If you think about it, the considerations you make about Iraq (freeing the country, establishing democracy) are more or less the same as some old considerations about Vietnam, and look how it turned out to be.
For example there are some issues far MORE important, such as the Kioto anti-pollution treaty, and the International Penal Court, that Bush decided against.
What America showed by saying no, is that they just don't consider themselves as part of this "world", as if those problems aren't just their problems.
One asks: weren't they supposed to be an interested party also?
After all, America has a fair share of pollution quota, and even made several times pressure on Russia not to sign this Kioto treaty.Why?
On the other side, America also was VERY reluctant to consider military action in Europe during the Bosnia civil war, in spite of numerous requests, or in East Timor.
As allways it's the dubious actions (some call it diplomacy) that ruins everything.
And as to the ever increasing role the U.S. has had, those dubious actions (conflit of interest/promises not fullfiled) in several regions of this World (Africa/Middle East) provoked anger in a lot of people.
|