The View from Europe

[mactavish]

According to a new poll, which questioned more than 9,000 Europeans and Americans about how they look at the world one year after the attacks, 55 percent of Europeans think U.S. foreign policy contributed to the tragic events.

Europe Thinks US Policy to Blame

I read this on Yahoo! News this morning.

Comments (particularly from our European friends)?

mactavish out.

[Capt.Hunter]

Well, one of the more restrained comments on America coming ot of the Johannesburg Conference was from Claire Short, a Labour MP. I believe she said,

"America has difficulty acting multilaterally".

In brief, although we recognize America wants many of the same things we do, it does come off as having the attitude that it (and only it) knows the correct way of achieving those aims.

Has American foreign policy contributed to the problems of some of the world's poorer countries? I'd have to say yes. Unfortunately, the same is true of many other Western nations. Currently, though, America comes off as the worst offender because it presents an attitude of "Well, we're the biggest military and economic power in the world, so we really don't care if you like what we're doing or not.".

I should add that this may not necessarily be how many Americans feel (or would like it to be), but it is the perception of many outside the US. Could the US avoid this by making its motivations clearer to the outside world? Probably.

[C5]

First, I'd like to assure every American on this board that 9-11 really apalled me, and that for me there is absolutely nothing that justifies such an act (if you have any doubts, look for this thread and see my posts there - I haven't changed my mind since).

Now for the question... yes, I agree that, to some extent, the US foreign policy contributed to this event.

For one thing, the simple fact that the US have a foreign policy ensures that it contributed to that. After all, if the US avoided becoming involved in any foreign affair, there wouldn't have been much ground for the terrorists to base their hatred on. It seems evident, but, after all, there is not much need to bomb a guy who never bothered you in any way.

Secondly, the USA are now the only superpower left in the world. China is far less involved in external affairs, Russia has much less influence than USSR had, as for the EU, it still lacks the necessary cohesion to have an important enough foreign influence. Thus, being without any counterpower, the USA seem to be able to do whatever they want with no penalty. Added to the American reputation of arrogance (true or false, this reputation exists in many non-American minds), it becomes rather easy to believe that the US are now doing whatever it pleases them in the world, starting a war here because the leader of the country doesn't pleases them, starting another there because some of their bombs are getting old and their president need to distract the opinion of his financial or matrimonial problems, stopping another here because there is oil underground (mmm Oil...). Hence, the fuel for a lot of hatred toward the USA.

Finally, the USA have fought a lot of wars in the world - and wars have a tendency to leave behind a lot of orphans, homeless, or poor, who know only that it was the Bad Uncle Sam who came and destroyed their family, their house, their goods, for sometimes obscure reasons... wich makes it very easy to loathe America once more, and decide to strike them (or rejoice when they're stricken).

Of course, the opinions above are only what, in my eyes, support the opinion according to which US foreign policy is responsible for 9-11. There are a lot of other reasons which have nothing to do whatever the USA do - like for instance fundamentalism and plain human idiocy. I don't want to offend anyone - like I said, nothing justifies such an attack for me, but I'm trying to find reasons for the people to have done it which involved the USA.

BTW, another point of this survey I hugely agree with is the need for the EU to build itself as a superpower - and, still like in the survey, to ensure a better cooperation with the USA (and NOT for competition).

[dimeboy99]

I would agree that US foreign policy has played a role, perhaps a major one, in regards to terrorist attacks upon the US in particular and the West in general. That goes for the relationship that the US has with Europe as well.

I'm a staunch patriot who is proud to be an American, but that doesn't mean that I'm proud of everything that the US of A has done. The US has a history of using weaker countries in the past, esp. in regards to their attempts to combat communism. We've propped up leadership/governments in the 3rd world that aren't popular among their own population. (Saudi, Iran, Iraq.) The US supplied schoolbooks to Afghanistan that showed young children with AK's and preached jihad against the Soviets. Mix in the good things that the US does, such as being a major supplier of aid and economic assistance to the forgiving of debt, etc, and the message cannot help but being a mixed one.

I have no doubt that US foreign policy has good intentions, but I personally would prefer that we take a less active stance in the governing and policing of the world. I would be more than happy to see the nations on respective continents (or respective hemispheres) take first crack at dealing with regional problems. I'd like to see the US not be a primary supplier of peacekeeping troops to the UN. I think the US would be in a better position if, when our help is needed, it is asked for in a public forum. That removes the perception, right or wrong, that the US jumps into things in a "my way or the highway" fashion. Personally I think the world would be up in arms if the US took the above steps. We're damned if we do and we're damned if we don't.

