British Newspaper tries to infleuence American vote.
 

Link

Personally I find this infuriating. If I ever recieved a letter from someone in another country trying to tell me who to vote for, I would promptly send a letter back telling them to shove it. This is an American Election and the only place for foreigners is to sit back and watch.

When I was in Germany during the summer, they were holding elections for the EU Members of Parliment. I said nothing of my opinions to the Germans. The only time I gave an opinion was after the votes had been counted, then I said that I was pleased with the result.

But on the other hand, I had several Germans tell me how I should vote in this election. In every case I told them that this is an American election and the opinions of Germans bears no weight. If they pressed the issue further I replied with, "Meinetwegen." (Translation: I don't care) And in every case it just pissed me off that these Europeans thought they knew how to run America better than the Americans themselves.

I don't know whether to be offended honored or just flat out laugh.
This if nothing else proves America's place in the world and nobody can really deny it.
If you have people that concerned about your internal politics that they would go through the effort to beg Billy Joe in bumblefuck Ohio to vote all the way from England
you know you've got the power...no matter what certain places beginning with F might think.
I kind of wish I lived in that town just so I could see what kind of letter I would get. lol.
Have to give those guys props for thinking outside the box on this one. I highly doubt their efforts will do any good as I would think the average American would give two craps about someone from another country telling them how to vote.

Foreigners trying to tell us how to run our country:

It's already begun......

Congress wants to amend the constitution to alllow "Ah-nuld" to eventually run for the White House. This makes me sick. We can't find an American to run the fucking country? We have to turn to foreign movie stars? We have to put people in positions of power just becasue they're "popular with the masses?" Never mind that he's not the most qualified for the job. He's popluar!! That's good enough according to right-wing Washington.

Pathetic.

Arnold has earned American Citizenship so he has a right to participate in our political process. However, I am against amending the constitution to allow naturalized citizens to run this country. Our founding fathers had wisdom in saying that people who want to run this country should at least be from this country.

I didn't say that Arnold couldn’t vote. I don't want him to be president because he's not an American born citizen. Even though he became a citizen, he's still a foreigner from another country (this is outlined in the constitution itself) and I don't want foreigners running our country.

America, or more accurately George Bush, tried to influence the Australian election. And why shouldn't people outside of America try and influence the result of the US poll. The result of the US election will have a clear influence on the rest of the world given the US's desire to meddle in so many different countries affairs!!!

There's a thread on this in the politics forum, which I think is the more suitable forum for this discussion:
http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=72454

I've had friends who are non citizens give me input on who they think I should vote for. I've always found it interesting when they do that. They care, but not enough to pursue citizenship. I'm not offended by it. I don't see this UK thing as a big threat either. People will probably treat it as spam. Now what would be funny is if Iran or North Korea had this campaign. I wonder how Bush would react.

I ran a search but didn't find anything. Mods, feel free to do as you see fit.

In reality the American Presidential election is an important issue for everyone.

Granted I'm not a big fan of the methodology, but I can't fault the British from becoming involved the only way they know how. They certainly can't cast a vote, but they can plead the case.

Rest assured, my fellow Americans, the fate of the Presidency isn't in the hands of foreigners and it's not like they're trying to rig the election; they're just writing letters. It's no different then when you write letters to express your concern with corporate policy; it's no different when churches write letters to the networks. They're just letters. I just don't see how it could hurt. If anything, it might, god forbid, get people talking.

The world at large has as much to lose as the American people in this next election. American Presidents have always had a heavy hand in the world forum, nevermore so than the present and America's influence in world affairs doesn't seem to be declining anytime soon.

We should be interested in the elections of other countries. We should be knowledgable in worldwide politics. Their elections affect us as well. We should give a shit about who's in charge in Canada, Mexico, England, France, Germany and the list goes on.... It's knowledge, I'll admit, I wasn't too interested at first, but I'm doing my best to correct it.

BTW, I don't give a shit if Arnold Schwarz...whatever ( I can't spell it :) ) wants to be President. I would imagine the first question should be "Is he qualified?" not "Is he naturalized or not?" That, however, seems to be the first requirement culled when running for public office lately.

As the lone superpower, of course our descision for president affects the whole world. But it's still an American election for the American President.

I would argue that it is indeed different. They are attempting to affect the political process of a country which is not their own.

In truth, it has only been since World War II that the US president has carried a big infleuence on global affairs. In less than two hundred years we were able to go from being oppressed by the redcoats to top of the world. Other countries have had longer histories and never achieved the status we have. That tells me that we managed to do something right and the rest of the world should pay attention rather than tell us how to be more like them.

I was interested in the EU elections that went on while I was in Germany. But when asked what my opinion was by Germans, I refused to tell them. Instead I told them that it was a European election and as an outsider, I had no right to infleuence it in any way. I only gave my opinion after the votes had been counted.

Naturalized citizens should have every right to become president. You can't fault a man for being born in another country. He's lived in the US longer than I've been alive and he's obviously qualified for the job, well at least more than most people.

I'm curious who other countries want me to vote, not just british, but german Iraqi, Japanese, Korean, whoever... I always welcome to an outside opinion.

you people are rediculous, you're missing the point. America has made itself the police of the world, and the way WE United States citizens vote will effect the rest of the world greatly.
For instance.. the US' decision to invade Iraq has sent armies from not just here, but Canada, the UK, Germany, etc.. None of those countries had anything to do with it, except for their loyalty to the US, and vice versa.
They have EVERY RIGHT to voice their opinions on an issue that WILL effect them.

