Iraq bares a European/US rift. Who is responsible?

I have not doubted that this administration is not in the least conscious of their alienation in dealing with most of Europe (not to mention the rest of the world). It makes the outcome of the war in Iraq even more spooky and forbodding.

We don't have diplomacy, we have dupeplomacy.

Quite plainly, you didn't bother to read the article at all....

It seems to me, this quotation from the article explains many, if not everything. Europeans have not yet realized that global terror endangers them in the same way it endangers Americans. From the other side, the Soviet military threat no more exists (thanks to President Reagan), and part of the Europeans have this misleading feeling of absolute safety, that makes them think that they no need in alliance with America.

I've read the article, several times, and I think it tries to be balanced. There have always been rifts, and reasons for them, but that is to be expected. What is happening now goes somewhat beyond that.

The diplomacy (rather, the lack of it) comes in when you are trying to achieve goals that you want the rest of the world to be involved in, but the perception is that you don't want the rest of the world to be involved on the same level; that you are the final word, the one who makes the rules; that yours is the game to be played. Diplomacy and tact has many times helped opinions to come to a common metting ground.

There is not only anti-Americanism. There are real names put to it. And there is not the respect for us as a country that we had. I think we have miscalculated people for far too long. I've never had great confidence in the major part of any populace, but the European countries have also taken note of what think is an erosion of the very principles they admired America for. They talk not only by Bush's pointing of his finger and saying they have to do it his way; they also commented on Ashcroft's intrusion into matters regarding law (that is not under federal jurisdiction), and the fact that we seem to be heading towrads a restrictive, narrow rule.

So, as the article points out, the business has laid bare a lot of the feelings that jhave evolved these past two years.

There was a much-publicized interview of Clinton by Larry King, in which Clinton agreed with some of what the administration is trying to do, and doesn't see them in such a bad light. Which is interesting, considering the eight years of deliberate demonization about him that went on. But that is a big, observable difference. Clinton went to talk to people, and he engaged people with knowledge in their fields and an ability to be diplomatic. The poll released by the Times today (on the front page) shows the erosion of much support that Bush had.

Steissd - the Europeans are aware most days of terrorism. The IRA, the Basques, the various Arab groups in France, Germany - they have more experience in this than the Americans do, so how can you say that?

I don't think that's the case steissd. Europeans have been dealing with terrorism within their own borders for decades. I'm pretty confident they recognize the danger. Terrorism on the US mainland however, IS new.

If anything the US may be over-reacting to some extent where the Europeans have been dealing with it so it isn't a huge reactionary measure on their part.

Just another view on it...

And Europeans always tended to negotiate with terrorists thus encouraging the latter to continue. IMHO, the best tactics are these of Mr. Bush: if you want to get rid of demons, then attack and destroy the hell.

It's a simple strategy. Since there is no central location attacking a "hell" won't rid anyone of terror. It's more like fighting mosquitoes.

When you fight mosquitos, DDT is to be sprayed on the lake their larvae develop.

Exactly, steissd:
"Many species of insects rapidly develop populations resistant to DDT; the high stability of the compound leads to its accumulation in insects that constitute the diet of other animals, with toxic effects on them, especially certain birds and fishes."

You mean, e.g. bombing the Basque Provinces and parts of Landes, Northern Ireland and probably Ireland as well?

No, I referred to the Muslim terror. Unlike Basque and Irish it bears global character.

Exactly what Muslim terror in Europe are you referring at?

When DDT stops being efficient, another generations of insecticides are employed: pyrethroids, organic phosphorus compounds, etc.

Whom did the German, French, Italian police arrest in the previous months for being involved in the Al Qaeda terror networks? Maybe these were Hassidic rabbis or Franciscan monks?

You seem, steissd, to know a lot more about life, politics, law, history etc. in Europe than I do.

And your hate on muslims seems greater than I've thought.

I do not know more about Europe than you do, Mr. Hinteler, since I do not live there since 1990 (I lived in the European part of the USSR before). I do not hate Muslims, but I have no positive feelings toward terrorists; I guess, you do not either.

Seems, there is at least one thing, we agree.

I hope we shall be able to find more points of agreement in future.