Editore"s Note
Tilting at Windmills

Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

February 7, 2006
By: Kevin Drum

HOW ARE WE DOING?....Dan Drezner points to an interesting recent poll that lets us know just who our friends really are. First the good news:

With Iran included in this years poll, it has displaced the US as the nation with the most countries giving it a negative rating.

The Iranians are really disliked, and I imagine that their combination of nuclear instransigence and Denmark-baiting in recent weeks has only made things worse for them.

Since I'm an American, though, I'm more interested in world views of the U.S. and while Iran may be doing even worse than us, the news on the home front isn't exactly good:

The poll shows that the US has lost ground in some key allied countries. Among the 20 nations polled in 2004 as well as this year, on average positive ratings have dropped five points; ratings have significantly declined in 10 of these tracking countries (including the US) while significantly improving in only five.

At least they like us in Poland and the Philippines. More significantly, our approval rating is quite high in Afghanistan, which is genuinely good news. If only we could do as well in Iraq.

Kevin Drum 12:27 PM Permalink | Trackbacks | Comments (95)

Bookmark and Share
 
Comments


We're doing pretty well among the illiterates.

Posted by: gcochran on February 7, 2006 at 12:30 PM | PERMALINK

We don't need to be liked, right? War on terrorism, and all that -- no need for allies, no need to try to lessen the amount of hatred for the U.S. -- right? We can just keep killing anyone that doesn't like the U.S., and that certainly won't create any new enemies or danger...

Posted by: Gore/Obama '08 on February 7, 2006 at 12:31 PM | PERMALINK

GIBSON: The next question is for President Bush, and it comes from Nikki Washington.

WASHINGTON: Thank you.

Mr. President, my mother and sister traveled abroad this summer, and when they got back they talked to us about how shocked they were at the intensity of aggravation that other countries had with how we handled the Iraq situation.

Diplomacy is obviously something that we really have to really work on.

What is your plan to repair relations with other countries given the current situation?

BUSH: No, I appreciate that. I -- listen, I -- we've got a great country. I love our values. And I recognize I've made some decisions that have caused people to not understand the great values of our country.

I remember when Ronald Reagan was the president; he stood on principle. Somebody called that stubborn. He stood on principle standing up to the Soviet Union, and we won that conflict. Yet at the same time, he was very -- we were very unpopular in Europe because of the decisions he made.

I recognize that taking Saddam Hussein out was unpopular. But I made the decision because I thought it was in the right interests of our security.

You know, I've made some decisions on Israel that's unpopular. I wouldn't deal with Arafat, because I felt like he had let the former president down, and I don't think he's the kind of person that can lead toward a Palestinian state.

And people in Europe didn't like that decision. And that was unpopular, but it was the right thing to do.

I believe Palestinians ought to have a state, but I know they need leadership that's committed to a democracy and freedom, leadership that would be willing to reject terrorism.

I made a decision not to join the International Criminal Court in The Hague, which is where our troops could be brought to -- brought in front of a judge, an unaccounted judge.

I don't think we ought to join that. That was unpopular.

And so, what I'm telling you is, is that sometimes in this world you make unpopular decisions because you think they're right.

We'll continue to reach out.

Listen, there is 30 nations involved in Iraq, some 40 nations involved in Afghanistan.

People love America. Sometimes they don't like the decisions made by America, but I don't think you want a president who tries to become popular and does the wrong thing.

You don't want to join the International Criminal Court just because it's popular in certain capitals in Europe.

Posted by: adios on February 7, 2006 at 12:36 PM | PERMALINK

I'm a bit surprised at how well we are doing in the African countries surveyed. My first thought is that it has a lot to do with visible iniatives to fight AIDS on the African continent, but more of that has been funded by Bill Gates than the US government. Are US companies investing in natural resource rich countries like Nigeria and Kenya and bringing up the standard of living? Just curious.

Posted by: lisainVan on February 7, 2006 at 12:38 PM | PERMALINK

I wonder how much adjustment needs to be made for a "Strongest Country in the World" factor. In other words, strong countries probably have a baseline negative reading dependent on their standing relative to others.

I.e. the #2 most powerful is always going to have a certain percentage of the citizenry that's somewhat envious that they're not #1. Countries the farthest from the top might have the least negative feelings based just on strength, so that might explain why we're relatively liked in Africa. Countries with different forms of government, especially as it relates to openness/freedom, might naturally be disposed against bigger, free-er societies. And so on. So a matrix of some sort might be more valuable than simply like/dislike.

Further, year-over-year changes in popularity could be a large number of things, from democracy movements to relative economic performance, etc.

But it's an interesting look.

Posted by: Kos-hack on February 7, 2006 at 12:39 PM | PERMALINK

I am surprised that the U.S. is almost as reviled in Iraq as in Iran given that the U.S. has: (a) deposed a brutal dictator in Iraq; (b) poured billions into Iraq reconstruction; and (c) is currently confronting Iran with the prospect of attack without democracy or aid in the offing. How is this not an epic indictment of the administration's handling of Iraq especially when compared to the Afghanistan numbers.

With a 2:1 negative view of the U.S., our continued presence is more likely to be radicalizing as opposed to democratizing. Rose petals indeed.

Posted by: Chuck Smith on February 7, 2006 at 12:42 PM | PERMALINK

Cue that nitwit rdw with his usual blather about how "old Europe" doesn't matter and that GWB' reckless disregard of world opinion is the mark of a master statesman.

Posted by: Gregory on February 7, 2006 at 12:42 PM | PERMALINK

Given the source is Drezner, take it with a large grain of salt, even if he's just reporting (tough to be an unemployed "teacher").

Jesus! Look at who we rate well with! More telling is who we rate poorly with - Russia and the entire Middle East. It's ironic that the Italians hate us as they have a "leader" that, if possible, is bigger piece of shit than Bush.

Interesting that Japan was omitted. The numbers would be, however, favorable for America in the abstract, and very negative for the government in particular.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 12:47 PM | PERMALINK

"The Iranians are really disliked, and I imagine that their combination of nuclear instransigence and Denmark-baiting in recent weeks has only made things worse for them."

I doubt their Jew-baiting has done them many favours either.

