no it's a world wide reduction in co2 levels to 1990 levels, not just for first world countries.

it works like this. third world countries need to increase co2 levels right now as they are still having the industrial revolution and do not have the technology that we do to make the a clean process for them. so to make up for this we reduce our co2 levels by more than they increase their's thereby leaving us with a loss in co2 levels to the 1990 levels. this process is then continued and when the third world countries they too then drop co2 levels and everyone is happy. it's not an attack on america it's a fair way of not flooding and killing millions while letting developing countries develop. you may not like it because it sees your fat wallet go a little bit thinner and you may not be able to buy that new oversized tv. now that is a shame puts the great plight of little timmy the african boy who hasn't eaten for 8 days right in persepctive that does. never mind kyoto i've just realised how harsh this entire thing is for america.

and what "real threats" do you have which are more important than making this planet inhospitable?

america has horrific food wastage in both it's industry and homes. wasted food = wasted money = money that could have been spent not killing this planet off.

are you really in the mind set that kyoto will destroy your country? cripple you and put you on your knees?

this argument is not about harming the us it's about not destroying this planet which i guess will harm the us (which i'm all for when i realise how disregardent it is on matters such as this). so meh you're gonna be dameged what ever way you look at it i guess.

i live in a country that isn't the richest nation in the world and we are pulling it off nicely thank you very much. not on our knees with a crippled economy. noone has answered me why if scotland can manage it so effeciently why can't a nation as big, powerful and rich as america follow an example of a country as small as mine?