OFKU0

Sorry for asking, but who or what are the Frogs?

I think many countries would be interested in preparing troops for a U.N backed mission if only to provide stability to the region which the U.S has failed to do. Could also show the needed allies support for the U.S in less direct ways than at the beginning of the war. A U.N presence could extend a vision of global support to the Iraqi's which is needed.

Of course if the U.S takes umbrage at that notion (current administration) and sees themselves as being undercut or as failures they will have to live with the consequences. Might as well just start calling Iraq, Vietnam right now.

I think it would be a good out for the Americans to relieve some of the image problem they are having,especially in the mideast and also a good chance for Bush to concentrate on America, which he seems to be the least preoccupied with as commander and chief..

One other reason I think the U.N can't get there fast enough was today's development with Bush supporting Sharon's vision of a Palestinian state. The Arab world sees they are excluded from any talks concerning their future which looks like nothing more to the Arab population like the U.S and Israel are conspiring against them.

I said it before and I'll say it again. George Bush lacks any and all diplomatic resolve. Not trying to hijack the thread, but really now, with the Arab world already seething at the Americans, did Bush just assume that not inviting the other member of the peace process, the Palestinian prime minister, that it wouldn't be a concern to the Arabs?

The Americans are not getting any respect and shouldn't expect any if that's the way they choose to do business concerning those in the middle east. The U.N jumping in immediately would be best suited for all involved IMO.

__________________
" In Canada, you can tell the most blatant lie in a calm voice, and people will believe you over someone who's a little passionate about the truth." David Warren, Western Standard.