How's this for collateral damage?

[Troll]

War in Iraq seems to have had an affect on other nations.;)

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/104/wash/Reality_check_Other_axis_natio:.shtml

[quote]
North Korea now says multilateral talks about its nuclear program which the United States wants are not a bad idea after all. Iran's former president, long allied with Islamic hardliners against the ''Great Satan'' America, is advocating a referendum on renewing ties with the United States. [quote]

Seems people were right. This whole thing did change the way others view us. Now they take us seriously. ;)

don't worry, one day France and germany and Russia will be taken seriously too. :p

[MRC_Hans]

Surely that must have been one of the important goals of the campaign: To set an example and show other "rogue" governments that business can become very serious. In fact, I think it is probably the most important outcome.

Hans

[iain]

Troll,

When it comes to finding WMDs you want to wait for a few months and see what's found (fair enough).

But when assessing the international political impact of the war you feel that an article written whilst the war is still in progress is worthy of being seriously considered as evidence. I'm guessing that if the article had not supported your point of view you wouldn't have posted it.

[MRC_Hans]

Well, as everything else, this article must be viewed critically, but I think this must have an effect on how dicators all over the world are going to play their cards in the immidiate future. It has now been shown on several occasions that there is both will and ability to intervene, and any dictator with even a rudimetary sense of reality (and Saddam Hussein may not have been in this category) must take that into account.

I do not think this is a matter of being for or against the war. The war was waged, and any positive outcome remains positive, whatever your overall standpoint. - Just as any negative outcome remains negative.

Hans

[iain]

Originally posted by MRC_Hans
Well, as everything else, this article must be viewed critically, but I think this must have an effect on how dicators all over the world are going to play their cards in the immidiate future. It has now been shown on several occasions that there is both will and ability to intervene, and any dictator with even a rudimetary sense of reality (and Saddam Hussein may not have been in this category) must take that into account.

I do not think this is a matter of being for or against the war. The war was waged, and any positive outcome remains positive, whatever your overall standpoint. - Just as any negative outcome remains negative.

Hans I agree this is nothing to do with being for or against the war. What I disagree with is proclaiming the effect to be positive (or indeed negative) whilst the war is still going on. It is just far too early to tell how things will work out.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Troll
War in Iraq seems to have had an affect on other nations.;)

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/104/wash/Reality_check_Other_axis_natio:.shtml

[quote]
North Korea now says multilateral talks about its nuclear program which the United States wants are not a bad idea after all. Iran's former president, long allied with Islamic hardliners against the ''Great Satan'' America, is advocating a referendum on renewing ties with the United States. [quote]

Seems people were right. This whole thing did change the way others view us. Now they take us seriously. ;)

don't worry, one day France and germany and Russia will be taken seriously too. :p

IIRC, NK has been after talks with the US before this war, it was the US who was refusing them. This was due, partly, to NK wanting some handouts in return for behaving itself.

Prior to this, NK has tried to do something similar with it's nuclear reactors, but the US has not kept it's side of the bargain.

[ceo_esq]

Originally posted by a_unique_person
IIRC, NK has been after talks with the US before this war, it was the US who was refusing them. This was due, partly, to NK wanting some handouts in return for behaving itself.
I believe the situation was that the US wanted NK to enter into multilateral talks under the aegis of the UN. NK refused to work through the UN, saying it would only agree to bilateral talks directly with the US, and the US said no.

[ceo_esq]

Originally posted by iain
Troll,

When it comes to finding WMDs you want to wait for a few months and see what's found (fair enough).

But when assessing the international political impact of the war you feel that an article written whilst the war is still in progress is worthy of being seriously considered as evidence. I'm guessing that if the article had not supported your point of view you wouldn't have posted it.
While there will certainly be a long-term political impact that is too soon to assess, I think the United States ought to capitalize on the immediate political impact of the war - because, as we saw after Desert Storm, some of the immediate feelings, impressions and memories of a short war begin to fade quite rapidly. The United States (and the Bush reelection team) need to take a reading of the initial impact of the war and then strike while the iron is hot, if they're smart.

Accordingly, I don't think it's too soon for an analysis of the immediate political response (as we saw in the linked article) to be useful.

[Jim_MDP]

IMO, we should just roll West...Iraq to Syria then Israel.

Ok, just kidding, the Syrians might actually see reason. Not much hope for the Israelis. :(

[Troll]

Originally posted by iain
Troll,

When it comes to finding WMDs you want to wait for a few months and see what's found (fair enough).

