Attitudes Towards America

Dan Drezner gets results. More here.

Aside from being the right thing to do, it seems charity has other benefits.






33 replies
  1. 1
    joshua says:

    Let me see if I’m reading this right. When we show up with bullets and bombs, we get bullets and bombs in return. When we show up with candy and flowers, we get candy and flowers in return.

    Fuck that shit, Silent Bob. BOMB PAKISTAN NOW!

  2. 2
    Mike S says:

    I posted this earlier today about our aide in Bande Aceh. Of course the blowhards on talk radio and FOX news would never accept us doing more humanitarian work because they think supporting bombing will make them look more manly. Reasonable people without tiny penis issues will see the advantages in considering the idea.

    …At the Navy’s request, Project HOPE—a Virginia-based health education and humanitarian aid organization involved in medical programs in 35 countries on five continents—asked for volunteers. More than 3000 doctors and nurses responded to its nationwide call. Of these, 210 were selected to join their Naval colleagues aboard the Mercy and commit themselves to a 30-day tour away from their jobs, homes and families.

    On Feb. 3, 2005, the Mercy, with her complement of 518 medical and support personnel, arrived at her destination in the Indian Ocean near Banda Aceh, Indonesia, the area hardest hit by the tsunami.

    During the next 40 days, the Mercy’s staff treated more than 9500 patients, ashore and afloat, and performed nearly 20,000 medical procedures, including 285 surgical and operating room cases. The ship’s teams provided water and sanitation, rewired hospital equipment, repaired oxygen tanks, immunized hundreds of men, women and children, and established other public-health measures.

    snip

    Suffering is the “norm” in these very poor regions of the world. They had not qualified for disaster relief because no disaster had struck. But they were lucky that a group of American volunteers had stopped by to help on their way home from the tsunami disaster area.

    There are important lessons for us to learn from this experience. We can reverse the hostility that much of the world feels against America simply by performing such humanitarian acts. According to a BBC poll, almost 70% of the people in Indonesia, the most populous Muslim nation, viewed our country with hostility before the tsunami. Today, according to a poll released by the Heritage Foundation, almost 70% think more favorably of us.

    Listen to what Tamalia Alisjahban, an Indonesian interpreter, said in her “thank you” speech to the ship’s staff as the Mercy departed Banda Aceh:

    “You were first greeted with suspicion, then puzzlement and then great fondness. And nearly all the patients are saying how grateful they are and that we really can’t thank you enough. There’s nothing we could give to you to repay your kindness and care, and it will have to be God who repays you.

    “I don’t know how we can ever thank you. In Indonesia we say terima kasih, which means `accept love.’ Because to thank someone is to give a bit of love. Please do accept our love.”

    The whole article is well worth the read.

  3. 3
    Mike S says:

    I didn’t even need to go to talk radio or FOX to find the clueless blowhards. The genious’ over in comments at PW are claiming this is proof that attacking Iraq is changing Muslim opinions of America.

    It would be funny if it weren’t so friggin sad.

  4. 4
    Bruce Moomaw says:

    Anyone optimistic about the results of the Iraq elections — which obviously includes the goofy Mr. Goldstein — is advised to look at the initial returns tonight on the NY Times and Washington Post sites. Worst results conceivable.

  5. 5
    Shygetz says:

    Can’t Buy Me Love? More of that liberal hippie nonsense.

  6. 6
    Il Supremo Benito Bush says:

    Judging by what I’ve read here the nearly half a trillion dollars we’ve dedicated to whatever it is we’re attempting to do in Iraq (leavened with the blood of 2,150 American military enlistees), should have made us more popualr there than Allah.

    Maybe we should have just bought them i-Pods instead?

  7. 7
    Ancient Purple says:

    Wow! You mean that if you are nice to people they tend to like you?

    No. That can’t be right.

  8. 8
    The Other Steve says:

    I think this comment over at PW was written by DougJ

    Add to this the growing potential for a free and democratic Iraq (and a free and democratic Afghanistan) acting as beacons of liberty in the Muslim world—their geographical juxtaposition to surrounding totalitarian states a constant reminder that freedom is available for those willing to struggle toward it—and its a sea change in perception of the Great Satan in the Muslim world doesn’t seem quite so remote as some ideologues and Orientalists would have us believe…

    You know like… uhh dude. They’re happy about the blankets and food we sent.

    This would be kind of like a President cutting taxes, and then increasing spending by 25% in a very keynesian manner… and then claiming that it was the tax cuts which boosted our economy and that it was proof that keynesian economic theory was bogus.

    Oh wait, they do that too….

    *smacks* head.

  9. 9
    Lines says:

    This is the war on terror, and the war on terror can only be won over the bodies of terrorist and anyone that might possibly be a terrorist in the future.