Posted by: Ginger Yellow on February 7, 2006 at 12:48 PM | PERMALINK

We are going from "The Ugly Americans" to "The Very Ugly Americans"!

Posted by: R.L. on February 7, 2006 at 12:49 PM | PERMALINK

I'm struck by the polarization in South Korea - 44/53 with only 3% in the middle. I guess the continued US military presence there is pretty contentious.

Also, that's a very well presented chart. Edward Tufte would be pleased.

Posted by: FMguru on February 7, 2006 at 12:50 PM | PERMALINK

And their incessant bear-baiting just seals the deal.

Posted by: spanky on February 7, 2006 at 12:52 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin: where does this poll say anything about whether or not "The Iranians are really disliked"?

All it shows is that the United States is really disliked by the Iranians, not vice versa.

Posted by: The Fool on February 7, 2006 at 12:58 PM | PERMALINK

It's interesting to look at this poll in light of where immigrants come from:

Mexicans don't seem to think much of us, yet can't seem to stop moving here; (Central America isn't in the chart). Likewise the Chinese claim not to like us, but if they could "even the lamp posts would come', as Fox Butterfield reported. I doubt you could find six people in China who have any legal claim to live in the United States who wouldn't come here tomorrow ASAP.

Pakistan isn't on the chart, but among the high sending nations who ARE, most claim not to like us.

Still India (which could be seen as ambivalent) favors us almost three to one, while smaller senders (with high #s for the region) like Nigeria (which leads Africa) and Poland love us.

(The Philippines, of course, has had a unique historical experience with the U.S. -- we really did liberate 'em from Spain, and though we occupied them as imperialists through WW2, the side by side suffering of our guys and their guys under Japanese occupation, plus the deep and unusual civic relationship we used to have -- Filipinos used to be "U.S. nationals", but not citizens -- makes 'em sort of an anomaly.)

Let's hope Afghanistan and Iraq wind up with similar memories of what a force for good we are in the world.


Posted by: theAmericanist on February 7, 2006 at 12:59 PM | PERMALINK

I find it somewhat depressing that we're viewed less favorably in Germany and France than in Iran. I'm sure Iran can't be too happy about that either. I mean, seriously, how much money do they throw away on anti-american propaganda each year? And Germany beats them? I guess that's why they're reinvesting in nukes: More bang for the buck, so to speak.

Posted by: Monstertron on February 7, 2006 at 1:03 PM | PERMALINK

Surprising? Mexico. I live many states away from the border, but still I would have thought they'd like us more.

Important? China. Assuming they are our main geopolitical rival, it doesn't help that the Chinese people don't hold us in high regard. What was the Soviets' opinion of us, say, ca. 1975?

Good going Karen Hughes!

Posted by: uncle toby on February 7, 2006 at 1:04 PM | PERMALINK

We are going from "The Ugly Americans" to "The Very Ugly Americans"!

America: The New Pariah State.

Posted by: tam1MI on February 7, 2006 at 1:07 PM | PERMALINK

The chart makes sense to me; all the Mexicans who like America must have already snuck in here.

Posted by: Frank J. on February 7, 2006 at 1:07 PM | PERMALINK

The Fool: Click the link.

Posted by: shortstop on February 7, 2006 at 1:07 PM | PERMALINK

Glad someone else mentioned Mexico. Because that's what stunned me the countries that should know us best - our direct neighbours, don't like our influence. And it's massive and overwhelming.

And no, it's not just the giant thing, they liked us a lot more when Clinton was around.

Posted by: Samuel Knight on February 7, 2006 at 1:09 PM | PERMALINK

Kevin: where does this poll say anything about whether or not "The Iranians are really disliked"?

All it shows is that the United States is really disliked by the Iranians, not vice versa.
Posted by: The Fool

Dude! Click on the link. The study is primarily about Iran.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 1:11 PM | PERMALINK

Iran should be GREATFUL to the US, for destroying their age-old enemy (Hussein) and handing over his territory (Iraq) to their control. They should be licking our sphincters in gratitude for destroying the tyrant who used poison gas on their troops.

Furthermore (and I'll reveal my inner-conservative on this issue): this whole cartoon-riots thing is really making me not care about the Muslim religion or it's adherents. If they can't respect the basic human right of free speech, then fuck, maybe I'll vote for Dick Cheney in 08, keep up the oppression and genocide, because this is an ideology not worth saving. Then, when the Christofacsicts start firebombing houses over gay actors, we can bomb them back to the stone age too.

Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten on February 7, 2006 at 1:13 PM | PERMALINK

That was the best the BBC could do?

Surely they must rewrite the questions to get everybody to hate us.

The BBC -- the one calorie of America hating, not quite hateful enough.

Posted by: Birkel on February 7, 2006 at 1:16 PM | PERMALINK

Jeff II,

Given the source is Drezner, take it with a large grain of salt, even if he's just reporting (tough to be an unemployed "teacher").

You need to keep up. 1) Drezner is still employed at the University of Chicago, he was just denied tenure, which means his contract won't be renewed, but it hasn't ended. 2) When his contract at Chicago ends, he will be moving on to a tenured position at Tufts.

Also your "given the source" crack is an obvious fallacy. The credibility of public opinion poll is totally unrelated to the credibility of the person citing it. If that were so, you could be pointing at the setting sun saying it were going down, and I would have to doubt it, even if I were seeing it with my own eyes.

Posted by: Ray on February 7, 2006 at 1:19 PM | PERMALINK

Furthermore (and I'll reveal my inner-conservative on this issue): this whole cartoon-riots thing is really making me not care about the Muslim religion or it's adherents. If they can't respect the basic human right of free speech, then fuck, . . . Posted by: Osama_Been_Forgotten

Since when, even in the U.S., do we really defend the "basic human right of free speech"? Didn't Cindy Sheehan just get tossed from the "People's House" because of the T-shirt she was wearing?

Otherwise, I agree with you completely. The Islam of "the street," just like conservative Christianity (yes, that includes Catholicism and the Orthodox sects) and Orthodox and Hasidic Judaism are the primary obstacles to advancing the human race. The sooner religion is down graded to a set of ethical rather than immutable believes, the better off we will all be.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 1:20 PM | PERMALINK

Also your "given the source" crack is an obvious fallacy. Posted by: Ray

I know. Just as with Yglesais, I can't resist the cheap shot. I hate both of them.

