[Cerek the Barbaric]

Originally posted by Rikard_OHF: Cerek the problem is although Bush did go to the UN security counsil after Powell repeatetly asked him to do so, he also said that the US can and will attack Iraq on it's own without UN support and that is very very scary because who knows who's next to be deemed evil by Bush Iran? North Korea? and then what? France maybe? or China? There are enough rulers that started out as good leaders and then turned out to be tirans

I agree that Bush committed a diplomatic faux pas with his attitude towards the members of the U.N. While most Americans agree with his decision to go to war (according to the polls), he certainly could have expended a little more effort to gain this same support among the U.N. members. I believe France and Germany would still have disagreed, but he certainly could have persuaded several others to support him if he had tried. I linked to an article that highlights this weakness in my thread about Bush's Reasoning and Logic.

AFA who's next? This is an overly exaggerated argument. We HAD an "international incident" with China just a year or so ago when one of thier fighter pilots tried to "buzz" one of our spyplanes (that was flying in international airspace). The pilot - one of China's best - had conducted this manuever many times before, but this time he miscalculated and came to close. Both planes were damaged, causing him to crash and the spy plane to make an emergency landing at the nearest airstrip - which was inside China's territory. Despite their pilot being at fault, they tried to lay all the blame on America (big surprise). They took the crew of the plane prisoner. They released them within a week or so, but refused to allow America to recover their plane. They kept it for several months, stripping it of everything inside (the crew had destroyed as much as they could - standard procedure). As tense as that whole incident was for BOTH sides, there was never any real danger of us going to war over it.

I also don't think there will be a war with North Korea (although thier leader is just crazy enough to keep pushing until we have no choice). North Korea doesn't want a war....they want money. They always have. They did this exact same "political sabre rattling" in 1993 with President Clinton. They threatened to withdraw from the nuclear agreement back then too...so Clinton sent them the aid they requested. George Bush refused to "give in" to thier tactics, so Kim has had to resort to bolder measures (firing the missile into the ocean near Japan). President Bush wasn't fazed by their threat to withdraw from the treaty, so they had to "prove they were serious" and "test fire" a missile. Despite all their posturing, the world wouldn't be hearing anything else from Kim if President Bush would send them the multi-million dollar check he wants. As distasteful as that action may be....it might be one that needs to be considered. Kim DOES have nuclear weapons and North Korea doesn't have any other "exports" to bring money into thier country. If President Bush refuses to negotiate with them, Kim is VERY likely to sell these weapons to terrorists.

As for the other countries you mentioned, America is NOT going to go to war with France or Germany or any other country just for disagreeing with us about Iraq.

Also keep in mind that George Bush can only serve as our President for a maximum of 6 more years (and could be gone after just two more years). After that, we will have a new administration in place with a new diplomatic policy.