If this were Pre-WW1 U.S. then I'd agree.. we don't mess with ya'all, ya'all don't mess with all. But with the responsibilities of position(s) the US has elected itself into, the rest of the world should AT LEAST be able to voice their opinions about this very crucial election.

The British are also coming up on an election in 2005. That is a descision that will effect the US, specifically in regards to Iraq. Yet there aren't any letter writing campaigns in the US telling the Brits whether or not to reelect Tony Blair.

And Canada and Germany did not send troops to Iraq.

I'm just guessing here but, of the 350,000 people who read 'The Guardian', only a tiny percentage will bother to write to the people of Clark County.

If your preferred candidate doesn't win the election don't look back on this as the reason.

Now, breathe...





and...




...relax.

I think the point was not whether anyone would bother doing this (I can't imagine why anyone would). The point is about non-US citizens "influencing" US-citizens on how to vote come Nov. 2.

This only goes to show that Europeans (among others) feel that the outcome of the US election will have a significant impact on the world as a whole and Europe in particular. But as usual, we (the Europeans) are short-sighted: Bush was "bad", cos he went to Iraq. So he should not be reelected. Seriously, I've yet to meet someone, anyone who is actually for Bush over here.

What most of us here don't bother to realize is that the elections concern primarily the domestic politics of the US, so lecturing Americans on what to do is way out of line.

Just so you know, personally, I don't give a rusty fuck who gets elected.

Hehe maybe I should put up my vote up on eBay and see what happens.

-snip-

Guess I had better stop watching BBC news, and ask for my money back from NPR. The media influence is far more effective when it comes to changing minds, and I for one, use these "Foreign" sources for information due to the slant (both ways) of American Media.

Am I being influenced?

We Europeans generally don't give a flying toss how you guys run your own country (except maybe that you ought not to pollute so much). It's just when your President launches an illegal war and uses the power and influence built up by previous generations in your great country to draw us into it as well that we get a little upset. He's set a very dangerous precedent in launching a preemptive invasion, which if adopted worldwide could see, for example, North Korea launch a nuclear strike on the US (Bush has already labelled them evil after all, and the US has a history of invading countries both overtly and covertly) or an attack by Iran/the whole Arab world on Israel. That is how outrageous his attack on Iraq was and that's why he's considered a danger to world peace. And we don't believe he went into oil-rich Iraq to free the people - they're suffering in many other countries where he won't help out. Take Uzbekistan for example: even the British ambassador is writing home about human rights violations but President Karimov lets the US use his air bases so it's hushed up, just like in the good old days when Saddam was shaking hands with Rumsfeld. The neocons are just playing the same old game that's been going on for thousands of years - using your money to make themselves and their class more powerful, and it has to stop, whether it's americans, british, french, dutch, spanish, portuguese or romans doing it.

Anyway, with this thread being about foreign involvement in the choosing of others' governments, I'm surprised nobody mentioned South America yet.

The thing Europeans don't realize is that the US changed when we were delt an unprovoked attack on September 11th, 2001. Though I would hate to ever see this happen, but I believe that Europeans will never understand it truely unless there is an attack of the same magnitude in Europe. We're not going to just sit around and wait for another attack. We have the power to deal with percieved threats in the world, so why not use it?

I am not convinced that France's opposition to the war was purely a desire for peace. The French oil companies had a lot of contracts with Saddam that were just waiting to go into effect as soon as the sanctions were dropped. And it is also coming out that the French recieved bribes from Saddam through the corrupt "Oil for Food" program.

And France holds a veto vote in the UN security council. So this pretty much shows that going to the UN is a waste of time.

You need to focus on where the attack came from. I don't know anyone who is against the war in Afghanistan, even though there are suspicious oil contacts there too.

We had an unprovoked attack in Spain and if you believe the reports then numerous terrorist cells have been broken up, so preventing other atrocities.

There were American individuals and corporations listed in the report too. They were the ones under the big black marks. The report also found that Saddam had no capacity to attack the US and was only maintaining plans to rearm because he felt a threat from Iran. We'd have known that years ago if the US hadn't been so quick to dismiss the UN. That's another reason we'd like to be able to influence your election - we've learned since WW2 that a multilateral approach and negotiating is much better than unilateralism and war. We're also greatful for the US (and not forgetting Russia's part in the liberation of Europe) for giving us the chance to learn that lesson. It's very sad that so much is talked about Europeans being anti-American when this just isn't the case. On 12 September 2001 a French newspaper headline read "We're all Americans now". Bush has thrown away so much of the good will that America had post 9/11 and we're anti-Bush, not anti-American.

That depends entirely on your definition of 'doing something right'

Now to get to the point, I would be very interested in opinions from people in other countries. It's one more opinion, one more viewpoint to bounce mine off, to check the validity of my arguments. US actions have implications throughout the world. If citizens of other countries need/want to tell me something they see that I don't, or that doesn't travel through US mass media, be my guest. I'll certainly try to factor it into my calculations. Now this doesn't imply that I'll be doing things without America's best interests in heart. However, I trust my own judgement. If one email from a Brit is enough to significantly alter my vote, my arguments weren't all that strong to begin with.

Screw nationalism. We're all in the same boat. *shrug*

This thread reaks of rotten nationalism. Get over yourselves and listen to someone else for a change. We're not the center of the world. I gladly welcome the opinions of others.

With all due respect. I feel that whether the election be American, British, French, German, Russian or any other country. That election is for the people of that country and people in other countries should stay out. While it is true that we live in a world that has been globalized to the point where the descision of one country will have an effect on another, there are still domestic issues of that country that need to be decided by the citizens of that country. Sovereign rights need to be respected.

