Do you agree with world opinion? (Revised)

[Patters]

NOTE: YOUR PATSFAN NAME WILL APPEAR AFTER EACH ITEM YOU VOTED FOR!!!

Check all that apply.

Source: http://abcnews.go.com/US/wireStory?id=2814371

[Real World]

I voted for one, Guantanamo. I don't like whats going on there. I considered voting for our causing more conflict in the middle east, and probably should have, but I don't think the middle east has ever been without some sort of conflict, so it's hard for me to say a sh!tty situation got sh!ttier. Afterall, Saddam is gone, Lebanon kicked out Syria, and Iraqi's voted for a constitution and democratic government.

Personally, the poll blows cuz it's framed to be completely negative. Lets ask questions about all of the worlds most controvertial issues that would paint the US in a negative light. Furthermore, it's nice to see them say:

"while half disapproved of U.S. policy on Guantanamo and Iran"

Why not say "while half approved of"? Glass half full, or half empty? Oh, and it's a BBC poll. Take that for what it's worth.

Countries polled: Some real pro US countries there.

Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Chile, China, Egypt, France, Germany, Britain, Hungary, India, Indonesia, Italy, Kenya, Lebanon, Mexico, Nigeria, the Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Russia, South Korea, Turkey, United Arab Emirates and the United States.

[Seymour93]

U.S. presence in the ME has provoked more conflict than stability

Only a fool would not vote for that option. Hmmm... the Iraq War has caused total chaos, not to mention the blind support for Israel and bases in Saudi Arabia motivated the 9/11 attackers.

We should treat the Middle East the same way we treat Africa. Let them ****ers solve their own problems. Promote the general welfare in America, NOT the Islamic World.

[BelichickFan]

Originally Posted by Seymour93

We should treat the Middle East the same way we treat Africa. Let them ****ers solve their own problems. Promote the general welfare in America, NOT the Islamic World.

I have no problem with the concept of letting them kill themselves - in fact I'm in favor of them doing so - but as unstable as Iraq is right now, letting them kill each other, especially with them developing nukes, is even more unstable than what they have.

[PressCoverage]

Originally Posted by BelichickFan

I have no problem with the concept of letting them kill themselves - in fact I'm in favor of them doing so - but as unstable as Iraq is right now, letting them kill each other, especially with them developing nukes, is even more unstable than what they have.

you're actually "in favor" of Iraqis killing eachother? cool... ummm, but could you expand on that a bit, please?

do you mean just the militant men, or are you satiated by just general genocide across the country as a whole?

[BelichickFan]

Originally Posted by PressCoverage

you're actually "in favor" of Iraqis killing eachother? cool... ummm, but could you expand on that a bit, please?

do you mean just the militant men, or are you satiated by just general genocide across the country as a whole?

The world would be better off starting over in that area. If we could kill the bad ones and save the rest, fine. But it's clear that we can't. So, to answer your initial question - yes.

[PressCoverage]

Originally Posted by BelichickFan

The world would be better off starting over in that area. If we could kill the bad ones and save the rest, fine. But it's clear that we can't. So, to answer your initial question - yes.

"the world would be better off" "i'm in favor of them killing eachother"

i don't mean to demonize you, because you've been a pretty respectful, ...

but do you have any idea how "Final Solution" that sounds?

[BelichickFan]

Originally Posted by PressCoverage

"the world would be better off" "i'm in favor of them killing eachother"

i don't mean to demonize you, because you've been a pretty respectful, ...

but do you have any idea how "Final Solution" that sounds?

It's not wholly different that what people who want us to just leave the middle east entirely are suggesting. If we just left completely, the entire middle east would likely be gone within a generation.

[wistahpatsfan]

Originally Posted by BelichickFan

It's not wholly different that what people who want us to just leave the middle east entirely are suggesting. If we just left completely, the entire middle east would likely be gone within a generation.

What's your point...?
If they can't control themselves from wiping each other out, what business of it is ours? I happen to agree with you to a point, but I would rather see us leave the region entirely and watch from afar as they realize that it's religion and only religion that fuels this fire and they have been behaving like idiots for 1500 years.

It could happen......I need some

[BelichickFan]

Originally Posted by wistahpatsfan

What's your point...?
If they can't control themselves from wiping each other out, what business of it is ours?

I don't really have one, just explaining why I said we haven't de-stabilized the middle east and also explaining my "I don't care if they die" stance being, IMO, the same stance as those who think we should just leave.