0
   

The UN, US and Iraq IV

 
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2003 08:28 am
Things seem to be looking up for the Iraqis. Smile
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2003 08:33 am
Or, maybe they aren't. Sad
These mistakes seem very frequent
Quote:
GIs in Iraq Kill Aide to Italian Envoy
By ALESSANDRA RIZZO

ROME (AP) - American soldiers in northern Iraq fired on a car carrying the Italian official heading up U.S. efforts to recover Iraq's looted antiquities, killing the man's Iraqi interpreter, an official said Friday in Rome. The Italian, Pietro Cordone, was unhurt.

Cordone, who is the senior adviser for cultural affairs of the U.S. provisional authority and the top Italian diplomat in the country, was traveling on the road between Mosul and Tikrit on Thursday when his car was fired on at a U.S. roadblock, said a Foreign Ministry official who spoke on condition of anonymity.

The official said American troops fired at the car, and that Cordone's Iraqi interpreter was killed. Cordone was unharmed.

The official said it appeared the car's driver did not understand the signals that the American troops were giving, and that the American's didn't understand what the car was trying to do.

The Foreign Ministry said U.S. officials had expressed regret over the incident.

Cordone, who was born in Egypt and spent his diplomatic career in the Arab world, was named to his position in May to head up the coalition office responsible for finding and restoring Iraq's looted antiquities.

He was on hand at the Iraqi National Museum last week when three men returned the Vase of Warka, a 5,000-year-old white limestone vessel that is one of the most valuable of the museum's artifacts.

The museum, once the home of rare Islamic texts and priceless, millennia-old collections from the Assyrian, Sumerian and Babylonian civilizations, was plundered in the lawlessness and chaos that followed the fall of Baghdad on April 9.

The destruction triggered an international uproar, with many curators and archaeologists from around the world blaming the United States for failing to protect the institution.

When he was named to his position, Italian Culture Minister Giuliano Urbani said Cordone's task was to recover ``one of the most important artistic patrimonies'' in the world.


09/19/03 07:08
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2003 08:37 am
In re: to McGentrix' post:

Apples and oranges - hardly comparable in scope and context.

After WW2, a whole continent lay in tatters - have you ever seen pictures of European cities in '45? Many looked like a nuclear bomb had hit them - not a building upright, people living in mere carcasses of houses - in one after another city of hundreds of thousands of inhabitants - the same went for factories etc ... Hundreds of thousands of displaced persons trekking around ...

In Iraq, the Bush admin prides itself in having rolled into Baghdad relatively quickly and relatively painlessly - the damage is incomparable, apart from it being just the one country. Not to belittle the challenges, but the "in Europe it took two years too" argument is really misplaced.

Additionally, its simply a fact that patience with the US and Britain this time round is a lot thinner - in the context of the international arena, in any case - and thats their own fault, or let's say: responsibility. They chose to undertake an invasion without - against - the explicit wishes and warnings of other countries and the UN. If now some of those dire warnings are turning out to have been right, you can hardly expect those who made them to show the US the kind of patience and benefit of the doubt it could justifiably appeal to in the post-WW2 context.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2003 08:46 am
Will be curious to see how Germany will tie this:

Schroeder wrote:
The United Nations must play a central role. [..] The international mission needs greater legitimacy in order to accelerate the process leading to a government acting on its own authority in Iraq.


to this:

Schroeder wrote:
In addition to its current military involvement in Afghanistan, the Balkans and elsewhere, Germany is willing to provide humanitarian aid, to assist in the civilian and economic reconstruction of Iraq and to train Iraqi security forces.


when it comes to negotiations next week and later.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2003 09:06 am
hobitbob wrote:
Things seem to be looking up for the Iraqis. Smile

Indeed they are. The European Union and The UN are coming around, IMHO. The two bodies cannot in conscience continue to allow the Iraqi People to suffer as consequence of pointless, self-serving geopolitical power games. That is the lesson they have drawn from Kosovo, and it is beginning to dawn on them.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2003 09:14 am
nimh

re your link about the Italian Envoy:
while the article speaks of "U.S. provisional authority" like (nearly) all US media.

However, it's officially named "Coaliation Provisional Authority".


Quote:

Will be curious to see how Germany will tie ...


And I will be curious about Tony's reaction on this, and if "the others" will be in line with Schröder (Germany).

Interesting as well is the opinion of one of the leading German conservativs, Schäuble, a strong supporter of Bush/USA:
Quote:
WASHINGTON (AP) - President Bush stands a good chance of healing a rift with European allies over the U.S. war in Iraq if he pursues a partnership with Europe, a senior German legislator said Thursday.

With nearly 2,000 troops in Afghanistan and willing to help train Iraqi police, Germany is contributing to U.S. efforts in both countries, Wolfgang Schaeuble, deputy chairman of the conservative opposition in the Bundestag, said.

Schaeuble said he had told Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's national security assistant, during talks here that there is a need for Europe to become a stronger partner of the United States.

The German legislator said Bush would meet with Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder next week in New York while the two leaders attended the U.N. General Assembly session.

The meeting may help to close the gap between the United States and Germany on Iraq, he said. If Bush ``shows he is not going a unilateral way he could bridge the differences,'' Schaeuble said.

Germany opposed the war with Iraq, lining up with France. Schroeder met in Berlin Thursday with French President Jacques Chirac and they will meet also with British Prime Minister Tony Blair this weekend.

Chirac said in Berlin that he would like to see a transfer of power in Iraq in a matter of months. Earlier, he had called for an end of the U.S. occupation in one month's time.

Chirac also voiced support for an offer by Schroeder to help train new Iraqi security forces in Germany, which Schroeder renewed at Thursday's news conference outside the chancellery in Berlin.

