I am in no way implying we need approval or a permission slip from the UN to fut-her our countries interests.
But the PR disaster of unilaterally going into Afghanistan and having the 9-11 attacks passed off by Al Qaeda and the world as retaliation for our attacking Afghanistan would mean we would never have gone into Iraq.
Bush would be blamed for the deaths of 3,000 Americans in NY and beaten over the head with that to the point I don't think he would have pressed for an invasion of Iraq,
And if he did invade Iraq in that environment, and no WMDs were found he probably would get impeached for reckless and dangerous behavior as commander chief.
So I'll say it again:Could you imagine what would have happened if we had invaded Afghanistan before 9-11...We were saved from a major PR blunder by our own incompetence. -Tom
I will concede that 9/11 galvanized this country to action as no other event could have. If Clinton had been more of a leader, we could have used the bombings of our embassies in East Africa to marshall world and domestic support.
I take objection to your use of "PR blunder" as a reason not to take action. When our vital national interests are at stake, I want a President who will take action regardless of how it may affect the polls or our international standing or the personal consequences. One of the functions of leadership is to lead and build a national consensus. Clinton saw foreign policy as an extension of domestic politics and acted accordingly. We are reaping the whirlwind due to Clinton's failures.