When I see the Guardian doing this, I see yet another example of European arrogance where they feel that they are better qualified to select the American President that the American people themselves are. They make this descision based purely on how the American president will effect them and give no regard for the domestic issues of the United States which is what will have the primary effect on the American people who are the ones voting.

I understand the point. Keep in mind they're just words. The British aren't loading up gunships and tri-corner hats to come over and "monitor" the election situation. They're writing letters. No invasion of the homeland. No horrible tories running through the streets and setting up shop in your attic. Just letters.



Again, just letters and in one state of the blessed union. They're not rigging the election, not travelling the country with postcards for everyone and pushing their opinion off when it's unwarranted. They're just letters. Letters from someone other than Bill from down the street. Opinions from folks who come from a different culture and can offer a different viewpoint.



In truth, it was WWI when the United States Government, against the better wishes of President George Washington and in spite of the Monroe Doctrine, became involved in political affairs across the pond.

America is hardly alone in her achievements of world domination. The Macedonians, Romans, Persians, Mongols, Carthaginians and the Chinese all did fairly well in the world, all things considered. For more recent examples, WWII Germany and Russia all held sizable deeds and carried some influence with the world at large. I've even heard China mentioned in the same breath as America when speaking of the sacred "superpower."



That's admirable. Were you living in country? Not a soldier on a base, not passing through, etc.... I ask this because if you were living in country why on earth wouldn't you offer an opinion. You were living in the affected territory, right? Doesn't that allow you to share your opinion? Not vote, but at least address the issues as it affected you both directly and indirectly.


I just can't see where hearing a wide variety of opinion to help frame your decision is so terribly evil.

I agree with MiRevolver. It's an American Election, and thus has no place for influence by foreigners in any way. Just as elections in other countries have no place for influence by us in any way.
I'm glad that they're not sending those letters to my state. I'm unaffiliated politically because I don't agree with any party enough to register as a member of that party. I'm an independant free thinker who agrees and dissagrees with aspects all polical parties. But being unaffiliated would have me on that list to recieve those letters, and that would piss me off to no end! I already recieve enough junkmail trying to persuade me one way or another from political groups on campus, and I hate it! I don't need more of it from a foreigner who has no right to tell me how to vote in my election!

I realize that we did start taking a role in foriegn affairs even before World War I. I would trace it back to Teddy Roosevelt. But even after World War I, the United States was still a minor player in the world. President Woodrow Wilson had to bow to the British and the French at the end of WWI in order to get them to sign on to his "League of Nations" idea.

There have always been hegemons throughout history, and there will always be a hegemon. The only noteable exception was the cold war when there were two hegemons, the United States and the Soviet Union. It's one of the most fundemental aspects of global politics and I don't see that changing anytime soon.

I was there as part of a summer work program. I did not have any permanent residence status there. I was just there to get real life practice with the German language.

At some point in the run up to the Iraq war at least 2 surveys found that over 80% of the US population believed that Iraqi nationals were hijackers on the 9/11 flights. Something in the domestic Media/Political circus managed to get 200 million people to believe a lie that would influence them to support a war which has since been proven to have no positive effect on homeland security. I'm sure this could happen in every other country on the planet too so it would be prudent for any nation to listen to outside voices once in a while - at least on foreign policy.

Ha, now you know how Australia feels. We get "influenced" by an AMERICAN citizen who owns a whole ton of our newspapers. Heck he even used to be one of us until he RENOUNCED his Australian citizenship - but he'll still pretend to be Aussie when some idiot asks him who to vote for.

You may of heard of him, he owns a little channel called "Fox News". :rolleyes:

For all those who feel outraged that a foreign country is attempting to influence the US elections, now you have some idea how it feels for citizens of other countries when the US not only attempts to influence their elections, but actually tells them who the candidates they can vote for are.

Europe has been dealing with terrorist attacks for far longer than the US. For the US to think that they are alone in this smacks of the insular attitude they've long been accused of (and probably a good reason for some foreigners to write to them and set them straight on a few issues).

The other day I was listening to a US radio station doing their daily "Today in History" spot. The date was October the 12th. I heard about some American ladies who got their pilot's licences, I heard about a US soldier who threw himself on a grenade in WWII and so on. There was one glaring omission, however, that I could not believe went unmentioned. See if you can guess what it was.

Mirevolver, i don't see how this is really that big of a deal. Our democracy is not being subverted. It seems to me like your issue with this is based on you personal idea of what is and is not acceptable behavior for a foreigner with respect to our national elections. It seems like an ettiquette issue to me, since they aren't actually breaking the law, or even acting unethically. Besides, just because you thought it to be in poor taste to comment on the elections of another country, doesn't mean that doing so is in poor taste under all circumstances. Especially in light of america's perpetual habit of attempting to influence the governance of myriad countries.

I find the whole concept amusing and in fact I'm humbled and quietly proud. I live in a country and in fact the actual state that would be the target of what I would consider to be an effort akin to a senoir high school project. Face it...if you get a letter/email or other correspondence from someone claiming to be from another country that asks you to consider voting for a particular candidate because that's who they would like to see get elected...:lol:....even being the cynical bastard that I am I have more faith in the electorate than that. No one worth their right to vote in this country would be influenced by such a contact. In fact I'd think an email like that would most likely be considered SPAM-O-La and get tossed out with the ads offering me the ability to regrow my hair. Even the most simple minded dumb ass who gets one of these and actually has the free time to waste reading it isn't going to be overtly influenced to vote for a candidate of preference for some spam-bot from another country. It's not happening....but I do find it amusing.

So what's the problem here?

