Countries of the World with the U.S.

EJO

Hellafreak
Sep 4, 2002
524
3
51
Seattle
✟8,395.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
from the news:

The 30 publicly-named governments, together with the United States, represent some 1.1 billion people, about one sixth of the total population of the world. Aside from Britain, Australia, Denmark, and Poland, the others are: Afghanistan, Albania, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Colombia, the Czech Republic, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey and Uzbekistan.
 

Morat

Untitled One
Jun 6, 2002
2,725
4
48
Visit site
✟12,690.00
Faith
Atheist
Better yet, how can you claim countries that are against war, but willing to allow overflights or use of their waters, as "supporting the war"?

I mean, as someone pointed out, Turkey's on the last, and they won't allow anything yet, despite getting offered tons of money.

What a lame list. That's desperation.
 
Upvote 0

paulewog

Father of Insanity; Child of Music.
Mar 23, 2002
12,930
375
39
USA
Visit site
✟33,938.00
Faith
Baptist
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
So, what country in this world HASN'T gotten financial aid?

We've given France, Russia, China, Arab countries, etc., all kinds of help. It's not like they have no reason whatsoever to help us ;)

Not liek we're perfect. I think it was a mistake to join the UN. hehe. Anyways, I find it interesting that not many Arab countries, if any, are against war.
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

Oliver

Senior Member
Apr 5, 2002
639
23
51
Visit site
✟15,992.00
Faith
Agnostic
Marital Status
Married
If you take this line of reasonning, then it is just as appropriate to add France in that list: after all Chirac said (more than once) that a regime change in Irak would be a good thing. Yet this is not the same thing as saying that they support the US position.

 

Likewise, if you ask the question:"who do you support in this war", then obviously the answer will be "the US" in many countries: but this doesn't mean that those people didn't prefer a peacefull solution.

 

The results you get depend on the way you express the question, so you'll get the same discrepencies here that you got with polls before: supporting the US now, but having been in favor of a peacefull solution, are not antagonistic.
 
Upvote 0

Sauron

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2002
1,390
7
Seattle
✟2,482.00
Yesterday at 07:15 AM EJO said this in Post #1

from the news:

The 30 publicly-named governments, together with the United States, represent some 1.1 billion people, about one sixth of the total population of the world. Aside from Britain, Australia, Denmark, and Poland, the others are: Afghanistan, Albania, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Colombia, the Czech Republic, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey and Uzbekistan.

1. Reads like a list of "Planet Earth's 30 Most Insignificant Countries". 

2. And of course, if you were to go through this list and cross out each one that had been bought off by a trade agreement, or a grant of foreign aid, or by a sale of military hardware, etc. you'd whittle it down pretty quickly.

3.  And finally, from among this list of 30 rag-tag microstates, how many of them are actually willing to commit soldiers to the Iraq invasion?  Hint:  you can count them on one hand - minus your thumb.

Boy - we should sure be proud. :rolleyes:
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums
Datan,

The Arab countries number something like 22 and are part of an Arab council or Arab league of nations or something of that nature. Their organisation has said they will not support the invasion of Iraq. Some of their countries are allowing US and UK troops but not giving support in the way of troops or money or whatever.

The ANZUS alliance consists of Australia, New Zealand and the USA. Australia has supported the USA based on this alliance and New Zealand have not. This treaty is in jeopardy.

Nato consists of 19 countries of which one is USA. Of the other 18 you have 8 on the list above. You have not listed Portugal who have given support behind the USA on this. Norway, Luxembourg, Iceland, Greece, Germany, France, Canada and Belgium are the NATO countries missing from your list. It looks like the NATO treaty could also be under threat.

There are 180 countries in the UN (or thereabouts) and it is divided. Looks to be under threat as well.

USA were negotiating a 75% nuclear weapons (Weapons of mass destruction) with Russia. These negotiations have been going for some time and they were expected to be fruitful by early next year. This has now been put on hold.

