Bush Sees the Light (Blue Flag)

[Krusher]

Originally posted by Gixer
I would like to know the real polls as to how popular the war in Iraq is with Americans at the moment. Is the popularity increasing or decreasing? As the news we have here, is that it's decreasing quickly along with Bush's approval rating.

the latest poll shows 71 percent support the actions in Iraq

[StSanta]

Krusher, that may be the American view (I think there is a substantial minority that disagrees with it though). Bush already has the American public convinced however. To get UN support he has to mend fences with those holding different views.

And those views are basically that the US unilaterally went in because they could, disregarding the opinons of many countries, without a clear UN mandate (one can argue about whether resolution 1441 permitted armed agression, but what is clear is that it is substantially different in language compared to the resolution given before the Gulf War I).

Am just trying to tell you how it's percieved over here. As always there's three sides to a story - yours, mine and the truth. Failure to understand this very basic rule of human interaction leads to problems.

This is the view that Bush will have to come to terms with and handle. Now Bush to me seems to be a 'sticking to his guns' sort of guy. Dig in and defend, right or wrong, but especially if he thinks he may be right. So it's gonna be a tough sell.

[Toad]

Originally posted by -tronski-
East Timor

 Tronsky

Following widespread international pro-test at the paramilitary rampage, and gov-ernmental pressure—particularly from the United States, Australia and Portugal, theUN Security Council authorized a multina-tional force (INTERFET) under the uni-fied command structure of a member state,Australia, to restore peace and security. TheUN also launched a large-scale humanitar-ian operation including food supplies andother basic services.On October 19, 1999, the IndonesianPeople’s

From Here

US President Bill Clinton, insisting that ''fundamental (US) values'' were at stake in East Timor, Thursdayordered 200 US troops to take part in the UN peacekeeping force to restore order to the devastated territory.

From Here

And Thrawn, "action" as opposed to debate. The sort of thing where UN troops interpose themselves directly between parties that are shooting at each other, where the UN troops shoot back at those breaking the peace. Combat, in other words.

You know, like what the Dutch Battalion did in Srebrenica.

Now before you get on your high horses to defend DutchBat, read this, which is the point:

The report also blamed the United Nations of giving an "unclear" mandate to the Dutch peacekeepers, thus indirectly bringing on the tragedy....

But it added that any action by the soldiers to defend Srebrenica would have been "contrary to UN instructions."

From Here

That's why the UN is a debating society. They've sent troops lots of places. Almost always without the authority to actually DO anything.

As Tronski points out, East Timor was one of the very few exceptions to that standard operating procedure. And even there, it's clear the US played a motivating role and even supplied the Communications troops.

[Dowding]

And even there, it's clear the US played a motivating role and even supplied the Communications troops.

Which is a world away from the 'The US is the UN' argument. The East Timor counter-argument still stands.

[Toad]

Yeah, Dowding... there's ONE example.

Congrats.

[Dowding]

I didn't realise you had specified a 'winning' number. Should I buy another ticket?

[Toad]

Here's what I said that Tronski quoted:

Toad:

The UN has almost NEVER taken any actual "action" anywhere, anytime. The few times it has actually acted, it's been following the leadership of the US.

He came up with ONE example, East Timor, and even that involved strong US backing in the SC and some US troops. (I'd have thought a reasonably modern military like the Australians could handle their own comms, but apparently we had some capability they couldn't or wouldn't provide.)

Looks like what I said still stands, unless the US is doing the acting, the UN is a debating society.

[Dowding]

In terms of peace keeping committment, is the US contribution dis-proportionate? I'm interested in exactly what you perceive the level of involvement should be to remove this horrific burden.

The UN is a talking shop... but some might say that talking is generally preferable to throwing HE around. Or at least it used to be.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Dowding
The UN is a talking shop... but some might say that talking is generally preferable to throwing HE around. Or at least it used to be.

So we agree, then. It's a debate society.

Preferable to throwing HE around? I guess that depends on where you're standing.

I wonder what you're position would be had you been a Muslim male in Srebrenica in 1995. Would you still be asking the UN to debate a bit longer? Or would you have asked for some HE to be thrown around?

[Thrawn]

Originally posted by wulfie
How about you get his description of 'action', then respond as if you were given a different description.

Mike/wulfie

I was unclear if he ment any sort of military action, such as peacekeeping, apparently he did.

Using that critieria here are the "few" times the UN Security Council has "acted".


