Skip to content

Kos Poll: Americans love France and Europe

The left-wing US blog Daily Kos has let Research 2000 do a poll on some of the purported 'boogeymen' of the right, including France and Europe. It turns out that France and Europe are almost universally loved by Americans. France has a 66 to 26 favourability rating, and for Europe the rating is 63 to 29. Favourable opinions of France and Europe exist across ethnic groups and party lines, but there is some regional difference: southerners have an evenly split opinion of both France and Europe.

This is quite a dramatic shift in opinion among the American population from four years ago, when the (more conservative) pollster Rasmussen reported that 57% of Americans held an unfavourable opinion of France.

Opinions of France have probably improved as a result of the improved political relationship that started with the election of Sarkozy, and were reinforced by the election of Obama. At the same time, they might deteriorate again if there is another major diplomatic disagreement between the two countries. Right now, the French and Americans have important reasons to stick together as they are both threatened with 'revenge' by Somali pirates...

Trackbacks

No Trackbacks

Comments

Display comments as Linear | Threaded

David on :

Interesting that women, in particular, have a positive view of France and Europe. Too bad the regional results are not broken down by demographics. My guess is that even in the south women were more positive. We've known since the last election that the Republican Party has devolved into a regional organization of primarily uneducated, white southern men ("Limbaugh Conservatives").

Marie Claude on :

umm, how do you know that women scored more ? cuz men hold our country as "metro-sexual" ? :lol: Well I am still in connection with the percentage that is supposed to have a bad opinion of us, they would like that we say to them all the day long how great they are, how strong, how good... before opening the mouth. They usely learnt our language, some of them speak it quite well, they buy our goods, but they can't stand our independance, be it material or spiritual. They have hard time to forget that we didn't follow them in the epical Irak expedition, though certain start to think that Irak war wasn't the priority, but Iran and Afghanistan. So, when things go way round for them, they become a bit more tolerant. It would not be a problem for our both armies and or navies to work together, besides our soldiers in Afghanistan have a well opinion return from the Americans, some vets still remember the first Irak trip, and appreciated our soldiers there too. The problem is, has Obama the political will to undertake the piracy problem ? up to now, from what I could read, the rescue of the Captain was a seals'decision. As far as France is concerned, she has no intention to let pirats dictate their law. Besides the first pirats that encountered a trial in our country will be condamned under criminal pursuits, and will be condamned to life jail http://www.lepoint.fr/actualites-societe/2008-04-15/un-proces-en-france-des-pirates-du-ponant-constituerait-une/920/0/238293 and in december the previous administration didn't want to participate to the piracy hunting http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,470344,00.html

Pat Patterson on :

That's not quite what the Fox News article stated as basically it discussed Chinese involvement and how the US welcomed that resolve and hoped that the Chinese would work with the ships already deployed. And obviously the analyst from Rand was wrong because, in spite of the non-strategic cargo aboard the Maersk Alabama, the US did act widening the rationale for intervention a lot. And that ability to act was from ships tasked to patrol, the Bainbridge and the Halyburton, from the prior administration. While the link to the description of French law has just as many loopholes as current American law in that both countries can try the pirates but did they have the legal right to grab them in the first place. Both countries face political tests in trying the pirates. The US because, it has agreed to act under, the pertinent UN Convention defining piracy was not a signatory. While the French link makes it very clear that France has never signed nor even agreed to abide by the Rome Convention which would be the international legal basis for seizing and trying on French soil the pirates. The rescue of Phillips was conducted by Navy SEALS but under an ROE approved, changed and then reapproved by Pres Obama. When to act and how to act, if Phillips was in imminent danger, was left to the commander of the Bainbridge. I noticed that imminent danger means something different when its a Democrat in the WH as opposed to a Republican.

Marie Claude on :

These rescue operations were considered as "Defense" operations against criminal "sea militias", where the no-man's land, as far as justice is concerned, prevailed. Somalia being uncapable to assure a proper government, and or, with no desire to make that that piracy ceases. They will be condamned as gang associations with the act of rapting under arms menace and ransom request procès aux assises (criminal) et de la réclusion à perpétuité http://www.lexpress.fr/actualite/societe/ponant-les-suspects-somaliens-restent-en-detention_752044.html otherwise, we don't need to digg in any international oraganisation to define such acts, but in our traditions that delt with piracy

Don S on :

A Daily Kos-sponsored poll is only slightly more credible than one commissioned by the Free Republic (aka Freepers). Could be that France and Germany are viewed less negatively than they were a few years ago. But positively? What have they done to earn it? From the POV of Kos they busted Bush's nuts, but now that they are doing the same to Obama that's going to get old quickly.....

Pat Patterson on :

Research 2000 does have a very good reputation especially for polling on the eve of an election. What it doesn't have in this case is any prior polls concerning the same issues that the current results can be compared too. World Opinion Research, Pew and Gallup still show some slight improvement in world attitudes towards the US but I have yet to see the remarkable numbers that Kos claims. Everybody wants to visit San Francisco but judging from its continued decline in population it appears that few want to live there. But I have to admit going to Tommy's Joynt for a turkey sandwich and sitting next to Carole Doda was interesting. I let her try my sandwich but didn't take up her offer to feel her breasts with the, at that time new, silicone implants.

Don S on :

I think more people would like to live in SF than do, for the same reason I'd love to live in inner London but live farther out - the cost.

Marie Claude on :

What have they done to earn it? not marching the poodle walk :lol: and considering the bellicous ambiance, it needed some courage to resist, being pointed as enemies, and being boycotted like the rogue states that are the real terrorist states that everyone on this earth knows... but America wanted to punish the French and berate the Germans Now, I don't think that the French will forget soon No American leader can play the to us the moral part they wanted us to swallow. De Gaulle was right, you played the scorpion part and of course wwe were the frog, but it didn't help your country to deamonise us at the end, you are sinking with us

Don S on :

Poodles have been passe in Paris for at LEAST 40 years - I'd say it takes much more courage to do the poodle-walk than not do. French Presidents have been telling the US to go to hell for almost 50 years now. If that is 'courage' it's not uncommon. Let me clue you - when the polls are at 70-30, the couragaeous thing is to side with the 30....

Marie Claude on :

and what we would have got ? a bus ! it's an old american habit to drive buses on their alliees when they aren't useful anymore

Pat Patterson on :

Really? Can you name one country that is a former ally of the US that has been punished by the US in any way other than a stern note and cancelling a state dinner?

Marie Claude on :

France ie revolution war and we are still in the collimator, even if "idi*ts" mixed all the things, it witnesses of the general spirit http://comments.americanthinker.com/read/1/308239.html http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2009/04/spain_to_indict_gonzalez_5_oth.html

Pat Patterson on :

That bus that France claims to have been thrown under must under must be about 1/43 the size of a real bus and made by Exoto. Saying nasty things about each other on the internet while still having normal polictical and economic relations can hardly be classified as punishment. Anyone else suffering as much as poor France?