[Eric R.]

Originally posted by C5




Finally, the USA have fought a lot of wars in the world - and wars have a tendency to leave behind a lot of orphans, homeless, or poor, who know only that it was the Bad Uncle Sam who came and destroyed their family, their house, their goods, for sometimes obscure reasons... wich makes it very easy to loathe America once more, and decide to strike them (or rejoice when they're stricken).

This is the only real point I take issue with C5 in your other wise soundly structured argument. Most of the countries who we have fought wars with have little beef (enough for terrorist) with us. I don't see any Veitnamese, Korean, Panamanian, Grenadian, German, Dominican Republican, Japanese, Italian, Spanish, Confederate, Mexican or British terrorist running around bombing our buildings. In fact most of the times its terrorist from countries who we have had no dealings ( aka war) with in the past such as the 15+ Saudi's on the 9/11 planes, no wait a minute thats not fully true we did have a war with the Barbary states which eventually led to the creation of Libya.

[Eric R.]

Hey it just doned on me, We can be the bad cop to Europes good cop.

Europe to petty Third World Dictator "See I am a nice guy, civilied and caring about you, so why don't you just cooperate a little with us here or I might just have to go to lunch for a moment or too."

Petty Third World dictator looks over the shoulder of European cop and sees american cop rubbing his fist in his hand in the traditional manner meaning "I want to beat the living Sh*t out of you."

It could work

[First of Two]

I believe that saying that US foreign policy caused 9-11 is like saying that a woman who walks down the street alone at night wearing a slinky red dress deserves what she gets.

I don't believe in mitigating crimes because the assaulted "asked for it."

Shame, Europe. You're supposed to be more civilized than that.

[Lancer]

Originally posted by First of Two
I believe that saying that US foreign policy caused 9-11 is like saying that a woman who walks down the street alone at night wearing a slinky red dress deserves what she gets.

I don't believe in mitigating crimes because the assaulted "asked for it."

Shame, Europe. You're supposed to be more civilized than that.

Well, here is one European who isn't p****d off by your statement. In fact I quite agree with you, or at least the first two paragraphs of your statement.

While a different US foreign policy prior to 9-11 could have changed quite a few things around the world (or maybe not - no one will ever know for sure), I believe it is hardly likely that this would have stoped some murderous fanatics from doing what they did

What I can't agree with is "Shame, Europe", if you base it on this news article alone. We are talking here about one single statistic and I think we all know how far to trust statistics.


Apart from that Capt.Hunter's post pretty much sums up my opinion in this matter.

[Lt.Khrys Antos]

I agree with you First of Two.

[Cybrludite]

Originally posted by First of Two
I believe that saying that US foreign policy caused 9-11 is like saying that a woman who walks down the street alone at night wearing a slinky red dress deserves what she gets.
I don't believe in mitigating crimes because the assaulted "asked for it."
Shame, Europe. You're supposed to be more civilized than that.

To hear some Europeans, if the attacker is an Arab, the woman was in fact "asking for it".

Then, in September 2001 (only five days, in fact, before the destruction of the World Trade Center), the Norwegian newspaper Dagbladet reported that 65 percent of rapes of Norwegian women were performed by "non-Western" immigrants–a category that, in Norway, consists mostly of Muslims. The article quoted a professor of social anthropology at the University of Oslo (who was described as having "lived for many years in Muslim countries") as saying that "Norwegian women must take their share of responsibility for these rapes" because Muslim men found their manner of dress provocative. One reason for the high number of rapes by Muslims, explained the professor, was that in their native countries "rape is scarcely punished," since Muslims "believe that it is women who are responsible for rape." The professor’s conclusion was not that Muslim men living in the West needed to adjust to Western norms, but the exact opposite: "Norwegian women must realize that we live in a multicultural society and adapt themselves to it."

[REG]

Originally posted by First of Two

I believe that saying that US foreign policy caused 9-11 is like saying that a woman who walks down the street alone at night wearing a slinky red dress deserves what she gets.

I don't believe in mitigating crimes because the assaulted "asked for it."

Shame, Europe. You're supposed to be more civilized than that.

That's why we have different views between our New World's perspective and that of the Old World's perspective. Although I know of some in the US that still cling to that thinking.

Right now, we need to reform our foreign policies if we're going to be neighbors and not a de facto leaders of the world as well as acting the world's police force. To say that there is no problem in our foreign policies which have not changed since the last millenium is ignorant.

[First of Two]

To say that there is no problem in our foreign policies which have not changed since the last millenium is ignorant.

Er, maybe I misunderstand what you said.

