Quote Originally Posted by Jaimecbr900
A couple of other things to remember too:

Who were the U.S. supposed to help? The country that had just kidnapped it's citizens and has been overthrown by radical Muslims or the country fighting against that??? It's a very logical answer. Would you of rather fight one weakened country 20 yrs later or 2 strong united countries then? It would have been WWIII.

The reason why Sr. had the backing of other countries in Gulf War I was because Iraq INVADED Kuwait. We beat their ass then. They surrendered. They signed a treaty which outlined specifically what they HAD to do. They didn't do it. 10 years later the U.N. was still playing pacifist about it. 10 damn years later. Not 1, not 5, 10 damn years to comply and STILL didn't. The U.N. is to blame for Iraq more than anyone else. Had THEY done what they are there TO do, this wouldn't be a unilateral fight.....it would be called Gulf War II. But as it is, the U.S. was the only one that was willing to go out on that preverbial limb and do what SHOULD have been done long ago.

Rules and laws have to have teeth or they are not worth the paper they're printed on. U.N. sanctions have no teeth. This is why countries like Iraq, Iran, N.Korea, China, and Russia wipe their asses with "U.N. sanctions". Hell, I would too if I were them. What consequences do they get? Worse interest on loans from world banks, no aid for a little bit, no voice in the U.N., maybe a big would really hurt their feelings???? The U.N. is a joke, period. They do nothing but grand stand and talk out of both sides of their mouth. They are like a chihuahua with no teeth. They can bark all damn day long, but at the end of the day nobody is really scared of them.


i really wish we wernt with them,but we might need thier help one day