You know that if it had been a plane to the Sydney Opera House or the Effiel Tower, or London Bridge, that the United States would be there to help you.
But would you? That's what some of us are not too sure about. If it wasn't of much benefit to the United States I wonder.
Perhaps we just see the past a little differently. The US was happy to sit back and watch during WWII until they were attacked. By the time they decided to help the war was half won, but to listen to Americans, you'd think they were soley responsible for victory.
Of course no one expects you to forget 9/11, but please stop with the "war on terrorism" crap. Terrorism existed long before 9/11 and still goes on in other parts of the world. Once again the US only becomes involved when it is affected (fully understandable) but then tries to tell the world it's for everyone's benefit. Are you going to stamp out terrorism everywhere or just where it affects the US?
Allies? That implies some sort of equality. Then why won't you listen to their opinions too instead of just expecting them to do what the US wants.
No one denies Saddam has to be dealt with. It may eventually be necessary to go to war, but most people want to give every opportunity possible to avoid it. The majority have said they will support a UN approved strike. Why not Bush? Why is he so eager for this war?
As for the last part, first of all who asked you to take charge? Because you have the biggest stick that gives you the right to run things how you see fit?
The US has a huge public relations problem. Perhaps if you tried to see yourselves as a part of the world instead of the most important part.
And for the record we don't all hate the US, just their arrogance sometimes. They are our allies and Australia has to support them. After all we need them more than they need us.


ASI
Carpe Cerevisi