It's not like England has invaded to take Bush out of power, as we did in Iraq. (They've pretty much given up on that route since 1812. Would that we had learned that lesson too.) They're just writing letters to plead with voters in a key state to remove a criminally incompetant leader. They aren't sending the SAS to kidnap him and haul him out of the country and into court as we did with Manuel Noriega and Slobodon Milosevic. They aren't sending assassins, as we did with Manuel Allende and... who was that fellow in charge of Iran before the Shah? They aren't trying to strangle us as in a fit of pique like we're trying to do to Cuba.

All they are doing is informing people, politely, that they believe it would improve our country, their country, and the world at large if he would vote that jackass out of office. That leads to a more informed electorate, and there is no harm in that. Maybe they should be asking us not to elect him this time either. Does it make you angry that the rest of the world has an opinion of Dubya that's somewhere between toe fungus and Tammerlane? It's not like he hasn't earned it. Look, these people love America. We are, or were four years ago, anyway, the country every other country wanted to grow up to be. If your favorite Aunt had a wart the size of Wisconsin on her forehead, wouldn't you suggest that she go to the doctor and have it removed. Bush is that wart to the rest of the world.

If you discount armed conflict (WWII) as protest, there has never been a world leader who inspired so many people to protest at once as Bush did. If you don't, he's second to the man who invokes Godwin. Fact, not comparison. Why wouldn't everyone in the world do everything they could to remove him from office? Look, I realize there are intelligent, well intentioned people - Art, for instance - who support Bush, I just can't seem to understand why, and I get the feeling that they don't get why I despise the man so much and believe his administration is a blot on this country's history. It sure seems to me that most of Europe feels that way too. If minds haven't met on this by now, they're not going to.

Maybe Bush supporters can get get John Howard supporters to write letters from Australia.

But, that's just my opinion. I respect that you might have another one. I just don't see how.

You have got to be joking.

Right, the IRA, the Basque seperatists, minor squabbles. The worst Europe has had is the Madrid train bombings and that still doesn't even come close to the magnitude of the September 11th attacks.

The Iraqi people did not have the power to get rid of Saddam themselves, they needed an outside force to do it. Just like Britian declared war on Germany in 1939 so they could oust the German leader.

The difference here is that the American people, if they so choose to have the power to pick a new leader. And by interfering with that process, the Guardian is violating the sovereign rights of the United States. I doubt the British would be happy if next year we started sending letters to them telling them to reelect Tony Blair.

You seem to be saying here that the American electorate is such that they would be 'influenced' by a letter from a stranger? If that's the case, then you have much bigger problems to deal with than who gets to sit in the daddy chair next. I know Americans personally who are intelligent enough to try and give themselves a balanced opinion, and the nationalists in this thread seem vastly outnumbered by the globalists, lending further credence to the argument.

You're either going to get people who look upon it as an unwelcome intrusion on their patriotism and disregard it, probably laughing at the sheer audacity of John Q Smith from Shitt Town, Greater Manchester as they do so. Or you're going to get people who read the letter, consider its contents and decide how well it fits with their own view, and if they care to take it seriously.

Why did we go to war in Iraq? Why have 24 British soldiers, hundreds of American soldiers and several thousand Iraqi civilians had to die? Why did the World Trade Organisation rule US tariffs on steel imports to be illegal? Why will the US not ratify Kyoto? Your president does not just act for American interests, his decisions have very real and, as we can see, potentially damaging consequences on the global stage.

I would further argue that were you to feel personally aggrieved by the actions of my Prime Minister, I would give you the benefit of a hearing before I chose how to use my vote. That said, I think it very unlikely that you do, since his influence and power are much less than those of your president.

Here's the thing, I don't care enough about any of it to want to write to you or anyone else. I don't think lobbying for you to vote Kerry is going to change a fucking thing, whether you listen to me or not. But some people aren't as laid-back as me. If they feel aggrieved, they will want to lash out, especially people who are grieving relatives lost in a war the basis of which your own Iraq Survey Group has undermined, or the steelworkers in Yorkshire who lost sleep over the future of their jobs when the already shaky industry took another knock.

Fact is, nationalism has a very reduced role in today's society. We live in a globalised world, where people of all nationalities are able to communicate at the drop of a hat. Nationalism is appropriate in sport, science and invention, and about nothing else.

Of course, Europeans should never be given an American vote, which would actually equate to what you describe as the power to 'influence' your electoral process. But as long as America is taking decisions that affect the citizens of Earth as a totality, your own dearly held ideals of democracy demand that you at least arm yourself of the broadest range of knowledge, information and experience that you can acquire before you take a decision on who runs your country. In my opinion, that involves taking account of everyone involved, American or not.

There is a difference between interfering with the process and talking to someone. How exactly are they violating the sovereignty of the united states by writing letters? I'm sorry, but that's ridiculous. Maybe you'd be happy if the government completely shut out any form of foreign media and limited our internet access only to sites originating inside the 50 states so as not to allow any "interference" until after the election.

The media sends messages to the general population as a whole. These letters are targeting specific voters.

What?

You dont have a clue about the fear that having the IRA on your doorstep creates. This is an attitude that alot of people here in Britain cannot understand. This dismissal by people in the US of an issue that people in our country have had to deal with for decades.

Just be careful with your throwaway comments.

I spent two years living in Britian. The worst I ever saw the IRA do was leave a bomb in the occasional pub. Like I said, nothing compaired to the magnitude of the September 11th attacks.

Oh I see. Two years. Well you have the lowdown then. Sorry sir.

