out of it, untll the bombing of pearl harbour galvanised the public.

brianct

recently in australia they tried to block a palestinian woman from receiving a peace prize. I know about this lot.

steven_ber

It seems to me that it the UK it is becoming politically correct to oppose the war in Iraq, but ask most of the 'anti-war brigade' what else could have been done and it is difficult to get a sensible answer.

Those in the world who are shouting loudest are getting all the attention, you would think that with all the anti-war feelings both Bush & Blair will lose their next elections by record margins, I think both will win, remember Maggie, always 'the most unpopular person in Britain' but always won the general elections.


I think most conflicts around the world have Muslims on one side and sometimes Muslims on both sides, if Israel/USA come to an agreement that was everything the Palestinians wanted, would that end the problems with Muslim extremists?

Who would be the next target of the Muslim extremists?

INDIA.

Will all the left-wingers of the world start to hate India?

It will be interesting to see BBC reporters crying into their videophones about awful Indian soldiers murdering Pakistani babies.....

EDIT NOTE

The Indian soldiers/Pak babies remark was an anti BBC remark and not my opinion about the Kashmir conflict.

__________________
.
How to get helpful replies to your transport/Itinerary questions.



Train information.

seraph

Cyberhippie,

I couldn't agree more. I also agree that we are really not that far apart.

You may be suprised to hear that I also think Israel should not receive financial aid from the United States. Not because Israel is evil, but because receiving handouts builds on all too many negative stereotypes and would prove once and for all that Israel exists by dint of its own hard earned money.

Again, as for anti-semitism ... I don't believe that criticizing Israel for crimes against humanity is anti-Semitic. As a dues paying member of Amnesty International I am not blind to Israel's excesses nor am I an apologist for Sharon's government.

I do think that there are many Europeans (and I am not implying that you are one of them) who fixate on Israel's excesses because they resent being made to feel guilty about the very real events that happened in Europe over the past 2,000 years or so. So they look at Israeli actions and say "They are no better than us and have no right to criticize our past actions." Some go so far as to equate the Holocaust with the Occupation and justify any act of terrorism because Israel is itself a "terrorist state".

There are alot of occupations in the world and alot of injustices. How is it that the Syrian occupation of Lebanon, the Moroccan occupation of Western Sahara or the plight of Kurds gets written off as an "internal matter"? Members of the IRA or ETA are labelled "terrorists" by the European press, but a suicide bomber who decides to blow themselves up on a crowded civilian bus is deemed a "militant".

At any rate, I read this yesterday in the Chicago Tribune and thought it was appropriate for this discussion:

"In the middle of a heated argument, it is helpful to recall that the closer we are to one side of a dispute, the harder it is to view the other dispassionately. We can't see our allies objectively when the emotions overrule reason--of which proposition, I offer myself as Exhibit No. 1."

Whether or not you decide to participate in "heated" political debates is, of course, your prerogative. I hope though that I am not the reason you have decided to retire.

All the Best,

Seraph

seraph

Yes Brianct, I know.

Is it nice living in a world where all you have to do is brand something as "Zionist" (or someone as "Jew") so that you do not have to pay any attention to it (them)?

I can assure you that the journal Foreign Policy is not a "Zionist" entity. Though, you probably already know that "the Jews" control the media. Oh, and the author's name is Strauss. Maybe he is a Jew?

I wonder ... If a blind man came to you and said, "It is dark outside." Would you: 1) Say, "What do you know, you are a blind man!" 2) Or would you bother to go outside and look?

I think I already know the answer.

Seraph

PS I'll be here if you ever want to take a look outside. (That goes for Timmy as well.)

Ruprecht

steven_ber,

I would like to know who has this 'loudest voice'. It is certainly not anyone who opposes invasion! Bush will win the next election, but not because he is popular - he will win because he CHEATS IN ELECTIONS.

Seraph, regarding probably your second post, you appear as a reactionary jew. No-one was being 'anti-semitic'. We can draw a distinction between jewish people and zionists. It is clear to many, many people that the US government is controlled by zionists, and Israels behaviour is zionist. Israels behaviour appalls me, but that is nothing to do with my opinion on jews. Quite frankly, if there WERE 'terrorists' (ie people with no army, no representation and no other course of action available other than assymetric warfare), i could VERY EASILY SEE WHY THEY DO WHAT THEY DO. If the American superpower did not exist and Israel did not exist, do you think there would be any 'terrorists'? This is not 'anti-semitic', anti-jewish or anti-american.

