Publius Pundit

« Previous · Home · Next »

They Want to Destroy us, so They Love Obama

Filed under: US Elections

260-4.gifThis chart shows the results of a recent survey conducted by the Pew Research Center.

On page 26 of the report, it states that of the nearly two dozen countries surveyed only Russia, Turkey, Lebanon, Jordon, Egypt, China and Pakistan had a larger group of respondents say the U.S. was an enemy rather than a partner. Of those, in only Turkey and Pakistan was the larger group a majority.

70% of the people in Turkey see the U.S. as an enemy. In the chart, they prefer Obama to become president by a margin of 4-1. 60% of Pakistanis say the U.S. is an enemy, and they prefer Obama nearly 2-1. 39% of Egyptians view America as a foe, and they preferred Obama by a 3-2 margin. 34% of Russians and Chinese respondents said the U.S. was an enemy, and Russians preferred Obama 39-22 while Chinese liked him slightly less well, 36-31. Obama has also been endorsed by the America-loathing terrorists of Hamas and the U.S.-despising Fidel Castro of Cuba.

So it's absolutely clear what America's enemies want: They want Barack Obama to be the next U.S. president. Now there are two ways of looking at this fact. One is that they "really want to be our friend" and just want us to give them the chance to be so. The other is that they want to destroy us.

Imagine if you will how the people of Russia would respond if told that 75% more Americans preferred them to elect Garry Kasparov president as compared to Vladimir Putin. Think they'd say: "Well, if Americans want that, it's probably because they really want to be friends, but Putin is standing in the way. So let's pick Kasparov, shall we?"

The Pew poll also shows that the countries who overwhelmingly view the U.S. as a partner (Britain, France, Germany, Poland, Australia, Japan and, surprisingly, South Korea and Nigeria) also want Obama to be the next president. Again, there are two ways of looking at it. One is that these countries want America to become even greater, to rise to new heights. The other is that when they say partner, they mean junior partner who knows his place, not a leader.

Americans, by the way, prefer John McCain.

Needless to say, I am not given to a Pollyanish view of the world, so those first variants hold no attraction for me. Thus, the question is whether we want to please our friends by becoming their junior partner, while exposing ourselves to our foes and destruction, by choosing Barack Obama. Or do we want to continue to lead the world, and continue to incur its wrath, as all great towering figures always do. Gandhi and King, after all, were assassinated.

It's something to think about this election season. Reader thoughts are welcome.

Social Bookmarking:
Del.icio.us this del.icio.us | digg this digg | Add to Technorati technorati | StumbleUpon Toolbar stumble upon | Furl this furl | Reddit this reddit

Comments


Ghassan Karam says:

So you suggest that we dispense with elections and find out what are the results of a Pew survey and anoint a president. Now why didn't I think of that.


La Russophobe says:

No, I suggest we vote for John McCain and continue to lead the world!

Or, I suggest we openly admit we don't want to lead the world any more, but want to step into the background and let somebody else take charge. Then we vote for Barack Obama!

But by all means, let's not do something muddled in the middle, signifying nothing.


Aris Katsaris says:

You have a confusing view of what "leadership" means. If your argument is that for USA to lead other nations, it must be loathed by them, then why isn't your argument likewise that if McCain is to lead other Americans he must be loathed by them?

MLK wasn't assassinated by one of his own followers. "Incuring the wrath" of your enemies, sure, that's perfectly okay. But when you incur the wrath of your followers/partners you very soon stop being a leader altogether.

You're also misusing statistics, by failing to account for the fact that favourable ratings for both Obama and McCain would overwhelmingly come from the people in those nations that had positive or neutral views of America: shown e.g. by your example about Turkey. 70% of Turkey viewed America as an enemy, 20% of Turkey had confidence in Obama, 5% of it had confidence in McCain.
It'd be reasonable to assume that the favourable ratings for either politician come overwhelmingly from those people in Turkey that do *not* view America as an enemy. So these statistics really really don't tell you much of anything about what the "enemies of the USA" want.

