One difference between Europe and the US
 

...it's the personality of the people that make the biggest difference.

After the worst act of terrorism on US soil the people of the US said, the shit has hit the fan and we had better seek these people out to the very ends of the earth, and kick their ass and all their friend's asses, liberating an entire country if we have to.

After Madrid, which is basically the Spanish 911, one European reaction is to urge the correct level of restraint.

Notably missing from that list of priorities is hitting back.

"Europe does not find itself at war." Compare and contrast Bush post 911 - not forgetting the atmosphere then, very united behind the Pres - "We wage a war to save civilization itself. We did not seek it, but we will fight it and we will prevail."

Part of this difference is that Europe brings a knife to this street fight while the US brings a shotgun. If all you have is a knife, maybe you prefer talking to fighting. But part of this difference is the national character, in which the American people, once struck, will fight back with ferocity. We ain't taking shit from nobody. Nobody comes into our house and pushes us around.

You punch us in the gut, it only makes us madder. You punch Europe in the gut and half of it shrinks back and tries to figure out how to walk away.

I prefer the US response. But then again, I'm in it.

Re: One difference between Europe and the US
 

If we have to?The thing is, Europe is trying to put their history of being utter bastards behind them. The colonial powers spent several centuries bringing shotguns to knife fights, and it didn't turn out well.

Frankly, I think it's great. The US's response to the WTC attack alienated traditional allies and gave a litany of new reasons for your arabs to take up arms against the great satan. If a measured, well thought out non knee-jerk-lets-kill-the-filthy-towelheads-unless-they-sell-us-cheap-oil approach is taken, great.

Good to see democracy in action in Spain, kicking out a leader who entered into your war against the wishes of 90% of his population. Looks like Howard will go in australia too for lying to the people so he could get his tongue a bit further up bush's ass.

Nor for that matter has any true progress been made in the war on terror, sure the-terrorist-group-formerly-known-as-al-queda may be in a bit of a shambles but it's merely been diversified to hundreds of smaller, more distributed, harder to track groups. When the hell will people learn you can't stop ideas with bombs.

Little or nothing has been done to address the underlying issues behind the popular rise of islamofacism in the Middle East and elsewhere and no matter how many captured 'leaders' your government displays to the world to garner a few more votes, the attacks won't stop.

The problem with shotguns is they hit everything indiscriminately.

Current cover of The Economist as a result of those Spanish elections. Shown on each card are the leaders of Spain, US, Australia, and Britian - the hardcore promoters of this war:

Re: One difference between Europe and the US
 

Maybe Spain would prefer to make sure that they have the right targets sighted before striking back.

Maybe Cowboy Dubya could learn something from that.

If all you have is a knife, maybe you prefer talking to fighting.

"If all you have is a hammer, every problem looks like a nail."

It is a bit alarming to me that international relations have taken second place to the use of cruise missiles when dealing with world issues -- the US military is used a bit too frequently for my enjoyment.

But, yeah, no one comes here and pushes us around and Spain has really fucked it up for both themselves and others by backing down. As a person, you can't permit anyone to bully you. As a country, that rule is magnified a thousand fold.

In terms of the Spanish election, lets put things in perspective here.
Aznar was deeply unpopular well before this, the war on Iraq was unpopular with 90% of the population and like every other leader on the front page of the economist, guilty of lying to his country to get involved.

The spanish people voted with their conscience, they voted to remove a leader who did not represent their wishes, who was at odds with popular opinion well before the attacks.

There is more than a tad of irony, Kitsune, in first saying that guns-blazing diplomacy is a bad idea and then saying Spain did the wrong thing by rejecting it.

There is more than a tad of irony, Kitsune, in first saying that guns-blazing diplomacy is a bad idea and then saying Spain did the wrong thing by rejecting it.

Yeah, you are correct. I draw a distinct line between Iraq and Afghanistan -- I don't even consider Iraq part of actions against terrorism. I guess the Spanish vote was expected and just coincidence with regards to the bombing.

My person feeling is that it merely drove the point home a little deeper - not only did they dislike the war but it had brought a conflift that was not theirs home too. At the time of the vote it was not clear who was responsible.

The conflict is very definitely Spain's, since they had the gall to throw out the Moorist states in 1492 and the Islamists have never forgotten. OBL mentioned this in his last tape... the loss of Muslim rule in Spain is a longstanding issue with these guys.

and recently being the 3rd biggest supporter of the US campaign had nothing to do with it.

In the end it doesn't make any difference. What are ya goona do? Invade Syria? That'll sure solve it. Maybe just step in a take over Pakistan, I'm sure they'll all calm down and go back to eating dirt after that.

IOW, we can't do anything about it, except of course bitch about the US.

Yes, that's the European attitude, precisely. You've got it down pat, well done.

Well when I read such stupid and arrogant answers, I think you're right Undertoad. Thanks for changing my opinion about America and how you see us Europeans and especially show me how we, the Europeans, think about you!!!
What do you know what the people over here think about America?! Maybe most of us agree about your prez that he's not a real clever man, but you don't know the jokes we told about Clinton. Do you think, because you read some articles on the Internet that you're tha man?! It's mostly this attitude that we can't stand. You can't generalize what you think about France (and I think that even that is quite gross for people who don't really know France, its history, its people, its language, its way of life and everything) to the rest of Europe. There a big differences between Europeans. There's a thing no sovereign nation and its inhabitants can't stand, and that's when some other country decides what they have to do and to think...
You're no longer discussing decisions and opinions but judging and condemning them, without really having the appropriate background, and that's dangerous... Someday you could think that France belongs to the Axe of Evil...

edit : Oh consider the "you" as general... and in no way a personal offense against Undertoad

I base my opinions on the decisions made by the leaders of these countries and the statements they make. Such as the EU's foreign policy chief. What else am I supposed to do? If there is more information, bring it, and correct me. I love to be corrected.

I lived in Europe for a year as a kid so I do have 2% Euro DNA culture in my brain. For instance, I have an irrational love for ABBA, and drive a small shifty VW.

BTW don't remind the hard leftists here that you were anti-US before George W. hit the scene. They all want to blame him for it.

If I would base my opinion of US on the decisions made by your leaders, what am I supposed to think about you?!
BTW Europe or let's say the EU, still doesn't have a Chief of Foreign Policy. I think it's a pity because if there was one and only one voice coming from Europe, I think that would be better.
I, as a Luxembourger, don't like the French to much. They are chauvinistic, La Grande Nation! It's not that wrong, because over here they're are one of the biggest nations and their president is not a dumbass. Actually I like Chirac.
You must know we had a lot of wars over here and even the french soldiers did some good fighting (the Légion Etrangère only has french officers and NCO's, there are some french soldiers too, but nowadays it's no more a hide-away for criminals). I think nobody over here wants a new war to start. So we try not to get involved too much in any wars around the world. But still we have our missions in Afghanistan, Ex-Yougoslavia, Congo, Rwanda, Côte d'Ivoir. It's true we normally join when the fighting's over but we will stay for 10 years trying to restore normal live and democracy. The population in Europe is too divided to act like US, swift but sometimes a little naiv; we need to be shure that takes time but we won't hide. Who should we attack after 3/11? There is no real enemy. We'll try our way, slowly but shurely...