Your experience of my country is absolutley nothing compared with living here a lifetime. From what you've said (and only from that, as obviously I know nothing about you) you literally have no clue what you're taking about in that regard. Do not dismiss something so awful so hastily. And believe me, a bomb is a bomb, found or not. The fear that it creates is not something to detract from. "Minor squabbles". What an idiotic thing to say.


Now, cool down, read my response again and see if I detract from the horror of the 9/11 situation.

That's an irrelevant distinction the voters are chosen randomly. What would the net difference be between seeing the opinion expressed in a letter instead of a newspaper? No one is forcing anyone to vote in a specific way.

Two years is more experience than the average American has.

Of course terrorism is awful in all it's forms and of course it creates fear in the public. That's the business terrorists are in, to create terror. And the fact that Europe has had to deal with terrorists for so long should give the cause to be behind America's actions as we go on the attack against terrorists and terrorist supporters, but instead Europeans turn to their second favorite sport behind football, criticizing America.

The Guardian is giving out the names and addresses of registered voters specifically in Clark County, Ohio. They have specifically targeted a particular area of a battleground state that they feel they can generate the biggest results from.

Yeah, I can understand that you must feel like that sometimes. Don't take it to heart - its really only about the political situation. Personally I love your country in general! :) Though, there are xenophobes in every country i guess.

The truth is, your president seems to have induced a state of heightened fear in my country. Indeed, my first thought after the 9/11 atrocities was "Oh sh*t! What will Bush do?! He could have us in a holocaust by the evening!"


PS: BTW, despite what my government is trying to tell me, I'm english, not european.

And? How will this effect the election more than a newspaper article?

the IRA has killed nearly 1,800 people during its campaign, nearly 650 of them civilians. That is a lot of bombs. Do not dismiss so lightly the pain, anger and dispair that the IRA brought to so many people.

Being bombarded with spam from The Guardian would bother me a little less than all the swift boat attack ads and all that nonsense on tv. I don't see it as a big deal, as it will influence virtually no one. And if it does, well, that's how it goes. You are influenced by what you allow to influence you. But I definitely do not agree with all this "Mind your own country" talk. If everyone just minded their own country then we wouldn't know anything about anyone but ourselves.

Here's a question for ya...Do Americans make good hostages? :) Is the pope catholic? Of couuuurse!!!

Oddly Europeans who know nothing of America beside what they see of our TV shows (and based on what TV shows get shown in Europe, Europeans must have pretty low brow tastes), think they know whats best for America.

Well, what you've done there is not read the whole thread, I guess. :)

For example:

[QUOTE=dobster]...The truth is, your president seems to have induced a state of heightened fear in my country. Indeed, my first thought after the 9/11 atrocities was "Oh sh*t! What will Bush do?! He could have us in a holocaust by the evening!"...[QUOTE]

The point thats been made is that YOUR country's actions can have a detrimental effect on the stability of world peace in a more dramatic way than other countries. If that's a misguided perception, I suppose you have to have lived outside The States to have reached that perception.

The domestic way your country works isn't something people are trying to change, just the international way it influences things. If it seems blinkered, sorry.

(EDIT: don't know why 'quote' isn't working)

Sorry, but this comment is just more evidence of what I was talking about in my earlier post.

What was the omission, DJ? I couldn't work it out.

And this is only one of the terrorist organisations operating in Europe over the last 3 decades. Not to even mention attacks carried out by the ETA, the Red Army Faction, the PLO and Al Qaeda across the rest of Europe.

But to some Americans they are still the only ones who experience terrorism, whereas the rest of the world only has to put up with a couple of bombs in some pubs and other such "minor squabbles".

Yet more reason to write some letters if you ask me.

The Bali bombings. It didn't get a single mention whereas the US soldier who threw himself on a grenade was mentioned twice on my journey to work alone.

October 12th - 2002 - Bali bombing: In Bali, terrorists detonate bombs in two nightclubs in Kuta, killing 202 and wounding over 300.

Its funny how americans use september 11th as an excuse for almost any thing nowadays. They forget all the foreign workers who died there too.

Well, I hope the British are successful and manage to change a few peoples vote away from the shrub. It's too bad americans feel that it's perfectly fine for them to meddle in sovereign nations affairs all the while ignoring foreign input into their affairs.

I don't hold a 9-11 victim or the event in higher regard than any other terror victim or event and nor should anyone else IMO. Dead is dead folks.

We did support your attack on Afghanistan, and when you guys finish the Iraq thing and start up the war on terror again I'm sure you'll have more support from us.

Yeah it's a joke. We don't watch your films, we don't import your TV, we don't eat burgers, pizza and popcorn, we don't listen to beyoncee, we don't have line dancing clubs, we don't have a disneyland, we don't have national parks and we don't drive fords.

We want to be nothing like you.

And we certainly don't wear jeans!

That's not English you're speaking is it ;P

A touch hypocritcal, don't you think? For every Guardian reader who sends a letter, there will be an American who believes that his country is 100% correct to go into other country and change their governments because they aren't how they believe the other country should be.
No it doesn't. It shows that America can't throw it's weight around at the UN. If it came to a solution that all the countries agreed on, there wouldn't have been a problem, and an illegal war wouldn't have been started. Just because another country doesn't want you going to war doesn't mean that their opinion is a waste of time. What makes America's opinion any more valid than another country's?

It's quite apparent from this that you sir, are an arse. A friend of mine was shot by the IRA, he's lucky to be alive. I know of people who have been killed by them. They are hardly minor squabbles, a lot of people live in fear of being killed, just like the Americans. Don't feel that because your country was attacked by terrorists it gives America the right to start laying down the law.