Tufts? After fucking up so badly at Chicago I'm surprised he won't be teaching at a voc-tech next year.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 1:29 PM | PERMALINK

This is very old news: the BBC released this data early in December. I guess Drezner has dial-up.

The fact remains, however, that the image of the U.S. is directly related to where Americans prefer to visit. Maybe if Bush did not allow Americans to visit Paris, London or Toronto our image would improve. (Or, we could teach Americans to chew with their mouths closed. Nah, wouldn't take.)

Posted by: Dicksknee on February 7, 2006 at 1:29 PM | PERMALINK

The BBC -- the one calorie of America hating, not quite hateful enough.

Nice straw man, Birkel. Thanks for once again demonstrating the intellectual dishonesty of the Right.

Posted by: Gregory on February 7, 2006 at 1:31 PM | PERMALINK

That was the best the BBC could do?

Surely they must rewrite the questions to get everybody to hate us.

The BBC -- the one calorie of America hating, not quite hateful enough. Posted by: Birkel

The survey had nothing to do with the BBC. Like Fool, you obviously didn't click the link either. Fucking Republicans.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 1:33 PM | PERMALINK

Well it looks like an American male can still have fun in the Phillipines.

Posted by: Pootang hunter on February 7, 2006 at 1:43 PM | PERMALINK

What? No Polish jokes?

Posted by: C.J.Colucci on February 7, 2006 at 1:58 PM | PERMALINK

What? No Polish jokes? Posted by: C.J.Colucci

I got one, the Poles are so stupid they sent troops to Iraq. Oh. Wait a minute. That's not funny, it's pathetic.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 2:02 PM | PERMALINK

Friends are overrated. We can go it alone. We are invincible. We are woman. Hear us roar.

Sorry, got a bit off track there.

Posted by: knights who say "nee" on February 7, 2006 at 2:06 PM | PERMALINK

My daughter just returned from a semester spent in Kenya. Every day someone asked her if they could go back to the USA with her. They think the streets here are paved with gold.

Posted by: cq on February 7, 2006 at 2:13 PM | PERMALINK

Speaking as a Brazilian who is firmly among the mainly positive 33%, I can say that the usual fear factors are all there: influence and manipulation, you are a huge superpower and could crush us like a bug, your economy could swallow ours as soon as you wanted it, your culture is infectious and it will vanquish ours, yadda, yadda, yadda. This is all absurd, but there are a lot of people who are a bit, let's say, unsophisticated here, who still buy into this.

But my experience shows that most of the negativity Brazil has towards the US comes from a legitimate source: your Cold War policies in Latin America. Brazil now understands the support the US gave for the military when they took power here, and that's not an easy thing to forgive and forget.

I still believe that what happened during the Cold War ended with the Cold War, and we should move forward - and the US has much, much potential to do many more great things, as it has already done in the past.

But you do screw up sometimes, too - the Iraq thing really didn't help you very much down here.

Posted by: Brazil Connection on February 7, 2006 at 2:16 PM | PERMALINK

I would have thought we'd be doing better in Finland with the whole Conan O'Brien thing.

Posted by: FXKLM on February 7, 2006 at 2:18 PM | PERMALINK

This is all absurd, but there are a lot of people who are a bit, let's say, unsophisticated here, who still buy into this. Posted by: Brazil Connection

Absurd, huh? Been to El Salvador or Nicaragua lately? Do you forget what happened to Argentina in the 1980s? Brazil is a slightly larger "bug," but your economy is about a stable as a right wing Christian or an unemployed Palestinian male with seven kids.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

Why Do You Care What Other People Think?

People in France think that Bush is as bad as Hitler. Anybody that deranged or ignorant shouldn't be accorded any attention.

Posted by: contentious on February 7, 2006 at 2:29 PM | PERMALINK

"Significantly," the approval rating of Iran is relatively high in Afghanistan (47 positive to 20 negative). Is that good news too?

Posted by: TimRabbit on February 7, 2006 at 2:36 PM | PERMALINK

Absurd, huh? Been to El Salvador or Nicaragua lately? Do you forget what happened to Argentina in the 1980s? Brazil is a slightly larger "bug," but your economy is about a stable as a right wing Christian or an unemployed Palestinian male with seven kids.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 2:29 PM

True, but the US are not entirely to blame for that. We had a big share of that ourselves, and blaming the US won't help us fix it. That's what I believe is absurd.

And again: I doubt the US is still doing in El Salvador, Nicaragua and Argentina what they did in the past. And what the US already did to Brazil - supporting the military coup - was grave enough, but I still think we gotta move forward.

Posted by: Brazil Connection on February 7, 2006 at 2:43 PM | PERMALINK

I'm from Australia. Now have U.S. citizenship.

Republicans like to crow about Australia's support in The War on Terror TM because John Howard enlisted our boys' help.

Note that Australia's "mainly positive" support ranks at 29%. A good 7% below Britain's own measly showing.

(Note also that in October of '03, John Howard was censured by the Aussie Senate for misleading the public in his justification for sending Australia to war with Iraq. No such corresponding act has been leveled at the United States President who lead us all there.)

Posted by: Robert S. on February 7, 2006 at 2:49 PM | PERMALINK

P.S. It's also worth noting that Saudia Arabia's approval rating is greater than both great Britain's and Australia's. Interesting.

Posted by: Robert S. on February 7, 2006 at 2:52 PM | PERMALINK

And again: I doubt the US is still doing in El Salvador, Nicaragua and Argentina what they did in the past. And what the US already did to Brazil - supporting the military coup - was grave enough, but I still think we gotta move forward. Posted by: Brazil Connection

You make international relations sound like some bullshit 12-step program.

El Salvador and Nicragua have their own problems, but we've pretty much isolated them for the last couple of decades, sufficiently enough that they've made almost no economic or political progress since their respective civil wars. Managua, for example, since the earthquake more than twenty years ago, has been described as resembling a Mayan ruin. Both countries get hit hard nearly every hurricane season. How much concern do you see here for them?

