5 years after 9/11, many angry at U.S.

[sabra]

http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/ap/world/4177631.html

5 years after 9/11, many angry at U.S.

PARIS — The nations of the world joined Monday in solemn remembrance of Sept. 11 _ but for many, resentment of the United States flowed as readily as tears.

Critics say Americans have squandered the goodwill that prompted France's Le Monde newspaper to proclaim "We are all Americans" that somber day after the attacks, and that the Iraq war and other U.S. policies have made the world less safe in the five years since.

...

New Zealand's Prime Minister Helen Clark joined many when she said: "No, we're not more secure since 9/11."

...

Israel's Haaretz daily expressed disappointment and cynicism in an op-ed piece that said: "This is Sept. 11 five years later: a political tool in the hands of the Bush administration."

...

In neighboring Pakistan, considered a major ally in the U.S.-led war on terror, newspapers ran bleak-toned opinion columns and editorials criticizing Western anti-terror policies and attitudes.

[bennywhale]

1. What was an opportunity out of

tragedy to unify the world based on a new understanding was wasted in the most horrific fashion.

What followed was lies, lies, lies and obscene violence.

History is already judging and it will continue to do so and these last five years can be described as nothing less than an absoliute disaster for America and the world.

[AX10]

2. Bush has made this world extremly dangerous.

[Giant Robot]

3. This is what angers me the most about Bush

He was *given* an opportunity here to bring the world together and lead us into a new age. He had this handed to him without him doing anything (of course I am saying this discounting any role he and his admin may have played). Even Iran, yes remember them axis of evil Iran, held a moment of silence for our country. And if I can see this, then hell, someone in the admin must have been smart enough to notice this golden opportunity.

But no.

He had to go and be a fucking cowboy. He had to go and live out some fantasy of the U.S. being some hegemony or empire. He had to be a complete and total tool. He ruined a potential new era of human understanding. He ruined our future and threw away a potential future. And he ruined my faith in man.

Fuck.

[rmgarrette64]

4. I'm going to be contrary here...

Please be more specific about this opportunity to "bring the world together and lead us into a new age."

Let me do a quick back-up here. I used to say I'd yield to no one in my dislike for Bush, but that was before coming to these boards ;-) I still thoroughly dislike the man, and wish he were not the President, but I also see some statements, like this one, that make me scratch my head a bit. My husband is, as I've mentioned to many, a rather stalwart conservative, so I hear that point of view somewhat regularly (only somewhat - it's not like politics dominates our lives...) It bothers me, and it bothers me a lot, that when people start thinking about national security, they tend to favor the Republicans more than the Democrats. But I think the post I'm responding to represents a fairly widespread view on our side, and is one reason people feel like that.

Now, it is true that almost every nation in the world expressed deep sympathy with the U.S. five years ago. But I don't think that actually made all those nations friendly to us. As soon as we started acting, instead of mourning, those divisions came right back up.

Oh, sure, you can criticize the actions - especially in Iraq, but keep in mind there was a lot of protest even over Afghanistan, which was much more justifiable. Anyway, if you want to criticize Iraq, I'm right there with you. But my point is that there are countries and movements out there that oppose the U.S., and aren't friendly. 9/11 was not a magical moment that turned that around. (Gods alive, I hate referring to that as a "magical moment" even in sarcasm.)

Perhaps I'm misinterpreting your statement, Giant Robot. That's always a possibility, I'm afraid, and I stand ready to be corrected. But it does sound to me like an all-too-standard trope that all our conflicts are the results of misunderstandings, and the round of sympathy we were extended after 9/11 was a chance to talk, and clear them all up. I don't think that's true. I think many of our conflicts are caused by actual conflicts - we understand each other quite well, and disagree. I may wish we could settle such disagreements short of force, but I'm also glad that we have force available for when nothing else will do. I may prefer settling such things without force, but if it comes to force, I prefer being on the side that has more of it.

Anyway, this may be a bit rambling, but I also think it's a real problem for our party. If things reverse by November, I think this will be the cause of it. We tend to see conspiracy in terrorism-related issues coming up before an election. It's worth spending some time thinking about why that hurts us - why do people, when thinking about national security, prefer the other party?

