With the majority of the world opposed to the war in Iraq, here's a snapshot of what our closest ally thinks. (The link below won't be good for long as Drudge flash reports never are, but the Sunday Times should have a link to replace it.) http://www.drudgereport.com/flash.htm ONE IN THREE BRITONS THINK BUSH IS STUPID - POLL Sat Nov 15 2003 19:43:02 ET The full extent of the low regard Britons have for George Bush was tonight revealed in a poll. The US President was branded a threat to world peace by a clear majority, 60%, of those questioned by YouGov. More than one in three, 37%, said Mr Bush was "stupid" while 33% called him "incoherent". Only a minority saw positive characteristics in Mr Bush, with just 7% regarding him as a good world leader, 6% as articulate and 10% as intelligent. The findings are published in The Sunday Times ahead of his state visit to Britain next week, the first by a US leader. A slim majority of those questioned opposed the visit by 26% to 21% although half did not care. There was sympathy with anti-war campaigners who plan a series of protests to mark the visit with a majority of 53% to 41% supporting the demonstrations. The antipathy toward Mr Bush is matched by an increasingly gloomy view of Iraq. For the first time a majority said Britain and America were wrong to go to war with Iraq by 45% to 43%. The question has been asked repeatedly since March and when US troops entered Baghdad in April voters were in favour of the war by 66% to 29%. Now almost three-quarters, 73%, expected the security situation to get worse over the next few months. Only 15% believed that things would get better in Iraq with just 18% saying the country's future would be as a peaceful democracy. An overwhelming 70% thought there was little hope for the people of Iraq and that it would be a permanently unstable country. Despite this, there is not a clamour to bring Britain's troops home. One in five, 20%, said UK forces in Iraq should be withdrawn immediately and 26% said they should return home within six months whatever the security situation. However, 47% believed Britain had a duty to retain forces there. There was little faith in the President's ability to handle the continuing problems in Iraq. Fewer than a quarter, 24%, had confidence in Mr Bush on Iraq, while 74% did not. Prime Minister Tony Blair fares only slightly better with 38% expressing confidence in him compared with 59% who did not. There was also scepticism about the "special relationship" between Britain and the US. Only a third, 34%, thought the relationship should continue as at present with Britain remaining America's closest ally. A larger proportion, 47%, said that Britain should continue as one of America's allies but be ready to pursue a more independent line. Some went further, with 14% saying Britain should no longer regard America as a close ally and should pursue its own interests irrespective of what Washington thinks. YouGov surveyed a representative sample of 1,934 adults, online, on Thursday and Friday, November 13-14.
When you get your news from a liberal propaganda machine (and proven liar) such as the BBC I'm not surprised the Brits think like this.
I had to re-read the article several times. Damed if I can't find anywhere where the BBC was involved in this piece. Where did that come from Tex?
Clearly you don't get the pattern; other countries, no matter their support of us in Afghanistan, etc. can be dismissed by one factor; France re: Iraq...there is an existing contract with Iraq, therefore entire poluation being against war is dismissed as biased...unlike us. With us, it's more complicated. Russia, Germany, etc. same thing. Other countries being agianst the war: they just don't like us, hence that s the one factor which disqualifies them from being able to be objective...unlike us. With us, it's more complicated. So now we can dismiss the opinions of the entire population of our closest ally, the same ally fighting and dying in Iraq too...because their most watched news media network has some employees who clearly lean left. What way does the most watched news medai network in the USA lean, you might well ask, but don't be so silly, would be the response; we're complex, we're hardly going to merely parrot FOX News...That would be like calling us idiots or sheep. That's only the kind of charge you can level against every other country on the planet. We're the right ones, 95% of the planet are the biased ones... ...sigh...
This logic has always beffled me. They are against war because they profit from peace. Does that mean because we have major contracts that happened because of the war, that that was the U.S. reasoning?
Oh I get it MacBeth. But what I don’t get is that Tex can cite a nebulous report from a trash tabloid like the New York Post as the indefensible truth, and dismiss one of the largest and most respected media conglomerates in the world. Oh well, to each his own….I suppose
Oh god spare me. Like the U.S. was the world's darlings to begin with. We were disliked prior to the war, and nothing has changed since then other than MORE surveys to prove the worlds dislike for our way of life. I wonder how differently our approval rating in the middle east has changed since 9-11, 2% to 1%? Just as soon as you learn to accept this line, the better off you will be, " I as a United States citizen are responsible for ALL the problems of the world."
No, no, no...It's much better to assume that they all dislike us for no reason, and as such we can do whatever we want to anyone. And polls show that the dislike is far and away higher than it's ever been...this after 9-11, when it was, for a while, at a high point. Must be everyone else. In ANY other situation, if there was one guy in a room who always thought he was right, who everyone else disagreed with, and the guy always blamed it on everyone else, an objective observer might admit that it's highly likely that it's probably not the 95% that's always wrong...but no, when it's us, we resort to Standing Up For What's Right When Everyone's Against You is Leadership...the fact that we saud the same thing about WMDEs, 9-11, etc re Iraq in no way deflates the hot air from those who love to look at the wrodl through Red White ANd Blue blinders....
World hating Bush does NOT mean World dislikes our way of life. The polls mean what they mean, the world does not agree with Bush's policies. Why are you trying to equate dislike of our policies with disliking us and our way of life? You are purposly misleading the point of view of people around the world. You do this for one reason, as an excuse to dismiss their view as just biased.
Listen little man, this whole argument must have written while under some medication, or your just not understanding my message. The approval rating for US (the U.S.) has always been dismal. Show me positive ratings prior to 9-11 in any category by other countries. Better yet, find a country that had some type of suffering, then find who they blamed the most. Wanna guess who it would be? And why will it be in different now? And your answer is they logically have an excuse to blame us? Nothing your little outburts has changed the fact. You take a poll anywhere in the world, at any point in time, and it's always going to be OUR fault.
I would just like to point out that these poll numbers are about Bush not Americans or our "way of life".
Who cares if no one likes us? we're the rich kid with all the best toys. im sure they are just jealous of our coolness! seriously though, that poll is biased, a real poll with educated people would have a much higher percentage thinking that Bush is stupid.
Although my fancy for Bush has been greatly dimished I'm not sure what the relevance of this figure is. You don't have to pass an intelligence test to get involved with politics in any country. The poll seemed interesting until I read the title. The threat to world peace figure seemed more concerning yet they entitle the poll such its difficult to respect it. Oh well.
Before throwing out names and medicinal assumptions about other people's arguments, you might want to have more than your opinion as a foundation for your own...
Liberal propaganda machine? Really? It is an independent corporation, funded publicly, and not accountable to government, owners or advertisers.
Just because it's independent doesn't make it unobjective. Read through the discussion we had earlier on this topic. http://bbs.clutchcity.net/php3/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64596
I take it that you mean in the UK. Why is he a "standing joke?" He was a relatively obscure figure-- having ONLY been the governor of Texas. What did the Brits know about him or what were they told about him? It sounds to me like he has been demeaned from the get-go by a liberal bias. How can you say that's not true. He had done nothing on the world stage to deserve any kind of reputation which preceeded him.
