<p>I have given this additional thought. Everyone has great ideas and Xiggi has some great thoughts on going to a location such as Salzburg. But with only three days I think you should plop yourself down in a city such as Paris where you know upfront that you have zero chance of seeing it all. Just pick an area of the city or a theme to concentrate on and save the rest of the city for future visits!</p>
<p>I think cities where three days would be a good amount of time would be Venice, Barcelona, Munich and maybe Prague (don’t miss the Jewish Cemetery in Old Town) </p>
<p>Travel arrangements will play a major role in your final choice.</p>
<p>It’s interesting to hear the different takes. I find it odd that somebody would nix London because of crime and then recommend Rome, for example. I’ve been to Brussels a couple of times, and I think I would maybe give it one day.</p>
<p>I think another factor in making this kind of choice is whether you are a planner or not. If you are a planner, the big cities work very well, because there’s a lot to do, you can find out about lesser-known things, you can fill the whole day going from place to place, etc. If you’re not a planner, you might be just as happy wandering around a smaller city.</p>
<p>One other tip: if there’s a Time Out guide for city you’re interested in, I’ve found those to have more stuff about what’s currently of interest. Something like Frommer’s or Fodor’s is good for the big tourist things, though.</p>
<p>It all depends what your interests are, but if one had to visit only one European city, Rome is the the one. It’s the foundation of European civilization. It’s dirty, crime ridden and full of tourists. It’s also amazing. Literally every time you turn around, you will see incredible art and history.</p>
<p>I’ve gone over to Europe for just a few days and have, on those short trips, visited Copenhgen/Stockholm, Dublin, Brussels/Bruges, Amsterdam/The Hague, and am soon off for a brief trip to Zurich. If you nave never been to Europe, consider London or Paris. But all these cities were wonderful, as was Rome, Venice, Geneva, etc.</p>
<p>Thank you, dear CCers for the great ideas and suggestions. I’ve been to Stockholm, Berlin, Paris and St Petersburg (loved them all and would visit any of these cities again in a heartbeat given the right opportunity). At this moment, the trip is still just an idea, but it is getting closer to reality. :)</p>
LOL I love this article. I am totally going to the Olympics though and I DON’T CARE if it is crazy (especially as I have already paid for the tickets).</p>
<p>That is a really hard question…There are so many places that i want to see in Europe. I think only being able to stay for 3 days would be torture since i have never been and always wanted to go.</p>
<p>I do think it would have to be Italy though. My parents have been all over the place and they loved Italy. The said that the people were very friendly and that was a big deal for them. I would want to go to Ravenna and see some of the churches with the mosaics from before the Renaissance period. I would like to see Sicily as well just because i have heard so much about it.</p>
<p>The chance to check out all of the Italian fashions and design would be a good reason right there. Of course there are the old churches and the art from the middle ages would be incredible to see. Rome is probably packed with tourists but, what a destination that would be. So, yeah I would vote for 3 days in Italy.</p>
<p>" I’m somewhat biased about where I live (Edinburgh) because I love it here. I’d always suggest Edinburgh."</p>
<p>My husband and I are going to Scotland in September. It has been on my list for some time. We are renting a boat and traveling thru canals ( brother and sister in law are coming too ) </p>
<p>I’m very excited !
I have done short visits to several cities in Europe , most of which I would do again , with the exception of Paris</p>
<p>I’m surprised no one mentioned Reykjavik ! It’s a relatively short flight and Iceland is just spectacular in landscape…and also food. The music scene is very vibrant in the summer and it is the land of the midnight sun</p>
<p>Italy is still on my list , but not for any short trip ! This is a trip I plan to take my time with</p>
<p>We went to Oslo a few months ago and I would love to see more</p>
<p>“It’s interesting to hear the different takes. I find it odd that somebody would nix London because of crime and then recommend Rome, for example”</p>
<p>I said that (if you are referring to my post) because I have heard from several people that London is pretty dirty and crime ridden, not terribly interesting and you may as well go to NYC. Rome has problems with pick pockets, but you just keep your money in a moneybelt and you’re fine. And Rome is well worth the risk. Since I’ve never been to London, I can’t honestly compare it. I’d be curious to hear from people who’ve been to both…if you only could go to one, where would you go to? If one is more interested in going to a big city that the countryside, which would you pick, London or Rome? I have the opportunity to go anywhere, mostly for free, and from what I’ve heard, I have little desire to go to London.</p>
busdriver:
I think you need to talk to more people because I disagree with that characterization of London. Parts of it are dirty and have crime, just like almost any big city, but the central area of London is pretty decent. It’s not at all like NYC. If you like history there are a number of things to see there - Tower of London, Windsor Castle, Cathedrals, Museums, pubs, fish and chips, and more. I think you should go see for yourself.</p>
<p>But if it’s a choice between London and Rome I’d pick Rome due to the history there, being in a place where the locals speak a different language, gelato, Italian food. However, Rome is dirtier, has a lot more graffiti, has beggars, and has thieves but I’ve looked past the graffiti, ignored the beggars, and haven’t been hit by the thieves.</p>
<p>Better yet - try to add a couple of days and do both.</p>
<p>A motivated person can see quite a lot in any of these cities in 3 days, especially in the summer when it’s light out so late. It’s generally enough to cover all the major attractions. I’m not one to enjoy spending hours sipping coffee at a cafe or spending hours eating a meal and I don’t go shopping so I can see a lot in these cities in a couple of days.</p>
<p>Maybe I should check it out further, gladgraddad. I just haven’t heard people raving about London that much. My niece called me from there in hysterics because she couldn’t get ahold of her mom, out of fear…maybe she ended up in one of those bad areas. I suppose I would just carefully plan the vacation to hit the right spots. Then again, my last trip to Italy was a Rick Steves trip, where they made sure you went to all the best places, at the right times, with no crowds. That might have something to do with the fantastic impression of Italy.</p>
<p>I didn’t notice Rome as being dirty at all, was rather fascinated with the beggars (definitely gave the guy with no arms some money, he seemed so incredibly sad), never got hit up by the thieves but one in my group did…and a group member pushed the pickpocket off the bus and punched him, so it’s really more color and drama as far as the crime goes. Of course, one guy that I worked with said that a criminal stole a $20K Rolex off of his wife, which made him irate. Though I thought, first of all, who wears a 20K Rolex, plus why would you be dumb enough to wear it to Italy? I have a $2 Rolex made in China (stopped working before it even got to the states), but I wouldn’t wear that overseas, makes you a target.</p>
<p>I think 3 days are not enough for all these cities. I know only Paris and can tell you that you’ll need minimum 5-6 days to visit it but a week or two would be better ! But if you really can’t have more, I advice you to stay in Paris.</p>
<p>^^ I’d be bored silly in Paris for a week or especially two.</p>
<p>Honestly, you can see a lot of the sights in one of these cities in 3 days if you don’t spend all day long eating breakfast, sipping coffee, eating lunch, shopping, sipping coffee, eating dinner, drinking. I know that’s what some people like to do though.</p>
<p>A $20K Rolex while traveling? Not so bright.</p>