R. Garrett

[Psephos]

5. A superb post

You're absolutely correct about the tiredness of the "we squandered the world's unity" trope. Ironically, as you point out, we on the left are also on the verge of squandering something made possible by a different unity: opportunities to win big this November, because of low Bush approval.

9/11 was a moment when much of the West expressed its sympathy to the US through superficial expressions of solidarity. But words are inexpensive, and soon blow away. The frictions and conflicts that had already driven wedges between the US and many of its mid-century allies remained intact.

Bush will be gone from office in 28 months. Animosity toward the US will remain. By focusing so much mental energy on the symbol, and not the cause, of division among nations, we prevent ourselves from addressing the real problems.

There are a lot of posters here on DU who think of the average voter as a sheep. To the contrary, voters are fairly smart. They don't want to vote for people who spend all their time immersed in conspiracy theories and hatred of half of America.

Political success comes to those who bring people together, not those who split them apart. That's how majorities are formed, and in our system, majorities by definition are the winners of elections. As you said, it's important for us to ask "why people, when thinking about national security, prefer the other party." The problem is not one of policies (ours are better), but one of creating a sense of unity, where those on the right can feel partnership with us on the left.

"If a man points at the moon, a fool will look at the finger."
- Sufi saying

Peace

[bennywhale]

12. "superficial expressions of solidarity." I think thats quite insulting

i'm european, and in the days, weeks and months that followed 9/11 there was genuine heartfelt sympathy for the people of America, those that died and their families. There was also almost total support for invading Afghanistan. The objections to the Afghan war the above poster mentions, was a very tiny minority, and that is the nature of democarcies.

The goodwill was squandered, terribly and predictably.

[Nihil]

13. And who even stands up to the official line these days?

... much less "spend all their time immersed in conspiracy theories"?

As far as "hatred of half of America" goes, the only thing any
politician cares about (*really* cares about) is being re-elected.
Proof positive occupies the seats of congress and senate.

> There are a lot of posters here on DU who think of the average voter
> as a sheep. To the contrary, voters are fairly smart.

Remind me ... who did the average voter elect TWICE in the US of A?
And you call them "smart"?
QED

[Dervill Crow]

15. "who did the average voter elect TWICE in the US of A?"

If I recall correctly, President Clinton was the last president to be elected twice. It is many people's belief that he was last president to be elected at all.

[Nihil]

19. That is true only if people accept the other part of the argument

i.e., "Bush wasn't elected because America is no longer a democracy."

If (as many others maintain) America is still a democracy then its
elected leader on the last two occasions was George W Bush.

Personally, I think your answer is correct but, in the context of my
previous statement, the above is the correct answer ... hence my comment
that the intelligence of the average voter is dismally low and their
behaviour sheep-like.

Sad isn't it?

[KitSileya]

22. He may not have been elected,

but the American people did not try, seriously, to stop him from taking office - not even in 2004, when you knew he'd already stolen one election. Why is the rest of the world supposed to absolve the American people any guilt because Bush wasn't properly elected, when other people, Mexicans but the latest in a long line, has tried much harder, facing much greater odds, to overturn illegal elections?

[fujiyama]

16. The West did not "express itself with superficial expressions..."

In fact, it's arrogant statements like that which continues to piss off the rest of the world and understandably so.

NATO, following 9/11 WAS united. They invoked the resolution stating that since a member state was attacked, ALL NATO nations were. People in countries the US has been hostile to for decades marched in vigils - hundreds in Tehran, I recall which was especially moving. Governments, which had poor relations with the US during the Cold War immediately understood the havoc Islamist terrorism causes and were united with the US in defeating Al Qaeda.

You can consider it all "superficial", but I believe there was genuine sympathy for the victims and disgust at the perpotrators throughout the world.

Soon after NATO sent thousands of troops to Afhanistan - there are Canadians and Europeans still fighting that war for us, which we ignored about six months after making a half-assed effort in the first place.