Face it, the U.S. treats everyone south of the border like the ugly red-headed step children of the region (just like all the Farkle kids!). We have a proprietary air but really aren't willing to offer any meaningful help to lift the region out of it's poverty. In terms of foreign aid, we get a bigger woody helping former satellite states of the Soviet Union than we do aiding nations in our hemisphere. For example, want to keep millions of Mexicans for entering the U.S. illegally every year? Build Mexico's political institutions and support its economy

In any case, it's all the Church's fault.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 2:59 PM | PERMALINK

As a Canadian, I would point out that the US has many friends here even, or perhaps especially, among those of us who currently hold a dim view of its influence in the world. Its important not to conflate support for official US policies overseas with the issue of "friendship". This poll is really just measuring intensity of support along one axis. That said, there is no doubt that American "soft power" has been steadily and precipitously falling away during Bush 43.

Posted by: Aidan on February 7, 2006 at 3:02 PM | PERMALINK

El Salvador and Nicragua

Ops, not enough information. I'll have to take your word on that.

For example, want to keep millions of Mexicans for entering the U.S. illegally every year? Build Mexico's political institutions and support its economy

Face it, the U.S. treats everyone south of the border like the ugly red-headed step children of the region

I agree, but I think it's important to work on these political institutions without giving the idea of unduly interference, which can be hard. As for supporting Mexico's economy, I couldn't agree more. How do you think the US should go about it?

You make international relations sound like some bullshit 12-step program.

Huh? How is that? Just because I think that is not in the interests of the Brazilian people to keep holding a grudge against the US over a coup that happened 40 years ago? The coup has left sequels, of course, but it happened in another time, with another US government, doing something that I don't think the US people were aware of. I think is much more important for the Brazilians to stop believing the US wants to swallow them and start thinking about how to maximize the relationship between the two countries.

Posted by: Brazil Connection on February 7, 2006 at 3:14 PM | PERMALINK

Anybody that deranged or ignorant shouldn't be accorded any attention.

Let's start with you.

Posted by: Gregory on February 7, 2006 at 3:15 PM | PERMALINK

As a Canadian, I would point out that the US has many friends here even, or perhaps especially, among those of us who currently hold a dim view of its influence in the world. Its important not to conflate support for official US policies overseas with the issue of "friendship". This poll is really just measuring intensity of support along one axis. That said, there is no doubt that American "soft power" has been steadily and precipitously falling away during Bush 43.
Posted by: Aidan

Exactly! Most people in the non-Islamic world actually like the concept of the U.S. It's our do as I say not as I do foreign policy the pisses off everyone.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 3:28 PM | PERMALINK

Exactly! Most people in the non-Islamic world actually like the concept of the U.S. It's our do as I say not as I do foreign policy the pisses off everyone.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 3:28 PM

I agree as well. That, and past direct transactions, that I don't know if other countries had as Brazil did (and Argentina, as far as I know).

Posted by: Brazil Connection on February 7, 2006 at 3:33 PM | PERMALINK

As an Aussie/US citizen: I second what Aidan and Jeff said. Amen.

Posted by: Robert S. on February 7, 2006 at 3:35 PM | PERMALINK

II sez El Salvador and Nicaragua have "made almost no economic or political progress since their respective civil wars..."

One reason is that, particularly El Salvador has attempted the colonialist, bracero approach: they export their workers here (illegally) and seek to import their wages.

Bush wants to accelerate this for Mexico.

It NEVER works as an economic development strategy. You can go to villages right next to each other in places like Jalisco, Oaxaca and Chihuahua, and the one that has a local economy, with shops and markets and such, is the one that has NOT sent workers to el Norte.

You find the villages that started sending braceros in the 50s, followed by illegals in the 70s and 80s, and in the last decade: they get remittances, but they have no CUSTOMERS.

When abuelita wants to spend the money she's getting from her family, she goes to the next village over.

And her grandchildren, who have been raised on the remittances, plan to go North at the first opportunity, cuz there are no jobs in town.

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 7, 2006 at 3:39 PM | PERMALINK

Interesting numbers. I came across another blog mentioning this article, while asking Why does Phillipines hate India? As do France and Finland??

Sepia Mutiny

More interestingly why do Iran and Afganistan love India?

Posted by: lasaabgirl on February 7, 2006 at 3:45 PM | PERMALINK

And her grandchildren, who have been raised on the remittances, plan to go North at the first opportunity, cuz there are no jobs in town. Posted by: theAmericanist

That and there are far too many people. Like I said, it's all the Church's fault.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 3:48 PM | PERMALINK

Jeff II, sorry, but what Church are you talking about?

Posted by: Brazil Connection on February 7, 2006 at 3:53 PM | PERMALINK

Kos-hack has it right - they're just jealous of us.

Uh huh. That's what all the stuckup a-holes think. It helps them sleep at night.

Posted by: Tripp on February 7, 2006 at 4:57 PM | PERMALINK


More interestingly why do Iran and Afganistan love India?

I dunno about Iran, but the fall of the Taliban has allowed Afghanistan to rediscover its grand love affair with Bollywood.

Posted by: cminus on February 7, 2006 at 5:02 PM | PERMALINK

Views of the US in Saudi Arabia are even?! I think somebody's fibbing in here.

Posted by: cld on February 7, 2006 at 5:08 PM | PERMALINK

Our ratings are horrible.

Posted by: Jimm on February 7, 2006 at 5:10 PM | PERMALINK

Yeah, but what counts is "share".

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 7, 2006 at 5:12 PM | PERMALINK

Should Saddam have been removed in 1991, or 2003? An analysis of each scenario here :

http://futurist.typepad.com

Posted by: Tester on February 7, 2006 at 5:15 PM | PERMALINK

More interestingly why do Iran and Afganistan love India?

Posted by: lasaabgirl on February 7, 2006 at 3:45 PM

I am not an expert on the region, but money seems the most likely answer in the case of Iran. Iran has been negotiating with both India and Pakistan on big natural gas and pipeline projects.

Also, the relations between Iran and Pakistan are complex, with both shared interests in some areas and sharp conflicts in others. Plus, there are isolated but ongoing violence between the Sunni majority in Pakistan and the Shiite minority. Both of these factors would reduce the degree to which Iranians might side with Pakistan over India.