Don S on :

Well, the poor Germans of course. Combine being thrown under a scale-model bus (a la francais) with their natural angst at the tought of being allied to the succesor state to the 3rd R (the US). Gotta be pretty bad....

Marie Claude on :

it looks like that whatever France does for the good ol american people, it's never enough, or it is regarded as a hypocryt action, no wonder people in Europe, and especially in France that can read american prose, have some repulsive feeling when it comes that Americans begg us for more involvment And MM Pat, and Don, the egocentric and contempting anglo-saxon spirit is kinda an american expression too 1/43 ? yeah, how long did it take you to pay back the very first french help ? and don't tell me it was for love sake for France, also, that's not telling what the american diplomacy and secret services were/are making in the back-yards to damn the french interests

Don S on :

How long? About 130 years by my count. But you have to factor in a certain estrangement beginning about 1861 caused by Napoleon III trying to intervene in the US Civil War (with British help), and also by installing a French puppet 'emperor' in Mexico while the US was occupied elsewhere. Really the only opportunities for payback were to the Corsican adventurer Napoleon and during the Franco-Prussian War. During the former the US helped finance him by purchasing the Lousiania Purchase, and also fought a war against the British at that wtime. The Franco-Prussian War went too swiftly for the US to intervene, even if we had been asked. During WWI private citizens joined Canadian and French units, even forming the Lafayette Escadrille to help the fight. And of course the US finally did join the war and helped push the Germans over the edge, fighting under the command of French Marshall Foch as I recall.

Joe Noory on :

You are genuinely paranoid. The United States is not engaging in any secret undermining of French national interests, in fact it has to go through tortured political gyrations just to get small military committments out of them after years of begging, which comes right after the warnings that "America should never go it alone". The fact remains that you will search hard, far, and wide to find some Rue89-esque extrapolation of something "America has barbariusly done to we mere little Bolivian-style peasants, toiling in our meagre fields," no matter how minor or irrelevant, in order to maintain an air of both self-precived imaginary victimhood under the heel of some far-away power, and the deluision that your own culture is both more meaningful and influencial than it really is. There is a difference between the limitless supply of opinions asserted by attention-seeking writers and talking heads, and the reality of the world. The effort is obvious: to pry a kind of importance, power, and action out of any entity outside of France to support that magnification at least cost.

Marie Claude on :

laughfable ! it ain't rue 89, but fox news, National review, Times on line....Le Figaro, Le point tell me when our sources will agree with yours, I know how you are fair !

Pat Patterson on :

All loans were paid, the ones from the Revolutionary War and the Louisiana Purchase were combined at 4% interest and paid in full between 1812-1823. In 1926 Pres Coolidge agreed to cancel some 60% of France's WWI debt and set up a new debt arrangement that allowed France to repay the loans at 1.4% over sixty-two years and which because of the Depression appears never to have been repaid except by Finland. Quite a bit longer than the US repaying it Revolutionary War debts but those anglo-saxons arrogantly assumed that getting a little back was better than getting none back at all. And after 1932 France has not paid one nickel back on its World War I debt though several other nations have not paid either. Or maybe France has been punished enough so that in its desire to not owe the hated Anglo-saxons any debt it will finally repay its World War I debt and offer out of the goodness and innocence of its heart to repay the billions of dollars the US gave France under the Marshall Plan. Heck, forget the World War I debt France still owes Mexico reparations for the damage caused to Mexico City and the imposition of Maxmillian when France reneged on the Covenant of London and invaded Mexico. Should I even bring up Citizen Genet?

Marie Claude on :

woah, looks like reverse psychology is a feature of the american behaviour too LMAO I am sorry I won't apologise for any of the above suppositions you made above, beside they don't stant any serious investigation

Pat Patterson on :

That makes sense as it appears that asking questions is hyperbole, especially when easily corrected, but somehow responding to counterarguments is somehow undignified to French feelings? I am still waiting for that one magical ally of the US that has been punished beyond that nasty note?

Marie Claude on :

prout prout

Joe Noory on :

Was Pat the one continually asking someone to apologize for history? Come on now. Half of the stuff you come up with is some lunacy founded on a long past event.

Marie Claude on :

umm, Joe I wasn't expecting that you would support me, easy to lunatise whith who you can't agree with LMAO

Don S on :

What Chester A Arthur did to Ruritania in 1883 was simply unconcionable, although some excuse that due to the fact that President Arthur being unable to locate Ruritania on the best day he ever had..... As a President he was good with making customes reciepts disappear.... Millard Fillmore was reputed to have released a bilabial fricative somewhere in the general direction of France, one time....

Marie Claude on :

umm, your talking of politic fictions millford didn't harm France, nor the US Arthur made sure that his collegues of Administration were rewardes and their positions preserved

John in Michigan, USA on :

"Arthur made sure that his collegues of Administration were rewardes and their positions preserved" That is a good point. And no, I am not being sarcastic (this time!). According to [url=http://www.amazon.com/Sixty-Million-Frenchmen-Cant-Wrong/dp/1402200455/]Sixty Million Frenchmen Can't Be Wrong[/url] by Jean-Benoit Nadeau and Julie Barlow (both Canadian), the French have a very different view of official conduct than we do here in N. America. If I understand correctly, it is normal and in fact expected for politicians to use their office to reward their supporters or fellow party members. In the USA, our politicians do this also, but there are (supposedly) many more limits. We have this strange (to the French) concept of a "[url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conflict_of_interest]conflict of interest[/url]" in our politicians and civil servants. In contrast, the French often see a such shared interests as a virtue: the Minister for X is also the Minister for Y, leading to better policy coordination between X and Y. I don't think our [url=http://www.bookrags.com/research/antitrust-legislation-ebf-01/]anti-trust legislation[/url] and traditions would make much sense to the French, since the entire French state is a system of trusts (monopolies). Although, that may be changing with globalization, EU, etc. We can't seem to agree about whether certain historical events happened, or not, and that is disturbing because we should at least be able to agree on events, if not their meaning. Still, lets not give the French too much merde in areas in which genuine cultural differences exist.