They're much more useful indeed in telling you what the friends of America want, because then the favourable ratings come from the actual majority segment.


La Russophobe says:

ARIS:

Umm, not to dare question your brilliant logic, but isn't it just a bit difficult to suggest that the people of America might not want THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT to succeed? After all, nobody can claim Americans compete with THEIR OWN GOVERNMENT for precious resources, can they?

It would be really nice if you actually read this post before commenting on it. It clearly says that there are two possible views for why our allies would support Obama, and it argues for one. Instead of arguing for the other in a coherent manner, you simply ignore that and claim it wasn't accounted for.

MLK was assassinated BECAUSE HE WAS HATED and he was hated BECAUSE HE MATTERED. People who don't matter don't get assassinated. The point is not that he got shot by his own follower but BY SOMEBODY WHO HATED HIM BECAUSE HE MATTERED. D'uh. We may have "allies" or "partners" in Europe but we don't have "followers," now do we?

Your comment about Turkey is simply asinine, more proof that you neither read nor think about what you write on this blog. Do you really believe that our enemies would abstain from expressing their views about our future leadership? The people responding to the poll are not those who self-identify as friends, they are those who self-identify, as the chart clearly states, as having followed the US elections. Statistically speaking, 70% of that group would be enemies and 30% partners. The response is small for Turkey, Jordon, Pakistan, etc. because the election is relatively obscure in those countries. Lots of people there responded that they hadn't been following closely.

You have not suggested one single shred of evidence that ANY country wants what is best for the United States as opposed to what is best for ITSELF, and such a suggestion flouts common sense. The world is full of hostility for the U.S. Many parts of the world cheered 9/11, but Bush had only just taken office. The world hated America under Bill Clinton just as it does now, and it hates us because we are the leader. Leaders always breed contempt, it is the price of leadership.

It's really obtuse and cowardly of you to simply reject the premise of this post and pick a side. If you must choose between American being hated leader and a loved follower, which one would you choose? Do you have the guts to answer?


Aris Katsaris says:

"You have not suggested one single shred of evidence that ANY country wants what is best for the United States"

I never said that. I never claimed that any other country wants what is best for the United State. I think that many countries however want what is best for the whole of humanity including the United States.

You keep seeing this as a zero-sum game where what's good for the rest of the world is automatically bad for the USA.

"Leaders always breed contempt, it is the price of leadership."

Villains also breed contempt, it is the price of villainy as well.

As for the statistics, you completely misunderstood or misconstrued my point (again), and my point was that you can't *say* what the enemies of America would prefer (Obama or McCain) because of these statistics, because you don't know what overlap is between the people who view America as an enemy vs the people who view America as a partner and those numbers. Without correlation figures between the two questions, you are shooting in the dark.

But since I don't really believe you're truly interested in responding to what I actually state, and since I think you're merely interested in misconstruing them in order to pretend they're something you'll easily knock down, feel free to misconstrue my statements again. No matter how much I clarify them I won't be able to actually get you to respond to a real opinion of mine, rather than something you put in my mouth.

"The world hated America under Bill Clinton just as it does now, "

Factually wrong. The very PDF you linked to (page 21) shows that the vast majority of countries liked America much more in 2000 than it likes it in 2008. (with few exceptions like South Korea and Nigeria)


Ghassan Karam says:

Feel free to vote for John McCain and to promote his campaign for the presidency. But please offer some "meat" for your choice besides the silly results of a Pew Poll conducted in 24 countries.

Hey, you will not be the only one that will be supporting a candidacy that will fail to get even 40% of the popular vote. That spells a landslide in American politics,:-)


La Russophobe says:

GHASSAN:

So let me see if I understand: Unless ALL evidence in favor of McCain can be put in a single post, NO post should be published?

Dude, you're seriously deranged.

