Precisely the point was that the world has not stopped watching and that what the US does and does not do MATTERS. One outcome is NOT the same as another, one strategy is NOT the same as another. If the UN is brought in and blue helmets, if the rest of the world had a stake and even felt that they had a say in what happened, then even if it all went to hell it would be the worlds failure, not just the US.

What I am saying is that the only difference is what criticism of us will happen. There is no “bring in the UN strategy” because that ship has sailed. The U.N. isn’t coming in. Neither is NATO. Not this time. Bush screwed the pooch on that possibility years ago. No other country in the world wants a stake in this catastrophe and I’m not about to blame them. So whatever strategy is followed concerning the presence of the United States military in Iraq will belong to the United States alone because it has already become obvious that the Iraqi government is incapable of getting its act together in any reasonable time frame.

From now on, I do not ever want to hear Aemrican liberals praise the UN, favor an international approach, etc. You’re a freaking superpower, when you invade a country, you mess with the entire world.

Michael, it wasn’t the American Liberals who got us into Iraq. All well and good if the Conservatives are now on board, but it’s been a Conservative Administration & Congress that has mis-managed this war and thumbed it nose to the opinions of the wold that made you angry to start with.

If you’d notice Michael, I didn’t dismiss what you said, but pointed out the Catch-22. We’ were blamed before we went into Iraq, we’re being blamed now, and we will be if/when we leave.

I more of less agree with Jason, I’d be happy to hear some actual constructive plans on Iraq.

NO. THE RESPONSE IS : WE KNOW!!! Now, please allow us to struggle with the horrendous decisions to be made.

Frankly, it’s insulting to imply that the US needs to be instructed in what is obvious.

How anyone could imagine that we need reminding about this set of dire consequences or the opposite set of dire ceircumstances is beyond my comprehension. Americans came down from the trees some time ago.

the response: we don’t care.’

No. That’s what you heard. Any nation will put its own interests firsts. It’s the NIMBY phenomenon on a global scale.

But, as others have pointed out, other nations will bitch one way or another.

Account for that.

Please distinguish between seeking dimplomatic relationships and international cooperation on the one hand, and kowtowing to world opinion on the other,

i never said you should do what europe says. i never, never said that. that’s not mine, nor lynx’s point. the point is only: you have to take it into account if you advocate withdrawal and this is what world opinion will be like.

the response: we don’t care.

At this point when the situation is not only dire but quite possibly irretrievable, inviting the UN and other countries in would be nothing more than a US effort to share the blame for failure.

I am willing to listen to world opinion. Please someone out in that big world come up with a solution to this Iraq mess. I read about 70 International papers daily and I have yet to see a solution by the pundit class overseas. Do you know of one I’ve missed? So far all I have seen is commentary about the US being hoisted on it’s own petard (deservedly). It is my contention that there is no solution to the Iraq mess and that all the US is doing is postponing the inevitable civil war so Iraq, like the US and other countries, can have the civil war necessary to find it’s natural equalibrium of power, distribution of resources and borders.

Only insofar as it serves to frame how those in the world’s peanut gallery will criticize the USA next. Currently there is criticism of any show of US force, anywhere, and pathological hatred of Bush (similar to what we see here in the States too often, including here on “TLV”), but even if we were doing totally humanitarian and social work associated with sanctions on a still-in-place Hussein regime, under President Carter’s second, late term, the Usual Suspects would be bashing us (including, regarding Husssein, that we were in bed with a dictator, etc.).

Please distinguish between seeking dimplomatic relationships and international cooperation on the one hand, and kowtowing to world opinion on the other,

The US never stops listening to the world’s many opinions, and it never should.

However, the US alone bears the responsibility for the consequences of its decisions.
The US alone has to sift through opinions to see which are useful and which not.

Telling the US what to do (go left/right,) is not useful in tiself unless along with the opinion come offers of help or useful advice .

One has to be able to deal with the complexcitiies of international relations. It isn’t as simple as you posit.

How many other nations, who don’t have America’s economic heel to their throats, ever say, ‘Geez, I wonder what that dumb ass Bush thinks about what [insert other nation's foreign policy or legislative body] does?

That would be zero.

Yes, I would love to be stuck on an Island with the Swedish Bikini Team, but what Lars Everysdottir thinks of what or country does ranks about 567th on the top 500 things I worry over.

Precisely the point was that the world has not stopped watching and that what the US does and does not do MATTERS. One outcome is NOT the same as another, one strategy is NOT the same as another. If the UN is brought in and blue helmets, if the rest of the world had a stake and even felt that they had a say in what happened, then even if it all went to hell it would be the worlds failure, not just the US.

It is a discussion that I think is worth having, in addition to others on pure military strategy, and it’s sad that there isn’t an interest in it.

Michael, let’s put this another way. How should world opinion factor into our decision at this juncture?

And here is another question for you: Would the opinion of the U.S. around the world fall more if we stayed and it continued to be a disaster, or if we left and it was a disaster?

There is simply no way for us to account for world opinion on this issue when decisions are made. Why? It’s called Catch-22. Frankly, it doesn’t matter what we do because world opinion will be against us no matter what. As you said, fair or not that’s the way it is. That’s the way it’s going to be for the foreseeable future. There is not one thing the United States can do to avoid it. So why shouldn’t we shrug and move on?

If they do start contributing more than just automatic condemnations, then I for one would be more than happy to “weigh it”.

From now on, I do not ever want to hear Aemrican liberals praise the UN, favor an international approach, etc. You’re a freaking superpower, when you invade a country, you mess with the entire world.

These comment sections have left me frustrated and even angry. It’s unbelievable. europeans should read these comments…

I’m happy that conservatives do seem to get it – although for now mostly in e-mails. Lynx, if you’re still reading this: frustrating isn’t it?

However, I have no doubt that we will get out the same way we got in- America is the proverbial bull in the china shop, and we never just leave quietly with minimal damage done. Its not our style, unfortunately.

Excellent point, Chris. Like it or not, we do bear at least some of the responsibility, because Iraq would not be in the middle of a civil war, had we not made the rash and foolish decision to invade and take out their army, police and civil service.

A valid point. But lets return to the Pottery Barn rule (which by the way doesn’t exist).

If you break a vase at the Pottery Barn, do they really expect you to sit down with glue and repair it?

Of course not. And if you manage to break 3 more as your trying to repair the first, it’s a good bet they’ll ask you to leave.

And if some nag next door starts saying how horrible it is that you left that broken vase, the manager of the Pottery Barn isn’t likely to care.

As for oil- we are still BY FAR the largest oil consumers around.

Somebody: First you argue it’s the Iraqis probs to solve, then you argue that ‘There are lots of things that can be done or tried. Leaving would certainly accomplish none of that.’ Which is it?

Kim: ‘We could withdraw to the bases and to the Kurdish region to protect the part of the population that has never been mixed up in the civil war.’

Hmm….now who said that earlier in the thread?