Ah! :thumb:

The rest of the world is either "with you" or "against you"k eh? Truth has very little to do with it, is that it?

Nope not at all. You seem so quick to criticize America , yet offer NOTHING else as a reference.
Cite some other ... anything... offer something to refute what was posted.

"Quick" ? How long is it now that the Americans are in Iraq? You must have just woken up to the news this morning, if you think that my opinion is "quick".

History, my friend, is an on-going thing and it doesn't begin with the swearing in of a new president. He doesn't even create history - he merely makes his own additions. He may try to rewrite it, but there's always someone who remembers the truth.

Turn off the Fox News and put down Newsweek and Time. Take a look around you instead.

You all do realize this poll is from 2003 right? I was reviving this to see if there was any new or compelling info available - instead it looks like the same ole shit. nevermind.

Oh and aretha, I don't watch Fox nor subscribe or read either of those magrags. I think I see plenty. My view just isn't skewed in the same direction a yours.

For latest data, try the Iraq Index from the Brookings Institute. It is updated monthly. It also clearly states when the various data was collected. http://www.brookings.edu/saban/iraq-index.aspx
The Brookings Institute is one of the most respected political think tanks. And no, its not far right; the media usually calls it liberal, although since it provides data that 'supports' Bush, some have accused it of going conservative. It is currently headed by Strobe Talbott, a former Clinton administration appointee.

I see that you missed your first chance to comment on this short list I submitted earlier on American democratic principles. Care to comment now? Or has your "skewed direction" lost its' way without a road map?

1) When the UN has the power to stand on its own to the point that they can dictate and enforce policy to the US then I'll care about that. Not to say that Iraq was a good choice, but the US is free to act in its own perceived best interest regardless how other nations feel about it. It is not a global democracy.

2) Reference please? Look at the airwaves, the internet, publications, clubs and organizations... Their are plenty of voices speaking in favor of alternate paths without fear of prison or death.

3) Americans can travel nearly everywhere in the world and expect the support and assistance of the US gov't if they run into problems. There are certain nations deemed dangerous where those protections end. The nations on the list may be debatable, but the policy seems reasonable.

4) Torture is not condoned. What qualifies as torture is open for debate with loud voices on each side. Personally I believe that Celine Dion's voice qualifies as torture and should be banned.

5) Again, if the effort is not perceived to be in the best interest of the US it would be foolish to support or endorse the effort. The worthiness of specific efforts may be debated, but in the end it is important to recognize that there is no "global democracy".

I have found web pages that list various state "NO American can travel to or from unless they have a rarely granted permit" (listed include Cuba, Iran, Iraq, Libya, North Korea, Serbia, Sudan).
I think that's what being referred to by Aretha's doctor.

However, these sites mislead. The only state with restrictions is Cuba. Check out http://travel.state.gov/travel/ for more info.
"The Cuban Assets Control Regulations are enforced by the U.S. Treasury Department and affect all U.S. citizens and permanent residents wherever they are located, all people and organizations physically in the United States, and all branches and subsidiaries of U.S. organizations throughout the world. The Regulations require that persons subject to U.S. jurisdiction be licensed to engage in any travel-related transactions pursuant to travel to, from, and within Cuba. Transactions related to tourist travel are not licensable. This restriction includes tourist travel to Cuba from or through a third country such as Mexico or Canada. U.S. law enforcement authorities have increased enforcement of these regulations at U.S. airports and pre-clearance facilities in third countries. Travelers who fail to comply with Department of Treasury regulations could face civil penalties and criminal prosecution upon return to the United States. "

Also, the protections don't 'end'. Consular services are always available. The ability to protect may be limited.

But otherwise I agree with what you're stating. Just adding the facts...

Thanks, my wording was poor. or my brain broke, one or the other.

So please correct me if I am wrong but you are from and live in Sweden? Yes or No?

Originally Posted by Aretha's doctor When did the UN ever matter? They have no authority in the world, no one pays any attention to what they say or pass as resolutions, and the US basically supports the majority of all they do with our TAX payers money. Screw the UN. I say kick them out of New York and move their asses to Iceland.

Total and utter bull shit. Prove it.
Total and utter bull shit, well other than Cuba, where else? D:
Life sucks for the rest of them, buy a helmet.
Oh really, like China and India. Don't go there you will lose big time.

These examples deal with the "now" - the "today". There are tons of additional examples to site within the last few years which still effect the situation today but were implemented during the previous decades.

Correct.

The catch is that reading what you've written (from other sources "verbatim" I suppose) one will automatically assume that the "rarely granted permit" might be issued from the afore-mentioned countries. Or putting into other words, that those countries do not allow Americans to vist them, though this is not true. Never-the-less this is the interpretation most commonly voiced by Americans.

Take the point of Cuba for example. There are American agents at airports in such countries as Mexico, where flights go directly to and from Cuba. Those agents are trained in spotting American citizens disembarking from flights originating in Cuba. Once spotted those American citizens are reported to the Armerican government for prosecution.

If you are an American citizen you only need to open your passport and read what country(s) you are not allowed to visit by American law. It will be written in a slightly criptic fashion such as to be a bit unclear but if you read it well, you'll understand.

The list that aimeecc has submitted may not be up to date but the countries on that list (plus many others) either are, or have been "off limits" for Americans by U.S. decree - not by decree of those countries.

From the Brookings link - The Dec 2007 pdf.

Some very informative data on this pdf. Much of which is a little overwhelming and requires more time than I have now to review, but there are some telling graphs.

As I stated, the only current one is Cuba. I'm sure some of the other countries may have been on the list for short durations. Like when we were bombing them. Not wanting our citizens to be in a country were bombing seems like a normal enough practice. I certainly don't have a problem with that.
Cuba is purely political, and there is a large movement to end the restrictions. You are absolutely free to voice your desire to have this regulation revoked. No one will arrest you or fine you. Since you seem so passionate about these issues, what are you doing to change them? Do you write letters to your Congressman? Do you lobby Congress? How about running for office?
Don't complain about regulations if you do absolutely nothing to try to get them changed.

psst aimee - methinks she/he (Aretha's doctor) isn't from America.