One day last month, 100,000 Irish people took to the streets of Dublin to demonstrate against war in the Gulf. Although it was a protest against war, all of the posters were aimed at George W. Bush, Tony Blair, and Israel. None were directed against Saddam Hussein, as though he had no part to play in preventing war.

This was a march of the well-intentioned but naïve, the duped, the ignorant, and those who simply hate America.

The demonstration in Ireland was, of course, typical of what took place all over Europe on that day, and in protests since. Such is the level of domestic opposition to the war — that the Irish government came under severe pressure to deny landing rights to U.S. military flights wishing to refuel in Ireland on their way to the Gulf. On Thursday a vote was held in our parliament which authorized the continuation of refueling rights despite the level of public opposition to them. But the fact that the vote had to take place at all gives an indication of the depth of ill-will towards America that exists in Ireland, and in most of Europe, at present.

Frankly, I cannot remember a time when I have felt so alienated from so many of my fellow citizens or my fellow Europeans. It is even worse than when Ronald Reagan was in power and protesters took to the streets in huge numbers to protest against the deployment of Cruise and Pershing missiles in Europe. Was it this bad during the Vietnam War? I am too young to remember. It is hard to believe that it could have been.

Well, let me, for one, put it on the record: I like America. I value America as an ally. I believe that Ireland would have had no economic boom were it not for America. I believe America is a force for good in the world. No, more than that; I believe that if America did not exist the world would be far worse off than it is. We would be poorer and less free. Where would the huddled masses go to escape from economic misery and political oppression? We would have no one to rescue us from madmen and dictators of every kind.

I am glad America came to our aid in World War I. I am glad America helped to defeat Germany and Japan during World War II. I am grateful for the Marshall Aid plan which helped to rebuild Europe. I am grateful for the fact that the United States faced down the Soviet Union during the long and dangerous years of the Cold War. I am glad that America was willing to sacrifice its own to save Korea and I regret that South Korea is now becoming irrationally nationalistic and anti-American. I am even glad that America attempted to defeat the Communists in Vietnam. I only regret that it failed to do so. Had it succeeded, there can be no doubt that South Vietnam would by now be on the same road to economic prosperity as South Korea.

Of course, America's critics say that America only intervened in Europe when it had to. They say that the Marshall Aid plan was needed because shattered Europe was no good as a trading partner. They say that America confronted the Soviet Union in order to keep the world safe for capitalism. They say that America is never altruistic, that it only ever acts in its own self-interest.

And up to a point, it's true. America, like every other country in history acts in its own self-interest. But what a definition of self-interest! This is the kind of self-interest the world needs. It is self-interest that sees there is more to be gained by rebuilding your enemies than by crushing them underfoot. It is self-interest that knows freedom and democracy do not build true rivals in the old historical sense, but allies and trading partners. Has there ever been a great power like this?

No one claims that America does not make bad decisions, and can never be petty-minded or vain, or vulgar, or materialistic. But give me America any day over any of the available alternatives. I hate the fact that America and Iraq find themselves at war again, but I think America and Britain (and let's not forget Australia) and the rest of the "Coalition of the willing" are right to strike at Saddam Hussein. Yes, it's a risk, but to do nothing would be an even bigger risk. I am thankful that in America, and in Britain, we have at least two countries that appraise the world realistically and are not content to remain in a fantasyland in which we believe that all disagreements can be resolved simply by good intentions. And, of course, we know that if the world ever does turn into the sort of peaceful place we all long for, it will be because of America and its realism, and not because of its critics and their delusions.

I wish America and Britain a swift victory as they fight this war. It is a pity more countries are not with them. It's a pity my own country is not there.

David Quinn is a columnist with The Sunday Times (Ireland edition).

You, sir, are a buffoon.

If you think the coverage in Ireland is bad, read the local LA Times reports on the Peace demonstrations in Los Angeles. The word "biased" is not even close enough to describe this rag.

I.ve been fortunate enough to have visited Ireland on several occasions and am of Irish descent. You need to read this article carfully as it bespeaks truth so profound it must hurt yourvary anti-american anti freedom commie souls. Tough shit if the truth hurts you batch of loosers.

Do you feel the sting of a brilliant observationalist seeing America from the outside. Do you ever wonder why every day millions upon millions dream of making it to America and freedom. Dio tou understand that your actions are directed in support of the continued enslavement of the Iraqi.