Marie Claude on :

"We can't seem to agree about whether certain historical events happened, or not, and that is disturbing because we should at least be able to agree on events, if not their meaning. Still, lets not give the French too much merde in areas in which genuine cultural differences exist." yes we can (:lol:) if we agree on the sources, as yours are written by Americans with all the pre-jugés they carried on the French, so it's obviously not a neutral narration, idem for the french side, though at a lesser point, we often have to justify our facts in front of a wrong interpretation and or intention, nonentheless there are some fair historians on both sides of the pond, I have read a few american articles that saw us more positively, hidden historical facts were sort out or explained differently, often these persons were former militaries, for them there is no intellectual interest to distord facts, they took their context in account too. Most people don't know history apart what from they read in papers or saw on TV, or from what is written in their school books, and one knows how it is seen different in each country. The education system though is the most faultive to vehiculate national visions, eg how Algeria war is explained in France and how it is very different of what it is written in Algerians school books. I still see lot of merde that is thrown at us, especially during stressing political events, as they are now and since a few days for those that organised a new "tea party"

Marie Claude on :

oh I forgot for your first part, the french connections are called "clientelism", idem for Spain and italy, don't know for Germany, so there isn't conflict of interests, rather conflicts of strong characters and MM the Americans, could you leave us alone sometimes, there more to discuss on Spain, Italy and tutti quanti

John in Michigan, USA on :

"there more to discuss on Spain, Italy and tutti quanti" Yes! That is one of the things that is troublesome when talking to Europeans about Europe. Too often, when I compare the US and the EU, or criticize the EU, Europeans will retreat and say "well Germany is better than the US in that respect" or "we don't do that in Germany" or whatever. But if Europeans want to make a fair comparison, they must be willing to match all of Europe with all of the US. If I have to defend all the problems of the US ghettos, or explain why the the Branch Davidians are permitted to exist, Europeans must defend the institutional, multi-generational poverty of Sicily, or explain why when Spain or Italy has problems they are bailed out as part of the European social contract, but when Eastern Europe (which has suffered far more than Italy) has problems they have to beg for scraps and apologize for keeping one foot in the American camp.

John in Michigan, USA on :

Crap. The Branch Davidians are a bad example, because they actually were not permitted to continue to exist. But, there are other cults like them that are crazy and have guns, but not really a threat outside of their own compound. Some of these heterodox Mormon sects for example. Hopefully, you'll understand what I mean, in spite of my bad example.

Marie Claude on :

but when Eastern Europe (which has suffered far more than Italy) has problems they have to beg for scraps and apologize for keeping one foot in the American camp. May-be they should (have said) say less crap on us (the first EUnionists) :-) well the problem is that their economy is young and that it has no solid basis, most of what they got since 1990, they become it from our EUnionist countries ; when we have difficultie at home, then it's logical that we first mend our problems, though Germany has more to fear if these eastern countries get into chaos But why the US can't help to bail them out ?

John in Michigan, USA on :

"But why the US can't help to bail them out ?" Why isn't Europe helping to bail out my home state of Michigan? Same reason. Michigan is part of the US. The central European states I am referring to (Poland, Bulgaria, etc.) are part of the EU.

Marie Claude on :

EU has a president, a Czech, then if he has the power to force the european banks to bail the eastern EU countries, lett him try, while his country has not signed Lisboa agreement and doesn't use euros so compare what is comparable besides Uncle Vaclav is the one that compared the EU to the soviet empire, the art and the manner to get some supports

Marie Claude on :

sources ????

Anonymous on :

had not Napoleonurged for clinging money, things would have been different, and the purchase of Louisiane didn't cost much to the new eastern american union,that, plus, still had good connections and spies in England, and, whose well-known anglo saxon spirit had a bad (already) opinion of the French : (le ministre du Trésor fédéraliste Oliver Wolcott Jr. le notait sous le Directoire, les Français étaient "les pires et les plus dangereux voisins que nous [puissions] avoir comme le sont les fourmis et les fouines dans nos granges et nos greniers"), sympathetic, nah ? 529 911 680 acres at 3 cents the acre, good bargain isn't it ? http://www.napoleon.org/fr/salle_lecture/articles/files/1803cessionlouisiane.asp also Napleon wasn't a money man but a warrior http://www.auteurs.net/entretien.asp/idC=51489&idTC=4&idR=201&idG= I can't see ow France had a debt toward America, up to this date America hadn't given a kopek back to the French, and instead of Napoleon borrowed money to England about Mexico expedition seems that the new mexican republic didn't honor its debts, it's why France, England Spain initiated a war, soon england and spain resigned and left france alone. So who still sayed with debts ? about WW1 isn't it funny that an Ubot attack on an american merchandise ship determined America's engagement, though Bois Belleau remained the main exploit (marines), otherwise they were supplying material while the troops had not to cover the harshest work. Plan Marshal was ment to reconstruct french infrastructures that had been destroyed by anglo-saxon bombs, and prevent France to fail into a communist governed state, would you visit France with soviet style buildings ?

John in Michigan, USA on :

I just finished the HBO series "John Adams" (which I enjoyed) so I think I understand what MC is upset about. After some delays, the French monarchy did provide much-needed help to the America Revolution. I think MC is angry that when the French had their revolution, Adams did not come to their aid (as Jefferson wanted). Of course, if we had aided the French at that time, it would mean that La Terreur would have been blamed on us.

Don S on :

You mean it hasn't? The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire was the US' fault, that I'm sure of. Not to mention the loss of the Garden of Eden...

Marie Claude on :

The Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire was the US' fault, that I'm sure of. Not to mention the loss of the Garden of Eden... no, the creation of potatoes, it's your fault, besides you even called them french fried when they were belgian, and then it was't sufficent you carried on calling them friedom fried ! uh, isn't it a propention to pervertion that is natural on the other side of the channel and the pond ?

Don S on :

French, Belgian, what's the difference? French and Walloons speak the same language. The French make jokes about the Belgos, but I think that is a manifestation of insecurity. I'd have my phobias too if my country had lost three straight wars to the Germans. Worse, if I'd almost lost 3 straight wars but was only saved from losing by the intervention of les Rosbifs and Yankees who had usurped France's natural place in the world. People point to la Louvre as the utmost manifestation of French culture, but isn't it more of a manifestation of a certain gallic tendency to lift everything which isn't nained down, much as the British Museum exhibits a similar British tendency? Personally I see Musee D'Orsay as a manifestation of French Culture, but La Louvre as a tribute to the glories that were Egypt, Greece, Mesapotamia, Italy, etc.....

Anonymous on :

"French, Belgian, what's the difference? French and Walloons speak the same language. The French make jokes about the Belgos, but I think that is a manifestation of insecurity. I'd have my phobias too if my country had lost three straight wars to the Germans." but your county starts loosing three straght wars, should I say that your bashing is a joke and thus a manifestation of insecurity too ? "Worse, if I'd almost lost 3 straight wars but was only saved from losing by the intervention of les Rosbifs and Yankees who had usurped France's natural place in the world." it could have been worst by the intervention of the soviets, anyway, that was what our commies resistants were expecting, the soviets in Paris would have been a bigger threat for the Anglo-saxons and their free-market ! Fortunately Roosvelt understood this plan, it wasn't to save our asses solaly, cuz it didn't disturb him to trade with the nazis and the fashist states of Europe, umm, nowadays, some Americans praise the fashists regimes, Franco wasn't he fighting the commies ? Mussolini as former socialist turned Italy into fashist capitalism, only Hitler still has the bad label, umm until when ? "People point to la Louvre as the utmost manifestation of French culture, but isn't it more of a manifestation of a certain gallic tendency to lift everything which isn't nained down, much as the British Museum exhibits a similar British tendency? Personally I see Musee D'Orsay as a manifestation of French Culture, but La Louvre as a tribute to the glories that were Egypt, Greece, Mesapotamia, Italy, etc....." What about the New york biggest museum ? well then you haven't seen the halls that are devoted to the french classical art in Le Louvre, Orsay is devoted to the 19th and 20th centuries french art.