Britain and France declared war on Germany in 1939 because they had a treaty with Poland, who were invaded by the Germans. They were given a deadline to get out. The difference is that in this case the war was legal, a country was invaded, this was an act of war, and Britain had a treaty with this country. The Germans were quite happy with Hitler really, he was a good leader.

Now, normally I'm open to views from all people on this topic, but it's fairly obvious that you don't really want to listen. Just step back a bit and look at America, a country that has illegaly invaded another and done what it wants, when it wants on the international political scene. I don't think it's any wonder that people from all over the world want to ask American votes to consider the effect that their foreign policy has. These letters won't be brainwashing, they will be polite letters explaining a point of view that Americans as a whole don't see. I'm sure that you agree that people should have all the information before they vote, and this is a way of giving them more. I'm also sure that the voters can think for themselves, being adults and all.

A newspaperarticle is read voluntarily. And the person reading the article paid for the newspaper so he/she could read the articles.

In the case of these letters, I'm willing to bet that most people in Clark County, Ohio don't know what the Guardian is and have neither paid nor asked for the opinions of the people sending them letters. Instead they have these opinions forced upon them through their mailboxes.

"The proposed redeployment would almost certainly put the British troops under US command."
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/uk_ne...329369,00.html

If troops from my country are to be under the command of an American President then that President should be accountable to me, preferably through a vote.

You all keep claiming that the IRA is a big problem there, but I have yet to see the Royal Marines go into Belfast and clean house.

You're really losing it! Do you go up to street preachers to get them to shut up?

They've been there since the 70's. You really lived here?

Originally Posted by mirevolver
And France holds a veto vote in the UN security council. So this pretty much shows that going to the UN is a waste of time.


Way to take my words out of context there. I was making the point that because the French had many oil contracts with Saddam and that they were getting bribe money from the corrupt oil for food program, it was pointless to go to the UN because it was already known that no matter the circumstances, the French were going to veto.

In Dundee, 92-94

Saddam also had a history of invading his neighbors, Iran, Kuwait. And the Kuwaitis put their full support behind the US going into Iraq.

The Iran war was a US-USSR conflict fought by proxy, and the US didn't exactly do much to prevent the first Iraq war:

http://www.chss.montclair.edu/english/furr/glaspie.html
"But we have no opinion on the Arab-Arab conflicts, like your border disagreement with Kuwait" is basically "go and invade if you want to"

It's no surprise that Kuwait would support the US, getting revenge by proxy!

Iraq is part of the war on terror. It is undisputable that Saddam supported terrorist activity. He gave funds to the Palistinian terrorists and their families. That combined with his desire to have weapons of mass destruction made him a danger to the world he had to be dealt with.

Mire you should head over to the politics board.

Hussein is a bad man, and Iraq may one day come to be better off without him (sometime after their civil war, and then again, maybe not), but you never heard anything about suicide bombings in Iraq when he was in charge, and he certainly wasn't exporting terror, just some money to give him some hardcore Muslim cred as a (successful) bid to poison the political well if we happened to invade and conquer. And it wasn't paymets to suicide bombers, but pensions to their families. Looked at from the Arab point of view, this is absolutely no different that passing the hat for a widow of one of our soldiers killed in this ideologically motivated war.

Now, combine this window dressing with a succesully frustrated desire to have weapons of mass distruction, and you have...

A pretext, and a flimsy one at that. I haven't been able to figure if Bush dragged us into this war for political, religious, or economic reasons, but I am pretty sure I am safe in ruling out national security concerns.

Ponder: we are 5% of the world's population, and use 25% of the world's resources. I would estimate half to 3/4 of the technological advances of the last 50 years have come from America. Before 9/11, we hadn't had an attack on our soil since WW II, and before that, you have to go back to 1812. So we're rich, fat, smart, tough, comfortable, and armed to the teeth. Leave aside our ideologies, which much of the world (hell much of the country) finds repugnant, and there's a lot to envy there.

Nope, not even close to kidding.

Well, obviously living in Scotland during the run-up to the ceasefire will give an unshakeable grounding into the atrocities committed by the IRA. :rolleyes:

The British Army has a constant presence in Northern Ireland. You never noticed that? SAS forces too. Operations in Northern Ireland constitutes the final stage of training for their counter-terrorist division.

But really, your assertion that the terrorism problems faced by other countries is insignificant compared to yours only reinforces the insular and self-obsessed stereotype of Americans that is already prevalent the world over.

Muahahahah!!! I'm influencing the American election and there's nothing you can do about it!!!!

Yes but you are speaking for the Brits(excuse me if you aren't British but you sound an awful lot likt one). I HIGHLY doubt you would have that same sentiment in Germany or France or Italy. So hence I kind of doubt the entire rest of the world wants to "grow up" to be like America.

BTW there is more to being American than eating bad food and watching trashy TV. When more of our own people realize that the better off America will be.

The tv we get from you is all pretty good: Simsons, 24, the West Wing, Frasier, Arrested Development (my current favourite). If you do have a lot of trash then I don't think it gets across your borders.

Germany is the most pro-american country in Europe and don't mistake France's desire not to import your culture as Anti-Americanism. They don't want to import British culture either! France holds dear to the ideals of Liberte, Egalite, Fraternite, which is exactly what the US used to be about. If anything it's the US which is now anti-american.

Yes, I'm British. I spell favourite with a U and I'm proud of it!

Yet we catch endless flack from this stat and are constantly told to cut back on consumption.

Yet many of those advances have been co-opted by other countries and vastly improved upon and the American roots of that technology are quickly becoming ignored.

A little thing called vast ocean expanses and friendly neighbors might be a bit to contribute to that.

