The answer is pretty obvious, and Mary Anne hit the high points. At the risk of playing the parrot, following is yet another answer to this terribly unanswerable question:
1) troops,
2) money,
3) additional stakeholders who were commited to making Iraq come out all right,
4) additional targets to share the terrorism backlash,
5) additional voices to deter the terrorists,
6) fewer voices calling America a 600lb gorrilla,
7) more people to support our subsequent diplomatic proposals in the UN,
8) more reasons for the terrorists not to say it is just America that is the problem,
9) happier American citizens (those who give a shit about the morality of starting a war),
10) etc?
I'm sure if I continued to sit here I could think of a few more advantages to multilateralism, but I'm out of patience with you.
Current Events » in reply to I don't. you're the one that didn't answer it
All right, knucklehead
The whole thread (41 posts)
- Bush U.N. speech persuades few
- Meanwhile: Baghdad Blasts Undermine Bush Bid for Iraq Backing
- Bush refuses to kiss U.N. ass
- Why did he address the UN, then?
- can't answer a simple question can you?
- re: Why did he address the UN, then?
- Perhaps you are asking the wrong question
- re: No
- Why did he address the UN, then?
- Bush’s U.N. fiasco