Marie Claude on :

Jefferson was an admirator of Voltaire ! I wasn't thinking of Adams but of Washington who corresponds to the Revolution and Napoleon eras BUT he was such a bus ! I'll have to investigate for Adams

Marie Claude on :

no john, if you had helped Louis XVI, there wouln't have been "terror", cuz with his money back Louis would have bought bread for the populace from his neighbourhood co princes, plus he could have paid the army and a batallon from America would have been welcome too

John in Michigan, USA on :

MC, You need to research Adams and Jefferson some more. [b]There was never, I repeat, never any possibility of Americans going to war to preserve the French monarchy.[/b] The only question was, would we side with the Revolution, or with the British, or stay neutral. George Washington had retired by the the time of the French Revolution. When pressed, Washington came out of retirement to take an honorary post as head of the new Army. But, Hamilton made all the important decisions for Washington. Hamilton was a Federalist, and had no love for the French or British crown. However, he wanted to preserve the European status quo, therefore he was in effect pro-British. Some argue he saw a war (against Napoleon) as a chance to forge a strong American identity that would follow Federalist principles. Jefferson, on the other hand, was an anti-Federalist and felt morally obligated to aid the French revolution. He said the US and the French revolution were one and the same. Later, after it got ugly and then Napoleon took over, Jefferson wanted to avoid war. Adams was also a Federalist, but he wanted to avoid war. He managed to negotiate neutrality. After Adams came Jefferson, who in 1801 said "peace, commerce, and honest friendship with all nations, entangling alliances with none"

Marie Claude on :

Jefferson wanted to avoid war. umm in 1812 he decleared war to England and invaded Canada what I wrote elsewhere "because the access to european harbours were closed to the american merchandises (the mutual anglo-franco embargo was the cause, when the Brits looted your ships (USS Chesapeake) and forced the american (some of them were former British) seemen to enrol in their navy, and that your country forbid the continental ships the access to the american harbours and caraibean colonial’s, when Jefferson wanted to conquer Canada, that’s were the real fighters were, the Canadians, the french canadian helped for good reasons (Salaberry anyone ? 2000 vs 6000 Americans), that is how Canada become the country Canada. But there were no continental French in the battles, even in New Orleans, Canadians, french Canadians"

John in Michigan, USA on :

Jefferson wanted to avoid war in Europe.

Pat Patterson on :

I know you'll claim this is beside the point or more Anglo-saxon arrogance but Jefferson had been out of office three years when Congress declared war and Pres James Madison signed the declaration. The rest is just a muddle when the bulk of troops defending Canada were British, the British had the same low opinion of militias as America was beginning to have, though the British relied heavily on the French speaking Canadian Voltgieurs the oldest native regiment in the New World. By the end of the war the ratio of troops was to the British advantage 5 to 3. But New Orleans ended both the pretensions of the French to regain territory and ended any further designs of the British to bisect the US. Adding to what John in Michigan said about Jefferson who wrote to the American Ambassador, after Thermidor, asking if it was as bad as the US press reported and if so then perhaps Edmund Burke was right. Also a slight correction even though schismatics under David Koresh suffered a severe downsizing the Branch Davidians of the Seventh Day Adventists are still in business and actually have recovered their property in Waco.

Anonymous on :

"I know you'll claim this is beside the point or more Anglo-saxon arrogance" professoral professional deformation, thus also arrogance :lol: "But New Orleans ended both the pretensions of the French to regain territory and ended any further designs of the British to bisect the US." umm, it' couldn't be, Napoleon had no means, but if you have some links that say so... can't wait to check them Adding to what John in Michigan said about Jefferson who wrote to the American Ambassador, after Thermidor, asking if it was as bad as the US press reported and if so then perhaps Edmund Burke was right. and he couldn't help, of course ! "Also a slight correction even though schismatics under David Koresh suffered a severe downsizing the Branch Davidians of the Seventh Day Adventists are still in business and actually have recovered their property in Waco." A guess, you wanted to be funny, or ?

Pat Patterson on :

No, actually it meant that MC doesn't know much about American history, the second is obviously not a real attempt but merely the pretensions of the French to regain territory, ie., installing Maxmillian as Emperor and using French troops till they had lost every battle to prop him up, Jefferson did drop his support for the French Revolution because it wasn't a revolution of ideas any more but simply an excuse to kill any enemy, real or perceived, and yes you finally sussed out a joke.

John in Michigan, USA on :

Or to put it another way, you seem to be suggesting that, if we had helped Louis XIV by repaying the debts and perhaps paying additional money, there would have been no French Revolution at all. Is that really the kind of help that France wanted? MC keep in mind there is an assumption by US conservatives that because France is socialist (as compared to the US) that therefore, all French are socialists. You, however, have hinted in the past on this forum that perhaps you are a French conservative? Are you by any chance pro-monarchy? Sorry, no offense, but I have to ask.

Marie Claude on :

"there is an assumption by US conservatives that because France is socialist (as compared to the US) that therefore, all French are socialists. You, however, have hinted in the past on this forum that perhaps you are a French conservative? Are you by any chance pro-monarchy? Sorry, no offense, but I have to ask." that 's right :lol: um, Voted "right", at least for the right that is not regared as morally not reprehensible such the "front national". Sarkozy's pary is what was the more morally right

John in Michigan, USA on :

If there were a chance to restore the French monarchy, you would vote for that? Would you prefer a Bourbon, or would you prefer an Emperor in the style of Napoleon?

Pat Patterson on :

Since we are all citizens of the world my vote goes to either bringing back the Merovingians or at the very least Emperor Norton. Either could run France in interesting and exciting ways.

Marie Claude on :

What about a black teleprompteur ?

