That's, right Tom!
The impact of "sternly-word statements" depends solely on the credibility of the nation making them. Bush didn't destroy our credibility by issuing stern warnings without backing them up; he came up with the novel approach of issuing insincere stern warnings. Iraq discovered that getting a stern warning from Bush accompanied by sincere (minimally-smirking) assurances that "war is a last resort" is in fact Bush's folksy (or passive-aggressive) way of declaring war. If war is a foregone conclusion, why bother listening to the stern warning? The smart money gets ready to fight.
You're right too, that negotiation won't work. Not for Bush, anyway. He's perceived now as speaking with forked tongue, and it seems like most of the world just enjoys giving us a hard time to piss us off. Why would anybody cooperate with America now, after five years of getting kicked by arrogant neocons? Good for Bush, turning the Conservative complaint that "the whole world hates America!" into a self-fulfilling prophecy.
Current Events » in reply to "Those sternly-worded statements would have worked if not for Bush"
re: "Those sternly-worded statements would have worked if not for Bush"
The whole thread (16 posts)
- The U.N.'s Secret Plan for Iran?
- The UN is planning to bore them to death with dull speeches.
- Wasn't North Korea doing this last year. Maybe they're taking turns. (n/t)
- One of the most hypocritical issues out there.
- MORE W/M/D B.S.!!!!