And you're statement about "asking why the other party is PERCIEVED stronger in national security" leads me to believe those people are poorly educated and are informed to the extent the propaganda media will allow. Many people think Afghanistan was a success, when in fact it is a collasal failure, forgotten only because Iraq is that much worse of a disaster.

And if you really believe the right wants a partership in any way, you are truly and utterly deluded. What are the causes of the divisions you ask? It's the disasterous neocon policies of the last five years - both here and abroad.

[cyberpj]

6. If we had stayed on Bin Laden and his boys we'd have more respect,

that's for sure.

Iraq's massive civiian casualties and cruelties exposed the bully that has control of the world's greatest power. It's a disgrace and we should never deny it.

[fujiyama]

17. You exagerrate

the extent to which other countries opposed the war in Afghanistan. There were scattered protests, but most governments were fully aware the US would end up pursuing some military action and supported it to some extent.

I think you and Psephos don't seem to understand that other countries (and regimes) were fully aware of the threat of terrorism and were reminded that such attacks could occur anywhere. Other countries realized this and were willing to help preventing those types of attacks in the future.

Instead the administration said "we don't need your help - we're going after Saddam" and basically told the rest of the world to go fuck itself, ignoring Afghanistand altogether.

None of this has anything to do with conspiracy theories regarding 9/11. It's just fact. As Gore said while Bush was begining the push for war in Iraq, Bush betrayed us and the entire world.

[iverglas]

18. and another squanderee pipes up

It's a complex thing for this time of morning with work to be done, but ...

What was squandered was the opportunity for the US to relate to the rest of the world as people, over and around the governments involved.

In Canada, we did people stuff. Our government allowed US-bound planes to land at our airports, not knowing what allowing them into our airspace might actually mean -- and no one objected. And then people in the neighbourhood of the airports took hundreds of stranded travellers, most of them USAmericans, into their homes. (I called up the local airport to offer, not thinking that of course my particular airport was going to be getting flights diverted from, not to it.) And then we sent firefighters, and sniffer dogs, and coffee and doughnuts or whoever and whatever all it was that got shipped down to NYC. People responded on a person-to-person, people-to-people level, and on a sub-state level through municipalities and volunteer organizations and the like (as was also the case for Katrina, btw).

And in what seems the most trivial way, we were spurned. The fact that the spurning was so petty was what made it not trivial. We didn't get a "thank you" in that big speech of George's a few days later -- even though we had arguably done more, simply by allowing those planes to enter our airspace and head for our cities, without even mentioning all the humanitarian efforts, than any other country or people, at that point.

Then came the not-with-us-against-us bullshit. People of goodwill, friends, can disagree. They can do so because what is in one's interest is not in the other's equally impotant and legitimate interest, or because one party sees other interests that trump both (like maybe the interests of the people of Afghanistan ... although, oops, we did go along on that adventure), and also because they don't agree on what is in the other's interest: we don't actually think it was in the US's interests, or at least the interests of the USAmerican people, to invade and occupy Iraq. But we were treated the way the right wing in the US treats its own dissenters: we were not treated like partners and allies and friends with whom it was worth consulting and exchanging views, and who were deserving of consideration; we were vilified and insulted.

The opportunity that was there was the chance to reach people around the world on a human level: the event in Iran mentioned in this thread was one manifestation. A huge "thank you" card signed by everybody in the US -- with the president's name at the top of the list -- would have been the appropriate response to that one. If one party could set aside its abhorrence of the other party qua state or government for the occasion, the other party should have held that door open for even just a moment.

The door got shut, on all of us. We had responded as human beings, and what we got in return was an undifferentiated, unnuanced, state-to-state door slam. And escalation of all the crap that makes us hate the US as a state to start with.

People in the US are fond of the idea that we foreigners don't hate them, we hate their government. Well, it gets damned bloody hard to hold that idea when your government, the one you elect, you'll recall, does so much that is so worthy of hating and rejects every effort we make to do what people who like other people as people do.