Marie Claude on :

why would we want another king while we have the opportunity to change its ersatz every 5 years ? if you really want me choose a king, then I vote for Juan Carlos, umm, a Bourbon on the rocks :-)

Don S on :

I doubt if Louis would have welcomed American soldiers in 1789 any more than DeGaulle welcomed them in 1964. They did not speak the language, did not understand what was going on, and their natural preference would have been to assist the Paris mob in destroying the Bastille rather than defend it. The US didn't really possess an army in the sense you seem to mean, not in 1789 they didn't! They had to build it mostly from scratch for every war the US fought until WWII. The first major US military institution, was West Point, established in 1802. Much too late for poor hapless Louis. Pay back the loan> In 1789 the US dollar was called the 'Continental' in the sense of 'not worth a Continental'. That changed to a degree after Washington was elected President in 1789 and Hamilton started creating a US treasury and banking system, but again that was not accomplished in an instant but over more than a decade. Too late for poor Louis again...

Don S on :

Ah, Marie, but you forget that the US was not really a nation-state until the Constitution was ratified. The individual states were not legally bound to pay the debt, and indeed there was no fair way to apportion it among the states. Even after the Constitution was ratified the finances of the US were not in a position to pay the debt. As Pat points out the US did pay off it's debt to France after 40 years (very quickly by the standards set in such things). France has not paid off it's WWI debts to the US. But the US was not in a position to pay in 1789, as it's wealth lay in potential, not actuality as yet. Would this have stopped the Revolution? I think it may have postponed it a few years, but France had recurring crisises of the Royal finances dating back to the 1720's I believe. There is little reason to doubt that crisis would have struck again, later, for another cause. One of the UK's greatest Prime Ministers, Pitt the Younger, made it his life's work to put the huge British debt resulting from the Revolutionary War on a sound (and cheap) footing. So the UK (with more than double the French debt resulting from the war) survived, while the ancient regime did not. In a very real sense the finances of the French state remained medieval until the Revolution, but the British exchequer had gone through several transformations (Cromwell and the Roundheads, Isaac Newton's creation of a sound British currency, Walpole's work, as well as Pitt Jr.)

Don S on :

Marie, you have interesting thought processes. You assert that the US has punished France harshly, and append as evidence links to stories about Spain seeking indictments of former Bush administration officials. Arguably that is an example of Spain punishing the US. Not sure what that has to do with France (except part of the cheering section urging the Spanish judge on may be doing it with French accents.... One could argue that Bush '[unished' Zapatero with silence, lack of communication, and perhaps a stiff diplomatic note, but you would find it difficult to show evidence of anything worse than that.

Marie Claude on :

"Marie, you have interesting thought processes. You assert that the US has punished France harshly, and append as evidence links to stories about Spain seeking indictments of former Bush administration officials". Don, umm, I was sure that you would pick what suits your agenda in the aforelink, while I wanted to point on the comments that illustrated "reverse psychology", where finally the French got on the focus for another european little judge hubris. and I would the rest on your derision skills, though I am not sure that you really ment what you wrote,should I say "manifestation of insecurity" ?

Joe Noory on :

Yes, and as we know there's never any reason for such a thing to happen, and nothing that ever preceded such a thing that would cause it to happen. It's just the way Americans are. They spend their lives obsessed with the specific issues and fears of a handful of individuals an ocean away. And since there was no reason to cause Jefferson to declare war in 1812, then that's the same thing, and it can be used to try to explain some strage theory about psychological complexes 197 years later. If I had a nickel for every time I heard a European use that sort of logic as a personal palliative, I wouldn't have to work for a living.

John in Michigan, USA on :

The cargo of the Maersk Alabama was humanitarian aid -- food and medicine. There could not be a more perfect symbol of the moral bankruptcy of Somali warlordism -- warlordism isn't caused by poverty, rather, it causes poverty in order to sustain itself. We saw this in Somalia in 1992-3 when UNITAF arrived to find an above average local harvest was being left to rot in the fields. And, nothing shows the intellectual bankruptcy of the left better that Johann Hari's defense of the pirates, "[url=http://www.huffingtonpost.com/johann-hari/you-are-being-lied-to-abo_b_155147.html]You Are Being Lied to About Pirates[/url]" "Once they had a ship, the pirates elected their captains, and made all their decisions collectively. They shared their bounty out in what Rediker calls 'one of the most egalitarian plans for the disposition of resources to be found anywhere in the eighteenth century.' They even took in escaped African slaves and lived with them as equals." So you see, pirates are really misunderstood Anarcho-syndicalists. Yay. I'll bet they never robed from other pirates, and gave their women the vote, just like in the movies! Even if this were true of certain pirates in history, Hari has never met the Somali pirates and has no idea what they're like. Instead, he just assumes the West has them all backwards. Plus, "many of the ugliest forces in the Western world have seen this as a great opportunity to steal the country's food supply and dump our nuclear waste in their seas." "Much of [the nuclear waste] can be traced back to European hospitals and factories, who seem to be passing it on to the Italian mafia to 'dispose' of cheaply." "This nuclear waste washed up during the 2005 tsunami." Never mind that he is almost certainly talking about the Dec, 2004 tsunami, that did hit West Africa... but hit 500+ miles south of Somalia, in Sri Lanka. That's some wave! To be fair, he shouldn't have blamed Europe 100% After all, the tsunami was caused by American underground nuclear testing in Indonesia. --- But like all conspiracy theories, there's just enough reality to make you hesitate. For example: we killed a bunch of Somalis, presumably Muslims, on the very day of Easter. During the Bush administration, this would be proof positive of a massive conspiracy. Under Obama, who can say?

John in Michigan, USA on :

OK make that EAST Africa...

Joe Noory on :

This poll was of 200 people called by telephone. No details are available from the Research 2000 website, but it's clear that they are not the non-parisan operation that they say they are (or more likely he or she is.) The only links posted to their own studies are to another one done for Kos, and a blog post reflecting on it titled to warm David's cockles: [i]"Provincial conservative resentment isn’t just American ..."[/i] However, on Kos' adulatory post relating to the unbelievable findings, we find that self-identifying democrats are 50% greater that republicans, and that a quarter are neither or other - a sign that it is geographically isolated in a place where third parties are present to a significant degree, such as one would find in Philadelphia and San Fransisco. The sample relative to race, shows that the numbers of white, black, and latino respondants are roughly equal. We ain't in Kansas, and we ain't in America as a whole: caucasians should be twice the number to reflect broasd-ranging sentiment, and Republicans roughly on half, not one-third. Now to the favorability question about Europe: favorable about what? Their image? F1 motor sports? If as the other slam goes, that we shoeless, ignorat, Americans never leave our provincial hovels, how would we know enough to answer that question? As to David's extrapolation, it's painfully obvious that every thing he sees around him: rainbows, earthquakes, acne, is some sort of sign demonstrating the absolute goodness of any thought that enters his head and any political proxysm or invective notion about people who he doesn't agre with. Much like the fact that comments on his blog that even slightly disagree with him are vetted, I think we know know how one can convince onself of assertions like the one where (on the basis of no issue at all) Europe is 'universally loved' by Americans. Like his wallowing in his own views, this poll is not to be taken seriously. His views, and the facts limited to the poll ARE to be taken seriously. Want to extrapolate based on WHY this story is here, perhaps? How much of this is the pining desire for Europeans and their strange proxies in the US trying hard in any way to seek that love? How much of it is vetted to provide that narcotic kick when the Rasmussen poll, and every previous poll that can be believed doesn't sugges anything along the lines that would let one exxagerate to the point were one could use the words [b]"universal"[/b] or [b]"love"[/b]. If the point of these posts is to not discuss NATO as a defense organization, and for the completly unrelated campaign of Europeans to promote their view of themselves to the handful of Americans who come here, then the one way not to do that is to go so far as to assert that anywhere on earth is there a [b]"universal love"[/b] shared by nations. It sounds like Soviet era public rhetoric. Many Americans like European societies and vice versa. But what on earth does it mean childishly suggest that ther is "universal love" there? It's so painfully stupid that it's almost too embarassing to read. There is no such thing as a universally held opinion, or for that matter universally held feeling of love for the image or a continent, let alone an individual.