Posted by: tanj on February 7, 2006 at 5:32 PM | PERMALINK

Jeff II:

I too love the idea of a free, democratic and peaceful United States of America, a beacon of hope and an inspiration to the world.

I wish there WERE such a place.

Posted by: jprichva on February 7, 2006 at 5:37 PM | PERMALINK

Jp: There is. You live in it -- or at least, I do.

America is a nation that sent hundreds of thousands of its soldiers to Europe, Asia, and the Middle East, without taking over a single nation.

We've saved France -- twice! -- from her enemies, yet disrespecting us is a point of pride for the French. (When DeGaulle demanded that all American troops leave Europe, Dean Rusk asked him for a shovel.)

Deep down, we don't care: if they needed us again, we'd help.

We had little to gain from sending young men to die in Mogadishu, just to keep mostly American supplied food getting to starving people: but we did it.

We had nothing much to gain from putting our sons and daughters between genocidal killers and Muslims in the Balkans: but we did it.

Hell, for all the fuckups and bitching about Iraq, the sheer FACT of it is that kids from Ohio and Montana and Connecticut are in a far away land fighting for THEIR freedom.

Ask 'em. They'll tell you.

We are free. We are democratic. (Win some damn elections, already.)

And when we DO win elections, we will be at peace, Insh'allah.

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 7, 2006 at 6:36 PM | PERMALINK

Jeff II:

I too love the idea of a free, democratic and peaceful United States of America, a beacon of hope and an inspiration to the world.

I wish there WERE such a place.Posted by: jprichva

Ya. If it gets much worse I'm retiring to British Columbia or Gifu Prefecture.

Posted by: Jeff II on February 7, 2006 at 6:37 PM | PERMALINK

That said, there is no doubt that American "soft power" has been steadily and precipitously falling away during Bush 43.

And also that in 2004 Americans missed out on an opportunity to distance themselves from a president they didn't actually elect the first time.

Never mind: the rest of the world is still willing to make a distinction between Bush and ordinary Americans. Apart from twats like 'theAmericanist'.

Posted by: ahem on February 7, 2006 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

I doubt you could find six people in China who have any legal claim to live in the United States who wouldn't come here tomorrow ASAP.

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 7, 2006 at 12:59 PM

I could. Easily. Wouldn't even have to leave this itsy bitsy 1 sq km island to find them.

And for good measure, in addition I could find you six Americans in China would wouldn't come back to live in the US tomorrow either.

Posted by: Tom - Daai Tou Laam on February 7, 2006 at 8:13 PM | PERMALINK

America is a nation that sent hundreds of thousands of its soldiers to Europe, Asia, and the Middle East, without taking over a single nation.

You mean like, gosh, how Canada liberated the Netherlands and didn't take it over (oh and just to remind you there were more British and Canadian troops than Americans at D-Day and six beaches not three). Yikes... American exceptionalism on exceptional display. Rah! Rah! Ooh, ooh America. Gosh, you're so good and lovely. Jeez I wish we were more like you!

To point, a number of people above mentioned the size factor. I agree. This is a large part of it but not as has been suggested due to some kind of missile envy (though in honesty I feel there is an element of this too). Rather it's the constraints we feel to our own freedoms. Canada feels constant pressure from the States re. its domestic policies on drugs, healthcare, marriage (and of course getting all worked up into a tither over terrorism) and what the American reaction will be is too large a part of political discussions - it shouldn't even be a consideration for domestic issues. And as Canadains didn't elect American leaders to try and decide things for them, it is resented. Canada pressuring America on these kind of issues would conversely just be shrugged off. So yes, size threatens (and the fact that too many Americans seem to be drifting away from democracy makes this even more felt).

The thing is America's size so amplifies its voice that talk softly was not just a good policy for TR. Anything else is like having a boombox in your face.

Posted by: snicker-snack on February 7, 2006 at 8:47 PM | PERMALINK

"I could find you six Americans in China would wouldn't come back to live in the US tomorrow either."

None of 'em named Harry Wu.

Damn, but it's easy to get folks on leftie blogs to brag about how anti-American they are.

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 7, 2006 at 8:59 PM | PERMALINK

that australians think less well of america's influence than saudi arabians, indians and indonesians is utterly bizarre.

Posted by: snuh on February 7, 2006 at 9:11 PM | PERMALINK

australians think less well of america's influence than saudi arabians, indians and indonesians is utterly bizarre.

Posted by: snuh on February 7, 2006 at 9:11 PM | PERMALINK

No. Often countries which have a strong relationship with a great power resent that great power on a superficial basis.

Its a bit like sibling rivalry.

Posted by: Mca on February 7, 2006 at 9:13 PM | PERMALINK

Gregory: Let's start with you.

Every one else did ignore me.

I wonder if the ratings have changed since the French riots, the burning of the Danish and Norwegian embassies, and the other violent Islamist uprisings.

Posted by: contentious on February 7, 2006 at 9:18 PM | PERMALINK

why is it that the whole world is not pukeing its guts out ,
watching a bunch of idiots called republicans trying to operate a DEMOCRATIC FORM OF GOVERNMENT ?
AS PAPA B. SAID AIN'T GONNA HAPPEN!

Posted by: STONEHEAD on February 7, 2006 at 9:33 PM | PERMALINK

Damn, but it's easy to get folks on leftie blogs to brag about how anti-American they are.

I haven't seen any real anti-Americanism here. Maybe it's cause I'm out here in the world and know what anti-Americanism looks like (and yes, it's out there)...

and I also know what dumb-fuck nativisim looks like. You can meet it in China, in Japan, in Germany, in France and in the person of the Americanist. There are always people ready to consume all their national myths. To dumb-fuck nativists not buying into the national myth is to be anti-whatever. So the Americanist, anyone you label anti-American should take it as a compliment that they are able to pull back and see things in perspective.

contentious... oh, most definitely not. zzzzzzzzzzzzzzz Get out in the world. You might have something interesting to say in 20 years.

