Does anyone have any idea which countries he means? Or is this on the level of Ford’s comments on eastern europe?
Well, there’s Britain of course. As well as Romania.
There are rumors that Andorra may throw the full weight of its support behind us.
What about Spain and Italy? They have been supportive of Bush in the past…while they may not donate many troops to the situation, they could be diplomatic allies.
Well the Irish government is behind you. We’re currently letting US military planes land and refuel in Shannon airport.
Ok the government has been brought to court over it and public opinion is pretty much against a non UN sanctioned action and our politicians are starting to “threaten” negative consequences from US multinationals if we don’t let the US use us as a pre-staging area for war.
Oh and it seems some of the big boys are stirring aswell
I think that “vast” may have been creative hyperbole, but as has been shown by others, the number of European countries supporting the US is far from trivial. It belies the myth that the US would be “going it alone”.
Jeff
Even if France and Germany accede to action against Iraq, they have never planned to participate in the fighting. So, Andorra’a support is militarily no less important than France and Germany’s opposition.
IIRC I saw something on CNN this morning about Australia sending a ship over to the middle east. I think it had to do with sending a symbolic message of support or something. Next time I’ll watch TV with the volume on.
World Eater as you can see from the thread below that this action does not indicate popular support either.
http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?s=&threadid=158275
… except insofar as it would be US dollars and US troops alone that would be spent and put at risk. In those non-trivial cases we would be going it alone, right?*
*With the minor exception of token support in these areas from the UK.
Support in countries that “support” the US is pretty weak anyway. What was the US’s approval rating this week in Britan - 20% or something along those lines?
I have no doubt that the Andorran Chasseurs battalions will be as much help this time as the use of German airfields and the participation of French Armor was in ‘91.
Look friends, there is a saying in the lawyering business: If the facts are on your side, argue the facts; if the law is on your side, argue the law. When you don’t have law or facts, beat on the table. The Bush Administration has been beating on the table since this thing began.
Don’t forget Poland-
Tadeusz Iwinski, top foreign policy adviser to Polish Prime Minister Leszek Miller:
“There is much greater understanding for US administration policy among new NATO members than among old members.” He added, however, that “all NATO memebrs are equal and we must not forget that Germany takes over presidency of the Security Council in February and all decisions will be taken under its leadership.”
Are there a vast number of countries in Europe? Several, maybe, but a “vast” number? I count 33 countries on this map: http://europa.eu.int/abc/maps/index_en.htm
33 is not a vast number. 33, IMHO, could be described as “several” or even “many,” but “vast”? I think not.
Don’t forget that unlike the last gulf war, US is going to have to pay for this one alone, regardless of political support.
Turkey supports the US, albeit reluctantly – and in so doing may jeopardize its secular government.
Denmark supports the US. And dont forget that it was the Danes who turned the tide in the 30 Years War!
So we’ve got Poland, Romania, and a waffling Britain, right? Well goddamn, what more could you ask for?
Well, with France’s Ecology Minister shocked speechless over Rummie’s remarks, looks like we’re all in real touble now…
“‘If you knew what I feel like telling him, to Mr. Rumsfeld …,’ French Ecology Minister Roselyne Bachelot said on Europe-1 radio. She then stopped herself and said the word would be too offensive to publish.”
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030123/ap_on_re_eu/europe_us_1
I personally appreciate her magnanimous display of self-restraint. We can all learn something from her…
Well, yes, but pretty much everyone accepts that as a given. If every nation in the world hopped on the “Invade Iraq or Bust” bandwagon, it would still be primarily US forces and US equipment going in. From what I typically understand of most people’s uses of “going it alone”, however, they’re referring to the level of agreement amongst our allies, not the level of help they’re going to give us. And I’ll further offer that aside from some much-appreciated aid from England and the use of a few military bases in the middle east, we really don’t give a rat’s ass who gives us actual, physical support. I suppose a troop or two of French soldiers might be nice as a gesture of solidarity, but certainyl nobody’s going to miss them if they aren’t there. Or, for that matter, notice.
Jeff
I was about to link the yahoo article myself. I think a war would be foolish but what truly astonishes me is the incredible incompetence of the Bush administration when it conducts its foreign policy and makes its case. Do they want to lose every important ally the US has? Can’t they find a less inflammatory way of expressing diagreement? Why is Rumsfelf mouthing off on what is a diplomatic matter anyway?
The fact is that one year after Bush first brough up the Iraq issue public opinion in the US hasn’t moved towards supporting a major ground war . Neither has world opinon. The administration will be able to arm-twist some governments into offering grudging support but the US will have to pay a diplomatic price. Even in terms of grudging support there aren’t “vast” numbers of European countries backing the US as far as I can see. More like a handful.