influx on :

Not a fan of Kos or phone polls, but I do care about quoting correct numbers: it's not 200 calls, it's 2400 calls.

Don S on :

2400 calls, but how many answers? 2400 - or fewer?

Don S on :

I had a look on both the Kos site and on Research 2000. The latter doesn't mention this poll. I also looked at well-respected pollster.com (Mark Blumenthal) to see whether he had any comment. It's the kind of thing he'd be interested in, but nothing as yet. Right now it's just headline figures on Kos, nothing else in the public record other than sample size and a very rough geographic distribution. I doubt any outside pollster could make much of it given the figures I saw. Research 2000 could obviously supply this data - but they aren't talking. Hmmmmm.

Pat Patterson on :

Don-Good observation on the amount of calls vs the sample size. I went back and it only mentions the former but implies that the results are based on the latter.

John in Michigan, USA on :

The research 2000 margin of error is +/- 2%. That is a low margin of error, for a typical poll usually it is about +/- 5%, which is what you get with a sample size of less than 1000. To get a low margin of error, you have to increase the sample size a lot. So their margin of error suggests that they did have a significantly larger sample size that a typical poll. A sample size of 2400 is very expensive, and quite impressive if it is true.

nanne on :

'Universal love' is just a bit of playful hyperbole. Attitudes on both sides of the Atlantic do matter for the quality of the transatlantic relationship, although I think, as noted in the post, that they follow actual political agreement or disagreement. If there is some major disagreement like there was on the war in Iraq, then we'll see attitudes quickly deteriorate again. In the mean while, the apparently improved attitudes on both sides of the Atlantic means that there is a smaller dividend for politicians who stoke cultural resentment. That is what Kos also noted. However, his analysis that this shows the GOP is now a regional rump party is self-serving. I think it's more a case of inertia among those Republicans who still try to score with anti-Europeanism. The details on the Kos poll can be [url=http://www.dailykos.com/statepoll/2009/4/9/US/284]read here[/url].

Joe Noory on :

It's not playful hyperbole, it's a structured evasion. As for the question on 'liking' continental europe, what beside her shape on the map is being asked? And to infer anything about "universal love" is buffonery, and typical of the kind of unidirectional and exclusionary thinking typical of small thinkers trying to make all aspects of life about their sad little proclivities turned into politics. You could say that about the Ugandan history and culture, showing the respondee a picture of the landscape, and then infer a sort of "universal love" for Idi Amin. On that basis, you could even call European 20th century history enlightened and humane, a lorry with a green paint-job "eco-friendly", and the like. This is the cotton-candy version of propaganda meant to draw eager-to-be-loved European pols to the American left that's not keeping it's tacitly implied committment to put the interests of those this is supposed to appeal to over America's. You've been had, Bubu.

Marie Claude on :

"It's not playful hyperbole, it's a structured evasion. As for the question on 'liking' continental europe, what beside her shape on the map is being asked? And to infer anything about "universal love" is buffonery, and typical of the kind of unidirectional and exclusionary thinking typical of small thinkers trying to make all aspects of life about their sad little proclivities turned into politics." can you make it more simple, cuz you know, we, the continental europeans are a bit short-sightened ! Though I have remarked that the people who fancy the most abstract and learned expression are those who lately embraced a new nationality or fonction, they want to show that they are more than the common sense

John in Michigan, USA on :

An interesting question is, how much credit for these improved relations should legitimately go to Obama? Clearly, he gets some credit, but it is still very early in his administration and his gestures towards Europe have been mostly symbolism, so far. The Bush administration spent the last two years trying to improve relations. The closer relationship with France started as soon a Sarko was elected, as seen in the famous state visit in which the French flag flew over the Bush ranch. It quickly moved from symbolism to substance. France officially re-entered NATO during the Obama administration, but this would have also happened if McCain had been elected. All the heavy lifting on the US side was done by Bush administration officials, not Obama officials. The few Obama officials that had been confirmed into office, were still learning the way to the bathrooms at that point. Overall, I would tend to give Obama more credit for the improved polling numbers; but most of the credit for diplomacy and improved government relations must go to Bush. Bonus question: The French Socialists in 2002 were clearly and objectively speaking, a rump party. Since then, they have seen some improvement. Still, the fact that they couldn't capitalize on the Iraq war and general disgust of Bush and America to prevent the outsider Sarko from winning, suggests they are still a rump party, even though they managed to beat the fringe parties this time. Discuss.

Marie Claude on :

the socialist party is kaputt, Segolene and Sarko managed it.

David on :

"As to David's extrapolation, it's painfully obvious that every thing he sees around him: rainbows, earthquakes, acne, is some sort of sign demonstrating the absolute goodness of any thought that enters his head and any political proxysm or invective notion about people who he doesn't agre with" Joe, you evidently have the low self-esteem of the immigrant. Every time I criticize conservatives in the US you respond with a personal attack.

Joe Noory on :

I'd wonder where you got to the "i have teh low self-esteem of an immigrant" thing, but I'll give you the benefit of the doubt, and pretent that that wasn't another personal attack. Was there some sort of point you were trying to make in there, or is a simple miasma of "something that kind of sounds like it might appeal to you" sufficient... what's wrong with asking the question? What is it exactly the respondents are supposed to "broadly like" about a CONTINENT, and how does one get to some vague conclusion about "unversal love" of something equally non-specific. Okay - let's test it. Ask a sample of adults if they like children. Nothing more specific than that, and say that it reflects 80% of the population, or perhaps, retired commercial Bankers living in Conecticut. Then, in the report, introduce some borad implication that it has something to do with child molestation. What's the useful conclusion for someone ignoring the specifies and is predisposed to wanting to wallow around in their own hatred of retired commercial Bankers living in Conecticut. I think even someone as prone to not notice things if it warms you political cockles as you are could understand that.