And that old favourite of certain Americans, what would we Europeans have done without America in WWII? Well, considering Prescott Bush had to be stopped through Congress from trading with the Nazis (and still IGFarben, the Bush company, manufactured about 33% of all Nazi steel), I would say never mind sending troops, just stop funding the conflict, as with now.

cyberhippie

Oh my name it is nothin'
My age it means less
The country I come from
Is called the Midwest
I's taught and brought up there
The laws to abide
And that land that I live in
Has God on its side.

Oh the history books tell it
They tell it so well
The cavalries charged
The Indians fell
The cavalries charged
The Indians died
Oh the country was young
With God on its side.

Oh the Spanish-American
War had its day
And the Civil War too
Was soon laid away
And the names of the heroes
I's made to memorize
With guns in their hands
And God on their side.

Oh the First World War, boys
It closed out its fate
The reason for fighting
I never got straight
But I learned to accept it
Accept it with pride
For you don't count the dead
When God's on your side.

When the Second World War
Came to an end
We forgave the Germans
And we were friends
Though they murdered six million
In the ovens they fried
The Germans now too
Have God on their side.

I've learned to hate Russians
All through my whole life
If another war starts
It's them we must fight
To hate them and fear them
To run and to hide
And accept it all bravely
With God on my side.

But now we got weapons
Of the chemical dust
If fire them we're forced to
Then fire them we must
One push of the button
And a shot the world wide
And you never ask questions
When God's on your side.

In a many dark hour
I've been thinkin' about this
That Jesus Christ
Was betrayed by a kiss
But I can't think for you
You'll have to decide
Whether Judas Iscariot
Had God on his side.

So now as I'm leavin'
I'm weary as Hell
The confusion I'm feelin'
Ain't no tongue can tell
The words fill my head
And fall to the floor
If God's on our side
He'll stop the next war

Bryan

Lets get away from this idea that America acts as a philantrpist to the world
The US since WW2 has acted in a manor that protects its interests and widesn its sphere of influence
The US is an empire in every sense except name

In every part of the world they have destroyed democratically elected govts and usurped national integrity
So the argument of expanding democracy has quite a hollow ring

Expansion of wealth to the developing world is also a smoke screen
While the US imposed protectionism to protect its steel industry it, through the IMF world bank ...The US have the deciding vote on both these intstituions they forced many developing nations to open their markets to hostile multi national corporations
In teh Asian economic crisis it was stated that the world bank turned a recession in Indonesia into a depression
The only coubntry to remain fairly economically intact after the crisis was Malaysia which rejected IMF world bank demands.

So spreading wealth doesnt really add up

As for the war against terror ...I'm no lover of the Taliban and even less a lover of Saddam but lets look at the kind of historical context

One of the main prosecution issues at Nuremburg ...I should add I'm not comparing anyone to Nazis but using as an internaional law example ...was the use of 'preventative military action'. Ie invading a counbtry which has not attacked or was not i the process, ie it was not a pre-emptive strike as Israel done in the 6 day was whicha verted an attack by the arab nations. This was a crime the nazi leadership was found guilty of.

The current US administration is using preventative military action and has ripped up any internaional law which was not condusive to its neo liberal aims in teh region

Why have they got involved in these conflicts. It would be simple to say oil and this is a major reason IMHO. however as any historian will tell you this area has been at the cusp, meeting point of many rival power groups for centuries and the historical great ganme between Russian UK and Frace is now being played in a similar manner

I may be off subject now
Kofi Anan has called the war in Iraq illegal we are involved in a war which is destabilising an entire region for what purpose

America has an us and them mentality which constantly needs a frontier a hidden enemy ...the muslim bogey man seems to fit the bill, not so long ago it was reds under the bed, and the like

I have no love of Amerian expansionist policies, I have no love of the total disregard for international law, I have no love of their destruction of the natural world and total disregard for democracy and human rights. Will things change at the next election...not really they may be a touch more gental but America will still be controloled by Wall street and willa ct in the interests of these corporations.
It may do it with a velvet glove but the result will be the same

Problem with Americans???
No I can see the differencee between a government and its people. Treat all individuals as that.

However it should be noted that we Europeans are not as pure as the driven snow
France are embroiled in king making in western Africa and the Belgians will always have blood on their hands for the Congo. As for us Brits what can I say, we were the US 100 years ago

No one likes a bully, especially a selfish greedy bully.
While 4/5 of the world population live on $4 a day or less we in the West feast and gourge ourselves at the top table.