Its intersting this war threatens to break some of the strongest and longest runnings treaties in the world. It has also ensured that for the foreseeable future that the world will continue to very high levels of WMD's. This was is supposed to remove some of them when in fact it ensures massive amounts of them will stay in existence.

I imagine G.W.Bush thought of this and knew the consequences of his actions BEFORE committing to the invasion.
 
Upvote 0

Sauron

Well-Known Member
Jun 14, 2002
1,390
7
Seattle
✟2,482.00
19th March 2003 at 07:15 AM EJO said this in Post #1

from the news:

The 30 publicly-named governments, together with the United States, represent some 1.1 billion people, about one sixth of the total population of the world. Aside from Britain, Australia, Denmark, and Poland, the others are: Afghanistan, Albania, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Colombia, the Czech Republic, El Salvador, Eritrea, Estonia, Ethiopia, Georgia, Hungary, Italy, Japan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, the Netherlands, Nicaragua, the Philippines, Romania, Slovakia, Spain, Turkey and Uzbekistan.

This article is especially relevant:

://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dy...-2003Mar20.html

United States Puts a Spin On Coalition Numbers


The Bush administration has frequently compared the level and scope of international support for its military operations in Iraq to the coalition that fought the first Persian Gulf War. But the statements are exaggerations, according to independent experts and a review of figures from both conflicts.

[...]

However, the current operation in Iraq is almost entirely a U.S.-British campaign, with virtually no military contribution from other countries except Australia.

"It's a baldfaced lie to suggest that" the coalition for this war is greater than that for the 1991 war, said Ivo H. Daalder, a former Clinton administration official now at the Brookings Institution who supports the war against Iraq. "Even our great allies Spain, Italy and Bulgaria are not providing troops."

The administration asserts that 44 nations are part of the coalition, but officials reach that number by lumping nations providing military units or logistical assistance with an eclectic group of nations -- such as Afghanistan, the Dominican Republic, Eritrea, Honduras, Rwanda and the Solomon Islands -- that are voicing only political support. The administration further suggests another 10 or so nations support the campaign but do not wish to be publicly identified.

The first Persian Gulf War was prosecuted by a 34-nation military force, with each nation listed in the coalition contributing troops on the ground, aircraft, ships or medics. (The list is sometimes reported as 31, because four Persian Gulf states provided a combined force.) Dozens of others nations voiced support for the war against Iraq in 1991, meaning that under the standards used by the current Bush administration, the size of the 1991 coalition likely topped 100 countries.

Moreover, the list of 34 countries in 1991 did not include Japan, which pledged $4 billion to fund the multinational force and aid frontline states; the Soviet Union, which supported a United Nations resolution authorizing force; or tiny Luxembourg, which paid the fees of Dutch and Belgian ships passing through the Suez Canal.

Twenty-one of the 34 countries that contributed forces or materiel to the first Persian Gulf War -- such as France, Syria, Pakistan, Canada, Germany and Norway -- have either refused to support the current conflict or have asked not to be identified because of public opposition to U.S. actions. In 1991, for instance, France provided 17,000 troops, 350 tanks, 38 aircraft and 14 ships. Syria provided 19,000 troops in Saudi Arabia and 270 tanks, and Germany provided five minesweepers, three other ships and eight aircraft.
 
Upvote 0
i wonder how many of you could now point to those countries on a map. The only country i havent heard of until now and couldnt point to on a map on that list was Eritrea, so i decided to check out how much weight they pull as far as power is concerned

Eritrea is a poor but developing east African country. Formerly a province of Ethiopia, Eritrea became an independent country on May 24, 1993, following a 30-year struggle that culminated in an overwhelming referendum vote for independence. Tourism facilities are very limited. The capital is Asmara.

oh wow. sounds great, i wonder how much support theyre going to be able to offer, considering theyve been at war on and off with Ethiopia for the past 6 or so years.

I think thats probably the best indication of how many straws the "coalition of the *cough*willing*cough*" are clutching at. It really brings a good question up as to the actual size of this "coalition" and hown theyre being defined.
 
Upvote 0