But when assessing the international political impact of the war you feel that an article written whilst the war is still in progress is worthy of being seriously considered as evidence. I'm guessing that if the article had not supported your point of view you wouldn't have posted it.

iain, as with every action or inaction there are immediate and delayed results. We went to war. Immediate result is removal of regime from power. Delayed is finding objects in a fairly decent sized area that could be hidden anywhere.

WMDs may take time to find, if there are any. Syria, Iran and North Korea changing their tunes are a more immediate affect of the war.

And as to the posting of something that supports me or my views, how often have you or anyone ever posted something that opposed them? Human nature, bud. Human nature.;)

[iain]

Originally posted by Troll
And as to the posting of something that supports me or my views, how often have you or anyone ever posted something that opposed them? Human nature, bud. Human nature.;) Depends what you're trying to achieve. If your aim is to "win" the debate by convincing others that you are correct, I agree fully with your strategy.

If on the other hand you are trying to keep an open mind and get closer to the truth then filtering out articles you disagree with and only referring to ones that support your view might not be the best strategy,

Like most folks here, I think I do a bit of both (as you say, human nature). I have posted material that I found thought provoking but didn't actively support my opinions (I think I did so yesterday); you are probably right that I haven't posted things that directly discredit the opinions I hold at the time.

What I haven't knowingly done (and I'm not saying that you have, but some people have) is to post something as fact, knowing that it is really opinion and many intelligent opposing opinions also exist.

[Troll]

Originally posted by iain
Depends what you're trying to achieve. If your aim is to "win" the debate by convincing others that you are correct, I agree fully with your strategy.

If on the other hand you are trying to keep an open mind and get closer to the truth then filtering out articles you disagree with and only referring to ones that support your view might not be the best strategy,

Like most folks here, I think I do a bit of both (as you say, human nature). I have posted material that I found thought provoking but didn't actively support my opinions (I think I did so yesterday); you are probably right that I haven't posted things that directly discredit the opinions I hold at the time.

What I haven't knowingly done (and I'm not saying that you have, but some people have) is to post something as fact, knowing that it is really opinion and many intelligent opposing opinions also exist.

I didn't post anything as fact. I posted one person's observations. I happen to agree with those observations if in fact those events are occuring at this time.

[iain]

Originally posted by Troll


I didn't post anything as fact. I posted one person's observations. I happen to agree with those observations if in fact those events are occuring at this time. And I specifically said that I wasn't saying you had done ;)

[Troll]

Originally posted by iain
And I specifically said that I wasn't saying you had done ;)

And I'm aware of that. I just reiterated that point prior to making my main point of posting someone else's observations. I wasn't on the defensive. ;)

[UnrepentantSinner]

Originally posted by Troll
War in Iraq seems to have had an affect on other nations.;)

http://www.boston.com/dailynews/104/wash/Reality_check_Other_axis_natio:.shtml

[quote]
North Korea now says multilateral talks about its nuclear program which the United States wants are not a bad idea after all. Iran's former president, long allied with Islamic hardliners against the ''Great Satan'' America, is advocating a referendum on renewing ties with the United States. [quote]

Seems people were right. This whole thing did change the way others view us. Now they take us seriously. ;)

don't worry, one day France and germany and Russia will be taken seriously too. :p

Hopefully this means that Iran will get rid of the Revolutionary Council and join us.

And no... I'm not being sarcastic. Naming Iran to the "axis of evil" was a mistake IMO. This is a nation of people (the ruling Mullah's are a write off) that should be engaged, not marginalized.

[Troll]

Originally posted by UnrepentantSinner


Hopefully this means that Iran will get rid of the Revolutionary Council and join us.

And no... I'm not being sarcastic. Naming Iran to the "axis of evil" was a mistake IMO. This is a nation of people (the ruling Mullah's are a write off) that should be engaged, not marginalized.

I agree with the naming of Iran as part of the axis of evil being a mistake. I'm glad to see someone else agree with that aspect pertaining soly to Iran. I'm merely guessing here, but I think part of the reasoning behind it was that they are so close to what can be percieved as a democracy as opposed to the others and we knew we were heading for Iraq and adding Syria to the list later that I think it was all a ploy to push towards a more friendly and open relationship that forces a nations hand in showing support and not merely saying it and then harboring those that oppose it.