    Hello? Awful quiet out there, is anyone there?

  10. 10
    The Other Steve says:

    It’s official!!!!!

    AP: Judge says intelligent design can’t be taught in Pa. schools. More to come

    The American Taliban have lost.

  11. 11
    Lines says:

    No, just when you think the American Taliban is down, they come back with violence and rankor. Begin countdown in 3..2..1.. Bennett!

  12. 12
    pmm says:

    Of course the blowhards on talk radio and FOX news would never accept us doing more humanitarian work because they think supporting bombing will make them look more manly.

    Because conservatives would never advocate humanitarian operations when they could push for a military response. I remember how Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity were calling for us to respond to the earthquake and the tsunami with daisy cutters.

    How about this: in some cases, humanitarian aide is the proper response. In other situations, military intervention is the proper response. The armed forces get this with the ‘3-block battle’ concept:

    the three block war is a term that was made famous by General Krulak when he was commandant in the Marine Corps. General Krulak explained a situation that at any given time you may have a group of soldiers doing block one humanitarian operations. You may have another group of soldiers doing block two, peace support operations. You may have another group of soldiers doing block three combat operations. The group may be all from the same unit, in the same city, in the same day, maybe at the same time if everything goes bad. That has become the three block war, if you will.

    And this:

    The genious’ over in comments at PW are claiming this is proof that attacking Iraq is changing Muslim opinions of America.

    Makes sense only if you think that ‘attacking Iraq’ was all that we’ve done over there, versus ‘liberating Iraq’, ‘rebuilding Iraq’, or ‘democratizing Iraq’. If the President has a manichean, simplistic point-of-view as many have asserted, he’s definitely got some company on the Left.

  13. 13
    Mike S says:

    Makes sense only if you think that ‘attacking Iraq’ was all that we’ve done over there, versus ‘liberating Iraq’, ‘rebuilding Iraq’, or ‘democratizing Iraq’.

    I guess you mean we have to forget the reason we were told we had to attack Iraq and only remember the reasons given after the fact.

  14. 14
    The Other Steve says:

    How about this: in some cases, humanitarian aide is the proper response. In other situations, military intervention is the proper response. The armed forces get this with the ‘3-block battle’ concept:

    What kind of nonsense is this? You’re promoting shades of grey thinking? That shows no moral clarity.

    Sheesh, you sound like one of them liberals with their moral relativism.

  15. 15
    Jack Roy says:

    Post hoc ergo propter hoc, eh? This is … suspect, to say the least.

  16. 16
    Mac Buckets says:

    I guess you mean we have to forget the reason we were told we had to attack Iraq and only remember the reasons given after the fact.

    I realize that you’re just lying here to be a shill, but liberating, rebuilding and democratizing Iraq were not “after the fact” reasons — they were given as reasons in every pre-war speech Bush made. But you know that. Shill on.

  17. 17
    Lines says:

    Yeah, tell people that the Iraqi’s are sub-human devils, then in the same breath you tell the people that they need to be liberated sub-human devils. I remember that.

    As an aside, how do you guys keep the unicorn hair out of your mouse ball?

  18. 18
    Shygetz says:

    Hmmm…I seem to remember stuff about mushroom clouds, chemical and biological weapons, yellow cake from Niger, and Al Quaeda and Saddam being best friends. Maybe he talked about liberating, rebuilding, and democratizing Iraq like Kevin Nealon doing his subliminal guy routine, but it sure as hell wasn’t the main point.

  19. 19
    pmm says:

    C’mon, Mike S. How many times do we have to link to pre-March 2003 speeches, statements, and interviews not to mention the Congressional Authorization to demonstrate that WMD was part of a slew of motivations? And even supposing that WMD was the only reason for OIF, who argued that the campaign would be simply punitive in nature, something akin to Operation Desert Fox?

    It is only by willful distortion that you can dismiss that Protein Wisdom commenter by pretending that it was the attack that they credited, rather than what the attack enabled. Easier to argue than the facts, I suppose. So misinterpret away!

  20. 20
    Mike S says:

    I realize that you’re just lying here to be a shill, but liberating, rebuilding and democratizing Iraq were not “after the fact” reasons—they were given as reasons in every pre-war speech Bush made. But you know that. Shill on.

    My mistake. The main thrust was always liberation. Not mushroom clouds, OBL blah blah Saddam, Anthrax, OBL blah blah Saddam, air drones, OBL blah blah Saddam, chem weapons, OBL blah blah Saddamm…

    Powell gave a speech to the UN about liberating Iraq not mobile labs, nuclear weapons, tiny viles of anthrax…

    Cheney was growling about liberating Iraq not reconstituted nuclear weapons programs, OBL blah Saddam, OBL bl Saddam, OBL has connections to Saddam…

    Condo Rice talked about liberating the Iraqi people, not mushroom clouds…

    I just don’t know how I could be so mistaken. I beg the mighty Maximus, ultimate pervayor of truth, for forgiveness.