And McA will you just come cleam, you're not Chinese-Malaysian but a colonial Brit who's grown up in Hong Kong and Malaysia. You're just ringing all the wrong bells. Anyway, you're right here that great (colonial) powers are always resented (except when they're seen as a bulkward against something else). I guess it's just that we humans are not comfortable with too great an accumulation of power. That is we are a hierarchichal animal but in the small groups in which we developed that hierarchy was fairly flat. Anything too steep we don't like. And isn't this, at heart, what democracy is all about? One man, one vote. How much more egalitarian can you get?

All that said, there are more hated and less hated empires. Soft power works better with a less hated empire.

Posted by: snicker-snack on February 7, 2006 at 9:48 PM | PERMALINK

Love your country. Hate your leader. I could say the same Italy... difference is you guys have a lot of bombs.

Posted by: Soviet Canuckastani on February 7, 2006 at 11:49 PM | PERMALINK

Writing as a citizen of a country that gave the US a rating of -46 (narrowly beating out Mexico at -45 for the most negative view), I think that the situation isn't nearly as bad as it seems. American pop culture is as popular as ever here and mistrust of American foreign policy has not grown into hatred of Americans. Get a sensible Democratic president that a) is loathe to start wars of aggression and b) doesn't scoff at the very idea of doing something to protect the environment. Your numbers will come around.

Posted by: Wrong on February 7, 2006 at 11:56 PM | PERMALINK

Wrong,

yeah but will you hate us Canucks when we deny you the hockey gold in the upcoming Olympics. But please, do go ahead and beat the Swedes.

Posted by: snicker-snack on February 8, 2006 at 12:08 AM | PERMALINK

snicker-snack,

Canuckistani hockey players are known throughout the civilized (read: hockey playing) world as vile, violent aggressors. However, as long as they promise to hurt Mats Sundin real bad at the earliest available opportunity, we can be friends.

Posted by: Wrong on February 8, 2006 at 12:22 AM | PERMALINK

ANALOGY, IRAQ 2003-2006 TO THE PHILIPPINES 1898-1901.

They hated us too, as occupiers; and killed our soldiers in the thousands. Now they are our staunchest supporters in otherwise hostile territory.

TOH

Posted by: The Objective Historian on February 8, 2006 at 1:19 AM | PERMALINK

A case of unrequited love:

Views of France's Influence:
Russia 57% posiitive 8% negative (+49)

Views of Russia's Influence:
France 21% positive, 62% negative (-41)

Posted by: snicker-snack on February 8, 2006 at 1:38 AM | PERMALINK

"I could find you six Americans in China who wouldn't come back to live in the US tomorrow either."

Damn, but it's easy to get folks on leftie blogs to brag about how anti-American they are.
Posted by: theAmericanist on February 7, 2006 at 8:59 PM

HuH??? Not wanting to live in the US at this moment in time is anti-American? *lmao* I think you're outrageously inflated sense of American exceptionalism is showing. *snicker* Be sure to wave your Chinese-made American flag and cheerlead "USA! USA! USA!" at the next Treasury debt auction!

Posted by: Tom - Daai Tou Laam on February 8, 2006 at 1:52 AM | PERMALINK

ANALOGY, IRAQ 2003-2006 TO THE PHILIPPINES 1898-1901.

They hated us too, as occupiers; and killed our soldiers in the thousands. Now they are our staunchest supporters in otherwise hostile territory.

TOH
Posted by: The Objective Historian

Ummm... Those dates on The Philippines are off. The Philippines were a US colony until after WW2 {except for that period when they were occupied by the Japanese during the war}. And that doesn't even get in to the US propping up crony authoritarians like Ferdinand Marcos right on through the 70s.

Are you suggesting by analogy that Iraq will be a US colony for another 40 years and we'll be installing puppets for another 30 after that?

Posted by: Tom - Daai Tou Laam on February 8, 2006 at 2:08 AM | PERMALINK

However, as long as they promise to hurt Mats Sundin real bad at the earliest available opportunity, we can be friends.

Ooh. I'm torn here. He is a Leaf after all.

Posted by: snicker-snack on February 8, 2006 at 2:14 AM | PERMALINK

Iraq will be a US colony for another 40 years and we'll be installing puppets for another 30 after that?

Posted by: Tom - Daai Tou Laam on February 8, 2006 at 2:08 AM | PERMALINK

And they'll still like you for it. Perhaps.

Japan is really well-liked. Can't the US take some credit for that.

Posted by: McA on February 8, 2006 at 2:31 AM | PERMALINK

Small point, which I figured was obvious (but then, some of you folks have trouble discerning daylight): Evidently one of the "national myths" that Tom thinks only "dumbfuck nativists" believe, is the true story of Harry Wu.

For those who don't know, Harry was a political prisoner in China. He managed to get out, and became a U.S. citizen. He writes about China's extensive and sometimes astounding abuses of human rights.

He went back to China a few years ago to document, among other things, the Chinese practice of harvesting organs from prisoners, for profit. He was arrested.

The State Department quietly told the Chinese government that Harry Wu is an AMERICAN, and we would not look kindly on, should the Chinese government put a bullet in his head, charging his family for the lead and gunpowder.

That's the only reason Harry is alive today.

Any other myths you want to identify, Tom?

I don't believe to be a patriot, you have to whitewash American history.

But, hey, look at these threads: one poster after another brags about how it's our "aggressive" wars, our bullying, etc., which is why -- FRANCE? -- thinks our influence is malign.

That's not whitewash, it's blackface.

Tell the difference.

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 8, 2006 at 3:22 AM | PERMALINK

It's probably already been pointed out, but that 27% approval rating in Iraq almost certainly reflects the Kurdish voice (20-25%). Not good news considering the Shiites (50-60%) will have the strongest voice in determining the outcome.

Posted by: Jonathan Dworkin on February 8, 2006 at 3:39 AM | PERMALINK

Kevin wrote, "at least they like us in Poland..." but not as much as they used to, and that reflects both the way Bu$hCo treats our allies and a reorientation of Polish public opinion. Before the Iraq war the US approval rating was up in the 70s, and yes they sent troops to Iraq and have lost journalists and soldiers to the insurgency. Did Bu$hCo reward the support in any meaningful way? No. For example, Poles have been wanting to be able to come to the US without the time consuming and expensive process of getting a visa, very simple change of policy would have meant a lot, but no change. On the other hand, now that Poland is a part of the EU, Poles can go to Great Britain and Ireland for work and not surprisingly Poles have a more positive view of GB than the US. Even France is not that far behind the US in Poles' estimation (and this after some right wing French politicians issued dire warnings about Polish plumbers taking jobs away from French workers. Interestingly, the Polish tourist agency dressed up a hunky Polish actor as plumber who invited the French to come visit Poland, and the campaign worked). More significant is that Europe as a whole is a third again higher the US. Some of this change would have come anyway as Poland becomes more integtated into the EU, but it didn't have to mean a drop for the US, that's Bu$hCo's legacy.

