Not only does Ted Rall ‘draw’ stick-men, but he also writes editorials opinion pieces:
The world hates us more than ever, according to a new Pew Research poll of 16,000 citizens in 15 countries. Most Canadians think Americans are exceptionally rude. The Chinese say we’re violent and greedy. Nearly half of Turks–up from 32 percent a year ago–say they dislike Americans as individuals and America as a nation, according to the survey. Muslims have a “quite negative hostility toward America,” says Pew president Andrew Kohut. Even among our traditional allies, he says, the United States “remains broadly disliked.”
The reason for our declining popularity is no mystery: Bush’s unjustified, illegal war against Iraq. But Iraq, Bush’s doctrine of preemptive warfare and instances of prisoners being tortured and even murdered aren’t completely unprecedented. Cheney’s neoconservatives are merely the latest executors of an aggressive foreign policy that has long prompted fear, hatred and resentment among the leaders and citizens of other nations. Beginning with Theodore Roosevelt’s brutal suppression of Filipino insurgents at the dawn of the 20th century, continuing with the holocaust of two million Vietnamese civilians under LBJ and Nixon’s carpet bombs and recently exemplified by a series of bullying adventures against such defenseless nations as Grenada, Panama and Afghanistan, the U.S. has become, perhaps to its surprise, the biggest danger to peace and stability on the planet.
Many Americans, still taking pride in the memorable image of “Gift of USA” flag logos on bags of grain being tossed to starving Africans, find it difficult to accept the role of international pariah. But the truth is that many people are as scared of us as they were of Germany and Japan in 1939.
Ah, irony. Our rep has gone down the toilet with the Koran, but things are looking up for the Axis powers we defeated in World War II.
So the entire world hates Amerikkka. And most of Amerikkka hates Ted Rall.
That makes Ted Rall the most hated human being on the planet.
Rick
“World Opinion” would extinguish Israel, for that matter. So it’s not exactly a moral guide.
Cordially…
Far North
Don’t let the messenger allow you to totally discount the message (I, too, think Rall is often over the line). But I think the point is that the US lost it’s standing in the world so quickly after the world stood with us beginning the night of September 11.
It’s a legitimate point.
Darrell
Far North, as for the “world standing with us” after 9/11, they gave us sympathy for only as long as it took them to figure out that we weren’t going to run away with our tail between our legs, wringing our hands over “why do they hate us so?”. When it became apparent the US was going to fight back, their “support” morphed into ‘US is the real terrorist nation’. You seem to sympathize with that point of view
brenda
Non Sequitur
The world hates A and A hates B does not mean that B is the most hated.
It’s about time Americans lifted their snouts from the feeding trough and noticed what their government has been doing in their name. Who knows, maybe some good will come of it?
Mike
” But I think the point is that the US lost it’s standing in the world so quickly after the world stood with us beginning the night of September 11.”
Yes, we lost it in about 30 secs and Bush had nothing to do with it.
“It’s a legitimate point”
No, it’s not.
Jeff Harrell
Way to win friends, Brenda.
Pardon me. I
Far North
Yes Darrell, Osama bin Laden attacks us so GWB attacks Saddam Huessin. Anything about that seem wrong to you?
Usually when one is attacked, one fights back against the attackers. Make sense?
A multiple choice question for you Iraq war fans:
Of the 19 hijackers on 9/11, how many were Iraqis?
19 15 9 7 0
No responding without taking a stab at the question.
Compuglobalhypermeganet
Yes Darrell, Osama bin Laden attacks us so GWB attacks Saddam Huessin. Anything about that seem wrong to you?
Usually when one is attacked, one fights back against the attackers. Make sense?
So in Far North Land, there was no war against the Taliban and Al Qaeda. Hmmmmm. I wonder what else goes on in that strange, alternate universe? Do hot dogs eat US? Do people throw ducks at clowns and nothing is as it seems?
Gary Farber
“… but he also writes editorials….”
I’m pretty sure he doesn’t, actually. He writes an opinion column (like a couple of hundred other people are paid to do), but I’m unaware of any publication he writes editorials for; are you aware of any? Editorials, after all, are written to speak officially for a publication; they’re entirely different from individual opinion columns, written by indivuals who speak only for themselves. This is actually not a small point, although it’s not the most important thing on Earth, either.
John Cole
Gary- You are now officially the most pedantic human being I have ever known. Post edited.
I am surprised you didn’t correct the spelling of America.
:)
Can’t even safely snark anymore…
Floyd McWilliams
Of the 19 hijackers on 9/11, how many were Iraqis?
Of the thousands of Germans killed by Americans at Normandy, how many bombed Pearl Harbor?
Russ
Not everyone hates Ted Rall. I pity him, but I don’t hate him.
Pretty much like I wouldn’t hate a rabid dog.
AlanDownunder
Just because you don’t like Ted doesn’t mean we don’t not like you. And one of the things we really don’t like about you is that you don’t know we don’t like you or if you know we don’t like you then you don’t know why we don’t like you.
Clue: your (dwindling) freedom is not a clue.