We need a total re-evaluation of the systems which keep the planet turning
As for me yes I'm glad I was born in the west but I'd rather more were eating at the table in a more sustainable way.

On an end note, One American baby uses the same resources as 100 Indian babies. Pretty much says it all

I have now stepped down from my soap box
You may return to what you were doing

Peace and good will to all men, women and 2 week old bairns called Skye

Bryan

__________________
Then let us pray that come it may
(As come it will for a' that),
That Sense and Worth o'er a' the earth,
Shall bear the gree an a' that.
For a' that, an a' that,
It's coming yet for a' that,
That man to man, the world, o'er
Shall brithers be for a' that.
- Burns

sgeneris

(*) The original article that started the discussion, was from frontlinemag which is a online republican (extreme right wing) portal. If you read the other articles there, it makes sense why this 'extreme' article appeared there and seems so contrary to experience of most experience.

(*) I just hope that this whole diaspora funded fanaticism (american jews/israel, Irish americans/ireland, etc) business does not make India their next victim. We have already seen the violence in Gujarat and the rise of extreme right wing with vitriolic rhetoric in India. India had already seen the khalistan movement once. That is enough.

seraph

Ruprecht,

As I noted before, bandying epithets around accomplishes nothing. I, for one have not called anyone anti-semitic.

As for my being a "reactionary" ... a "reactionary" is someone opposed to liberalism and progress. I am not opposed to either. Besides, labelling someone (i.e. ad hominem attacks) accomplishes nothing productive - at best it is an attempt to put them in a box and at worst an effort to silence them by painting with a broad brush.

I am however opposed to liberals who are into conspiracy theories. Aside from being completely unrealistic (governments are large bureaucracies that do not always know what one branch is doing while the other acts), charging (without any real proof) that "Zionists" control the US government is insulting and feeds into centuries of (blood) libels and charges of Jewish double-dealing. (Perhaps also, it makes people such as yourself sleep easier knowing that at least someone is "pulling the strings".)

Unfortunately, it is often only a short step into fantasy and wish-fullfilment. During the Nazi-era in Germany the idea that was being sold was that, "If only we would get rid of the Jews, the world would be a better place." Today there is this idea that, "If only, we could get rid of Israel, the world would be a better place."

It is an example of what Goebbels called the "Big Lie". Repeat something again and again, and whether it is true or not, people will think it is true.

I find it ironic that on an India discussion group you raise the above canard. Perhaps it is because you see yourself as a "suspected terrorist" (sympathiser). Maybe you find the thought of "assymetric" body parts flying about as somehow romantic or dashing?

The fact is, that neither the Palestinians nor anyone else in the world can argue with a straight face that they have, "no other course of action available". Have you ever heard of non-violent non-cooperation? Have you heard of Gandhi or Martin Luther King? If the Palestinians would stop teaching hatred in their schools, would stop sending children to blow themselves up and would stop feeling sorry for themselves, there would be peace before you know it.

The fact is that Israel was willing to sign a peace treaty with Arafat during the time that Barak was PM. The fact is that under many different governments, Israel has negotiated peace and maintained peace with Egypt and Jordan. Israel happens to be the one with the proven track record with regards to making peace. Hopefully one day soon, the Palestinians leaders (who live quite a cushy life) will realize that they have a partner for peace and stop playing games with their poor people's lives.

It is also a fact that prior to the present Intifida, at a time when there were ongoing peace negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians and a lull in the violence, the 9-11 hijackers arrived in the US and began laying the ground work for their criminal act. It may be convenient to blame American support for Israel, but it simply does not fit the facts.

And finally, another examples of that broad brush you use. Just because Prescott Bush was trading with the Nazis does not implicate all Americans in anything.

Again your conspiratorial mania. If it is not "the Jews" or "that lot" who are behind the mess in this world, than it is no doubt the Bush family who are to blame not only for the present mess, but for World War II as well!

Seraph

Ruprecht

Dude, it's oil. The money that you cited, the cost, effectively goes into military contracts for the military-industrial complex that runs America. The rest goes into contracts for 'rebuilding' Iraq and providing the infrastructure to get the oil out. Who do you think gets the money? Western companies. Of course it is about the oil. The crux of Geopolitics is getting control of the oil. All oil. Everywhere.