If our foreign policy hadn't changed in the last century (forget millennium, the US wasn't around a millennium ago), the arabs would be about as numerous as the Husnock after TNG's "The Survivors."

Consider the Japanese after Pearl Harbor. They attacked a military installation, not a civilian one, and we STILL dropped 2 nukes on them and occupied their islands for years.

Consider the American Indian. Genocide rings a bell.

Foreign policy is conducted to benefit the country conducting it. To conduct it in any other way is national suicide. To believe that other countries conduct their foreign policies in a different manner is self-deception of a deplorable degree.

If they wish that we should not act as the world's police force, they must stop asking us to act as the world's police force. That means no criticizing the US for not doing anything about Rwanda, and it means cleaning up things like Bosnia and East Timor and Kosovo and Slovenia and Crete and Montenegro ON THEIR OWN.

How soon do you see that happening?

[Victory Leo]

I don't want to respond to this for fear of insulting/hurting people's feelings, but I feel I must defend my country.

As for our foreign policy... yes it has its problems. BUT I'd like to note that the US has been dragged into most problems by the request of our allies. The current situation in the Balkans... The UN asked us to go in there and 'fix' things. I say we should have stayed out of it... but if we do that, the world calls the US a bunch of 'isolationists'.

Vietnam (our biggest screw-up in foreign policy) happened because we were nice enough to help the French with their problem...

World War I and World War II... we didn't want to be involved and we got pulled in... As we always do.

As for nuking Japan at the end of WWII... People, invading Japan to end the war would have been horrible... Think Vietnam. Every person on the island would have been fighting the US troops to the bitter end. So, either way it would have been nasty.

The second point to that. We weren't the only ones researching the bomb... And I hate to tell you, the first country to get one was gonna use it. Great Britian, Germany, Russia, Japan, or the US. The United States was the (un)lucky one. So, don't act like the US is full of evil people. The other countries would have dropped it if it had gotten it first.

As for our current idea on invading Iraq... the world said they would support our anti-terrorism actions. Bush said he was going after countries that harbored terrorists within a month of 9/11... and the world said they would support us. So, where's the support now? And don't tell me that Iraq isn't harboring or supporting terrorists.

Don't want the US in your neck of the woods, tell your government to QUIT asking for OUR help... case closed.

[C5]

I believe that saying that US foreign policy caused 9-11 is like saying that a woman who walks down the street alone at night wearing a slinky red dress deserves what she gets.

I don't know what the exact wording of the poll was, but, according to mactavish's quote, the question was whether people believed if the USA foreign policy contributed to the tragic events.

Well, as I said earlier, to this particular question, my answer is "yes", for the reasons I stated above.

What I did NOT say (and understand the poll was about) was that the USA deserved what happened at the slightest degree nor that it partly justified the attack or wichever rubbish. If a woman walks alone at night with a TOS uniform-like dress and get raped, I may say that her actions may have contributed to what happened to her, but I'll NEVER say that she deserved or that the rapist's crime is somehow lessened.

When will people stop putting words in other's mouths ?

[J. Maynard]

Originally posted by First of Two
I believe that saying that US foreign policy caused 9-11 is like saying that a woman who walks down the street alone at night wearing a slinky red dress deserves what she gets.

I don't believe in mitigating crimes because the assaulted "asked for it."

Shame, Europe. You're supposed to be more civilized than that.

A friend of mine once said to me that people elsewhere knew very little of how the US really is. Well, it seems that some Americans don’t understand Europe neither…


Take the above article:

“Europe thinks that US policy to Blame”

What kind of conclusions does the reporter jumps to?

It is a really long way from saying that “U.S. foreign policy contributed to the tragic events” to saying that “…Washington should blame itself for the attacks…”

It is generally believed that the real cause for bin Laden hatred for America is the US support of the (corrupt) Saudi regime.

The US stands in the way of his bigoted, demented vision of the future of Saudi Arabia and of the muslin world. And besides, values dear to the West are an affront to him and his cronies.

Simply by being there and supporting his enemies (and in fact by simply existing) the US is making itself an enemy of that megalomaniac with a messianic complex. So yes, because of that the US foreign policy contributed to those tragic events. But that isn’t the same to say “the US should blame itself for the Attacks.”

In Europe the widespread reaction was one of shock and consternation, and sympathy towards the victims and their families. There is no support, or friendly attitude towards those terrorists among the overwhelming majority of the Europeans, even among those that do not agree with the US foreign policy, nor do we think their actions are acceptable, period.

You should know better than accept a reporter’s interpretation of a survey at face value, Shame on you