Statistically speaking, of course. Some of my best friends…
Mike
“Just because you don’t like Ted doesn’t mean we don’t not like you. And one of the things we really don’t like about you is that you don’t know we don’t like you or if you know we don’t like you then you don’t know why we don’t like you.”
Or you don’t know why we don’t care…
Far North
McFloyd……anybody home?
Far North
Compu………..,
So, as far as Afganistan goes, mission accomplished? Is that it? Everything is A OK in Afganistan?
We defeated the Taliban, yes. Hell, that was easy. That was over in about 6 weeks. The hard part was staying with it in Afganistan and rooting out most of the rest of Al Qeada. That means capturing or killing the big kahuna himself, bin Laden. But that’s not too glamorous and there ain’t no photo opportunities for GWB by slogging it out in Afganistan and finishing the job. Nosiree. Fearless Leader had to attack Iraq. Just how badly did Bush misunderestimate Iraq? Just think back to that photo-op on the aircraft carrier where he declared “major combat operations have ended”. That was more than two years ago, Compu…. Two f**king years ago. Now nobody knows how the f**k to complete Bush’s war. Oh, we’ll never be defeated militarily. We’ll win every battle. But the fact that we’re still there, hiding within the sanctuary of the green zone, that’s a defeat in and of itself.
No, Compu…, we never finished the job in Afganistan But nobody focuses on that because of Iraq.
It seems as if Bush isn’t after true victory, just the illusion of it.
shark
Rall is a disgusting individual. Imagine my suprise when the last issue of MAD Magazine I read contained a cartoon (not one of his offensive ones) by Rall.
That’s the last MAD I ever read, and while I’m sure they couldn’t care less, I told them so…
Bob
Rall’s been a better predictor of events in Iraq than any mainstream news source. Weird-ass cartoon style, though.
AlanDownunder
“Just because you don’t like Ted doesn’t mean we don’t not like you. And one of the things we really don’t like about you is that you don’t know we don’t like you or if you know we don’t like you then you don’t know why we don’t like you.”
Or you don’t know why we don’t care…
We know all too well. We get your media but you don’t get ours. We’re on the outside looking in while you’re on the inside looking in – not out. As a result, the US handle on the world is way behind the US influence on the world. Bull in china shop.
Statistically speaking of course. Really, some of my best friends…
scs
When I get in international chatrooms I always hear things like “USA – United State of Arrogance”. I then ask these people about their respective countries and ask them if their government is always good, kind, and compassionate, and the people in their country are all so humble and cariang. That always makes them seem to shut up and think.
I’m pretty sure we could go around to any country in the world and list their bad behavior over the last hundred years outside of their country and to their own people, just as some people are so fond of rattingly off about the USA. At least the USA had some good, lots of good, along with the bad. What good has any other country done in the world in the last 100 years?
Mike
“It seems as if Bush isn’t after true victory, just the illusion of it.”
Or he realizes that a war can have several fronts, of which we (perhaps not very wisely I’ll grant you) are fighting on several.
Fools consider the “war on terrorism” as nothing more than a police action (ala Clinton), wiser heads (Bush, Biden, McCain, Lieberman, etc.) realize it’s a clash of civilizations which is a much different thing.
scs
And by the way, I think its funny that the world was with us after 9/11, and through the Afghan war, but then suddenly hated us when we went in to kick out Saddam Hussein? THAT is what the world chose to get upset about? Please, spare me. That country needed a regime change, bad, ain’t no two ways about it. Now maybe if we had went in to invade France or someplace, then maybe I would understand all the hubbub…
AlanDownunder
“Just because you don’t like Ted doesn’t mean we don’t not like you. And one of the things we really don’t like about you is that you don’t know we don’t like you or if you know we don’t like you then you don’t know why we don’t like you.”
Or you don’t know why we don’t care…
We know all too well. We get your media but you don’t get ours. We’re on the outside looking in while you’re on the inside looking in – not out. As a result, the US handle on the world is way behind the US influence on the world. Bull in china shop.
Statistically speaking of course. Really, some of my best friends…
Mike
“We know all too well. We get your media but you don’t get ours. We’re on the outside looking in while you’re on the inside looking in – not out. As a result, the US handle on the world is way behind the US influence on the world. Bull in china shop.”
We get your newspapers, but not your electronic media.
I see the Sydney Herald is talking about important things such as the fact that Waltzing Matilda is under threat from Americanism. Can’t imagine how that one got by our 6:00 news…
http://www.smh.com.au/news/National/US-threatens-Australian-larrikinism/2005/07/04/1120329369083.html?oneclick=true
P.S. We do look out sometimes you know. Just this week I was watching the protests over at the G-8 Conference when I saw the big black and white sign up front of the crowd that said: “9-11, an inside frame up job”.
That’s when I pulled my head back in after realizing there really isn’t that much worth seeing. I can see that crap over here by reading Kos, DU and other silly nonsense, or if I want another stellar view of America from the “oustide”, I can read the yellow rag “The Guardian” from the UK.
AlanDownunder
What good has any other country done in the world in the last 100 years?