Posted by: Will on February 8, 2006 at 6:22 AM | PERMALINK

the Americanist,

it was I, not Tom, who called you a dumbfuck nativist Perhaps it's your lack of careful reading that has your arguments jumping all over the place.

I'm not quite sure where Harry Wu comes into excusing your bleating "America, America, America, America." That Canada's (one of my nationalities) done some good wouldn't make my bleating "Canada, Canada, Canada" any less stupid.

You seem to think that if you speak your message loudly enough at the world they will come round to your way of thinking. Sorry to disabuse you, but it won't. We know a heck of a lot more about you than the other way round (some of the commentators here - rare exceptions in American society - excepted).

And why such investiture in nation? Perhaps if you simply tried to be a good human and took less pride in mere accident of nationality...

Posted by: snicker-snack on February 8, 2006 at 7:03 AM | PERMALINK

I apologize to Tom.

Snicker sez "I'm not quite sure where Harry Wu comes into excusing ..."

He's alive because he's an American. Like millions of others, he became an American because he loves freedom.

Am I going too fast for you, Snicker?

Another error: you don't know the difference between an accident -- and essence.

Birth is an accident -- but American CITIZENSHIP, is not.

For one thing, birthright citizenship in the United States was the product of the Civil War. Perhaps you've heard of it? Heroics, dead guys, new birth of freedom. It means something.

For another, America INVENTED citizenship. It has Greek and Roman roots, to be sure -- in both places, in a slave society based on a helot class. (Watch our current immigration policy devolve.)

But THIS country doesn't have "nationality" in the way Snicker stupidly uses the term. Being American is not based on nativity (hundreds of thousands of naturalizations a year), nor on blood (like Germany was exclusively until quite recently, and even then, only a half-hearted reform); we don't confuse our language and culture with what makes us American, the way France confuses being French with speaking French: every rioter who burned a car speaks better French than I ever will -- but have they BECOME French?

Damned few countries in the world have anything like American immigration -- Canada has been trying to become more like us in this regard since Laurier. (And failing.)

I couldn't move to Japan and become Japanese anymore than I could climb a tree and become a pinecone -- which is what "nationality" means, Snicker. But (within the law) anybody can lawfully move to the United States and become an American CITIZEN.

That means something you evidently do not understand, Snicker. The growth of the AMERICAN concept of citizenship all over the world is precisely the greatest achievement of the United States -- it's not a French, nor a Canadian, much less a British, and certainly not a German, Japanese, or Russian achivement. WE did it.

Canada is an explicitly, Constitutionally multicultural nation in a way the United States would never be: we believe that "We, the People" is a concept that UNITES.

Canada wasn't founded on citizenship -- you guys were and remained SUBJECTS, your independence was achieved as members of the Commonwealth. That's why Quebec has a special status that no American state has, why Quebecois have group rights where, in this country, we believe in INDIVIDUAL rights.

What, did you flunk civics?

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 8, 2006 at 12:57 PM | PERMALINK

we believe that "We, the People" is a concept that UNITES.

Which is why you write extensively about keeping those darn coloreds out of the US, Mr Dumbfuck Donnelly.

Canada wasn't founded on citizenship -- you guys were and remained SUBJECTS, your independence was achieved as members of the Commonwealth.

False, false, and... false.

What a wanker.

Posted by: ahem on February 8, 2006 at 4:32 PM | PERMALINK

"Which is why you write extensively about keeping those darn coloreds out of the US, Mr Dumbfuck Donnelly..."

Huh?

I played a small role in pushing the 1990 Act through Congress, the last permanent increase in annual immigration visas (40%) -- and the biggest since 1965. It doubled visas for nuclear families, tripled employment-based visas.

So in a very small way, I've helped make (back of the envelope math) 7.5 million new Americans in the last 16 years -- a significant chunk of 'em in the only immigration category specifically designed to benefit AFRICA, which was the only part of the planet that had never sent even modest numbers of voluntary immigrants to the U.S. (The visa lottery.)

Kindly quote ANYTHING I've ever written, anywhere, anytime, to back up your charge, Ahem.

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 8, 2006 at 4:49 PM | PERMALINK

As I said, you have consumed your national myths fully and wholly. Quite pathertic really.

People moving to other countries for freedom? America is way down the list. Europe and Australia both rank above the States as chocie of destination for refugees and Europe actually takes in far more than do you guys. As for regular immigrants, Canada takes in twice as many for its population as does the States and they want to come (despite our winters!). Australia of course is the world leader here while the States ranks something like #10.

Your vaunted melting pot. Okay let's try some actual stats. I tend to think marriage is one of the best indicators of how integrated a society is. You need to both interract and feel it is okay to interract to fall in love and get married on a large scale. So in the UK we have something like 40% of black women marrying non-blacks, in the States something like 1% of African-American women marry non-African American men. In Canada, 90% of Japanese-Canadians marry out of group, in the States it is 50% Yes, the American melting pot. Just keep screeching Kumbaya enough.

Loving freedom? Perhaps of a once. I see a people cowering to be made safe from a non-existential threat.

No, nativist dumbfuck fits you perfectly.

P.S. While I'm no nationalist, Canada washes the floor with the US on almost any measure of life.

P.P.S. I'm a de facto not de jure kind of guy. It's quite funny, for all your braying, in Canada, we seem much more like citizens and in the States of late, you seem far more like subjects. You know, that the Evil Empire had a wonderful constitution on paper didn't make it any less evil.

P.P.P.S. I couldn't move to Japan and become Japanese anymore than I could climb a tree and become a pinecone If you mean Japanese in popular perception, you're right. If you mean obtain Japanese citizenship, then apparenty it is not possible for us to become pinecones.

