Well that's a really good point.  How much of this dislike of America is simply biased perception from the other side.  I'd throw out the argument that a lot of the European powers that have a problme with America are simply because of how much power they've lost since World War II.  If they can't have it then they don't want anyone else to have it.  Of course that argument would not hold up for other places around the world. 

But a good point... if we don't intervene then who will.  I think that's a good question but I think something another country might propose is why is America so picky about where they intervene.  We intervene in countries such as Kuwait to "protect" from a dictatorship but we don't do the same for such countries in Africa and South America.  Actually we help instigate them.  So is our "counterbalance" really all that effective if everything America does is for their own self-interest.  I mean if America really were intervening in all theses areas for simply the well being of the planet as a whole then we'd probably be seen in a better light.

I'd say despite the first argument I proposed in this post, it's quite possible that a lot of the anger stems from America simply acting on things that only interest them which then causes more problems than it solves. 

Thus I'll go with what famousring said is how much of this "soft" and "hard" power as he puts it does the country need to take a part in.  Obviouly a good amount of our foreign policy needs to be dictated in our own self-interest but does this mean the destruction of other governments and economies at the same time.  Wouldn't this go against what America is all about?  Or is that a privilege for only Americans.  What I'm trying to hit at here is despite all these acts of patriotism within the country to spread the political culture and ideology of the country... it never really comes off that way.

Thos we go back to the idea of isolationism.  This worked well for a long time in America but that was when America wasn't a world power.  Could America actually have a period of isolationism as a superpower.  With political and economic branches stretching around the world, not being involved in many worldy affairs may actually be more negative than positive.  But of course this brings up another very good question in that is America losing that appeal as a superpower.  There are numerous things (loss of worldy appeal, torture accusations, slowing economy, etc) that suggest we are losing that title.

As you can see despite coming off as a very simple question, there are numerous implications and questions to such a seemingly small issue.  Just wait til I make threads about the "bigger" issues haha.

It is not arrogance it is the truth. We bailed out Europe during WWI, WWII, the Cold War, and did not fight to conquer but to liberation you from totalitarianism, fascism, and encroaching Communism. If you want me to apologize to you Euros (aka pull an Obama) I don't think that you know me that well. In short: not a snowball's chance. Simply put, de Oppresso Liber and Sic Semper Tyrannis.

Spanish / American war should have been the last one the US was involved in.
We had no business getting involved in WWI, WWII, Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, or Afghanistan. We should have just sat peacefully in our country, and let the rest of the world fall apart.

Mmm America in European eyes... difficult topic. Of course the policing of the world is a sore sight for us. "We Europeans" by now consider us an expert on global policing, war and scare-politics with our vast history. We also know, by now after WW2 that none of this works. England lost India because of their harsh actions there. The Netherlands lost Indonesia due to our bullying and refusal to decalre independance from our country. The US set that straight in the UN... and rightfully so. Colonies weren't feasible anymore.

Now, I dare to say we have learned. It took Europe 2 world wars and the loss of all of it's colonies but we learned. This meddling with foreign countries is now something we see happening in the US and though we can't make parallels because there are major differences, I see the actions and words coming from Europe to "condemn" the US rather as warnings that diplomacy and a " laissez-fair" style of politics where nations try to accomplish things together and keep eachother in check is much more fruitful. This is also why Obama is so popular here. He is a leader, something we still desire from the US but also one that seeks advice and tries to make friends among other nations, big and small. Europe believes that we can tackle anything as long as we handle things together.
The US' previous run under Bush was much more isolated and it showed. We condemned every action as stupid, far-fetch'd and when the US did ask for our help we reacted snooty indeed. We knew it would happen and it was very much a "told you so" situation. this of course was an overreaction from us but it examplifies my point that no country can do things alone. We know that now, and i'm glad the US is starting to realize it.

On a more personal level, on general I treat all Americans I run into with hospitability untill they proof to be jackasses, like anyone would. Most Americans I run into get annoying though, 3/4th of them turn out to be valley girls and as soon as I hear a sentence like: "Well, that coffeeshop was all like, brown and stuff" I cringe and have the urge to throw him/her in the canal. Especially with that horrible accent.

Oh, and what we also dislike to some extent is the overtly nationalistic tones. This is also a throw-back to WW2. If it is ever possible, take a walk around various towns... you will see that outside of football-championships and holidays there will not be a sinlge Dutch flag waving anywhere. Same goes for the other nations. Overtly nationalistic tones are a throw-back to a more black period in our history so we treat that with contempt, also with respect to the uprising to more nationalistic and fascistic groups.
The stereotypical American we sometimes get on TV-reports who considers the US to be the most hollistic country possible, the country everyone else should strive for... we fear that image and philosophy for understandable reasons I think. So whenever someone here starts to debate that point or get's too much into US-lovin' we fear that from our historic experience and will try to bring that person down a few pegs.

Hope that gave some insight ;0.

/

Err... if I remember rightly, weren't you guys attacked at Pearl Harbour, and that's what dragged you into the conflict? The others I agree with.

OT: In many ways the US is acting very much like the British Empire did during its prime, arrogant and sticking its nose into situations where it doesn't belong. I also find the overly religious areas and overly religious people of the US to be highly distrubing. When people are that heavily religious then they are that much easier to manipulate and it shows in numerous American media. Combine this with how patriotic people in the US can be and you have a significant proportion of the population ready to just jump to politicians wishes, which for a nation as powerful as the US is a scary prospect for the rest of the world. I haven't even mentioned the corporate media of America, I thought the British media was bad but I think the US is worse in terms of sensationalising stories and bending the truth/outright lying (in the case of FOX at least :P)

And yes, the US does end up in wars, and usually it just makes situations worse and there are ulterior motives for these conflicts, usually money and business. Also, the Vietnam war is mentioned, but the US was also in Cambodia but pulled out and just left the Cambodian people to a 4 year reign of torture and terror, yet on so many occasions the US politicians take the moral high ground, and conveniently forget about the millions of people around the world that have been tortured and put to death due to US medling.

Btw, a lot of the Americans I've met are really nice people and I get one with very well, but the countries global policies over the years have been... suspect to put it nicely.

As I mentioned, a lot of the US attitude in the global political landscape is reminiscent of how the British and other European powers carried themselves in the past. I sometimes feel that we recognise these aspects from our past and in hindsight its a little more disturbing, especially with the tech now available.

For all the US did, I still think what Cuba and socialist thinking has done (and still does) to Latin America is far, far worse.

This issue is complicated. The World wants America to lead, but only when they think it should.

On one hand, the US isnt the world, so it will always look at its interests (both people and business) above everything else.

On the other hand, this power it posseses is used to further its own agenda, affecting other countries.

I have to say I am pretty "americanized" and I dont hold a grudge like Zexen does.

I believe that the US is doing what any country in its position would do.

Also, with all the bad things its done, it is also the country who has done the most to help the World.

So, like pretty much everything else in life, this isnt about good or evil and more about shades of grey.

I would like the US to interfere less in certain places, but more in others.

But how can I expect a country to act against its own interests? How can I want it to be complete self-less when their own citizens demand other things?

Its one thing to expect it form individuals. Countries, its another totally different game.