Thanks for taking time to address this rationally.
I also wish the US had found a way to make a UN resolution happen. I truly believe that part of the reasoning behind not waiting any longer is the weather. In a short time it will be just too hot to operate heavy equipment and or wear chemical suits in the desert.
This does sound like a reasonable explaination, though the fact that I hadn't heard it until now leads me to wonder why I hadn't heard it until right now, considering how closely I've been following things.
I have to say that 'acted more diplomatically' in your statement is vague. I believe that no matter what the US brought to the table, the French were prepared to veto.
For what it's worth, I beleive that the extremist attitude of the French government has been over the top. Anyone who knows a good number of french people knows that 'stubborn' doesn't really do them justice.
However the same could be said of the US's position on this. The US was too quick to let out that they were going to go to war with Iraq with or without the backing of the US, leading some nations to cally take an adversarial stance. As evolved and enlightened that we all pretend to be, nobody likes to be bullied.
The current coalition is larger in number (over 40 nations) than the previous Iraq coalition (roughly 30 nations). Just different players this time.
If the French did not have veto power I think the resolution to the resolution would have passed.
You may be right, although I haven't seen the full list of countries that comprise this 40 nation coalition. Surely the lack of support from some of the worlds more (for lack of a better word) important countries counts for something.
Do the French and where they stand today in the political spectrum warrant veto power? What was the true reason for Frances decision to block this action? Politics, economics? Does it matter? At this point no.
I agree. Whether France deserves thier veto or not is a debate for another time. The fact of the matter is that at this time they currently have it. I for one am surprised at the anti-French sentiment that is being endorsed by the US administration, considering that there are other manny other countries who do not share the US's views on this war. Something doesn't stack up.
The US's military power seems to have blinded them to the fact that 250 (or so) million people still represents a rather small minority compared to the 6 (or so) billion people that represent the total population of this planet.
I agree in part with this. It would be great to have a truly equal society where people in countries in Iraq, Saudi Arabia, and anywhere else where leaders are not elected by the people could do so. It would be great to have that 20-20 hindsight in the present to avoid future pitfalls. I'm beginning to feel, more and more, that the US needs to rethink it's involvement in the worlds problems. I know that isolationism isn't the answer but it is tempting.
Obviously, I think the answer lies in the US deferring to the judgement of the UN, EVEN when said judgement doesn't necessarily agree with the wishes of the US.
I mean, let's be realistic. More often than not the US's interests and the UN's interests are going be compatible. There just needs to be the perception internationally that the US obeys the UN, not the reverse.