The opportunity that was squandered wasn't an opportunity for the US to buttress its fortifications by co-opting the rest of us into its vile crusade against half of the world outside its borders. We weren't about to sign on to that. What it was, was an opportunity to spread the kind of goodwill for the people of the US, at a grassroots level out here in the world, that any nation needs to have in its back pocket.

---> The corollary, and it's a rather important one, is that the brief surge of the goodwill felt by USAmericans toward us out here was also choked off. And we can tell you that being left with nothing but the ill will displayed by your government and fostered by the likes of FoxNews doesn't exactly enhance feelings of security, and nourish goodwill in return.

I have to say that your words display an enormously short-sighted, ethnocentric perspective on the whole thing. What's in it for you, eh? "As soon as we started acting ..." -- there the rest of us recalcitrant, dimwitted, cowardly fairweather friends were, not falling into line behind you. Us against them is what it comes down to every time, them being anyone who doesn't do what we're told. And that's exactly what squandered the goodwill.

[heliarc]

24. Remember 9/11/1973

[We_R_da_Future_1986]

10. We were once united

I really must say, you hit that one dead on. We had the whole world behind us. People all over the world were saying " We are all Americans now" after 9/11 first happened, and for the first time the world was united. It is just to bad our "GREAT" President had to fuck it up!

[KitSileya]

7. As a Norwegian, I agree.

Heck, even my students, 16-20 year olds, most of them not interested in politics or world affairs, vocational students who prefer hammers to books, who prefer shoot'em ups to An Inconvenient Truth, are quite clear on that point. Bush is a failure. Bush is a menace. Bush just made more terrorists. The Iraqis should bomb American soil in retaliation, the Americans deserve it for what they've done. All these things, and more, have I heard today in the classes I've taught.

[bdamomma]

8. I hate to say this, but we will pay a heavy price for all this death and

destruction and for being totally ignorant. (well some of us are not ignorant)

[KitSileya]

9. I think the price will be heavy too.

Even if it is not paid in American lives on American soil, however unlikely it is that that will be avoided, the US will never again fully regain the respect it once had.

As dangerous as it is to use nazi comparisons on message boards, I will use one here, and you are hereby warned.

No one will, in any time in the future, ever think of Germany without having those 12 years during which Hitler wreaked havoc hanging as a shadow over the name. It might not be a big shadow, a big blot, in some contexts, but it will always be there whenever anyone thinks of Germany and Germans. I predict that the US can never wash away the Bush years. Like the shadow of Hitler over Germany, Bush and what he has done to the world, and what he will do to the world, and what his successor will do to the world if the Republicans aren't stopped, will forever taint the US. And, I am sad to say, similar to how we condemn, if only in the deeper recesses of our minds, the Germans for not stopping Hitler, for going along, the same way, if not to the same degree, Americans living under Bush will be judged.

You may counter with the horrific day of 9/11, but the globality of the world, the interconnectedness the internet has given us, will strike that down. There may come a day when history will say, you should have known better, you should have risked, if not your lives as Sophie Scholl and her ilk did, your jobs and your consumerism to stop these tyrants. One general strike. One mass demonstration that last longer than a few hours, like the Ukrainians and the Mexicans did- One time when the American people together say, enough - even if you fail, it would regain you your honor. We judge you more harshly than we do the terrorists simply because to whom much is given, much is asked - you had democracy, you had a good life, you had freedom of speech, freedom of congregation, means of getting information thru to people. People in Afghanistan didn't. People in Iraq didn't. People in Iran, in North Korea, in many parts of the world didn't. But you did. And as far as the rest of the world can see, you are failing in your duty - should the Bush administration invade Iran, I think nothing can prevent this judgment from the rest of the world.

This is not an easy thing to write. We have failed in our duty as well, failed in trying to contain and neutralize the Taliban, and the mullahs of Iran, and the maniacs in North Korea. But the US is the world's only superpower, and as I said, we expect more of you - not militarily, but diplomatically.

[Bragi]

20. You wrote:

There may come a day when history will say, you should have known better, you should have risked, if not your lives as Sophie Scholl and her ilk did, your jobs and your consumerism to stop these tyrants. One general strike. One mass demonstration that last longer than a few hours, like the Ukrainians and the Mexicans did- One time when the American people together say, enough - even if you fail, it would regain you your honor.