It is true that Irish people don't hate America. We hate American foreign policy when it involves illegal wars.

We don't hate Americans. We hate the murderous actions of a minority of Americans that don't believe in Freedom and Democracy.

We love Americans, many of us have American family and friends. We love the people who are making the effort to shout out to the world that they don't support this war.

The Sunday Times is a British conservative rag and anyone writing in it is probably right-wing. I would guess that Quinn is because he attempts to confuse the idea of being "anti-American" and "anti-War".

Just remember, it's YOUR democracy, not Bush's, not the Republicans, not the Democrats. You can't trust any of those people. That's what your country is based on isn't it? Self-reliance, independence and courage?

We love Americans, we support your troops (as people) and we mourn their deaths, but we're quite clear that this is an illegal war and that ordinary working-class and middle-class Iraqis are being slaughtered so that a US-created dictator can be brought to heel.

Love and Peace,
An Irishman

And they should swing from lamp posts. Plus, the Times is an Irish paper that this article came from, you dumb American cunt.

Is that the same David Quinn who is the editor of the (right-wing) Irish Catholic? The views expressed would be consistent with his.

The Sunday Times is certainly not an Irish paper. Most of the British papers do an "Irish edition" Most have the front cover and a small section inside carrying Irish news stories, with the rest of the paper being exactly the same as the main edition.
The Sunday Times publishes articles by some of the most right-wing Irish journalists. From what I have seen of Quinn's previous writings, he certainly fits into that category.

Seanin Mor has already said precisely what I think and feel on this subject. I also agree with Ian, his answer was short and sweet (and incredibly accurate)

First things first. I took part in the Feb15 march in Dublin. And there were anti-Bush and anti-Blair posters. There weren't any anti-Israel ones that I saw. And the most popular sign was "Not in my name". I am neither naive, duped, anti-American nor ignorant.

David Quinn does not speak for Ireland. He has no right to claim to do so. Neither does our Taoiseach, as he is ignoring the fact that the Feb15 march was the largest public protest in Ireland in thirty years. They both ignore polls carried out over the last few months which all show that we do not support this illegal war.

The Sunday Times (yes, even the so-called "Irish Edition") is an English newspaper, and while I read it every week, I am under no illusion as to where it's bias lies. If you wish to get a more balanced picture of Irish thinking on this war, I invite you to look at the Irish Times (http://www.ireland.com), or any of the other Irish newspapers on the web.

Frankly, we are concerned for a good reason. Your country has been taken over through a very dubious application of your constitution by a religious fanatic who has dragged this world into a war which can have no possible "good" outcome.

Rumsfeld decries Saddam at every opportunity, but in 1983 he shook his hand and sat down with him to grant him 300 million dollars of credit to purchase weapons, less than 2 weeks after Saddam bombed halajba killing 5000 kurds. Two days ago, a US bomber dropped a LGU bomb on Halajba. That, for me, just about summed up this war. It's like a war between Hitler and Stalin - you can't cheer for either side but you know damn well that the ones paying the price will be the innocent ones caught in the middle.

There is a right-wing body of thought in the US and the UK that says that Saddam must be eliminated at any cost. I don't see them actually paying attention to what that cost actually is. So take a good hard look at it and tell me if you think this is worth it.

That would be the same David Quinn, not in line with the Pope (against the war), nor with conservative Catholic opinion in Ireland (against the war), liberal Catholic opinion in Ireland (against the war), radical Catholic opinion in Ireland (against the war). However entirely in line with British establishment opinion, which is not surprising given that he writes for a right-wing British newspaper with an irrepressible anti-Irish agenda.

In that context enjoy what seems to me to be self-parody.

but
most of us hate war
and
most of us hate imperialism

Anti War = Anti American?
Anti Bush Administration = Anti American?
Anti Imperialist = Anti American?
Pro Democratic = Anti American?
Anti Blair Administration = Anti American?
Anti Sharon Administration = Anti American?
Anti McDonalds = Anti American?
Pro Peace = Anti American?
I don't think so. More likely you can be against many or for many of these and still like America or the American people. It's the simple way to put anti war campaigneres on the back foot on the start of every debate. Proclaim them Anti American and they spen the rest of the debate arguing they are not. Same as the old 'Holocause Denier' trick!