"I'm just wondering here, do you and/or your "dear friend" avoid traveling to states in the USA, where the electoral votes went to the other candidate in the last election???"

Just curious - does any do this or know anyone that did this? I never thought about it but it makes about as much sense as boycotting France or Germany

Oh by the way - how come my amfali coast question(which I just topped) doesnt get nearly as much traffic as this one!!!

Thanks, Elle - what a great reference! I'll use it next time I upset someone on the Australia/Pacific forum. Probably later today.

We were living in the mountains 90 km west of Sydney at the time, and although bridges were in short supply locally we had plenty of cliffs. What worried me is that I sometimes suspected the offender of thinking that if Justin did leap the cliff he must know what he's doing....

Djkbooks, I asked a simple question, and judging by the responses, some found it interesting. I asked if political views affected your travel destinations, nothing more. If you found it to be a silly question, then you needn't have responded. I see no need for your hostility and incivility as you did not need to reply if you found my topic a waste of time.

My parents just said "a bridge". I grew up right at the confluence of the Mississippi and Missouri rivers, with a dozen other rivers nearby. I had lots of options for lemming-ness, so they covered their bases well.

To the original question: no. Every country, including mine, has issues. Can't correct them at home, so I sure don't figure on correcting everyone else's.

No, they don't. I travel to see all kinds of things I can't otherwise see. I guess I have a journalist's approach to travel, in that I want to see the good, the bad, and the ugly of all the world. I don't judge, I just look, take notes, dig into the local culture, and write down my experiences. Most of them are good.

I traveled to Morocco in November 2001. Loads of people, including family and friends, thought I was totally nuts. The government of Morocco isn't our enemy, in fact the opposite, but many U.S. citizens would have considered it such at that time because of the ties between Morocco and numerous terrorists.

But I don't travel on a political level. I travel to see and smell and taste and feel. You can do that in any country at any time, except under truly oppressive circumstances, and under such I would probably choose not to travel because I may be a journalist at heart but I'm not one for real, and I don't want to encounter bombs and guns on a vacation.

World views definitely don't even begin to make a mark on my decisions to travel. It's the PEOPLE I'm interested in meeting, not the governments, for goodness' sake! In Morocco in 2001, I met countless people who apologized to me for their country's assistance in the terrorism effort. I was never once harrassed - as a woman traveling with another woman - and was treated graciously everywhere.

If you're not willing to confront the supposed "enemy," then you're a wuss. The argument about not spending money in a country whose politics you're not comfortable with strikes me as about as dumb as the period when Americans were pouring out their Champagne and French wines and not buying French mineral water. BIG statement - yeah, thanks.

Fine - go only to countries where your political views are shared by the government - that could change in a heartbeat, as witness Spain this spring after the bombings.

Your friend has simply cut off her nose to spite her face. Her loss.

Is there a line somewhere that you wouldn't cross? If you were a strong believer in some religion, and that religion was being persecuted by the government in a country, would you go anyway? We saw some evidence of anti-semitism being tolerated by the Italian authorities last month, and honestly I'm now going to think twice before going back to Italy in the immediate future.

I hope Fodors doesn't pull this thread, because I think it's extremely travel related, and it really brings up some issues that some - not all - people will find relevant in their travel plans. Is spending your tourist euro/dinar/shekel seen as a political act? In some places some of the locals see it distinctly in that way. If you are unaware of that, time you learned it. In Israel a couple of months ago we had more than one person thank us for "supporting Israel" with our visit in this time of troubles. It really wasn't about that in our minds at all, but it was in theirs.

Some friends who got back from France and Spain last weekend said they perceived anti-American sentiment more than they ever had before, in very many travels to Europe and all over the world. They're going off to Norway for a wedding in a few weeks, and have decided to skip passing through France en route, which they normally would never consider.

It's a valid issue and one that warrants some self-assessment.

So ChatNoir, are you going to change your username to something less French-sounding?
The stances of Canada, France and Germany on the war made me appreciate countries I already was quite fond of even more. I've been to Toronto or Montreal at least seven times since the war started.
Dissent is healthy and necessary.

marty, the thread is working because people are not forcing their fellow posters to justify their views. Hoping to continue on something unique here for a bit longer by keeping it that way.

Gardyloo, I think you raise a valid question, and I probably come off as a bit apathic in my earlier reply. That's not the case. I do have lines, but I also try to avoid assigning more importance to my small activities than warranted. Even if others believe that they understand my motives, doesn't mean that they do. I have to live with them though, so I suppose I do have lines, that if I were to cross them, would make me feel like part of the "problem". My perception of a problem. Myanmar would be an example that jumps to mind.

For the most part though, I believe that the osmosis of ideas don't transfer at any level through isolation.

bad edit. "doesn't transfer"

Try your question THIS WAY:

Would you consider not buying a product MADE in a particular country because of that country's opposition to the policies of the US?

