Discussion in 'Europe' started by NATO AIR, Nov 9, 2004.
the frenchies wiped out their "newly built" air force, two russian jets and three helicopters...
What??? All is not perfect under French government?? How can that be??? Surely they realize thhat the good citizens of the Ivory Coast don't need or want French intervention. It must be all about the oil!
I'm glad they formed a large coalition and asked the security council for permission.
a coalition that ties one of france's hands behind its back when it comes to fighting back and doing what must be done
Of course, that is the normal template when the UN is involved.
my how i have realized the fatal flaw of the modern UN in the past 18 months or so... i used to think their style was a good thing, boy was i ever wrong. this is a textbook example
The UN, like most utopian ideals, falls apart rather quickly when put into practice. The problem with utopian ideals is that they fail to take into account human nature and man's propensity to display his personal flaws at every opportune moment (greed, arrogance, cruelty, etc.).
i have thought the formation of an emergency coalition structure would be a good idea, something along the lines of RESCUE international, the retired military officer coalition that comes together in various crises like sierra leonne and darfur to try to formulate realistic, effective measures to stop the killing and bring the responsible parties to justice.
to clarify, the US being the leader and different nations operate within the structure depending on the situation... violence in burma, the US supports intervention with Australia, India and Singapore. violence in darfur, the US supports intervention with S. Africa and Nigeria. violence in uzbekistan, the US supports intervention with Russia and Turkey.
Such a coalition would only hold together as long as the interests of the coalition partners are aligned. When national treasure and blood are involved, look for every nation to try to protect it's own interests and further its own agenda; some more boldly than others.
true, that's why i only keep the US in at all times. we should abandon the permenent alliance structures we have built, they are outdated and only hinder and slow any meaningful effort these days. however, the framework for coalitions of the willing should be developed and continually upgraded.
btw, the US being involved every time doesn't necessarily mean we have to put troops on the ground in every case, but logistical support, intelligence gathering and air superiority are vital aids to any noble effort, and we excel in these fields like no one else.
Separate names with a comma.