So the UN is offering to rebuild Iraq

Ishmael

Literotica Guru
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Posts
84,005
Of course they are. Having risked nothing and done nothing they are now more than happy to interject themselves into a situation that came about primarily form their lack of action to begin with.

President Bush and PM Blair should collectively tell them to shove it up their ass. In substantially more diplomatic terms most certainly. Quite frankly I’d bring the measure before the security counsel and then veto every damn measure their collective ignorance comes up with.

Having watched the UN’s “Nation Building” skills over the past several years, Kosovo, Haiti, Somalia, Serbia, and other efforts I am certain that the US/UK alliance can at least do no worse.

Like most critical, high-risk projects, as soon as it appears that it will be a huge success, the non-participants flock around to receive the laurels. I hope that Bush and Blair prevent that from occurring. The UN has nothing to offer the people of Iraq. Nothing of any value that is.

Ishmael
 
Not so fast Ishmael. I'm not buying it.

You've pointed out inconsistencies before in this international nonsense & they cosistently turned out to be the the pursuit ofgovernment self interest.


I don't believe that the UN is just in it for the "Laurels". That is only true of porn writers at LIT.

How do I know the UN beaurocracy isn't interested in administering the money now that the "Oil for Food "program is over?
 
Someone needs to. From the Gulf War there are plenty of buildings ect still not repaired in Iraq.
 
morninggirl5 said:
French President Chirac said today that France would veto any UN resolution that had the US or Britain as administrators of the rebuilding.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,81787,00.html

Ahhhhhhhhh, the arrogance of the French.

Their wine sales is in the toilet, they've lost their lucrative "Oil for food" contracts with Iraq, as well as all the missles and spare parts sales. His countries companies must be ripping their hair out in the board rooms.

The guy is just too funny for words.

Ishmael
 
patient1 said:
Not so fast Ishmael. I'm not buying it.

You've pointed out inconsistencies before in this international nonsense & they cosistently turned out to be the the pursuit ofgovernment self interest.


I don't believe that the UN is just in it for the "Laurels". That is only true of porn writers at LIT.

How do I know the UN beaurocracy isn't interested in administering the money now that the "Oil for Food "program is over?

I'm still chuckling over your post. Watch that your tongue doesn't stick in that cheek. :)

Ishmael
 
PoliteSuccubus said:
Someone needs to. From the Gulf War there are plenty of buildings ect still not repaired in Iraq.

Guess those contracts won't go to the French either.

Ishmael
 
Since the USA is, so called, "liberating" Iraq then let the Iraqis rebuild their own place just like they want it. They have more than enough oil to pay for everything and if they need help I know the right places to shop! :D Just ask LK! He will tell you.
 
If it was up to me. I would expel all french diplomats in the US for week...a good symbolic slap in face to those ingrates...
 
You're right Ish...I think France, China, Germany, and Russia all vetoed their rights to any say in what happens with a post-war Iraq.

And today when Chirac said that France would veto any resolution that put the US and UK in charge of rebuilding Iraq I just had to laugh. Does he really think that resolution would be introduced?

And if some "UN rebuilding" resolution was introduced, it just shows the fallacy of the security council to begin with.

Instead of relying on the UN, I think the US should make a list of long-trusted allies and give them all dibs on rebuilding. It would be a much smaller list than we would have made a few months ago, but at least it's better than France re-establishing their trade in Iraq.
 
Bob_Bytchin said:
You're right Ish...I think France, China, Germany, and Russia all vetoed their rights to any say in what happens with a post-war Iraq.

And today when Chirac said that France would veto any resolution that put the US and UK in charge of rebuilding Iraq I just had to laugh. Does he really think that resolution would be introduced?

And if some "UN rebuilding" resolution was introduced, it just shows the fallacy of the security council to begin with.

Instead of relying on the UN, I think the US should make a list of long-trusted allies and give them all dibs on rebuilding. It would be a much smaller list than we would have made a few months ago, but at least it's better than France re-establishing their trade in Iraq.

LOL, you know. That is the heigth of arrogance. He's going to veto a resolution that has the US/UK alliance rebuilding Iraq.

Sanity check here. Whose army is he going to send to enforce that? His? :D :D :D :D :D

(I wonder how secure the Russians feel about their $40 billion oil infrastructure contracts today? Hmmmmmmmm?)

Ishmael
 
Do any of you watch the news? America doesn't have a lot of allies in the region. Even after GWB "liberates" Iraq-- Russia and France will have a more favorable rating. GWB is too easy to hate, especially with Sharon at his side.
 
Ishmael said:
Sanity check here. Whose army is he going to send to enforce that? His? :D :D :D :D :D

(I wonder how secure the Russians feel about their $40 billion oil infrastructure contracts today? Hmmmmmmmm?)

Ishmael

Sure...he could just get some guys off the street and arm them with white flags of glory.

I think that the Russian situation does pose a problem. $40B is a lot of money. I just hope the blackmarket doesn't suddenly see $40B worth of plutonium.
 
Bob_Bytchin said:
Sure...he could just get some guys off the street and arm them with white flags of glory.

I think that the Russian situation does pose a problem. $40B is a lot of money. I just hope the blackmarket doesn't suddenly see $40B worth of plutonium.

"For Sale: French Army Rifle. Never fired, dropped once."

I think Putin will deal in the end. We'll see. It's not in our best interest for them not to execute the contracts.

Ishmael
 
70/30 said:
Do any of you watch the news? America doesn't have a lot of allies in the region. Even after GWB "liberates" Iraq-- Russia and France will have a more favorable rating. GWB is too easy to hate, especially with Sharon at his side.

I'm very aware of the region's volatility and "hatred" of the US. But then again, under Stalin, many Russians hated the US.

There's not much you can do to combat hatred that's bred and brainwashed into a people.
 
You should run some eBay searches, for scud missiles. Don't bid, mind you, the delivery charge could be outlandish, but I think I know how Hussein has been unloading his biological and chemical munitions.
 
Bob_Bytchin said:
I'm very aware of the region's volatility and "hatred" of the US. But then again, under Stalin, many Russians hated the US.

There's not much you can do to combat hatred that's bred and brainwashed into a people.


This is why I do not buy into the belief "we brought it upon ourselves." It's funny how the presence of US troops in Saudi Arabia during the 1990's is part of what set Bin Laden off the deep end, yet the reason they were there in the first place was due to Mr. Hussein's ill advised adventure in Kuwait.

Clinton had a policy of trying to be more sympathetic to Middle East opinion, and the terrorist attacks continued. I wonder how many Muslims are thankful for the intervention in Bosnia and Kosovo...? I'll agree that there is much work to be done and I don't subscribe to the kill all Arab theory, but there is a certain group of Islamic Facist that do not understand anything but being slapped down.
 
LukkyKnight said:
You should run some eBay searches, for scud missiles. Don't bid, mind you, the delivery charge could be outlandish, but I think I know how Hussein has been unloading his biological and chemical munitions.


Something unusual for a fathers day gift... LOL
 
How about permanently gagging Inhofe, Warner, McCain, Roberts, DeLay, Hastert, Ari, Cheney, Wolfowitz, Perle, Rumsfeld..for starters. America barely supports the Republican Party platform (if it truly does)--it's especially not popular around the world. GWB can't be a hardliner. His attitude doesn't allow him to be a uniter domestically even worse abroad. Until he can stroke some egos, gain some trust, and appear even-handed (esp religion) we'll run into roadblocks all along the way.

Stalin died in '53. Reagan won the cold war (lol) in '89. BTW--how do Russians rate America in 2003?
 
Back
Top