It's the balance of powers theory and nothing else

[Kropotkin]

So? They probably believe that they will gain something from it. But that might be a futile hope as the US under Bush jr. has not shown much will to act with someones interests beside its own in mind.


So what does the US need Blix for? They can clearly fabricate their own evidence.

[Kropotkin]

Since the US is acting selfless to promote the rule of law, human rights and democracy, I severely dought that the rest of the world will be against the US.

A superpower never acts selflessly. At least not when it comes to something as big as this. You can't really believe that, can you?

[Lancer]

"So what does the US need Blix for?"

Kropotkin, good question, exactly nothing. Blix came down middle of the road every time he went in front of the UN. In order to achieve the middle of the road he burried real evidence in the back of reports, insread of raising such issues as is his job. He did everything but his job...

[DanS]

So? They probably believe that they will gain something from it.

Were you talking to me?

I was merely pointing out that if your theory is correct, then a credible balance would be evident in the current situation. But it's clear that there is no credible balance.

[Kropotkin]

It was a joke there Lancer, that rushed past your brain in 150 mph. Blix seems to have got a lot of bad press from the start, as soon as he got the job. I can't really say if it's possible to actually estimate the quality of his work as most evaluations to me says a lot more about the evaluaters prior opinion on the issue at hand. But that's just my two cents.

[Kropotkin]

Yes I was talking to you. Well, No. My theory would be proven false if in fact nations always acted in a stict, rational way. However, this is hardly the case. Not that this in any way proves my hypothesis either though. Maybe they think they will gain from it. I think they will be screwed by Bush the next time they need him. That's my theory.

[kolpo]

"I was merely pointing out that if your theory is correct, then a credible balance would be evident in the current situation. But it's clear that there is no credible balance."

No because humans aren't computer programs who react instandly, it can takes years or even decades before nations react. It is a slow process in which the relations with the big unbalancing nations slowely worsen. Directly after WWII wheren't the relations between the US and the USSR as bad as they where later, it took some time for the balance of powers to take effect.

Take for example Britain, I think that the labor rebels won't be able to stop UK participation in this war, but the next war the UK joins(againsts North Korea or Iran for example) will the rebelion raise even more, and the war after that even more, until it has become so big that the rebels win and break the alliance with the US. It doesn't happen instantly, it is a slow process.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kropotkin

So what does the US need Blix for? They can clearly fabricate their own evidence.

It is simply unbelievable that there are people who buy Saddam's drivel.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kropotkin

A superpower never acts selflessly. At least not when it comes to something as big as this. You can't really believe that, can you?

With Saddam, now, he is a threat to Israel, a threat to Kuwait, Saudi Arabia and to the whole Gulf region. He is a threat to the US and to the world because of this.

He is also a threat to hand bio weapons to a terrorist in order to attack the US. In fact, I think the anthrax attack just after 9/11 may be linked to Saddam.

No, our national interests are involved in disarming Saddam.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kropotkin
It was a joke there Lancer, that rushed past your brain in 150 mph. Blix seems to have got a lot of bad press from the start, as soon as he got the job. I can't really say if it's possible to actually estimate the quality of his work as most evaluations to me says a lot more about the evaluaters prior opinion on the issue at hand. But that's just my two cents.

Kropotkin, I find it very interesting that Blix did not conduct one interview outside Iraq where the whole family was also outside Iraq.

He seemed to accept interviews with monitors or tape recorders present or in bugged International Hotels as an Iraqi "initiative."

Outrageous!

[DanS]

My theory would be proven false if in fact nations always acted in a stict, rational way.

No doubt. However, I would point out that nations do act in rational ways much of the time (or at least the successful ones do). Given this, a good number of countries would "fall in line" rather than contribute to the counterweight.

Overall, I'm skeptical that this will be a bipolar world. The only country that will be strong enough to do this will be China. Is Europe going to ally with China against the US and Japan? I doubt it. Rather, it might sit out this round...

[Kropotkin]

I do agree about the bipolar world not being likely. If there will be any US against the world situations in the future it will probably be more in the form of temporary alliances formed our of a specific situation, not a solid block. After all, overall Europe has more in common with the US than with China for example. China, however might see opportunities to play the US against the EU on some issues.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Kropotkin
I do agree about the bipolar world not being likely. If there will be any US against the world situations in the future it will probably be more in the form of temporary alliances formed our of a specific situation, not a solid block. After all, overall Europe has more in common with the US than with China for example. China, however might see opportunities to play the US against the EU on some issues.

Kropotkin, the split between France, Germany and the US is because Saddam played us like a fiddle. A year ago, the attitude of most Americans about the French and Germans was very positive. Today, it is highly negative.

Even Kissinger said that we simply cannot forget what happened and go on. He said we have to review the fundamentals of our relationships and alliances.

I agree. So do most Americans.

The world has changed. Humpty Dumpty has fallen off that wall. All the Kings horses and all the Kings men cannot put Humpty Dumpty together again.

[St Leo]

4 out of the G-7 countries are explicitly supporting US action on Iraq. As long as that happens, there will be no counterweight.

Japan, Italy, UK, and...

Canada isn't explicitly supporting US action. In fact, we are actively trying to prevent US action in a way that won't get us boycotted by Yankistani rednecks and neocons.

[DanS]

Japan, Italy, UK, and...

G1. The US, of course.

2 out of the G3. 4 out of the G7.