Sycamore's amazing conclusion #2

elSicomoro · 03-05-2003, 08:32 PM

The UN Security Council will approve a US-UK-Spanish resolution authorizing force against Iraq. It will not be approved because all agree this is the best course of action, but for the good of the world economy. Discuss.

elSicomoro · 03-07-2003, 08:44 PM

Hmmm...maybe this one got too much of a workout in other threads. Oh well...here goes:

There will be intense saber-rattling, but I think in the end, any US resolution will go through. Although Bush said that those against war are still friends, this will no doubt be held over the heads of those countries (with the possible exception of China). It will turn into a shit-throwing economic war. We may raise some tariffs, France will do the same thing, we'll pull all our money out of Russia except for the $$$ that helps them clean up their nuclear shit. And it'll be one happy fucking party that throws the US economy into a serious recession...and when that domino falls, the others will fall in line. Oh, and let's not even go into Mexico...they may suffer the worst wrath...not just economically.

There. Short and to the point.

Undertoad · 03-07-2003, 09:41 PM

How about this one then:

- US+UK introduce resolution w/Mar 17 amendment

- FR, RU veto

- US+UK go BEFORE Mar 17

- Details of Saddam regime come out including worse horrors than originally thought

- Veto used as reason for FR and RU to be kept out of the POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS, the conspiracy theory that the left has entirely missed (what amateurs! You heard it here FIRST!)

- Veto and details of horror of regime and discovery of WMD and more nuclear development details used as reason for US to dismiss UN as irrelevant and incapable of acting to control Hussein, and thus:

- US departs UN, so that

- US+UK can act bilaterally or with new pro-US coalition to address N Korea, Iraq without UN involvement, after which

- US rejoins UN or some other new world order is determined.

Hey, it could happen.

elSicomoro · 03-07-2003, 09:55 PM

I cut back on that sorta thing...due to what I considered the unrealisticness of it. But since you marched down that path, UT, let me catch up to you:

--US cuts off all but food aid to Cameroon and Guinea if they vote "no."

--Pinochet suddenly dies shortly after Chile votes no. Hmmm...heart attack? You don't say!

--Russia and France have Bush and other members of the administration and military charged with war crimes (whether our attack is justified or not).

--US invasion of beaches of Normandy...US flag again flies over Paris...Eiffel Tower torn down and rebuilt at WTC site.

--If US invades Iraq and takes over, pro-US administration in Iraq will void all business contracts with Russia and France.

--US provides assistance to Chechen rebels.

Some are more realistic than others...but you never know.

03-05-2003, 08:32 PM	#1
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	Sycamore's amazing conclusion #2 The UN Security Council will approve a US-UK-Spanish resolution authorizing force against Iraq. It will not be approved because all agree this is the best course of action, but for the good of the world economy. Discuss.

03-07-2003, 08:44 PM	#2
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	Hmmm...maybe this one got too much of a workout in other threads. Oh well...here goes: There will be intense saber-rattling, but I think in the end, any US resolution will go through. Although Bush said that those against war are still friends, this will no doubt be held over the heads of those countries (with the possible exception of China). It will turn into a shit-throwing economic war. We may raise some tariffs, France will do the same thing, we'll pull all our money out of Russia except for the $$$ that helps them clean up their nuclear shit. And it'll be one happy fucking party that throws the US economy into a serious recession...and when that domino falls, the others will fall in line. Oh, and let's not even go into Mexico...they may suffer the worst wrath...not just economically. There. Short and to the point.

03-07-2003, 09:41 PM	#3
Undertoad Radical Centrist Join Date: Jan 2001 Location: Cottage of Prussia Posts: 31,423	How about this one then: - US+UK introduce resolution w/Mar 17 amendment - FR, RU veto - US+UK go BEFORE Mar 17 - Details of Saddam regime come out including worse horrors than originally thought - Veto used as reason for FR and RU to be kept out of the POST-WAR RECONSTRUCTION CONTRACTS, the conspiracy theory that the left has entirely missed (what amateurs! You heard it here FIRST!) - Veto and details of horror of regime and discovery of WMD and more nuclear development details used as reason for US to dismiss UN as irrelevant and incapable of acting to control Hussein, and thus: - US departs UN, so that - US+UK can act bilaterally or with new pro-US coalition to address N Korea, Iraq without UN involvement, after which - US rejoins UN or some other new world order is determined. Hey, it could happen.

03-07-2003, 09:55 PM	#4
elSicomoro Person who doesn't update the user title Join Date: Jan 2001 Posts: 12,486	I cut back on that sorta thing...due to what I considered the unrealisticness of it. But since you marched down that path, UT, let me catch up to you: --US cuts off all but food aid to Cameroon and Guinea if they vote "no." --Pinochet suddenly dies shortly after Chile votes no. Hmmm...heart attack? You don't say! --Russia and France have Bush and other members of the administration and military charged with war crimes (whether our attack is justified or not). --US invasion of beaches of Normandy...US flag again flies over Paris...Eiffel Tower torn down and rebuilt at WTC site. --If US invades Iraq and takes over, pro-US administration in Iraq will void all business contracts with Russia and France. --US provides assistance to Chechen rebels. Some are more realistic than others...but you never know.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)