I think that reaching out, to France and Germany and the EU, will mean dealing with power expressed (in BushCorp) only from a position of power, b/c that is all that they respect. Exhibit One: Iraq. Exhibit Two: North Korea. This is the thinking of this administration. France and Germany will push the UK to really choose a side in this power balance struggle through ratifying the EU Constitution, and will deal with the US not from acquiesence and reconciliation, but from establishing an ew understanding of how things are going to be, and reflective of the reality that the US needs the world in it's Iraq and Terror endeavours, not the other way around. Thus, they will reach out only to challenge the Bush worldview with an alternative, b/c they know that inthe first two years, Bush will be the most extreme. I'm guessing that your/the US conception of "reaching out" springs from an entirely different frame.
I think the anti-US feelings are politically motivated, and hopefully now that political season is over they will take a back sit to the reality that we share a lot in common. We are free democratic nations facing many of the same issues in today's world. And, failing that, maybe they will remember that we are consumers who love to drink their champagne, wear their fashions, drive their cars, and so on. Maybe these things will help them see past what they perceive to be our unloveliness and intelectual and cultural inferiority.
I think you're wrong in assuming that anti-American means that Europeans hate everything that's to do with America. They hate the American government, i.e. Bush/Cheney and their mates. American 'culture' is very popular in Europe. So the hatred is a direct effect of your government's actions, not because of some deep dislike of all things American.
Well, yeah. Definitely a different frame. I am hoping to increase my company's sales in Europe. I am planning to exhibit my products at a trade show in Frankfurt next January.
Good, then you can share chopsticks when China makes you a new province. According to liberals, America had no enemies while Clinton was President only 4 years ago. But rest assured, you have enemies. Ask the people in Spain who got blowed apart by the train bombings if there are enemies out there. Ask Theo Van Gogh. All the luck to you--the world will run more profitable for everyone with two powerful world currencies (dollar & euro)--but believe me, you're gonna have to spend on your military, to the detrement of your social welfare system you hold so superior, yet don't realize your social welfare system is predicated on us protecting you on our dime.
I find it to be the same in America. Many people don't like Chirac, but they love French things. As much as people say the French are rude, ungrateful, cowards, whatever, the truth is, there is something about the French and their culture that is irresistible. Here in California most malls have some french patiseree or bullangerie or whatever, usually with French symbols like the Eifel tower or the Arc de Triumph, and they are always full of customers. And of course, people pay obscene amounts of money to eat miniscule portions of French food. Not to mention expensive wines, cologne, brand names like Louis Vuitton and so on. Truth be told, the French have our number, they are ripping us off with all their expensive crap, and yet we love it. That is why, now that the issue of who is president appears to be over, I think people will start looking beyond it. I expect that we will and I hope that we will.
China has no interest in Europe other than as a trade partner and even if they wanted to do not have the resources to take Europe on. The only thing China cares about is Taiwan and keeping their oversized country together in one piece without it breaking up. That's been the story of China for thousands of years, they couldn't be expansionist even if they wanted to. The people in Spain who were blown up was an act of terrorism conducted by Islam terrorists due to Spain backing the war in Iraq. You can have the biggest military budget in the world and all the nuclear weapons possible, that is practically useless against terrorism. It's political actions and internal security which matter. Take a good look at 9/11 and that whole Anthrax thing, the Washington sniper etc.. Theo Van Gogh was an individual murder conducted by some lone psychopath, irrelevant in a discussion about military spending. Unless you feel that all controversial film makers should be given their own aircraft carrier and fighter escort. Europe's social security exists because there is a fairer tax system, less "trickle down" Reagonomics, fewer tax cuts for the rich or a military-industrial complex completely out of control and wasting billions on enough nuclear weapons to destroy the world five times over and ineffective and overpriced "Star Wars" weaponry.
Consequences ? I think that, right now, EU and USA will simply ignore each other. Americans voted for Bush, it's their country, their own choice, their business. - We certainly won't reach out to the US. "Wait and see" will be the policy. - On military level, 4 years of Bush is a great relief for France and Germany. It means that we won't have to send troops in Irak. It also means that USA will have to relocate troops in Irak, closing bases in Europe, South-America and Asia. It also means that they'll spend another handful of billion dollars for military expenses... another hundred of billions dollars for the debt (see below). - On diplomatic level, it means that EU will try to create links with Asia and South America, the main purpose being, at long term, to make them use euro as a currency (not tomorrow, of course, but later). It should be relatively easy: South Americans are naturaly anti-american, and Asians feel tricked with the dollar (they loaned money to the US, but the currency in wich the debt was taken, dollar, is loosing value everyday). Since euro is more stable, it should replace dollar as world currency within a few years, thanks to the US debt. Four years ago, Americans made fun of the euro currency as a third world one. Today, you need 1.20 $ to make 1 €. Soon, we'll have to send them humanitarian supplies. - Economicaly, I believe the election of Bush will represent a big blow to the US exports. "BUY FASCIST, BUY AMERICAN" will not be a good commercial advertising. The most american brands (Nike, Microsoft, McDonalds, Coke, Disney and the like) should see their foreign sales drop. Good news for Adidas. With any luck, we could even rid the world of McDonalds. - It is also a good opportunity to reverse brain drain. Today, a lot of european intellectuals, doctors, engineers, artists, etc... live in the USA. Many of them will probably head home now, or move to the Canada. - All in all, i don't see a direct confrontation between USA and EU. We will more probably try to a) get rid of Bush pets in Europe (Blair, Berlusconi, the polish prime minister) b) create a new alliance with Asia and South-America c) force Americans to isolate themselves. Easy, since they are naturally xenophobic. Let them play in their ranch, let them play the machos with their nice guns, and make the real business without them.
