Quote:
Originally posted by Djinn Raffo:
Virtually every nation on Earth was behind the United States after Sept. 11th. Everyone sympathetic and willing to contribute to the war on terrorism. In a short year and a half Bush's policies have divided the world. He turned worldwide well-being and a willingness to work with the United States into contempt. If that isn't bad statesmanship then someone please explain to me exactly what it takes to become a failed statesmen.
|
Yes, they were behind us, but when it came to a course of actions the disagreements began.
Bush didn't convince the world that Saddam has had long enough to disarm and that he is a threat, but that doesn't mean that he didn't try, or does the lack of world support relieve him of his responsibilities. He's got a job to do, and in my opinion and the opinion of @70% of Americans he is doing that job now.
Quote:
Originally posted by Djinn Raffo:
Quote:
Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:
but it didn't work.
|
Sounds like failure to me.. 
[/QUOTE]Are Chirac, Schroeder, and Chretien failed statesmen because they didn't convince the coalition not to act. Are they somehow successes for standing with their population on the subject while Bush is a failure for doing the same thing? Think about it?
[ 03-26-2003, 12:57 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]