None, according to US mainstream media and US popular belief.
And by the way, I think its funny that the world was with us after 9/11, and through the Afghan war, but then suddenly hated us when we went in to kick out Saddam Hussein? THAT is what the world chose to get upset about? Please, spare me. That country needed a regime change, bad, ain’t no two ways about it.
Well they got regime change. Mission accomplished. So why stick around?
scs
Well Alan, hate to be a patriot here, but who kicked out the Nazi’s, saved half of Korea, stood up to the Soviets and kept watch over half of Europe, kicked Iraq out of Kuwait, refereed the Yugoslavian crisis, and patrolled half of Iraq to protect the Kurds and Shiites for all these years. Now of course we always had help, like the Brits and such, but without the US, those missions most likely would not have been attempted or accomplished. Could Australia have done all that on their own? I think not. The point is, all you international folks, stop your whining and look at the good things once in a while.
And as for Iraq, the mission of regime change was accomplished, as Bush said. Now we are on a regime ‘creation’ mission. That will take a little more time, but I think in the end that mssion will be accomplished too, and the world will be better for it.
Far North
I thought we invaded Iraq because Saddam had WMDs and was a threat to us. Oh yea, that was so 2 years ago.
scs
Far North, we invaded Iraq cause they weren’t abiding by the cease fire agreement, such as shooting at our planes in the no-fly zones and playing fast and loose with UN inspections and sorely in need of a regime change. Whether they had WMD ultimiately is immaterial. The point was we THOUGHT there was a POSSIBILTY they had them and we weren’t going to take any more chances on weirdo Middle Eastern leaders, thanks to 911 (hence the Bush connection between Saddam and 911- it’s a figurative, ethereal connection) They bluffed us and we called their bluff.
Sojourner
scs:
You’re trying to rewrite history. Bush, Cheney and Rice were quite explicit that the reason for the war was WMD. Remember Rice’s mushroom cloud?
Hussein allowed the inspectors in. It was Bush who kicked them out. And guess what… the inspectors were right when they said there weren’t any WMD.
scs
Sjourner, you try to get me in every posting segment here. You didn’t get my post. Bush and Co. said that they thought there MIGHT be WMD in Iraq and hence, no chances to be taken, we were going to go in. They never made it a definite. And according to world evidence at the time, most intelligence agencies thought that Iraq probably DID have them. And as to the inspectors, Saddam was playing some games with the inspectors, letting them in sometimes and not letting them into sites at other times. Probably he did that then just to give the world the “appearance” he had WMD cause it made him feel powerful. So we didn’t know, we gambled and we went it. But what if they HAD had them? We’d be facing another Iran today. Better safe than sorry I say.
Darrell
This LIE needs to be dealt with every time a lying leftist scumbag like Soujourner tries to raise it again… the LIE that WMD’s was the only reason, or even the primary reason given for invading Iraq. After over a year of national debate, read the actual Congressional resolution which was voted on
Repetition of the lie that WMD’s were *THE* reason are made by dishonorable lowlifes like Sojourner in a dishonest attempt to re-write history. Again, read the Congressional resolution itself, read what was actually said at that time. There were 10+ different reasons given for toppling Saddam. After 9/11 it did not make sense to allow Saddam to continue to violate his ’91 terms of surrender as he had repeatedly been doing for the past 12 years. There was evidence Saddam had cooperated with terrorists groups (hell, he was tied to the WTC bombing in the early 1990’s), gross human rights violations, shooting at our planes, ejecting weapons inspectors out of the country, having KNOWN WMD’s (Iraq had admitted to possessing 3.9 tons VX + hundreds of tons of weaponized chems before ejecting inspectors out of the country) which were NEVER accounted for, etc, etc.. WMD’s were but one of many different justifications given and debated at that time
We can have a debate over our actions in Iraq.. What should not be permitted however, is for lying scum like Sojourner and soo many, many other leftists to get away with dishonest attempts to re-write history claiming WMD’s were “THE” reason for invading Iraq. That claim is demonstrably a lie as there were many other well documented reasons for the Iraq war which were loudly debated in the runup to war.. reasons which were explicitly stated and voted upon by Congress.
Please take note that the same scum who are perpetuating the lie that WMD’s were ‘THE’ reason for toppling Saddam, these are the very same lowlifes now screaming that Iraq is a “Quagmire”, a “failure”. Are we supposed to pretend that these are honorable people?
Sojourner
Nice try but no. Bush, Cheney, Rice – they sold this war on the basis of WMD. They had to scare the American people into this war.
The American people didn’t give a shit about Hussein. They didn’t care if he was paying off Palestinian bombers. They didn’t consider him a mass murderer that needed to be taken out immediately. They cared about 9/11. If there was no connection to 9/11 and no immediate/near-term threat of WMD, they would never have gone along with this, especially since it meant pulling troops out of Afghanistan.
Play all the semantic games you want but that is the reality. The American people only signed up for this war because they were afraid of another attack.
The Downing Street memos already confirm that the Bushies didn’t care if there was reliable evidence of WMD. They wanted to start a war and, by god, they got their wish.