P.P.P.P.S. It's rather amusing that someone with such demonstrated poor reading comprehension sikills would accuse anyone of flunking out of anything.

Disease: Nationalitiis.

Symptoms: The patient is often unable to see things about his/her own country and believes in place things that make him/her feel good.A secondary symptom is tthat the patient starts seeing caricatures of nations around him/her. The patient is often abusive of those that don't ascribe to his/her fantasies.

Dumbfuck nativist confirmed. You condemn yourself Mr. Donnelly.

Posted by: snicker-snack on February 8, 2006 at 7:00 PM | PERMALINK

then apparenty it is not possible for us to become pinecones.

should read "then apparently it is now possible for us to become pinecones."

P.S. Though I still say you're full of delusions re. the States (I'm assuming you haven't had the chance to live and work in different countries so given this handicap it's somewhat forgivable), liked your contributions to the Corretta Scott King thread.

Posted by: snicker-snack on February 8, 2006 at 8:21 PM | PERMALINK

Snicker: actual refugees don't choose where they go. That's why they're refugees.

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 8, 2006 at 9:18 PM | PERMALINK

theAmericanist: actual refugees don't choose where they come from. They do have preferences though (remember they often spend interminable time in refugee camps) - though you're right in that almost anywhere they can go to is better than where they've been.

Even the States :)

Posted by: snicker-snack on February 9, 2006 at 12:38 AM | PERMALINK

As a coda: Ahem lied.

He said of me "you write extensively about keeping those darn coloreds out of the US, Mr Dumbfuck Donnelly..."

I noted what I've actually done in small ways, e.g., the 40% increase in annual immigration visas in the 1990 Act. I might have added my public advocacy for dual citizenship (Google my debate with Brimelow), or for wholly deregulating employment based immigration (search the New Republic, "Temporary Help").

I challenged Ahem to back up his ugly slur, to quote me saying ANYTHING remotely like his claim. He couldn't, and didn't.

So Snicker pipes up.

Just because it is so important to the lives of about 25 million people, about whom you obviously know nothing and wouldn't give a rat's ass if you did, this is how refugee policy works:

Refugees are people who are running for their lives. For that reason, it doesn't matter where they go TO. What is important to them, what makes them refugees, is what they are running FROM.

It is a major step forward for civilization that the world's nations have assumed a mutual obligation that, when people HAVE to flee their homes, other nations HAVE to take them in: refugee policy.

This is the exact opposite of immigration.

In immigration policy, people are INVITED. While there are exceptions (the visa lottery, noted above, which I played an infinitesimal role in enacting), the Rule for American immigration is that an individual American (spouse, child, sibling, or employer) invites an individual foreigner to come to this country, putting them on the path to BELONGING.

The great danger in refugee resettlement is Never Again, Squared. While we have failed more than once, it is still a good rule and a solid commitment that Never Again will we force people back into harm's way, as was done to Jews fleeing the Holocause -- and Never Again will we refuse to give permanent homes to refugees, as the Arab nations refused to do for Palestinians, leaving terrorism to grow in the stony soil of the West Bank and Gaza.

To deliberately distort the idea of refugees -- they have to flee, we have to let them in -- with immigrants (who choose which nations they go to, nations which also choose to let them in) -- the aptly named Snicker, however inconsequentially, encourages every France and Kenya on the planet to leave millions of displaced persons in tent cities because, you know, somebody ELSE can "choose" to let them in, and after all, they would rather "choose" to go to Canada, or Australia (neither of which is exactly eager to admit the world's 25 million refugees).

I doubt you have the grace to feel shame, Snicker.

Posted by: theAmericanist on February 9, 2006 at 9:07 AM | PERMALINK

http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/drunk-girls.html - drunk girls http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/drunk-girls.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/index.html - index http://comorado.co.funpic.de/index.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/sex-toys.html - sex toys http://comorado.co.funpic.de/sex-toys.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/voyeur-sex.html - voyeur sex http://comorado.co.funpic.de/voyeur-sex.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/voyeur-sex.html - voyeur sex http://comorado.co.funpic.de/voyeur-sex.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/asian-sex.html - asian sex http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/asian-sex.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/spanking-sex.html - spanking sex http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/spanking-sex.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/anal-sex.html - anal sex http://comorado.co.funpic.de/anal-sex.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/hardcore.html - hardcore http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/hardcore.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/cams.html - cams http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/cams.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/bisexual.html - bisexual http://comorado.co.funpic.de/bisexual.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/bigtits-sex.html - bigtits sex http://comorado.co.funpic.de/bigtits-sex.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/interracial-sex.html - interracial sex http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/interracial-sex.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/bondage.html - bondage http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/bondage.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/group-sex.html - group sex http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/group-sex.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/cheerleader.html - cheerleader http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/cheerleader.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/fisting.html - fisting http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/fisting.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/anal-sex.html - anal sex http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/anal-sex.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/smoking-sex.html - smoking sex http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/smoking-sex.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/hardcore.html - hardcore http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/hardcore.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/big-cock.html - big cock http://comorado.co.funpic.de/big-cock.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/dating.html - dating http://comorado.co.funpic.de/dating.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/toons.html - toons http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/toons.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/uniforms-sex.html - uniforms sex http://comorado.co.funpic.de/uniforms-sex.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/babes.html - babes http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/babes.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/dildo.html - dildo http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/dildo.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/interracial-sex.html - interracial sex http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/interracial-sex.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/foot-fetish.html - foot fetish http://comorado.co.funpic.de/foot-fetish.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/bigtits-sex.html - bigtits sex http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/bigtits-sex.html
http://comorado.co.funpic.de/dildo.html - dildo http://comorado.co.funpic.de/dildo.html
http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/bigtits-sex.html - bigtits sex http://home.tiscali.cz:8080/muskulatura/bigtits-sex.html
WBR gpduqDaJHxZwLkOAc

Posted by: pcDFdlfuvQ on February 10, 2006 at 5:33 PM | PERMALINK




 

 

Read Jonathan Rowe remembrance and articles
Email Newsletter icon, E-mail Newsletter icon, Email List icon, E-mail List icon Sign up for Free News & Updates

Advertise in WM



buy from Amazon and
support the Monthly