As for your "landslide" garbage:

http://publiuspundit.com/2008/06/the_dumbocrats_vs_the_filibust.php

Mr. "Landslide" LOST ALL THREE of the biggest electoral states to Hillary.

Dude, get a freakin' clue and this poll data shows him LEADING even though Republicans are held in contempt by the nation.

So much for "Mr. Landslide."


Inky says:

I remember that these same countries overwhelmingly wanted Bush for his second term as President.

What do they know?

How many Americans know the leader of any country? How many Americans even know when another country is having an election.

Maybe the rest of the world has a better press than we do. Or, maybe the people who responded to this survey were just very interested in the US, from one bias or another.

I suspect that those who chose Obama did so from both points of view. The majority of their countrymen don't have a clue and don't care.

This poll was a waste of good money that could be used for better purposes.


Russian Bear says:

Hah-hah-hah! What a "brilliant" mind!

Pakistanis see the USA as an enemy, and they prefer Obama nearly 2-1. Egyptians view America as a foe, and they preferred Obama by a 3-2 margin. 34% of Russians and Chinese respondents said the U.S. was an enemy, and Russians preferred Obama 39-22 while Chinese liked him slightly less well, 36-31.

Ummm...

Australia is a friend and they prefer Obama 81:40, while Japan liked him slightly less well, 77:40.
The nastiest "friend" is Spain. Spaniards want to destroy the USA by supporting Obama 72:19 which is about 1-3.8 This is even worse than the attitude in Russia and Egypt.

So what is going on?
Do Britain, France, Germany, South Korea Poland want to destroy us, or what?

"No"-says Kim. Poland, South Korea, and Nigeria just want to have the USA their junior partner.

Will I ever live up to the time when Kim getting smarter?



Russian Bear says:

Kim! There is the KISS rule, to understand things.
Which stands for Keep It Simple, stupid!
There is no plot to destroy the USA or to lower the USA rank.
People are just sick and tired of the USA arrogance and abuse of power. And this is also kind of competition in which everybody who are interested or heard about has to take one of the sides. This is why people in the world prefer Obama. They are sport fans.

Nobody in the world wants the USA leadership as such. What people in the world want is peace, security, prosperity, and a fair international order.
Who will be considered the leader, if any is not the primary issue.
George Bush administration dropped the USA image in the world low. In the ordinary people's minds the USA is not a justice and noble world power any more.
Picking on Iraq, ignoring the UN and the world public opinion, protests of millions, lying about the true American motives, going to war under false pretext, overuse of military power- were not good things. This is why people in every country of the world do not like President Bush. This is why those people want the USA to behave responsibly and to respect the international law. Barac Obama is seen more appropriate than John Mccain to meet such expectations. This is what the poll shows.

The other thing is that Obama is an unusual candidate for presidency. A black man, young, energetic, capable to bring fresh air in the USA and the world politics-this is what people like about him. It is just interesting to see him the President. McCaine is predictable, Obama is intriguing.

It has nothing to do with their desire to destroy the USA or to have the USA their junior partner.

RE: Obama has also been endorsed by the America-loathing terrorists of Hamas and the U.S.-despising Fidel Castro of Cuba.

So what?

White supremacists, neo-Nazis, Ku-Klux-Klan, conservative Christian fundamentalists and Kim Zigfeld, the idiot- are going to vote for McCain.


PJ says:

For the love of God, vote John McCAIN.


R. Bacon says:

I remember that these same countries overwhelmingly wanted Bush for his second term as President.

A similar BBC/Globescan poll conducted ahead of the 2004 U.S presidential election found that, of 35 countries polled, [b]30 would have preferred to see Democratic nominee John Kerry, rather than the incumbent George Bush, [/b]who was elected.




Post a comment


(will not be published)



Remember Me?

(you may use HTML tags for style)




TrackBack

TrackBack URL: http://publiuspundit.com/mt/contages.cgi/834