I have this funny notion that the sales of BMWs, Mercedez-Benz cars, French-made cheeses, French or German wines, etc., have NOT plummeted in the least...nor will they.

It has been an interesting thread this one.

Although I question current US foreign policy, it would never stop me from visiting America for the sights, the culture and the people.

Most of us accept that, in the main, countries look after their own interests, politicians usually screw up, and that people generally do their best to rub along together.

Travelling helps us to understand one another and forget the drudgery of work and the demands of others. Long may it continue and don't let politics get in the way of it.

Grandmere:

Your husband's unhappy with France and you went to Holland? Whose contribution to The Noble Cause was what precisely?

Leelani:
I'm puzzled at your respecting your friend's decision. If she wants to limit her holidays to Britain and Australia (if she's going to Spain or Italy she's either ill-informed or a hypocrite), who's suffering? Certainly not the French. And she'd be well advised not to share with any Brits or Aussies the reasons for this bizarre decision. Suffering fools gladly isn't a common trait in either Britain or Australia.

She's cutting off her nose to spite her face. And friends are there to point this out to other friends.

Which is exactly what Canada did.

I think that lots of people are thinking twice about visiting the US at the moment.
There have been so many horror stories about people's experiences with US immigration.

Leelani dear, your friend needs to grow up. The amount of money the French economy is losing because or narrow minded people like her is utterly minimal.

I can understand not travelling due to political reasons which result in unrest in that country e.g. Vietnam (let's not go into the politics of that one!). However, simply not travelling somewhere because the government doesn't share your political views is more than idiotic.

I'm put off travelling to American, no because of their misguided president, his even more misguided polititcs, and his huge mistake in invading Iraq, but because of the new "five hour check-in" at the airport. They're becoming neurotic, and unfortunately, if someone does wish to carry out acts against humanity they'll always slip through the net.

Grow up, see the world don't let politics get in the way - they interfere with you daily life enough!

France had a choice to make and they decided not to join the war. Every nation is entitled to do this. Why on earth do people get annoyed when other countries don't do what they want them to do...I find this attitude a bit frightening, does anyone else? This fear and anger about people who don't always agree on matters smacks of McCarthyism and I feel we are getting more and more fanatical/obsessive about those who do not join us. Think about it if you were the president of France.....You are far closer to these conflicts in Arab Countries than the U.S, you have a section of your population who are of Arab descent and are working and adding to the country and economy and are citizens with no issues, you do not feel they found sufficient evidence to go in...that's fine with me, how can I be mad at them for not joining a fight they are unsure about....we need to stop blaming others and get on with things...Go to Paris and enjoy!

Just in case the gods do pull this thread I'd like to echo the sentiment that it's been a great discussion. It's a pleasure to see it go on so long with civility and humour, and with nary a spluttering ranter in sight. Nor for that matter any querulous complaints that it hasn't been dealing with "travel-related" matters. I'm greatly encouraged by the common sense, courtesy and wit of the contributors to this board. Wouldn't it be great to get together for a few reds and a noisy but good-natured argument?

Flanneruk, thanks for the kind words, but the sad fact is that down here we have enough home-grown idiots to deal with, many of them I'm sorry to say we elected to positions of power. I'm not too sure that we're winning the battle. At any rate, we're not resourced to deal with an influx of imported fools.

Sue, are you saying the candians are going to throw the bums out of office?
Maybe there is some hope we'll get better anti-terrorism help.

In response to Sue and ChatNoir: Yes, it looks like the Liberals are losing the Canadian election -- for reasons that have nothing to do with Iraq. The most recent polling I've seen show Canadians as opposed as ever to the invasion of Iraq -- though with the characteristic Canadian willingness to embrace paradox, they may be about to vote for a party that supported intervention.

YES,I will not return to France or Germany,nor will I visit Canada or Russia until there is a change to more appreciative governments who know the meaning of loyalty and alliance.

tedgale, thanks. Help in Iraqi would be nice, but more help along the border and at transportation/shipping points is more important right now.

Re mgmargate, do us all a favour, don't travel you narrow minded ignorant small time person, thank you!

In answer to Gardyloo, there is a line somewhere that I wouldn't cross. I know that I would not have traveled to South Africa during apartheid nor would I have knowingly purchased a product to support that economy. Possibly the deciding factor would be how much the political issue permeated the society of the country.

Most of the time I can draw a line between the people of a country and the actions of their government, but there are some instances in which that may not be possible.

m_Kingdom2, have you looked in a mirror lately? Get your own house in order before you dare to bad mouth others.

mk2:

You know, on this occasion there really is no need to be obnoxious.

mgmargate has every right to restrict his or her travels to countries that show "loyalty"

Which, given the US' stabbing of the backs of Britain, France and Israel in 1956, rules the US out.

And given the near-total lack of support in practically every other country in the world - including the UK and Australia -for what the US is doing in Iraq leaves everywhere else out.

