Is Powell still willing to walk into that French trap ? It's going to be 11-4 against the US attack, after which Britain, Spain and Bulgary have to abandon ship. Does this man never learn ? He managed to make the first Gulf War a colossal failure AFTER the most stunning battle field victory in history and now he leads the US into a colossal defeat BEFORE the war even starts.



Bush should have acted like Clinton did during the Kosovo crisis : bypass the UN entirely.

There is an amazing parallel between the role the UN has assumed, led by France and Germany, in serving as "checks-and-balances" against Bush's leadership on in International Affairs and Defense and the role the Senate Minority Party's, led by Daschle and Hillary vis-a-vis Domestic (espe. Judicial) policy. Pure talk, pure intellectual dishonesty, and pure obstruction,

There's not going to be a vote unless Blair needs one.

Peter -- more likely 15-0 for U.S. No way there's a majority against. Why on earth would any sane country side with France and Saddam over the U.S.? Why would France want to be isolated and look like a rogue state to its voters? Anti-American talk the French voters love, but outright siding with Saddam is going a bit too far. Once it's clear the U.S. has a majority and is going in, all the holdouts will fold.

PJ - I'd like to agree. However, the story yesterday that France won't veto the resolution makes me believe a) someone else will (Russia), b) France thinks there are enough no votes to not have to bother with a veto, c) you're right (France et al cave). We'll see.

A positive vote by Turkey (are they still saying early next week for a vote?) would probably help push countries into the US camp

I stick to 11-4 against. All these countries share one goal with the French (whom they dislike, like any sane person would do) : bring down Bush, so that another feckless Democrat will win the '04 elections.



It's simple. You can get a lot of money from the Bush administration, but only if you do as Bush wants you to. They can get at least as much from a Democrat and not do as he wants, without any negative consequences (North Korea somebody ?). So in order to reach this result, it's worthwhile to put up with the French (and shake them down as well).



It's all about Bush. It's all about the US refusing to submit itself to the anointed, semi-divine bureaucrats of the UN (and their French masters, but the latter part is wishful thinking by Chirac). Why can't those Americans just hand over their money and their armed forces to Kofi Annan ?

Peter - Agreed the European left would like to damage Republicans and America in general, but when push comes to shove I don't think that will be their highest priority. A UN veto does little harm to the US - we go ahead with the war anyway, and Bush gets credit with US voters for trying the UN - but it is damaging to Tony Blair, Jose Aznar, Silvio Berlusconi, Jacques Chirac, Gerhard Schroeder, who are left disunited, irrelevant, apparently ineffective and incompetent, with damaged alliances.

pj:



Don't underestimate how badly the Europeans misjudge America--they really seem to think that Bush is vulnerable to public opinion on the war. Recall how shocked they were at the November election results.

AWW:



The Russian foreign ministry announced they will veto, but this appears to be a tactic Putin enjoys, because then he can ride in and play white knight for W.

It seems to me the most likely result is a majority vote against Iraq vetoed by Russia or China. But the veto doesn't really matter to the US, and the majority vote may be enough cover for Blair, et al.
If, as recently reported, 75% of Britains support a war with UN backing, isn't it likely that enough will consider the Russian veto, say, as illiegitimate to give Blair a strong plurality. (Remember, even in the US wars rarely have majority support before they begin.) In practice, I think a majority of the SC is sufficient, and may even be enough to save the UN (not that that is one of my goals).

China will abstain. Russia will court everyone, see if anyone has any good bribes on offer, then abstain (or, if Bush really begs, vote with the U.S.). If there's a veto, it will come from France. If France vetoes, Germany and a few other countries, mainly Africans with close EU ties, will join them. I think the two possibilities are something like 9-4 for the U.S., or else 15-0 for the U.S.