New Bush term sparks anxiety

[cal04]

London - As George W Bush kicks off his second term as United States president, many around the world are nervous about the intentions of a leader they regard as cocky, shallow and dangerous. When he says world peace is best promoted by "the expansion of freedom in all the world," the critics wonder: Will he now set his sights on Iran? Will he widen the rift with Europe? Or will he become more conciliatory, seeking to secure a legacy the world will ultimately respect?

There are pockets of support around the world for Bush's foreign policy activism: pre-emptive strikes against perceived threats and the conviction that American muscle is a legitimate tool for spreading democracy. Israelis, for example, are grateful for his strong opposition to terrorism. But the Iraq war has undermined his relationship with allies in Europe. And many here are offended by his unilateralist approach - carried out with a perceived cowboy swagger, and compounded by an overt religiosity out of synch with Europe's secular politics.

A BBC World Service opinion poll released on Wednesday indicated that majorities in seven important countries thought less of Americans because of Bush - led by Turkey with 72%, France 65%, Brazil 59% and Germany 56%. But mixed signals have been perceived from Bush's new team, too.

A hundred anti-Bush demonstrators held a candlelight protest outside the American Embassy in central London, staged by the Stop the War Coalition, which organised mass rallies opposing the Iraq conflict in 2003. Protesters in Germany held a vigil on Wednesday evening in front of Berlin's landmark Brandenburg Gate, holding a dozen American flags upside-down.

http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,,2-10-1462_1650285,00.html

[ayeshahaqqiqa]

1. there were protests in

Tokoyo, South Korea, and Manila as well-saw photos on yahoonews.

[EFerrari]

2. There's only one pocket, Isreal. n/t

[Paleocon]

4. Not allowed to point that out...

Besides, he is "in their pockets"...

I think you've got your pockets confused...

:spank:

[renaissanceguy]

3. It's sad when other countries

have to protest "our" president. If only they could've voted.

And the MSM is bragging about his f***ing 50% approval rating. Like we're supposed to cheer and jump on board. Got news for them (no pun intended)--50% DON'T like what's going on.

http://www.cafepress.com/liberalissues/472476

[Paleocon]

5. I agree that it's a sad day when other countries protest....

our choice of a leader...

But I'd be careful for what you wish for as far as allowing them to vote in our elections...

At some point we may be able to elect a leader that is responsive to issues here at home, willing to work on domestic issues and not so much interested in conquering the world.

If we allowed everyone in the world to vote I don't think those issues would have priority...

:think:

[Niccolo_Macchiavelli]

6. we'd vote for more education in dumbfuckistan (eom)

[allalone]

14. this type of statistic drives me nuts

such as the one they came up with the other day.
10% of children under 10 are overweight! OMG.Yeah and 90% AREN'T!!!!
It isn't good for kids to be overweight but they try to make it sound so shocking.

[Massachusetts]

7. It is OUR JOB

to "beat" the drum and make sure that this dork goes down as the WORST leader in the HISTORY of this country!

WE MUST MAKE SURE THAT FUTURE GENERATIONS OF AMERICANS REMEMBER, SO THEY DON'T MAKE THE SAME MISTAKE AGAIN!

"If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace". Thomas Paine

[Flyer72]

8. Of course there is anxiety

Most of the demonstrators will demonstrate in any case. The reason why there is a lot of anti Bush sentiment around the world is simple.

Most don't really complain about preemptive strikes. Of course some will always oppose war and acts of war regardless if it is necessary or not. If there is a real threat, it needs to be dealt with. You even had german foreign minister Joschka Fischer who belongs to a greenparty ok the bombing of Serbia due to the Kosovo conflict. Because of that demonstrators threw eggs and paint at him. Ethnic cleansing isn't ok and you can't watch that going on, what choice did he have? And that was the first time since WW2 that german forces were involved in acts of war. Yet he acted.

We were however told that Saddam had WMD, involved in terrorism etc. and it all turned out to be wrong. Did Bush say he was wrong? No he didn't. He still won't confess to the mess that Iraq is in. The US had credibility back then, noone expected Powell to stand up and lie in front of the UN assembly - and a lot of people were VERY dissapointed when it turned out that we were lied to. How can you trust Bush after that? How can you trust an administration that just wants to cover up things? And only find new excuses to justify a war, when we know that isn't so? And how on earth can you trust that "next time" he will be right? Perhaps Iran is developing nukes, but who will believe Bush?

[Wright Patman]

9. Kosovo was

almost as unnecessary a war as Iraq. The US/NATO, led by the battle-ax Ms. Albright, issued an unmeetable ultimatum to Yugoslavia. In that sense it was about laying the hammer down to the concept of sovereignty for any European state. Either allow us to occupy all of your country without resistance and establish bases there as we "integrate" your country into Europe or we will bomb you into submission for the next three months from high altitude, complete with the wanton destruction of thousands of civilians which always comes with the barrage of (not so)"smart bombs."

When a country is in the process of breaking up, there are not really any good guys anymore. The KLA turned out to have strong links to Al Qaeda (if you believe it is more than a CIA front, which I doubt, but still it is the alleged great enemy of our day now). Confederate sympathizers could seize on what you said and agree that Gen. W.T. Sherman should not have been allowed to ethnically cleanse the Southern state of Georgia as he marched to the sea.

If Iran is developing nukes, it is only because that country has learned the lesson that nukes are the only ultimate guarantor of national sovereignty, as the "special case" of Israel proves. No one messes with Israel and everyone knows the reason. A lot of people in the Middle East and elsewhere curse it under their breaths, but otherwise they have "gotten over it" so to speak. Even without U.S. backup, Israel has enough nuclear firepower to end civilization on vast stretches of the Eurasian continent.

Seymour Hersh wrote an interesting book about all this about 14 years ago called The Samson Option.

[IthinkThereforeIAM]

11. Dont Forget that Yugoslavia...

... had ACTIVE GENOCIDE going on. Easy to gloss over the details when you have an agenda to adhere to.

[Wright Patman]

13. How's that Milosevic trial going?

If the Serbs were actively committing genocide under Slobo's command, what is taking so long to put him away?

I will repeat. There were no good guys. It was (at least) a 3-sided civil war.

[newyawker99]

12. Hi Flyer72!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[BeHereNow]

15. Welcome to DU and GREAT Post!

Right on, right on...
No one ever mentions the rule of law or
the consequences that have resulted
by breaking it, which is in essence what
you have described.
No accountability or responsibility has been taken
by these neoconazis for the WORST mess in
the history of the world since Hitler.
BHN

[robbedvoter]

10. The polls:

Influence of Bush's second term in case of peace and security for the world.
negative positive
Turkey 82 6
Germany 77 14
France 75 13
Great Britain 64 29
Lebanon 64 23
Mexico 58 4
China 56 27
Russia 39 16
Philippines30 63
India 27 62
Source http://www.spiegel.de/politik/ausland/0,1518,337659,00....