Thread: Has the Iraq debacle made the world 'scared to help'?

With the possible election of Obama as President, we will see American intervention abroad subside noticeably. Many who now loudly complain about America's adventurism will then be lamenting America's departure from needed interventions and whining about it.

I think the US may go along with UN votes in various areas, but will no longer send troops and direct assistance, unless it's in a critical national interest.

Look for a new role of semi-isolationism by America. However, even Obama will not be able to pull out of Iraq so quickly.

There is somewhat of a 'damned if you do and damned if you don't' conundrum about an international policing role, be it carried out by the US or UN or NATO. I think that US diplomatic action to play ball with the UN will be mainly positive, but it still feeds into the same conumdrum. And, of course, the UN is far from perfect.

It still leaves the question hanging though- the Iraqi intervention can be viewed in many ways, but is pretty much seen as a failure. Has this perceived failure of intervention made the international community lose it's collective balls?

Is this good, or bad?

^I don't think there was ever a 'collective' set of balls by the 'international community,' if by this you mean the members of the Security Council basically.

Bush had is 'coalition of the willing' which lasted a bit until we found out his intel was wrong and we were lied to. Apart from that, on questions like Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Israel, I think we will continue to see polarization involving China, Russia and the US. The UK might still get behind the US, together with France and Germany on occasion, but I think the days of US-led coalitions are over for 4 or 8 years. That's a good thing.

The US needs to get its house in order.

The intervention in Iraq was never a collective effort. The international community never had any collective balls....

^ Blimey, I hope they offer you a Green card Brit.

^^ Afraid you are right, but there will never be another like Iraq, and as far as I can see it is fior the best, if another country gets in trouble then it is just tough shit and they can get their selves out of any jam they get in.
I will vote again anything that comes up for the USA to help anyone. The rest of the world can go fuck themselves, and always remember the sorry piss in the pants pussy bastards like Ray Carey and Sabang and the rest of you crying pricks when ever your country is in a hard spot... Fuck off.

Sorry to piss on your parade BG, but we're just doing fine for ourselves.

Quite a few of our ignoble citizens are feeling a bit sorry for your lot lately.

I think any western country that attempts to form a coalition, for anything, will remember Iraq.

Pretty tough to implement any sort of action (against Myanmar, for example) when half of the countries who buy into it initially, quit after a few months. Nobody likes to be left holding the bag.

When will the EU insist the generals be brought to the Hague?

Um, never. The EU is spiraling down the shitter as we speak, back to the drawing board ... again.

A dysfunctional band of villages that never got along who thought they might somehow form a gang to consolidate efforts and compete better with those countries whose citizens' heritage isn't based on hate, distrust and contempt of all its neighbors. They're busy trying to pound a square peg into a round hole at the moment and might reach some sort of watered-down consensus by 2150.

Whilst I have to agree that the EU does come across as a group of squabbling grannies quite often, going down the shitter? Well hardly.

Not meaning to rub it in, but collectively the EU enjoys some pretty impressive quality of life standards- and the benefits for the more recent members in the old eastern bloc are huge.

Of course I'm exaggerating a bit ... But the EU is struggling to define itself. The infighting doesn't help. It still doesn't speak with one voice and opinions of individual member nations are still listened to more closely than the EU.

Why would you be rubbing it in? Thought you were Australian?

Yeh, the Paddies have just thrown a spanner in the works too.

Originally Posted by Texpat

Why would you be rubbing it in? Thought you were Australian?

I don't think he understands who or what he actually is from the sounds he makes sometimes.

^ Ahem -

Originally Posted by sabang

During the 1990s, certain precedents were created. The administration of George Bush snr intervened to prevent famine in Somalia and to aid Kurds in northern Iraq; the Clinton administration returned an elected leader to power in Haiti; NATO ended the war in Bosnia and stopped Slobodan Milosevic's campaign of terror in Kosovo; the British halted a civil war in Sierra Leone; and the United Nations authorised lifesaving missions in East Timor and elsewhere.

Sure argue no international backbone in spite of the above, but look how the rigid backbone exhibited by those neo-cons provided humanitarian relief to the poor, suffering people of Iraq? Madeleine Albright makes a valid, though debatable point. It seems to me fairly shallow to dismiss it just because you vote Republican, or defend the invasion of Iraq.

Originally Posted by blackgang

Quote: Originally Posted by Texpat Why would you be rubbing it in? Thought you were Australian?

I don't think he understands who or what he actually is from the sounds he makes sometimes.

Born in UK, grew up in Oz, worked in HK & US, live in Thailand.
Hell, even my accent is confused.

If I must rub it in, the point I was making is that much of the EU uniformly ranks above the USA in quality of life surveys.

Originally Posted by Bugs

I say again all Iraq has done is give the wankers an excuse to continue to do nothing.

Madeleine basically agrees, except she's saying it's given them even more of an excuse.