Some interesting comments by world leaders who are involved in the ongoing fight against terrorism, after Bush was reelected:

I read Putin's statement with amusement. If we didn't "give in to terrorism," who would he be referring to as having done exactly that?

It's a funny thing about the Russians. The US argues with them all the time, but when you scratch the surface, and see what they really believe in their hearts, it isn't all that much different than our beliefs here in the States.

Wolf

Pinguino:

Thanks for your input. I won't compete with you about knowledge of Californian mentality, since I am not so knowledgeable on the USA as to write on your idiosincrasy state by state.

Of course, I won't either try to guess what you and/or your wife feel.

And however, the fact is (let's put it this way) that the world believes the USA have shown it's worse, imperialistic, warmonger, unfair face under Junior, and thought the americans wouldn't agree, and would punish hin at the ballots. But you americans re-elected him, and that's validating his politics, his destroying unarmed (almost) countries, his massive bombings that have made more than 100.000 or 150.000 innocent deaths and even more seriously injured in Irak, plus (if I am not wrong) 1.000 american soldiers dead, 7.000 with amputations, and 30.000 injured, plus sabotaging the UN, not signing Kioto protocol for ecology (we all cause catastrophes in other countries with the grenhouse effect, because of climate changes, and don't pay a dime in compensations), like so many things.

Anyone can have their own opinion, but if you give your vote to Junior, you are giving the vote to massacres, against ecology, against the UN, against punishment to the ones that fooled you to push for a war, ...

No matter how compassive you are or you think you are. You are suppoting this, and all the world knows it now.

Thanks for your kind words, and your civilized debate attitude, not always usual here.

Wolf:

It's just a matter of: You don't get in my backyard and I won't get into yours. Or even more:

When you are in a crusade against "terrorists", whatever you consider so, and you are using shameful methods, it's good to support other powers that do the same, and they'll support you helping isolate track and eventually destroy your enemies as far as you help isolate, track and eventually destroy theirs (chechens in this case), regarless that you may think they are right and are being exterminated and hunted unfairly.

The same Aznar did, selling his loyalty to the USA in their supposed antiterrorist (and in fact "terror") crusade for their support against ETA.

That's, shamely, dirty politics, where morals can be surpassed by convenience.

Let`s face it. There is a very wide gap, as wide as the Atlantic Ocean. We, Americans and Europeans, come from the same roots, but have evolved into different branches. We all write with the latin alphabet, dress similar costumes, speak indo-european languages; we all respect Christian tradition and the heritage of Athens and Rome. But that is all. I plain can`t understand you more than I understand the Chinese or the Arabs. What else can I say? I am puzzled.
I don`t trust much democracy, and I believe soon or late real power (that is, the power of banks, lobbies and big companies) finds its way to handle elections and politicians. I know Kerry wouldn`t make much difference. But anyway, simply and respectfully, I can`t understand how can a reasonable, adult, honest and moral person vote for George W.Bush. It just goes beyond my understanding.
I heard once that, during the Viet Nam war, demonstrators used to shout: "Hey, LBJ, how many kids did you kill today?". I liked that, it was brave, it was defying. For once in history, the real provoker of the horror had to face his responsability. For once, the man who disguised war and massacres with beautiful speeches, had to watch straight at his crimes.
Those demonstrators were also Americans. Those I can understand. Those I admire. But today? Today I am puzzled.

I have a question for Pinguino. With all due respect, please don`t take it as patronizing or anything. I just am asking out of sheer curiosity.
There are some sources now which claim some 100 000 people have died in Irak during the last year.
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=st.../iraq_deaths_dc
Let`s suppose some 10 000 of them were children. Now here comes my question:
Was it worth? You say your wife is merciful and decent. Does she support this horror? If not, why has she voted for Bush? Would she say "10 000 babies? It is OK for me, it is a worth paying price. I will sleep as a baby tonight"
God almighty, 100 000 people!!!!

Cristobo,

Since this article comes from the media, is there any reason to believe that it's true?
I didn't bother reading it, since all the articles you point out, I can detect there anti-U.S. bias in the first paragraph. Hardly the voice of reason.

But let's say 100,000 people died. What is the cost of freedom?

Cristobo quote "simply and respectfully, I can`t understand how can a reasonable, adult, honest and moral person vote for George W.Bush. It just goes beyond my understanding."

You speak for 48% of America.

How right you are Cristobo -
Ignacio - believe me - not all native Californians think like certain people on this board.
In fact, California is historically one of the (if not the most) liberal state in the US.
And as a native Californian - most of us are very damn proud of that fact.

Cristobo,

A couple of quick points in relation to why the US voted as they did.

The Vietnam War. Wrong? Maybe. But, at the time, the Communists were using the domino effect to topple governments. One by one, nations were falling to them through outside influences coming from neighboring Communist countries. Kruschev even went so far as to say; "We'll bury you!", in the UN, and meant every word of it.

So, where would we take a stand? The Berlin Wall, but not in Asia, because those people didn't matter?

It's easy to chastise people from the past when you don't consider the political climate of the era. We'd just gotten past the Cuban missle crisis, and we weren't in a position to allow Kruschev's "master plan" to work its magic.

If the US had abandoned Asia, we would also be prone to abandon Western Europe. Now, that would be a price that would be paid by everyone on the continent. By and large, Europeans wanted us there, but in Asia... Why? It was "so far away," and we were better served being in Europe.

I'm afraid that's not the way the US went, and to be honest, I wish we would have stayed the course in Vietnam, and won that damned thing. Why? Because the growth of Communism would have been halted at that point. I think we allowed left wing mentality to strike us down and it caused a lot of dictators in the world to begin believing they were beyond the reach of the American forces because of it.

So, why Iraq? It's not going to be Vietnam. We walked out and abandoned the people in Nam. It's not going to happen in Iraq. We're there, and staying there, because the people of the US voted for the President who said we planned on "staying the course." Maybe we learned from our mistakes in Vietnam, and maybe we know that the only thing dictators and rogue regimes understand is brute force. Just maybe we're right for being there, even if we went in under the wrong premise.

But worse. The UN. I'm watching tens of thousands of people being slaughtered in Africa right now, and the UN isn't doing a damned thing to help these people, or stop it from happening. I don't see Europe really concerned about it either.

So, in your beliefs that we are killing innocents in Iraq, where do you put the genocide that is "acceptable" by your definition in Africa in perspective. I'm afraid I just don't accept that as the way caring societies act.

No. I disagree with why we went into Iraq, but I don't disagree with Hussein being toppled. He killed more people each year who were innocent than the terrorists will kill during the course of our being there.

Then again, why aren't you blaming the terrorists for the deaths in Iraq? Obviously they're the ones who are initiating the action, and beheading people. Please. Tell me why it is that you feel terrorists and their agendas are okay, and they can murder innocents, and then say that any humanitarian efforts by the US is wrong, and go so far as to abandon the people of Africa?

As for you not trusting democracies, I can understand that perfectly. One should never trust anything they don't understand.

Wolf

Wolf,

You're amazing. It's obvious that history didn't exist before Cristobo was born, and then, only in an antiseptic, linear, Euclidean world.

Puna,

You're right, California is the most liberal state in the U.S. bar none.

Wolf,

Once again you have earned the title of Most Erudite and Logical person on this Board!

As we all know, I don't always agree with your comments but I always admire the thinking process behind them plus your ability to explain what led you to your comments.