  21. 21
    pmm says:

    You’re right, Shygetz, it’s the President’s fault you didn’t hear everything being said, or voted on, or written on the topic. And it sure was subliminal that the invasion was entitled “Operation Iraqi Freedom”.

    I know it complicates your Fischer Price version of history by making you weigh the positives of the invasion versus the negatives, but that’s part of wearing big-boy pants.

  22. 22
    pmm says:

    Lines,

    Good point. I remember the ‘sub-human devils’ argument employed by the administration and it’s supporters well. After all, it was the neo-conservative warmongerers who were arguing that the Iraqis are incapable of responsible self-government. And those racist caricatures that Ari Fleischer and Scott McClellan employed on a daily basis! Shameful.

    Put another way, given that you presumably think that the current administration is a bunch of evil, corrupt, murderous, facist sumbitches, does it then follow that the American people are also?

    Do you guys even make sense to yourselves?

  23. 23
    Mike S says:

    And it sure was subliminal that the invasion was entitled “Operation Iraqi Freedom”.

    Good God. People like you fell for the “Clear Skies” bullshit too.

  24. 24
    Lines says:

    Sure we make sense, because we only write what the unicorns tell us to. Didn’t you get the memo?

    And just because you don’t remember the constant degradation of the Iraqi model, that doesn’t mean it didn’t happen. I knew Iraq was a target when the propaganda from Faux and Company started against the Iraqi people. Since its an official outlet of the administration, it was pretty clear intention.

  25. 25
    pmm says:

    Lines, that explains it. We get our marching orders from Leprechauns–not Unicorns. They’re too ‘multicultural’ for most conservatives, in that they challenge our natural male insecurities and suppressed homosexuality. Leprechauns have the right ethnic background, greed for gold, and fondness for booze that attracts conservatives. Although there are some reservations about that whole ‘rainbow’ thing…

    Seriously, though: what’s the Iraqi model that was disparaged, Lines? A dictatorship founded by a neo-fascist political party in a 1968 coup with proven expansionist tendencies and brutal suppression of the populace? Or was it the people of Iraq, whose mere existence warranted invasion and war?

    Pre-empting the snark: am I describing BushCo? Or the Iraqi Ba’ath party?

  26. 26
    Mike S says:

    Lines, that explains it. We get our marching orders from Leprechauns—not Unicorns. They’re too ‘multicultural’ for most conservatives, in that they challenge our natural male insecurities and suppressed homosexuality. Leprechauns have the right ethnic background, greed for gold, and fondness for booze that attracts conservatives. Although there are some reservations about that whole ‘rainbow’ thing

    Just when I was starting to think I wouldn’t like you at all you make me laugh.

    I think I’ll leave now while I have a good impression.

  27. 27
    pmm says:

    Mike S et al.

    The best (worst?) part about balloon-juice comments is that I want to hate most of you guys, but at the end I must admit that you are, in the words of Patton, “magnificent bastards”.

  28. 28
    che says:

    Imagine, then, what might have been accomplished with half a trillion bucks!

  29. 29
    Mike S says:

    The best (worst?) part about balloon-juice comments is that I want to hate most of you guys, but at the end I must admit that you are, in the words of Patton, “magnificent bastards”.

    Agreed. Even the people who piss me off the most seem like people I would have a blast sitting at a bar and arguing this stuff in person with.

  30. 30
    Krista says:

    I agree. There have been times that I’ve wanted to shake Stormy and ask her what the hell she’s thinking, but by the same token, I wish she lived close by so we could go see geeky movies together, and talk about our unrequited love for Naveen Andrews.

  31. 31
    Il Supremo Benito Bush says:

    Once again Mac Buckets nails it.

    Look at it this way, if God didn’t want Bush to become President and save Iraq from the Saddam and his terrorists, he’d still be in Texas saving Mexican children from chigger bites.

  32. 32
    Steve S says:

    So we’re clear then.

    We didn’t invade Iraq to save us all from weapons of mass distraction.

    It was because we were going to be greeted with flowers and candy.

  33. 33
    Gray says:

    “It was because we were going to be greeted with flowers and candy.”
    Yup. That has been the neocons wet dream. But what an overly complicated plan to accomplish that. Just imagine, taking only a part of the hundreds of billions wasted in Iraq, you could have paid the inhabitants of a cute Indonesian island to greet GIs with flowers and candy all year long! :D

Comments are closed.