Anyone else think that with a Kerrry victory Europe will immediately love

[noahmijo]

or respect us almost as much as they did on Sept 12 2001?

I think the act of sending Bush back to Texas will be symbolic in that it tells the world we got rid of him we didn't want him anymore we cast him out.

[emulatorloo]

1. agreed - and if Bush is elected we will be in DEEEP DEEEEEEEEP Trouble

with Europe and the European People. . .our former allies will join together against us.

PS They will not care about "protest votes" . . . .

[noahmijo]

2. Yea that too you're right

Could swing AGAINST us in the way you just mentioned

Luckily I think after Kerry's speech we now have a good lock on the "Nader vote"

[dolo amber]

3. That's assuming

they DID respect us...

I think maybe tolerate us, as one does the playground bully they don't want to piss off, is a better estimation.

I speak only of my European friends, of course. :)

[charlyvi]

4. I think a Kerry victory will give us a chance...

What we do with it is another matter. Kerry is an internationalist, but if we have a Repub Senate and House, you know it's Big Dog all over again. Unless Kerry wins with a mandate--LANDSLIDE. But I don't think that's too likely.

[TlalocW]

5. If I ever go to Europe in the next 4 years

I'll be sure to wear a shirt that says, "Yes, I'm American, but I voted for President John Kerry and not Bush."

TlalocW

[Wilber_Stool]

6. No.

That's gone for good. Maybe in a couple of decades we'll regain their respect, but the moral high ground is gone. We're just like everyone else now.

[Hoping4Change]

7. I think people will be relieved but the anger they currently feel

will simply change to a sense of nausea about the world situation that bush created. I think people's emotions are spent. Furthermore with its suspicions aroused the world will be watching
how Kerry handles the Abu Griab debacle, Israel as well as various treaties Bush reneged on which is very worrying to Europeans but gets little attention in the US.





"In 2002, the US government declared that it no longer agreed with the commitments made in 2000, particularly the global ban on nuclear testing, putting the future of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty in jeopardy.



The Biological Weapons Convention (BWC), a treaty aimed at eradicating another weapon of mass destruction...in June 2001 the Bush Administration refused at the last minute to agree to international inspections...



This decision outraged the international community, and is particularly hypocritical in light of the current demands on Iraq.



The Bush administration has also reneged on the Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) Treaty, announcing in December 2001 that it was withdrawing from the Treaty in order to pursue its Star Wars missile defense programme.



Funding the safeguarding and destruction of nuclear weapons and materials in the countries of the former Soviet Union by the United States is crucial if the proliferation of nuclear weapons is to be curtailed. Yet one of the first acts of the Bush Administration when it came into power in 2001 was to slash funding for these programmes by almost 21 percent while increasing nuclear weapons funding by almost five percent.



(Bush's) plans to build new nuclear weapons, shows that the US is in material breach of the NPT as well as other international nuclear non-proliferation and disarmament treaties. Furthermore, it clearly displays that the Bush Administration presents an imminent threat to global security.



http://www.greenpeace.org/international_en/extra/?campaign_id=285488&forward_source_anchor=Weapons%20of%20mass%20destruction&item_id=286152

[whistle]

8. Neither Europe nor any other nation on this planet will immediately....

...or ultimately love us, the United States of America, because it is not the nature of sovereign states and nations to "love" any other nation. Politics is about finding ways for groups of people to get along, hopefully without killing one another, never to love one another. We Americans, unfortunately, are so very starved for real love and happiness, for reasons far too complicated to cover in a thread like this, that we, this poster included, will take any act of kindness or compassion or generosity or caring or whatever it might be that we believe is for some higher good, and then wait for the recipient to immediately fall to the ground at our feet to worship us. We liberals are certainly accused of this, but so are conservatives and yes even the neo-cons, if not in a different way. Did not BushCo expect Iraqi citizens to pour out into the streets back in April 2003 to shower U.S. troops with love and gratitude for liberating them from what the Busheviks called Saddam's tyranny?

Why do we expect unconditional love when we are unable to give it? We fail to practice this here at home, what makes us think we can practice giving unconditional love elsewhere? I know I struggle with it, my character flaws get in the way though of being true to that goal and I'm afraid I fall far short of the necessary humility to serve that end. I keep trying I keep praying and I keep hoping that I can someday be worthy enough to deliver such love. In the meantime, I look to our leaders to represent this ideal which is why I will vote for Kerry/Edwards.