The US, The UN and Iraq

george

You're a good guy but you obviously didn't read Berlin's famous essay with any care at all (it isn't terribly easy, that's true) and your post above suffers for that.

But do read the New Yorker piece I just linked. Steve earlier made the point that the near world-wide good will towards the US that arose after 9-11 has been almost entirely wasted and reversed. That ought to be understood, for the lack of understanding it will do no one's grandchildren a good turn.

Ah, Dys, that reminds me of a congressman speaking on the floor at that time:

You say Gre-nay-dah
I say Gre-nah-dah
Gre-nay-dah, Gre-nah-dah
Let's call the whole thing off ! ! !

No. Like North Korea, Pakistan, India, Iran, Indonesia, and some other Muslim countries. c.i.

I understand your position, but I tend to think that the relevance of the UN is directly proportional to the force it is willing to put behind any sanctions or resolutions it passes.

What I would like to see:

No War

1) A stable, non-belligerant Iraq, participating to mutual benefit in The World Community

2) A significant lessening of instability and violence on the region.

3) An International Oversight and Direction of Recovery and Development Administration of Iraq's Petro Assets in the interest of Iraq's People.


The only one I at all am confident of is Number Three.
While many of the "Justifications" for the war, and criicisms of the war alike, are valid and to the point, a blatant "Ripping Off" of Iraq's Petro Assets makes neither economic nor diplomatic sense. The basis for such a International Administration is in place, and includes The UN, which already administers the current "Humanitarian Aid for Oil" program. Even The Current Administration is constrained by that simple reality. It simply is not a factor. Far greater near and long term benefit and advantage are to be expected from integrating Iraq's economy with The World Market Place. To not recognize and acknowledge this is disingenuous.

I expect a quick, relatively "Cheap" effective military victory in the event of war. I expect a rather difficult near-to-mid-term Post-War Administration of Iraq, among the responsibilites of which will doubtless be some military "mopping up". I expect tension in the region will be unlessened despite Iraqi "Regime Change", and both Turkey and Iran could very quickly become inconveniently self-interested players. Other Arab States well may experience considerable domestic instability. This of course hinders the direct addressing of the question of a Palestinian Nation. Saddam goes away, nobody "steals" Iraq's oil, and unrest and violence will yet, and for some time to come, plague the region and require significant "Western" Military Presence.

That isn't very good business either, but it is a better business plan than simply appropriating Iraq's Assets. That plainly offers no cost/benefit gain, political or economic.



timber

Well, I'm not sure what to think now:
- I can handle the fact that the US-government thinks, I live in an country of "old" Europe,
- when this country, however, is said to be on the same level as Cuba and Libya, when this has been said be the honourable man, who is second in command to the United States Armed Forces and will lead them in war,
well, you allow that I think loud about someone's intellectual possibilities.

Although I believe any President who found themselves in this position in the world would run a course somewhat parallel to this President. I just believe that that we do not have "A Great Communicator" here and when Powell speaks I have more of a tendency to listen. I think they should relax the strings on Powell and let him perform the diplomacy. Although the evidence he presented at the U.N. was indeed compelling that Saddam is still playing games, it still isn't enough to trigger a war. If it does, Bush will have to face the consequences - LBJ had to. If he knows even more than is being divulged and is determined that he wants to get rid of Saddam and his regime, history will be the judge. I think this is a fork in the road for the U.S. where there is no light at the end right now -- both courses are scary and nearly impossible to predict.

dys, A man holding a gun or rifle is a threat - even when he seems to be aiming at another human. You don't shoot first, and ask questions later. That's not how democracies work. c.i.

Gee c.i. Uncle Ronnie thought somebody in Grenada might have a gun or at least might know where a gun might be so we INVADED. admittedly it was a very little gun, unloaded, in the closet, but what the hey it was an easy virtory for Uncle Ronnie and he felt soooooo proud.

Just because Ronnie did something, doesn't make it ethical or right in today's world. c.i.

c.i. that was my point, it wasn't ethical then either

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030205/ap_wo_en_po/un_gen_un_iraq_reax_4





http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030205/ap_on_re_mi_ea/un_iraq_reax_4





http://community.centurytel.net/index.cfm?action=popup.printdoc.news&id=wed/cl/Qiraq-japan-reax.R5P9_DF6.html



Three different takes ... all with significant "Wiggle room".

timber

Timber

Do you think there is any chance that the Saudis will be able to(at the last second) persuade Saddam to take some beach front property in anther neigborhood?

perception....LOL

Just watched PBS news including one segment where four senior editors from major papers discussed Powell's briefing, what is likely to follow, and whether it should. Four different opinions quite reflective of the range we see here and advancing very similar arguments.

Walter

I hadn't seen that! If Germany is now in the same category as Libya and Cuba, that means she is much higher up on the list of 'Who Next?' countries than we'd expected. My guess would now put an attack on recalcitrant/oppositional/anti-American Germany as coming immediately after Operation Canadian Commupance (so I can't even offer room and board to you and your family).

I think Tony Blair is in big doo doo. Some reporter said 75 percent of Brits are against the war against Iraq. c.i.

c.i., well, yes. What's in it for them?

I am of the mind that if we took war off the table, made it not an option, then we would find a way to deal with the present crisis.

There are many ways to confine, contain, control, divert, bribe (yes..), dialogue with, Saddam. If we culled the wisdom of other countries and created a peace council ( or some other name that did not sound conciliatory) and did a summit (remember summits?) we could bring the wisdom of countries who have been there/done that and we could lead in a diplomatic solution to the current crisis. We would have the world behind us.

ci

Yes, and they have been for a long time. The US has hired the services of a huge PR company there to try and sell them product.

It seems the only country that favors a US war with Iraq is Kuwait. I wonder why? c.i.