Quote:
Originally posted by FlyingIguana
i haven't been against the war, i have always been against how it was handled by both the states and the UN.
|
It's not often that wars are started in a way where people feel it was handled well.
Consider the start of World War I. One could draw the conclusion that even a small regional conflict can become a world event under the proper circumstances.
One could also draw the conclusion that Austria could have acted unilaterally and quickly by invading Serbia under the obvious pretext. Acting unilaterally may have avoided the wider conflict. Instead they took a month trying to act multilaterally asking for and receiving assurances from Germany that if Russia became involved Germany would come to their assistance. France would become involved if Russia did by treaty and so on. Everyone got scared and mobilized kicking in all the war plans and treaties. The rest is history.
Sometimes delaying and acting multilaterally can be worse than acting unilaterally.
Are there any circumstances where France could have been brought to the US position and vice versa? I don't think there was in which case diplomacy was doomed from the start.