What if the US loses the UN vote?

[DanS]

I don't think the U.S. will have any problem purchasing Chile's vote. Pakistan will sign up once we remind them that we're giving them a pass on supporting terrorists and selling nuclear weapons to our enemies.

If so, then the US seems to have a winning hand. I doubt that France is willing to pony up much money to take away any of these votes. I'm skeptical about Pakistan, though.

[Dauphin]

Originally posted by Ramo
Why do y'all need anyone special to challenge Blair? Isn't his approval rating in the 30%'s?

Thats the party ratings - not unusually low given the parliamenary system is not a PR system, and its still higher than the Tories.

[Shi Huangdi]

The USA will go to war anyway. I am pretty sure if Bush makes the case to the people that the UNSC is being unreasonable and that the action is nessecary for our security, the people will come around and support the war.

[Dis]

On a related note.

What are the best websites for the upcoming war. I'm looking for stuff that shows troop placements and such. although I would hope that they aren't too detailed- or Iraq would look at them. But I want to keep up with every battle if I can.

[Chris 62]

Pakistan is a sure thing Dan.

Mussy needs Uncle Sugar support, or Bin Laden's boys will wipe him out, France can't help him.

[Spiffor]

I think France is actively looking for support as well. Maybe even more than the US (I wonder what we gave to Russia for it to back our position ?).
To the US, this whole UN charade has been a painful formality, which ended up badly. To France, it is central in the prestige of the French diplomacy, as the only counterweight against the US.

But the most probable outcome will be :

- a watered down resolution in the words, which practically allows the US to attack, but gives enough rhetorics for Chirac to save the face.
- Calm and backstagey negociations between the US, France and Russia, so that nobody vetoes the whole deal, and everyone finds an acceptable win in the situation.
- Germany makes an ass of itself by voting against the war alone (China will abstain)
- Iraqis get slaughtered as planned

[SlowwHand]

Re: What if the US loses the UN vote?

Originally posted by chegitz guevara
What if, after the US makes it's presentation, it loses the vote. I don't just mean if France, China, and/or Russia decide to veto. What if we lose the majority vote?

The President addressed this already.
It would be nice if the U.N. finished what they started, but otherwise looking like the U.S. and the Brits.

All others just stay out of the way, please.
Thank you so much.

[DuncanK]

I agree. France will definitely want a say in post-war Iraq. Chirac wont care, because he's not running again. Blair is as good as done politically as the Bush administration goes around telling the whole world that we will attack Iraq no matter what Saddam does. Bush will probably not be reelected either as it looks like a bad economy before the election.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by DAVOUT


Wrong place again ! Not Avenue des Champs Elysées, Palais de l'Elysée where Président Chirac is living.

Chinese embassy? You said the Chinese embassy?

[Spiffor]

Re: Re: What if the US loses the UN vote?

Originally posted by SlowwHand
All others just stay out of the way, please.
Thank you so much.

It looks so much better with a "please". I would almost stand out of the way

More seriously, I mean it. Had Bush's diplomacy not been so brash and humiliating for its vassals allies, the war would have started already, with UN approval.

[SlowwHand]

"King of Cowards".

[Spiffor]

DuncanK :

Actually, I think Chirac cares. He is precisely at the peak of his political career : after decades of petty politics, he managed to get to the absolute power in France : an opposition in shambles, a ruling party completely at his will.
French presidents always want to enter history books, and Chirac has now 4 years to enter history next to De Gaulle (his official inspiration) and Mitterrand.

Since he cannot do well on the internal level, because recession lurks and France is simply too small to do anything about it, he has to do everything on the external level : new dynamics in Europe and building his cherished Common Foreign and Security Policy, showing determined opposition to the US' hegemony, etc. Pretty much everything De Gaulle would have done

(this offsets of course his freedom-killing laws, the greater repression against alienated minorities, the resurgence of brainless flagwaving, the destruction of the welfare we hold so dear etc.)

Chirac might end up accepting a compromise with the US, but it would mean the US will give quite some power to France in another area of the world.

[DanS]

I think France is actively looking for support as well. Maybe even more than the US (I wonder what we gave to Russia for it to back our position ?).

Trying to act as a counterweight to the US sounds to me like an expensive proposition.

Chirac might end up accepting a compromise with the US, but it would mean the US will give quite some power to France in another area of the world.

Why would the US compromise very much with France?

[CerberusIV]

This whole thing is looking like a done deal. It is just whether a form of words can be found that lets everybody off the hook.

Blair has gone too far to back down now. If he does he might as well resign. So the UK will go to war. Blair has just won the vote in the House of Commons by 400+ votes to 124 on Iraq having reached the final chance to disarm. If the UN now votes Iraq has not complied and military action is possible, that's it, he is clear to go ahead with the UN approval. It has been Blair even more than Bush who has needed UN clearance all along.

What matters now is whether it is a short clean war or a long bloody one.

[Sten Sture]

Originally posted by DAVOUT


Wrong place again ! Not Avenue des Champs Elysées, Palais de l'Elysée where Président Chirac is living.

I was talking about this special ops squad: