quote:
Firm holds or influence in multiple governments around the world display how the country results to intimidation tactics. There was a vote in the U.N. several years ago about sanctions and supervising Iraq. One South American country on the board, I think it was Chile, voted against it. The U.S. representative later told the person "That is going to be the most expensive vote you ever made." You see, the U.S. was on the verge of giving them some 800 million or something for the basic necessities. So the government tries to sway other countries with promises of money or business trade.

That is called bribing. A country in need feels that if their people are to do better, then they must vote with Americans. And then again, there was that ultimatum Bush gave following 9/11. "You are either with us, or against us on terrorism."
Or, it's called "contract."

You, as individual, are free to give or not give your money to individuals with whom you agree, and to not give your money to indviduals who do not agree with you, or actively work against your interests. For example, I doubt you'll be spending much hard earned money on Coulter's book.

Why is it any different for the United States? Why shouldn't the United States give aid to allies as opposed to opponents? Should the United States simply throw money blindly at other nations, without regard for those nations' policies and how they impact our own beliefs or perceived interests?

Both Iraq and Kyoto are examples of this. And, in the case of Kyoto, I spend several paragraphs explaining why Kyoto was NOT a good thing. Rather than address that, you simply return to "well, Europe wanted it."

Why do you assume that Europe wanted it for anything other than its potential to devastate the American economy? Why do you assume that Europe's attitudes towards us are uniformly benign or not, at least, motivated by Europe's own economic self-interest?

In fact, your entire post seems based on the misapprehension that getting Europe (with its history of colonialism, regency and continued anti-Semtism) to go along with us is automatically good, and any interest we have is automatically bad if Europe decides that.

Which does seem a little like knee-jerk anti-Americanism.