My impression (nothing more than that) is that all the countries involved would definitely have openly pledged support but that the support would have been weak at best.
They were profiting greatly from Iraq at the time and weak support at the end would have let them continue to profit to some extent without a great degree of risk. (And be clear that we're no better: the US has definitely supported monsters in power to further our own agendas - let's not forget where Saddam acquired many of his arms.) As it stands those countries can claim, to varying degrees of accuracy, that the US led action was illegal, hot-headed or just plain impetious. This action did not pass the "Global Test" as Kerry meant it (or, in fact, as the Bush campaign painted it). Jim Davis -----Original Message----- From: Gruss Gott [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: Tuesday, November 02, 2004 3:57 PM To: CF-Community Subject: Re: Bin Laden shows his ugly face > Jim wrote: > But it's a good bet that those > countries, while being unable to challenge the action reasonably would have > still failed to fully support it. The way I view the situation, they were ready to commit, but wanted to let the weapons inspectors finish. It seems to me that Mr. Bush allowed them the only out they could've gotten from the diplomatic box Mr. Powell had put them in. Purely academic, of course, but then why would you say they voted yea on 1441? Certainly they would've expected to be held to account for their vote. ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Purchase from House of Fusion, a Macromedia Authorized Affiliate and support the CF community. http://www.houseoffusion.com/banners/view.cfm?bannerid=38 Message: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=i:5:133743 Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/threads.cfm/5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/lists.cfm/link=s:5 Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5 Donations & Support: http://www.houseoffusion.com/tiny.cfm/54