Yet for everything you've listed I've had lengthy LENGTHY arguements with people from other countries about regarding our habits and I highly doubt their motivation comes from a place of envy. In fact I kind of cringe at this strand of thinking because it's exactly what some of the more extremist people I know base their arguements of foreign criticism of America on. I.e. the belief that everybody in the world is merely jealous of America and that's why they have a problem with things we do. Never minding that there might actually be something wrong in what we are doing.
I don't think you'd ever get the average person in Europe to say they are jealous of America just as a blanket statement. There might be one or two things they wish they had that is uniquely American but you can say that of every country. As an American I'm jealous of the Japanese and their endless amount of cheap electronic trinkets. I'm jealous of Mexico for their beautiful country and coastal areas. But that doesn't mean that I want to "grow up to be like Mexico". IMO to say you want to grow up to be like something that means you want all their good traits and all their bad traits...and if you can find me a poll where the majority of the French,German, or Italian people who would want their country to become exactly like America I would most assuredly be shocked. Hell Canada doesn't want to be like America and they really are the most like us in the entire world.

To be honest the only people on the web I've run into that wilingly say they want their country to be more like America...are Brits(and a couple of very self-hating ones at that).

Not seeing it...I really am not. In fact the French/American animosity towards one another has been on the rise even before Bush even stepped foot in office.

Yeah...Arrested Development is a bit trashy(funny but trashy).

Not saying they are being Anti-American I'm saying they don't want to be "American" when they grow up. Those are two very different things.
North Korea is anti-American. France isn't. I understand that. But at the same time not being anti-American doesn't make you want to be exactly like America. I'm not anti-French like many of the people I know...I like things about France...but it would be a cold cold day in hell before I'd wish my country to turn into France.

Regardless of what you feel about Bush the US still gloms strongly to it's initial tenants of Liberty and Justice. Now whether those same tenants are applied internationally....I dunno but I'd argue the ideals of French Liberty,Equality, and brotherhood don't hold up internationally either.

Ahh so my Brit sensor isn't completely broken. Nice meeting ya Pompie.(just kiddin...picked that one up from an Aussie guy I used to work with).

Good post. I might have got you wrong before.

I agree with the jealousy thing. If the terrorists really did "Hate our freedoms" as Bush still maintains then they'd have bombed Vegas, San Francisco and the Hamptons.
The fact they went after the sources (or at least the symbols) of what they probably consider to be abuses of financial, military and political power is the key.

The Guardian has published some correspondance they recieved on the subject.

And as for the guy complaining we all have yellow teeth, it's because we are a socialist bunch at heart and still haven't got used to the privatised dental service. This used to be free but the taxes were cut so much that it couldn't be provided by the state any more. So our average man on the street saves a few thousand in tax and has to spend £15000 on dental care, or be yellow.
http://observer.guardian.co.uk/cash/...328984,00.html

We're not as bad Austin Powers though, and lots of people are going in for bleaching these days, even if it does destroy the enamel.

Hey gringo! you forget Pancho Villa!
http://www.hsgng.org/pages/pancho.htm

http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselection...329858,00.html

i have to say that somewhere in my mind, i had held out hope that the responses from americans to this guardian initiative would not be cringe-inducing.
then i saw the above.
have a look.

the conservative reponses defy commentary...no more damning critique seems possible than to simply post them.

there are other responses as well,
but they do not serve to lessen the embarrassment generated by conservative "thinking" as expressed here.

it is as if the talking heads prominent in the swirl of mediocrity that is right media had undertaken a campaign the point of which was to demonstrate to the world that the americans really are a stupid and crass as you might suspect, were you do judge the whole country on the basis of george w bush.


way to go.

Oh how I laughed at the amount of responses telling Britain to "butt out and stop interfering." It's as if the Irony Fairy is having a party and the whole of conservative America is invited.

Enjoyed this response too: "Please be advised that I have forwarded this to the CIA and FBI." It's okay, don't worry - it'll be about 3 years before the two of them realise that they have both been sent the same letter.

The guy threatening the UK with invasion was pretty funny as well. Yee-ha Cowboy, and all that, don't you know?

And how often have we heard this lovely line: "If it wasn't for America, you'd all be speaking German." How original. I bet he spent hours thinking that one up.

Strangely enough, almost all the of the people telling the UK readers to "butt out" are pro-Bush (those that identified an allegiance anyway). Which is odd, as nowhere in the original article did the Guardian tell readers that they should be persuading people to vote for Kerry. Guilty conscience anyone?

And if only this happy contributor would offer this advice to his president instead of Guardian readers: "Go back to sipping your tea and leave our people alone."

This gentleman offers some sage advice too. Although I don't know who he'll scare more - the British, or Bush: "As a US citizen, I want to advise you that you and anyone that participates in subverting the US presidential election can be criminally charged and perhaps even charged as spies." He must be talking to Bush - unless he thinks the UK falls under the jurisdiction of US law.


Thanks for the chuckle everyone.

The guy who was shot was a soldier in NI. They are there.

For all the guys who can't figure out why people hate Americans and their culture, read the comments on the Guardian website. It's quite simple, a lot of those give the impression that Americans are rude, obnoxious bastards. I see American tourists every day, even in this country they aren't much more polite than the comments on that website.

And as for the whole invading part, that's probably the one characteristic that pisses me off most. You know, the whole "I'm gonna go to Iraq and kill me a Taliban" thing you've all heard the soldiers say on TV.