Except, of course Iraq. Where doubtless mgmargate would be happy.

tedgale and Chatnoir

I am sorry to have upset you with what was intended to be a lighthearted comment about my home and native land's lousy weather (and rather boring election.) I go now to sin no more.... or at least not until next week.......

I will admit to buying a T-shirt (made in the USA, union labor) from Tom Binh :).

MK2:You are ignorant. I never start these posts, but when I respond out of personal principal narrow minded people like you spew nonsense because I disagree with you.Loon's crack me up.

Flanneruk: Stop embarrasing yourself.The U.S. might not be perfect but the world is a much better place because of the money and blood of our soldiers we spend abroad.We are back to the same facts.The main opponents to our policy opposed us for no other reason then they were bribed with money and the threat of exposure of there criminal acts.The facts of what went on are slowly emerging despite the attempts of Kofi,Chirac etc to cover them up.Why don't you try to dispute the FACTS!

Blind patriotism? A victim of propaganda?

I'm thinking Vietnam, Cuba, Iraq.... all wonderful outcomes with no meaningless loss of life?

>I think it was that great American president George Washington who said that a nation can have no permanent friends or permanent enemies - only permanent interests.<

Interesting about this quote.

It's by Lord Palmerston (1848), but has beeen attributed to DeGaulle, Kissinger, and now Washington.

Flanneruk, re: your response to my comment about my aborted trip to France last year: travel decisions are often subjectively made. And I have been back to France since then and will continue to go. I imagine my husband will accompany me from time to time, as in the past.

Ira: As sad as it is I think you are correct,history shows it time and time again.On a personal level it doesn't make it anymore palatable.

Hi Leelani. Unless the gov't of a country has a regularly enforced policy of meeting Americans at the airport, loading them in a van, taking them to an isolated location and shooting them, I'd probably go anywhere. However, if as a woman I'd be less than welcomed, I'll spend my money elsewhere. That said, if you don't want a political discussion, you probably shouldn't ask questions about politics. This site - as evidenced by the number of responses in one day - is filled with people who love a good argument, political or otherwise.

Who knows, without France and Spain, there may not have been a country as we know it....


From the National Archives (of the USA):

Washington battled both the British army and shortages facing his men. Supplies for the Continental army were often insufficient. While the colonies were in revolt, their government was based on the proposed Articles of Confederation, although the government established by the Articles was limited in power. For example, the Congress lacked a power to raise money through taxes. The new government had to attract respect, aid, and recognition from other nations. One of the first to do so was Spain, who had colonies to the south of the English colonies. One of the best successes came from the diplomatic efforts of Benjamin Franklin, who was sent to Paris to negotiate with Britain's traditional enemy.

At first, France could not openly aid the American cause. Franklin was well known in France, and did his best to appear as American as the people in France had expected. It helped that the Articles of Confederation established by the Second Continental Congress showed that the Americans had plans for their future.

International support played a major role in the success of the colonies' revolution. The efforts of Franklin and others in negotiating with the French for supplies and aid were vital. In fact, some European soldiers came to America, inspired by the revolution that was occurring. Notable among these arrivals were Baron Von Steuben from Prussia and the young French Marquis de Lafayette. Both played significant parts in improving the American military's abilities.

MichelParis: There is no dispute here.I guess we fall back to the adage,What have you done for me lately.We more than paid back the French for there help 230 years ago.

Shanna, I didn't ask to hear political views. I asked if those views affected your travel plans, pure and simple. Unfortunately, with the way the thread is going (personal attacks), it isn't long for this world!

I respect everyone's right to take vacations and spend their money as they see fit. I thought it was a good question...........

mgmargate - obviously your history book is different from everyone elses.Mebbe you should only visit where your own history & dogma is accepted.
Also you can't "spend" other peoples blood.Its not money, you can't get it back by work.You pay nothing, they give everything.
Those in SE Asia, Chile etc will be glad to know that they are better off for your big "spending" (sorry, still cant get used to that concept....)

Well, back to the question at hand. I may be mistaken in this, but it seems your friends are of a conservative bent. If this is so, they are probably opposed to gay marriage.

In Massachusetts, gay marriage is now legal. Are they vowing never to enjoy Cape Cod, Boston, etc. for this reason?
It's the same logic.

Me, I'm not going back to Beantown until my beloved Red Sox get back into the World Series. (So it looks like France again this year, Ireland the next, the kids want to see Italy...;)

I have visited several European countries, and sadly I will not be back to see some again in my lifetime.

It is not only their government's politics, but the overwhelming anti-American attitudes of the people in those countries. What I see on TV and read in the newspapers about the hatred of America in some countries is so discouraging and shocking that I can't imagine any thinking American would want to support such pathologic venom and lunacy. It is not only what France (for example) has done, but what the ordinary French citizen thinks.

Each to his/her own. I will spend my money in more friendly places. **==