US prepared to go it alone - allies warned.

[Transcend]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Of course this unilateral U.S. policy could suit a lot of allies and neutrals down to the ground - let the U.S. do all the heavy lifting whilst they sit back and enjoy the benefits

That's very reasonable.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Transcend
Digging your head into sand like an ostrich is of course a good solution.

A solution to what? You seem to forget that we have no problem.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Sikander
We will provide plenty of evidence to the public at large once the military significance of that evidence has lessened, and we are assured that we can protect our sources.

I hope that information won´t turn out to be as true as the famous 'Saddam´s soldiers killed babies in Kuwait' story.

Or the Tonking Gulf incident which never happened.

[Transcend]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


A solution to what? You seem to forget that we have no problem.

No problem? Do you little Austria depend on foreign resources or not? If that's the case, isolate yourself from the rest of the world will not help you. You better realize that entire Western countries are sitting in the same boat. Al-Qaeda is not going to distinguish between an American and an Austrian(or shall I say German?). They are all the same: Christian infidels.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Alexander's Horse
Of course this unilateral U.S. policy could suit a lot of allies and neutrals down to the ground - let the U.S. do all the heavy lifting whilst they sit back and enjoy the benefits

I don´t think so. If they really flatten Iran, Europe is just going to lose a good business partner. How would we profit from that?

[Transcend]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


I don´t think so. If they really flatten Iran, Europe is just going to lose a good business partner. How would we profit from that?

Fool! You profit by rebuilding Iran, just like America profited by help building up Europe after WW2!

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Transcend
They are all the same: Christian infidels.

Do you really believe that?

AlQuaida bombed you for two, and only two, reasons:

1) US troops stationed in Saudi Arabia.

2) US unconditional support for Israel.

Please believe me this one thing at least: No one, and I mean: No one in Austria thinks that any Muslims are going to attack us, now or ever.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Transcend
You profit by rebuilding Iran, ...

Even if that were true (which I doubt), this sounds like a pretty cynical motive to help destroy a people who never did us any harm...

[Alexander's Horse]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


I don´t think so. If they really flatten Iran, Europe is just going to lose a good business partner. How would we profit from that?

simple. They bomb it and take all the flak and casualties. Then you come in as the good guys and rebuild it.

Americans don't seem to realise how they are hurting themselves international in so many ways, including trade and investment wise. I wouldn't be surprised if a few big U.S. companies like the oil giants didn't end up going in to tell the Administration to tone it down.

Another example is travel. The list of countries U.S. citizens could not dare visits grows longer by the day. For what?

This is really silly stuff.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune
I hope that information won´t turn out to be as true as the famous 'Saddam´s soldiers killed babies in Kuwait' story.

Or the Tonking Gulf incident which never happened.

That's the sort of 'information' that you get in real time when a government wants to justify it's actions. There were good reasons to intervene in Kuwait and Viet Nam, whether you agree with the actual policy developed or not. In both of these cases we were allied with a government which did not meet Western Standards of humanitarian conduct in many cases against other governments which were probably worse, for realpolitik reasons. Because of the tendency for fairly large portions of the Western World to believe that the only valid reasons for foreign policy are humanitarian reasons we needed to humanize our allies and vilify our enemies to sell what were in fact realpolitik policies to the moderate left.

Our task is much simplified in the case of the "war on terror", because chasing down these murderous SOBs is merely self-defense which 98% of the public understands. Expanding the war to Iraq will be a tougher sell, as it fits more properly into the realpolitik type war than a war of self-defense (with the information that is in the public sector as of now anyway). Either the administration will have to show some evidence that the Iraqi's are doing more than merely defying the terms of the armistace, or it will face a more difficult time selling the operation to the American people and the RoTW.

[Grrr]

Say red_jon, wheres the banana option.

[Comrade Tribune]

Originally posted by Sikander
Either the administration will have to show some evidence that the Iraqi's are doing more than merely defying the terms of the armistace, or it will face a more difficult time selling the operation to the American people and the RoTW.

Of course it´s mostly the US that defies the terms of the armistice, or does the armistice allow bombing raids?

To the American people, you can sell anything, which these threads amply prove. Rotw: Mission Impossible. You are just going to breathe new life into the Shanghai agreement.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


Do you really believe that?

AlQuaida bombed you for two, and only two, reasons:

1) US troops stationed in Saudi Arabia.

2) US unconditional support for Israel.

These are their stated purposes, but the Palestinian cause was added to their list fairly recently, and seems to be a cynical ploy to take advantage of the current support for the Palestinians on the "Arab street".

The strategic goals of Al Qaida are not the ones stated, but to replace secular governance in the Arab world with religious governance, with of course the leadership of Al Qaida playing a prominent role. U.S. troops hundreds of miles from Mecca are not an affront to Islam under even the most militant interpretation of the Q'uran, but are perceived as a real obstacle to the overthrow of the secular regime in Saudi Arabia.

[Sikander]

Originally posted by Comrade Tribune


Of course it´s mostly the US that defies the terms of the armistice, or does the armistice allow bombing raids?

We agreed to halt military action while the Iraqis met their obligations under the agreement. When they refused to do so, we felt no compunction to to fulfill our obligations under the contract without consideration. The contract has to be observed by both sides, or neither side is obligated to it. Thus we find ourselves in a continuing state of war with Iraq. If they are tired of that, then they can get rid of their WMDs, which are not feeding a single child or effectively protecting their country from the U.S. anyway. If their government is not meeting their needs, then they should replace it. Every nation pays the price for it's leadership.

[Roland]

Overall I welcome the "unilateral" approach, as well as the stunning hubris and arrogance of the US oligarchy. About time to set the things up for a clean divorce.

If the US wants to make ad-hoc alliances, Europe has to make up its mind: Do we still want a formal alliance that is of no benefit to us ? The "No" will be slow to come as long as jerks like Schröder, slimeballs like Blair and utter morons like Chirac are in power, but it will come. I also have little interest in seeing europe as part of a paranoid militarist "security" doctrine.

I've been of that opinion for a long time; sept 11th made me reconsider, post sept 11th confirmed this view. Time to move on.