Re: questions for discussion

Well, now we're clear, and I do kind of disagree with you.  First of all, France and Russia (and China), at least this week are much more important than Germany, which doesn't have a security council veto.  So far France, Russia and China are not on board.  Schroeder has little choice but to retain an anti-war position.  He won an election on it.  When was the last time a US president won an election on any sort of foreign policy issue?  Reagan against Carter, I think.

I think you are seriously underestimating the European left.  It is large.  And it is completely opposed to a US war.  It just isn't the same dynamic as in the US, where to have a movement of any substance, a lot of people would have to really change their views.  So I think you will see Europe start to move away from the US--if not this war, which could possibly be short and 'easy' from the US perspective (or not, and could certainly wind up being an unpopular occupation) then the next one (which, if this one is short and easy, Bush will undoubtedly embark upon).  I am not sure exactly what a US-Europe split would mean.  Would Europe rearm?  Would they become much more aggressive about taking a different political/economic/diplomatic tack?  Should be interesting.

Steven Sherman