And just as many of those quotes had people welcoming the outside comments. Listen if you want to look down upon a group of folks fine but if you are going to do it at least look at the OTHER side that some what mitigates the negative. That logic of you looking at that site and using it to justify that Americans are rude and obnoxious "bastards" is no different than John boy in Arkansas looking at serial footage of extremists in Islamic countries burning American flags and saying they are all evil. Or reading quotes from the random guy on the street in Europe calling them bastards and assuming that all the world hates America and becoming even more resentful to the outside world in general.

If you hadn't noticed this whole Americans are rude and pushy/Euros are all nosey and jealous know it alls is a viscious cycle.
American hears a European downing an American. American thinks Euros are all snotty. American acts pushy towards an unrelated Euro. Euro thinks all Americans are rude. Euro gets condescending to American. American thinks all Euros are know it alls. So on and so forth. At least temper your venom against America SOME what especially when evidence to the contrary is readily available on the self same link you are going off about.

We're all part of one world.

I think that every citizen of the world should have the right to send a letter with their opinions to another world citizen, whether the context is local to the recipient or more on a global scale (and this election is a global concern). I do not see this affecting the results of the electoral college for Ohio, but I believe that if it does, then I also see the letters making some very good points so as to sway the voters. If this is the case -- if the letters make persuasive, rational arguments -- then I bet the voters who changed their vote would be grateful for the insight they gained.

Foreign Bush supporters have the right to send letters as well.

When we limit communication, we limit liberty. That goes for the US and the world as a whole.

Lockjaw, I don't see it as labelling all Americans. I didn't put it forwards that I think all Americans are rude but I presented that you can see why people think that, given the quotes on that website.
Personally, I'll give everybody a chance. You see like an alright guy, as do a lot of Americans I've met. Unfortunately, some don't.

With all due respect mirevolver, I think a lot of other countries dislike the U.S. for this very reason. The fact that many Americans, as well as some of our leadership, doesn't take into consideration the livelihood the rest of the world. You mentioned Sept. 11th as a pivitol point in the decision to go to war and that other countries shouldn't compare themselves to us unless they go through what we do: well, there were plenty more people from other countries that died that day. In addition, Americans are not the only people having beheadings by extremist terrorist groups. The decisions that our president has to face are NOT only U.S. issues, but issues that the entire world has to live by. We should be setting an example, not ostracizing ourselves from everyone else because we think our problems supercede everyone elses. Therefore, I don't mind someone else writing a letter to me to help me better understand how the decisions my county makes will affect the way they live their life.

In fact, I wish more people from around the world would create a much larger letter writing campaign to help educate our fellow Americans. Then, it will help people to make educated and informative decisions when it comes to voting instead of self-serving decisions that affect only themselves. Perhaps when some Americans start pulling their heads out from their butts, will the rest of the world begin to appreciate what we are doing over here. My 2 cents....

I think it is all moot.

The majority of Americans have made up their minds, one way or another.

I really don't think the direction an "undecided" will vote will hinge on a letter or email from someone in another country. It isn't personal enough to sway a vote.

Let them write all the letters they want, I highly doubt it will affect any outcome here in the states.

While I can appreciate the opinions of those who find the idea of foreign nationals contacting US voters in a key state appalling, I assure you that it will have no effect on the current election.

If the Democratic and Republican jauggernautic machines are unable to effectively persuade the populace of said states with the $400 million that they have on the books for campaigning in this election, a Belgian dairy farmer's e-mail is not going to ruin our democratic process.

In addition, the recipeints e-mail filter, whether it be software or cerebrally based, will most likely pick it up as spam.

Just my humble opinion... :thumbsup:

These terrorists hate all things western and even a blind person can see that they will continue to kill regardless of who is in office.

It seems to me that all of you who agree with the letter writing campaign say that people of every country should try to sway the vote of every other country and let sovereignty be damned.

So perhaps next year we in the US should have a letter writing campaign to Britain and tell them that they should keep Tony Blair, he is after all a big supporter of the US. Or perhaps the next time Germany has an election we should write letters to them and tell them to oust Schroeder, any American who heard what he said the last time he was up for reelection would know that if he stays in office it's bad news for the US. It is also clear that the French President Chirac is one of the most anti-US leaders in Europe, so maybe we should write letters to the French during their next election telling them to get rid of him.

I can tell you exactly how all this would be received. The Europeans would see this as rude, obnoxious America meddeling in their internal affairs. But when it's the American election, they're all fine with it because in their eyes we don't know what's best for ourselves and so we must listen to the patronizing Europeans. Such a ridiculous and hypocritical double standard.

It is sometimes fun to pretend we can predict what would happen in a hypothetical future.

Every time you write something like this you make yourself look more and more like a hypocrite. The US has no problems meddling in the affairs of others, telling them what system of government they should have, arranging their "elections" for them and installing puppet regimes, but a few letters to you from your greatest historical ally voicing their concerns and you're foaming at the mouth.

I cannot tell you how much I am appreciating the irony of this.

Tell me about it...

Why don't you go back and read through my posts and answer one question I have. Have I even once endorsed the actions of the United States in meddeling with another country's electoral process?"

In truth, I am for a lesser US presence in the world. The US should start by completely pulling out of the UN and kicking them off of our land. Then begin a systematic pull out of our troops from countries where it is clear that our troops are not wanted, starting with Germany and South Korea.

And I believe the last time our "Greatest historical ally" treid telling us how to run our government, we started a little revolution and kicked those red coats off of our land.

can't we all just get along

I've never seen you speak out against them and I have seen you attempt to justify the invasion of Iraq.

However, if you truly are against US international meddling, then great. Why didn't you say so sooner?

I don't like all this xenophobic secularism, if a country is in trouble - for whatever reason war, famine, flood why shouldn't countries able to help do so.