Current UN Peacekeeping Operations
Region/Country Duration
AFRICA
Western Sahara April 1991–present
Sierra Leone Oct. 1999–present
Democratic Republic
  of the Congo Nov. 1999–present
Ethiopia and Eritrea July 2000–present
Côte d'Ivoire May 2003–present
MIDDLE EAST
Middle East May 1948–present
Golan Heights June 1974–present
Lebanon March 1978–present
Iraq/Kuwait April 1991–present
ASIA
India/Pakistan Jan. 1949–present
East Timor May 2002–present
EUROPE
Cyprus March 1964–present
Georgia Aug. 1993–present
Kosovo June 1999–present
     
     
     
     

Completed UN Peacekeeping Operations
Region/Country Duration
AFRICA
Congo July 1960–June 1964
Angola Dec. 1988–May 1991
Namibia April 1989–March 1990
Angola May 1991–Feb. 1995
Somalia April 1992–March 1993
Mozambique Dec. 1992–Dec. 1994
Somalia March 1993–March 1995
Rwanda/Uganda June 1993–Sept. 1994
Liberia Sept. 1993–Sept. 1997
Rwanda Oct. 1993–March 1996
Chad/Libya May–June 1994
Angola Feb. 1995–June 1997
Angola June 1997–Feb. 1999
Sierra Leone July 1998–Oct. 1999
Central African Republic April 1998–Feb. 2000
MIDEAST
Middle East—1st UN
  Emergency Force Nov. 1956–June 1967
Lebanon June–Dec. 1958
Yemen July 1963–Sept. 1964
Middle East—2nd UN
  Emergency Force Oct. 1973–July 1979
Iran/Iraq Aug. 1988–Feb. 1991
AMERICAS
Dominican Republic May 1965–Oct. 1966
Central America
  Observer Group Nov. 1989–Jan. 1992
El Salvador July 1991–April 1995
Haiti Sept. 1993–June 1996
Haiti July 1996–July 1997
Guatemala Jan.–May 1997
Haiti Aug.–Nov. 1997
Haiti Dec. 1997–March 2000
ASIA
West New Guinea Oct. 1962–April 1963
India/Pakistan Sept. 1965–March 1966
Afghanistan/Pakistan May 1988–March 1990
Cambodia Oct. 1991–March 1992
Cambodia March 1992–Sept. 1993
Tajikistan Dec. 1994–May 2000
East Timor Oct. 1999–May 2002
EUROPE
Former Yugoslavia Feb. 1992–March 1995
Croatia March 1995–Jan. 1996
Former Yugoslavia
  Rep. of Macedonia March 1995–Feb. 1999
Bosnia & Herzegovina Dec. 1995–Dec. 2002
Croatia Jan. 1996–Jan. 1998
Croatia Jan. 1998–Oct. 1998


Toad, you said, "The few times it has actually acted, it's been following the leadership of the US."

Do you have any evidence to back up that statement?


Edit:

"Since 1948 there have been 56 UN peacekeeping operations. Forty-three of these operations have been created by the United Nations Security Council since 1988. Thus far, close to 130 nations have contributed personnel at various times; 89 are currently providing peacekeepers. As of March 31, 2003, the top contributors of military and civilian personnel to current missions were: Pakistan (4,236), Nigeria (3,318), India (2,742), Bangladesh (2,644), Ghana (2,176). In 2003, there were 14 peacekeeping operations underway."

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0862135.html

[Dead Man Flying]

Originally posted by DmdMac
I'll take a discourse in literature and the nature of man over poli sci anyday.

How'd I miss this gem?

I hate to rain on the ignorance parade, but discussing political current events is not political science.

-- Todd/Leviathn

[DmdMac]

Originally posted by Dead Man Flying
How'd I miss this gem?

I hate to rain on the ignorance parade, but discussing political current events is not political science.

-- Todd/Leviathn

Ah, ok. Well, the private life pace has picked up so I would stay for some noggin thumping enlightenment, but I don't have time.  If I find the time and the motivation to learn more about poli sci I will, but it's low priority because I'd rather not become so frightfully insipid.

[straffo]

Originally posted by Dago
Facts and evidence have already come to light proving these countries were selling banned items to Iraq in violation of UN resolutions.  

Good , now show me the evidences.

[Toad]

Originally posted by Toad

And Thrawn, "action" as opposed to debate. The sort of thing where UN troops interpose themselves directly between parties that are shooting at each other, where the UN troops shoot back at those breaking the peace. Combat, in other words.

Now, how many in your laundry list included extended combat operations?

The DutchBat is the example;

 "the United Nations of giving an "unclear" mandate to the Dutch peacekeepers, thus indirectly bringing on the tragedy....

But it added that any action by the soldiers to defend Srebrenica would have been "contrary to UN instructions."

When the going gets tough, they send for the sonsabeeches.

Yeah, there've been LOTS of "Peacekeeping" operations. How many UN sans-US "stop the killing using any/all means necessary" operations have their been?

[Thrawn]

I think I might understand what you are trying to communicate though.  If you mean, "There are very few times the UN SC has directed the UN member states to used all necessary force to enforce a UN SC resolution, and the US has led them', I would agree wholeheartedly.

There are only two that I can think of.  The Korean War, and the Gulf War.

If this is the case, my question to you would be, what resolutions would you have like to see the SC ask the UN member states to use all necessary force to enforce?