Kevin Sampson on :

'Joe, you evidently have the low self-esteem of the immigrant.' Is it just me, or does that have a faintly racist ring to it?

John in Michigan, USA on :

It isn't just you. Frankly, it doesn't surprise me coming from from David. He writes with such passion whenever he thinks he detects racism in others, I wouldn't be surprised if he is wrestling with, shall we say, "complicated" feelings of his own. Or, maybe he thinks, since racism is welcomed here (but it isn't...) he'll be taken more seriously if he tries to fit in and be one of the gang. Possibly, he thinks that we need to be exposed to racism so that we will come to understand that it is hurtful; he is doing it for our own good, you see. But these are just guesses. He might just be an ordinary, garden-variety person who is blind to his own faults, as we all are from time to time.

Pat Patterson on :

I wish it was the last but I think more a reversion to type. David was trying to get at least a 90 day pin but will have to start all over again.

Joe Noory on :

Are you out of your mind? How did -I- have a racaist ring to anything I said? Really, when people try to silence others with that one, you know that they are incapable of presenting a reason for their policy ideas. To boot it makes a mockery of genuine efforts to oppose racial discrimination. I realize that anyone who trots that out doesn't care about teh outcome of a broad accusation like that. They're normally more interested in their own phyrric battles on the plane of class warfare than the state of those whose cause they are pretending to champion. In reality they're just exploiting a trope that no-one will be able to be unsympathetic to. It's sad, and it's cheap. As to David's desire to "smite" anyone who pretested the White House and US Congress' economic intervention measures, I've come to the conclusion that he has no reasons. It's just the hate puppet of the day. Pull the ring on his back and hear the parroted message of the week. Its' consequences are irrelevant. 75% of the population opposes giving GM and Crysler another cent, and the zombies fall into line against the overwhelming majority of the public. Janine Garoffolo trots out a wild accusation of racism, and the thoughtless supporters repeat the notion as readily as a quotation from Mao's little red book, or any other paranoid dictator for that matter. There is no place left in this world for people who find interesting, but disagree with the ideas of the theorists of the American left.

Joe Noory on :

What's more interesting is the political usefullness of polling. Pew, with only slightly less mercinary tactics, did not poll global attitudes until Bush came to office, and stopped after he left office. A month before 9-11, it began with this "seed project" in the manipulation of perception: [i][url=http://pewglobal.org/reports/]Bush Unpopular in Europe, Seen As Unilateralist[/url][/i]

John in Michigan, USA on :

Interesting...what is your evidence that Pew has decided to stop polling global attitudes?

Joe Noory on :

An ex-girlfriend who becomes magically silent about the "future of that work group".

Don S on :

One more thing: had I been polled for that polled and the political purpose had not been made explicit, I would have expressed approval on all four questions. I like New York, San Francisco, France, and Europe generally. That is not the same thing as approving of everything emanating from those localities. Far from it. Nor do I believe these places have achieved perfection. But I do love aspects of all four places, and could live in all four (except maybe France). It's hard to hate a place, or even all of the people living in a place. Given the wording of the questions I think it's surprising that as many as 26% confess to not liking places. I could love San Francisco as a place while also believing that half the populace should be shipped to Gary Indiana. Not that I do, bus still....

John in Michigan, USA on :

That's a good point. The Kos post manages to take a general preference for these cities and bend it into "evidence that the GOP has become a rump regional party". As if there is no way to measure directly what people think about the GOP...hey, why not just ask them in a poll!?! And how is the GOP doing? Better, although still not good. The Generic Ballot shows that [url=http://www.pollster.com/polls/us/10-us-house-genballot.php]the gap between Democrats and Republicans has completely disappeared[/url]. The remaining gap is less than the margin of error. But the most important finding, is that both parties are less popular than they used to be. I think that reflects the true national mood; it certainly reflects my mood.

Marie Claude on :

(except maybe France) that's born from last easter, last year you were saying you'd love to work in France, but language was your main barrier, umm "gone with the winds" is the american words

David on :

I watched some of the "tea-bagging" protests the other day and they were pretty sad and pathetic: totally incoherent in their message. Mostly white men, with some carrying signs attacking Obama's "socialism" and others decrying his "fascism". Needless to say, one of the more popular banners was "Impeach the Kenyan!" , which shows how far the conservative "movement" has fallen. It has become a sick joke here in the US.

Joe Noory on :

So it was sad becuase of some Pavlov's Dog response you have to their race? Don't you find yourself otherwise defending the confiscation of individual property and earnng in the service of the enlagement of gub-mint and a newly enlarged class of parasitites serving it? You'll note the feebleness of a [url=http://no-pasaran.blogspot.com/2009/04/teabag-left.html]counter-protest[/url] by people who want higher taxes and invasive governmental departments auditing people into a state of fear and detachment... Can't you just see them BEGGING to have their lives and industries [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dirigisme#Dirigisme_in_other_Economic_Systems]managed[/url] by an [url=http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Statolatry]unchecked state[/url] in the manner consitent with radial power-hungry nationalism. I realise too that like that handful of counter-protesters that your only reaction will be not to argue in favor or against anything, but boradly attack and undercut the messangers a la "they're only whites", much as you addressed a previous opinion I put forward [i]feebly[/i] by saying that [i]must have been drinking[/i]. Broadly speaking, that's not exactly something you can call a social philosophy or set of ideas useful to anyone other that a politically motivated death squad. Frankly, if it satisfied you bloodlust for the people whom you think you're arguing with, you'd likely be gleefuly telling us that we should "make our last vote count" before you have an actual economic idea to to advance.

Don S on :

Dave, the Hawaiian President will have to succeed in a longer context, or it will be him and his party who are the 'sick joke'. I'm not tea-partying, nor judging prematurely. But success talks and failure walks, which is why the Democrats are in power today. Should they fail it will go in the other direction. Not in 2010, I think, but the probability rises after that....

John in Michigan, USA on :

Any signs comparing Obama to Hitler? To chimps? Didn't think so. David, why is it so important to you that the Republican Party fails? Do you want the US to have a one-party system?

David on :

Yes, as a matter of fact there were a number of posters depicting Obama as Hitler. Here is [url=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wCA-3q6t57Q] video [/url] from the Chicago rally that was broadcast on CNN. But there are many examples, if you bother to search. It's not that I want the Republican Party to fail - there are still some responsible Republicans around - we have them in New England. But the party is failing and I'm simply pointing out what is obvious and what is discussed by nearly every political observer in the US.

Pat Patterson on :

As opposed to all of the Bush as Hitler at most of the anti-war rallies? Do I draw the same conclusion as to the intelligence to the general participants based on the idiocy of a particular participant? It is encouraging that all of a sudden the Democrats have turned into true believers in respect for the president's office and also a serious challenge to blue noses and prudes everywhere!

