http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_the_Willing is the list
More than forty countries have been involved at one time or another: US, UK, South Korea, Australia, Japan, Ireland, Spain, Italy, Poland, Hungary, Romania, Denmark, Georgia, El Salvador, Netherlands....Lots and lots and lots.
Hardly the 'Unilateral' attack the Libs keep talking about. They keep using that word. I don't think it means what they think it means.
Enjoy the link!
Orion
EDIT: Fran seems to have missed that most of NATO was involved...Perhaps she should go and look up the countries involved in NATO.
And why not the UN? Oh yeah, that's right. There were 12 UN resolutions authorizing us to use force in Iraq, plus the fact that they were violating the Cease-Fire in place from the First Gulf War...So much for 'illegal war' (whatever the heck THAT is).
2nd EDIT: Here's a list - I've broken it down to non-NATO (23 nations) and NATO (18 nations) for those of you who think NATO should've been involved. I think 18 of 27 nations (2/3) counts as 'involved'...Don't you?
NATO:
USA
UK
Denmark
Iceland
Italy
Norway
Netherlands
Portugal
Spain
Czech Republic
Poland
Hungary
Estonia
Bulgaria
Latvia
Slovakia
Lithuania
Romania
NON-NATO:
South Korea
Australia
Georgia
El Salvador
Azerbaijan
Mongolia
Ablania
Armenia
Bosnia/Herzegovina
Macedonia
Kazakhstan
Moldova
Ukraine
Japan
Thailand
Honduras
Dominican Republic
Nicaragua
Singapore
New Zealand
Philippines
Tonga
2007-02-25 11:17:51
·
answer #1
·
answered by Orion 5
·
0⤊
2⤋
First of the 1st gulf conflict replace into between the U.S. (additionally U.N.) against Iraq because of the fact Iraq invaded Kuwait all we did replace into take returned Kuwait and provide it returned to the human beings of Kuwait. we've been hopping returned and forth we armed and knowledgeable OSAMA BIN weighted right down to combat off the soviets in Afghanistan. And in some unspecified time interior the destiny after being close with Iran for a super sort of years we would have enjoyed a regime replace in Iran so we offered Iraq a set of weapons alongside with alot of the chemical weapons that we went in to locate because of the fact the inspiration for this maximum recent conflict alongside with tanks and helicopters. i dont comprehend it the two yet i comprehend the international doesnt want a police tension and it damn properly should not be us because of the fact we are terrible at it. terrible
2016-10-16 11:51:41
·
answer #2
·
answered by ? 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The coalition countries. And those who didn't have the guts to openly declare war against the jihadists. The war in Iraq is only the tip of the iceberg. What is your point?
2007-02-25 11:13:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
A big coalition.
The main allies include Britain, Australia, Canada, Poland, and many others. However, it is a lot to name, instead, I'll post a link to a site that lists all of them, and what they gave:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coalition_of_the_willing
2007-02-25 11:13:51
·
answer #4
·
answered by Chopper 4
·
1⤊
1⤋
You mean help to drag the USA into the war.
2007-02-25 11:20:57
·
answer #5
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
1⤋
Well all the countries we could bullie into it....or wanted a part in the oil...This should have been a NATO action or none at all.
2007-02-25 11:11:47
·
answer #6
·
answered by Frann 4
·
1⤊
2⤋