How very true that is. What the docility of Americans in reaction to Bush's catastrophic policies post-9/11 showed the world, and what his suspicious re-election by a majority of Americans underscored, was that there is not any real democratic checks on what an American president can do if he can successfully frighten the populace, which itself doesn't seem to be a hard thing to do.

Once they become afraid, once an Adminsitration orchestrates the mass media to generate mass fear (which is real easy in America) then we know now that Americans will support their President and their government in implementing horrifically murderous and dangerous policies against non-Americans, no matter how insane those policies are, and no matter what anyone else -- friend or foe -- thinks.

Personally, I think that's the real Bush legacy -- an enduring global mistrust of Americans, and of American democracy, that will not abate for at least a generation.

- B

[KitSileya]

21. "An enduring mistrust of Americans"

You will find, increasingly, that the rest of the industrialized world will find solutions without consulting you, be polite to your faces, but the real deals and the real negotiations and diplomacy will increasingly only pay lip service to your 'hegemony' and rather do what needs to be done without you. Europe may be stumbling a little, but the future seems clear. As for the non-industrial world - half of it hates you, the Muslim half, and it will regard you as a snake, someone to be wary of, someone that may strike at any time, and which it would be best to avoid. The other half is so desperate that it will take your money, for they are so squeezed dry by the industrialized world that they have no choice, but even there Europe is becoming more and more important, at the expense of your position.

Simply put, the US has shown again and again since the Republicans got power that you cannot be trusted to put the good of the world above your own interests.

[bronxiteforever]

14. But the story isn't over yet. There still burns however

the light of reason, democracy, peace and hope in the hearts of many Americans. Every powerful country makes terrible horrible mistakes, it is the nature of humans and yes we are all humans. The question is, after the trauma of the Bush years will we will turn the Nation around? I believe we are on the verge of rejecting Bushism and its offspring fear. There is a future for this country that can be waged in diplomacy and innovation and the arts and renewed political institutions. I was lucky enough to remember John Kennedy and Robert and Martin Luther King ,those giants who shaped our country.They still reside in our hearts. There are those of us,diverse and cantankerous though we may be, that seek their better world beyond bombs and multi-color terror warnings.


Don't give up on us yet. We are on the knife's edge but as Dylan said "you don't need a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowing"

[Bragi]

25. True, at one level...

The US may be, as you write, "on the verge of rejecting Bushism and its offspring fear." I sure hope so, and I have nothing but respect for the many, many decent Americans who rejected Bushism all along.

However, even if Americans do reject Bushism in the near future, and even if you elect new leaders who seem to care about the world and the people in in who are not Americans, there will still be mistrust simply because we have now seen how awful American can be, and how far Americans will let their leaders go when it comes to warring against non-Americans. We now know that Americans, if you fill them with fear, which isn't hard to do, then they will even re-elect leaders who behave monstrously towards the rest of the world.

Given this, I don't forsee America being trusted again as reliable ally for at least a generation. This is a measure of how much lasting damage one very stupid President -- backed by American voters -- can do.

- B

[katty]

11. 5 years later...and all they have to offer U.S. is: FEAR

[heliarc]

23. 33 years after 9/11

Chileans are still mad at the US...

On 9/11/1973 the Chilean military with the financial and logistical help of the CIA, deposed democratically elected Salvador Allende and replaced him with Augusto Pinochet who subsequently was responsible for the murder of at least 3000 citizens and the torture of almost 80,000 more. Remember La Mondeda.

¡Viva Chile Mierda!

[Raine]

26. Sad...

that September 12 the US could have set a whole new course with the nations of the World. Chimp's MISadministration blew the whole thing and set the World on disastrous path that is going to go on for generations. Such a missed opportunity to make something good come out of a horrible event:-( To think that many talk about Clinton's missed opportunities, this is one thing chimp really out did Clinton on.

[Anakin Skywalker]

27. Yeah. Me Too. LOL.