Coldfire, you make some reasonable points. I’m just not convinced that you’re accurately paraphrasing the Reto/Schnitte Axis of Evil. They seem more a part of that subspecies of Ugly Anti-American that bases its ignorant stereotypes on movies, biased press and envy.
What the American government does is a legitimate subject for appraisal and criticism. It shows foolishness and a lack of class to attack individual citizens for a modest display of patriotic solidarity in tenuous times. If there is a rational argument to be made that we are too patriotic, it hasn’t appeared here. (Note: in the interests of full disclosure, I should mention that like yosemitebabe, I began displaying U.S. flag images on my website after 9/11 - two Revolutionary War-era flags including the Gadsen flag with the coiled snake and the legend “Don’t Tread On Me”. The two flags occupy about .0000000001% of my non-political (gardening) site, so I also would be amused and disgusted by some non-American bozo voicing outrage at my display of patriotism. The flag images do not imply my love of Bush Jr. and all elements of the government’s foreign policy, but my feeling of solidarity with other Americans facing evil, as well as respect for American core values).
Despite problems abroad including the recent wave of xenophobic incidents and anti-immigrant policies in numerous European nations, I would never have the inclination or gall to tell (for example) Dutch or British citizens that they have no right to express patriotism.
To get back to your argument - I think the point can be made that America is far from unique in tending to go its own way without the consultations and deference that other nations think they’re owed. If you look back at recent history, European nations when riding high in terms of wealth and power were not overly receptive to outsiders’ attempts to negotiate for the communal good. Take for instance Russia’s offering to mediate arms reductions in the late 19th century, or Wilson’s trying to convince the warring nations in WWI to accept a peace short of total victory. Countless lives might have been saved if the great powers of the time had not disdained outside intervention. This does not automatically justify all current U.S. policies. But it should lend a sense of perspective.
Jackmannii, thanks for your thoughtful response.
My motivation was not to justify what this Reto character did: in fact, I too think he’s an ass for sending an unsollicited e-mail complaining about patriotism. I just saw Schnitte being raked over the coals for suggesting there may be something else behind Reto’s attack than mere assholishness. That’s when I decided to jump in - I’ll leave it to my neighbour to the East to say whether I did so sufficiently or not. 
You’re absolutely right - and what our Swiss friend did was certainly wrong. I was merely trying to explain what sort of thought mechanism might be at work in the background here.
It’s not that these nations (and their citizens) “think they’re owed” consultations, it’s more that there is a sharp contrast with the amount of US-Euro consultation that took place under the last president. Oh, I realise that GWB doesn’t hate Europe, and I also know why he’s placing such an emphasis on the US’s priorities right now. It’s not too hard to understand - similarly, it’s not too hard to understand how a semi-educated European might come to the conclusion that in comparison with Clinton, GWB just doesn’t give a fuck about the outside world (again: I’m not saying this is what I feel or think). Of course, this contrast is a bit of cummulative damage resulting from a few international rows (Kyoto, the Star Wars program) followed by the die-hard approach of the War against Terror. Add to the mix that GWB embodies a few American stereotypes that are found annoying but forgettable in usual citizens, yet are considered dangerous for a leader of such a large nation: the perceived (?) lack of intelligence, the ignorance of what the world outside the US is about, the eagerness to show off ones weapons arsenal, and the willingness to use it. Combine all that, and it isn’t too hard to see why a lot of Europeans -and in some cases European governments- aren’t too pleased about American foreign policy right now.
Again, I’m not offering this as my rock solid opinion, I’m just trying to illustrate what goes on on this side of the pond.
That’s the point of time for me to quit that debate. Have fun, guys.
Well, I take it my attempt to elaborate was unsuccesful, then.
I doubt there’s much you can do to help someone who’s not interested in a thoughtful defense of his position (i.e. you have to actually be debating before you can quit a debate).
While it was amusing to try to get our Bavarian friend to recognize the idiocy of embedding one’s worldview in foolish and outmoded stereotypes, I recognize that this is hard for some to accomplish, detrimental as it is to dialogue (personally, whenever I hear a European commentator use the word “cowboy” to describe a U.S. action, it serves as an immediate indicator that the person has no idea what he’s talking about).
One of Bush II’s biggest problems vis-a-vis* Europe is his perceived lack of style and charm. Clinton either did practically zero or waited until the final moments of his term to do anything about issues of importance to Europeans (global warming, the ICC) but got away with it. I seriously question whether our “display” of weaponry or willingness to engage it abroad have been increased under Bush II. The charisma deficit, I suppose, is another matter.
*I love using this word. I feel so Kissingeresque.
It’s Jackmannii’s turn to judge this, not mine.
Best wishes to Jackmanii for his upcoming Kilopost, btw.
You just might ask Reto when women got the vote in that democratic country. Hint: 1971. Wouldn’t appear to me that you have democracy if the women can’t vote.
Didn’t one Canton hold out til the 90s?
I don’t want to get involved in the shite that this Reto guy is talking about but…
Northern Ireland is to me anyway quite important. Clinton and his envoy George Mitchell were a vital part of the peace process. They where heavily involved and stayed involved. Without them the peace* may not have happened. This may not be a pan euro deal but I get the feeling that not a lot of Americans know about how much the former administration were invloved.
*not perfect but a lot better than it was