Oh, please. I wished I saved the political cartoon which showed a fat American drinking a beer and shouting that he'd never buy any more French products. LOL. (if you don't understand why it's funny, think about it for a moment)
Sure, China will gladly trade with you to get your BMW's and clogs, as they concurrently build their military, then in like 2012 or something, when they get a militaristic guy in power, then look at Europe and say, "Hey Wong, why do we keeping BUYING clogs and BMW's from Europe, when we can just take them, and make them part of greater China?" Keep dreaming that a Communist regime of a billion people will have your interests at heart forever into the future. How long did it take Germany to conquor Holland? Like 3 hours, right? Perhaps your grandfather was as glib about not needing a military back before the war? I bet he sent Morse code to his buddies, proclaiming, "We don't need a decent military, Germany is our friend, and would never attack us. I mean, we buy BMW's, and Germany buys our bicycles and clogs, oh...and our tulips. They can't resist out tulips.
About military expenses. It's true that US spend much more for their national defense. But is this money EFFICIENTLY spent ? You have the most expensive (i didn't write "the best") security and intelligence services, and yet 19 madmen armed with boxcutters could destroy the WTC. You have the most expensive army (idem) in the world, and yet, after 2 years of war, you don't even control Bagdad's downtown. You're spending hundreds of billions, and your soldiers lack of supplies, of equipment, of ammunition. A MAJOR difference exists between what you spend and what you receive in return. This difference is named "defence contractors". No bid, over-over-over-priced supplies, disapearing money, US troops used to protect Halliburton's industrial facilities... Us Security and Military budgets are nothing more than a gigantic fraud, a way for the politicians to repay their contributors. It's just a concealment for bribery. It doesn't means you're powerful, just that you're corrupt.
Communist? More like a capitalistic dictatorship. Anyway, if they’re going to invade anyone it’s going to be because of their natural resources. We aint got any.
Awesome. A post like this, on election night...from a guy named...PIERRE!! BWHAHHHHAHAAAA!! I just crapped my shorts, BRB.
Why bring Holland into this again? Are you obsessed with the Dutch? No-one ever said Europe doesn't need a military. We are saying that it would be silly to spend half of Europe's budget on it - we don't need the weapons to destroy the world 20 times. 60% of Holland's military is currently abroad on US-led missions. Many other countries, including the UK, are in a similar situation. If we all pulled out of these missions we'd have more than enough people and material to defend Europe against whomever. Think about that for a second.
Europe tends to have problems with itself when the US goes isolationist. I think 2 world wars in the last century prove my point.
Yes, I am obsessed with dutch babes Ok, whatever the numbers are, you're going to have to change what you spend your money on. All I'm saying is that when Europe starts to pay it's own defense, many things you think of that are part of your "system" won't be as easy to pay for. Europe has trouble paying for the "system" already. Now add a military expense. At that point, perhaps you will understand why Americans do things that are "odd" to a European worldview. You have to remember, most Americans think the UN is the root of all evil, in the same way you guys think Bush is the root of all evil.
Except Europe has learnt the lessons from those wars, of which the last one was over 60 years ago, and they're not going to happen again. What is far more likely is another American civil war, that is if the Chinese don't invade Taiwan and spark off a fight with the USA in asia, while Europe watches on in amusement.
What a silly and pointless comment. Those world wars were started because Europe was fragmented at the time and there were many political differences particularly between Germany and France, and Germany and the UK. Those former enemies have all united in the EU now, one important reason being that we don't want to have 'problems with ourselves' anymore. As a result there now is a stable economic and political region stretching from London to Warsaw. Or did you miss the formation of the EU, by chance?
How is Europe having trouble paying for the system, exactly? Budget deficits in the EU are tightly controlled. Please compare to the US.
UN? re League of Nations. A useless body that achieved little and annoyed the 'global' powers. And allowed for Hitler and others to get away with many things. History just repeating itself.