David on :

Pat, President Obama ordered the release of four memos regarding the torture of detainees prepared by the Bush Justice Department. I challenge you to read every word of these documents and then come back and tell us all about the glorious deeds of the Bush administration. While you're at it, comment about this: [url=http://www.nytimes.com/2009/04/20/world/20detain.html?hp]Memo Says Prisoner Was Waterboarded 183 Times [/url]

John in Michigan, USA on :

I'm reserving judgment until we hear the whole story. Most importantly, I am waiting for a comprehensive investigation and report from the Obama administration. As you recall, I came out in favor of that on this site. I reject utterly the idea that we should declassify bits and pieces and conduct the inquest via the media. He and his party control virtually all of government, so he certainly shouldn't need to create media pressure in order to jump-start hearings. If Obama continues to do this, he will loose my trust on this matter. I guess this will be one more way of learning if Obama is at heart pragmatist or a socialist: does he believe in substance, or does he believe in street theater and show trials. The left described 13 years (1991-2004) of frustrating middle eastern diplomacy as a "rush to war". Why the sudden rush to judge Bush?

David on :

John, The whole story is now coming out. Abu Ghraib, we know from the Armed Services Report released last night, was not the fault of a few "bad apples". Rather, it was a systematic program of torture that can be traced back to the White House and its legal counsel. These are serious crimes against US and International law that must be prosecuted if we are a nation of laws.

Pat Patterson on :

That is not what the report says but how Sen Levin describes it. It beggars belief that an off-duty group of Reservists, who had been warned officially in writing to not return to the prison during their off hours, took their cue from events that were occuring under the authority of the USMC and the CIA thousands of miles away. But if that's the case then let's start with Pres Clinton and the various Defense secretaries that had essentially approved the similar methods during the 90's? No presidential administration has ever turned against its predecssors as much as it appears to be unfolding now. I can hardly wait for the squealing to commence when some future WH decides to go after Pres Obama and his enablers as per the precedent they are trying to create today.

John in Michigan, USA on :

This is the essence of a developing story. Why the rush to judgment?

Pat Patterson on :

Why the hyperbole? War is seldom glorious and often brutal and demeaning. Even Daniel Ellsberg admitted that often some of the things that occurred in Vietnam were shameful but considering the benefit to the country justified. Torture seems to have become a litmus test for being the right kind of person or not. But how can there be a discussion when the definition of torture is problematic on two fronts? The first in that everything is deemed torture, especially during a Republican administration, from waterboarding or sleep deprivation to serenading Noriega with Van Halen. The second being to remain a civilized country that country must often be more uncivilized than its enemies. Who in this case hijacked four jets and killed over 3,000 people and in Iraq and Afghanistan didn't take one American or NATO soldier alive to hold as a prisoner.

David on :

Thank goodness not all of us were Good Germans during the last eight years and spoke out against torture. There can be no discussion about whether waterboarding is torture. The US put Japanese interrogators in prison for a single act of waterboarding. We know from the Bybee memo that the US was waterboarding a detainee several times - several times a day for several months. Whether or not the detainee was a despicable human being is totally irrelevant under law: torture is against the US Constitution, and those who ordered and designed the torture program must be held accountable.

Pat Patterson on :

Ah, if you had just stopped at the end of the first sentence. The example you allude to, Asano et al is not very instructive. The four, civilians and soldiers, were charged an convicted of a variety of acts against American soldiers. Beating, waterboarding, burning with lighted cigarettes, stealing the prisoners Red Cross packages and leaving some of the prisoners exposed naked during the winter. And as the indictment made perfectly clear they were only marginally interested in information but more interested in simply causing the maximum amount of pain to the the POW. Plus the indictments describe the prisoners being held upside down and then having gallons of water forced into their noses and mouths while that description simply doesn't apply to what the US did. Most of the torture the Allies received seemed to be on the basis of two points. That any Commonwealth soldier who was in the Asian Theatre at the surrender of Singapore who kept to arms was considered by the Japanese to no longer have any protections and the air crew's from the Billy Mitchell Raid were considered pirates. And I certainly don't agree with the blanket description of waterboarding as torture in every case because what is claimed to be the ruling authority, the UN Convention Against Torture has so many exceptions and exemptions, as does the IV Geneva Convention, as to make them useless except for tub thumpers. http://www.2008electionprocon.org/pdf/asano_case.pdf

Pat Patterson on :

BTW, are the members of Congress, both chambers, now also Good Gemans? Can I expect David to demand that Speaker Pelosi, Rep Harman and Sen Rockefeller resign their posts and appear for public reeducation in sack cloth or avoid travel to France for their collusion and approval of waterboarding? Let's have some real fun and indict them all but only after weeks of televised hearings on C-SPAN. But that can't possibly happen because the Chairman, Sylvestre Reyes, is also a member of the Latino Caucus and the next in line, also a Democrat is the widely admired and impeached member of the Black Caucus, Alcee Hastings. How can this be as the meme that David is pushing, alone mostly, is that only rich white people allow the torture of people of color.

Don S on :

Funny how the people who complain endlessly about waterboarding rarely seem to mention how many people it was done to (3) and just whom those subjects were (Al Qaida figures high in the planning and operations apparatus). Nor do they tend to mention that lifesaving intelligence was definately obtained. Deploring torture is much easier to argue in the abstract than in the concrete. The primary torture 'victim' was none other than Khaled Sheik Mohammed, the operations director who was instrumental in planning and supporting 9/11 and many other atrocities. When people learn that I'm sure that many of them feel somewhat less sorry for it, because the suffering visited on this man is a tiny fraction of the suffering he has dealt out.....

John in Michigan, USA on :

OK, fair enough, you found some examples (although none of chimps). We'll see if the Obama=Hitler meme becomes anywhere near as frequent as the Bushitler meme (and in time of war, no less). I am delighted to know that you acknowledge the legitimacy of Republicans who would be at home in the Democratic party. Of course, Northeastern Republicans are the very definition of a regional rump party. Was McCain part of your concept of a loyal opposition? Based on your posts during the campaign, you'll forgive me if I got the impression from you that he wasn't.

David on :

"although none of chimps" That was already covered by Rupert Murdoch in [url=http://s-ec.buzzfeed.com/static/imagebuzz/terminal01/2009/2/18/10/nyposts-obama-chimp-cartoon-25714-1234970341-2.jpg]The New York Post[/url].

Add Comment

E-Mail addresses will not be displayed and will only be used for E-Mail notifications.

To prevent automated Bots from commentspamming, please enter the string you see in the image below in the appropriate input box. Your comment will only be submitted if the strings match. Please ensure that your browser supports and accepts cookies, or your comment cannot be verified correctly.
CAPTCHA

Form options