In Washington, a senior U.S. official hesitated to assess Chirac's apparent willingness to delay a handover of power to Iraqis for months. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the United States also wanted to see Iraqis taking charge of their country. But he said the timetable was up to the Iraqis to set.

At the same time, the official said the United States and Germany agreed on several Iraq issues and Germany's offer to train security forces reflected a shared interest in a free, prosperous and stable Iraq.

Schaeuble said he hoped the Schroeder-Chirac-Blair meeting on Saturday would help close the gap with France and Germany.

Pondering the reasons for the rift, Schaeuble said it is very difficult for Americans to understand what is going on in Europe and it is very difficult for France to accept the loss of its position as a world power.

He advised all sides to look to the future, and not to the past.
German: Bush May Heal Rift With Europeans
0 Replies
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2003 09:19 am
timberlandko wrote:
hobitbob wrote:
Things seem to be looking up for the Iraqis. Smile

Indeed they are. The European Union and The UN are coming around, IMHO. The two bodies cannot in conscience continue to allow the Iraqi People to suffer as consequence of pointless, self-serving geopolitical power games. That is the lesson they have drawn from Kosovo, and it is beginning to dawn on them.

Let us hope so, yes? However I haven't much faith in politician's ability to be humane when it might mean having to stop being political.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2003 03:25 pm
timberlandko wrote:
Indeed they are. The European Union and The UN are coming around, IMHO. The two bodies cannot in conscience continue to allow the Iraqi People to suffer as consequence of pointless, self-serving geopolitical power games. That is the lesson they have drawn from Kosovo, and it is beginning to dawn on them.


OK, lemme make clear, first, that I actually do think that, as soon as the US gets a better government arrangement in place, one that the European countries can invest some trust in, those EU countries should start contributing, pretty heavily, to the post-war (social) reconstruction in Iraq. After all, stakes are high, and we just cant afford to let iraq slide into anarchy - and all of us in the North have a bit of legacy vis-a-vis Iraq to make up for.

But. Still. Wait. I mean. Ho. I mean, what you said there. I really find the above kind of statements of an astounding cynism - either that or of an astounding attempt at doublespeak.

Let me get this right: if the US start a war against the explicit, passionate wishes, judgements and warnings of a number of EU countries and the UN - it ignores those warnings and wishes, goes ahead anyway - and when its done it also insists on ruling the country by itself, centrally, with no significant role for the UN or other international bodies - still refuses to let anyone's warnings influence the way it governs -

and those other countries, ignored before the war, ignored during the war, and denied any real influence on how the post-war situation is tackled, decide that in such a context, its no use to start giving the US blank cheques -

then its those European countries that are engaged in "pointless, self-serving geopolitical power games" Question

What do you think those European countries are - subjects of the US, somehow morally obliged to pay towards the US bills even when its denied any influence on how they are accrued?

<shakes head> I'm sorry, but - some of you people must think we're really dim - or that you're God's gift to the world, whom all owe unconditional submission to, or something. <shrugs>
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2003 03:53 pm
Interesting sidelight here ... do a little research on the flow of money into US Treasury Notes over the past year or so. Remarkable is the component accounted by major European Institutional Investors; central banks and governmental long-term investment programs ... that sort of thing. It has never been higher. Could it be that saying one thing and doing another is not an exclusively American attribute?
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2003 03:53 pm
nimh, timber doesn't speak for all Americans - some of us are okay and really do see the fault in what he writes Smile
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 19 Sep, 2003 03:59 pm
timber, At the same time, outflow from bonds into equities by US investors in August was the highest in over six years. We've kept our portfolio in the same ratios. We shall see who made the 'right' move.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Sep, 2003 02:35 pm
Max Cleland--the former Senator from Georgia who left two legs and an arm in the Mekong Delta; the man his Republican opponent, Saxby Chambliss, derided as "un-American"-- wrote this in the Atlanta Journal-Constitution:

Quote:
The president of the United States decides to go to war against a nation led by a brutal dictator supported by one-party rule. That dictator has made war on his neighbors. The president decides this is a threat to the United States.

In his campaign for president he gives no indication of wanting to go to war. In fact, he decries the overextension of American military might and says other nations must do more. However, unbeknownst to the American public, the president's own Pentagon advisers have already cooked up a plan to go to war. All they are looking for is an excuse.

Based on faulty intelligence, cherry-picked information is fed to Congress and the American people. The president goes on national television to make the case for war, using as part of the rationale an incident that never happened. Congress buys the bait -- hook, line and sinker -- and passes a resolution giving the president the authority to use "all necessary means" to prosecute the war.

* * *

Sound familiar? It does to me.

The president was Lyndon Johnson.


Read the rest here.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sun 21 Sep, 2003 02:48 pm
Lose sight of what's right, and empty rhetoric is all thats left.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:19 am
Timber by what moral compass do you arrive at a position of blaming those who warned against war for the continuing suffering of people caught up in the war you started?
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 09:29 am
In fact its worse than that. You continue to berate France and Germany for not helping to wage war and now you are begging for their help in keeping the "peace".
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:06 am
From the Cleland piece--
Quote:
In his campaign for president he gives no indication of wanting to go to war.

Cleland is wrong. Bush addressed Saddam in at least one Presidential debate, and stated he would address the issue, which Clinton had neglected.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:08 am
I don't see any "Begging" going on ... that's a misperception, and a chancy one at that. Right or wrong, the US "Attitude", I believe, is that the UN and The EU deserve another chance. Arrogant, yes. But arrogant or not, it reflects a reality. That renders it quite staunch a sentiment. Enormous shifts are overtaking the geopolitical map. Regardless who may "Ride the wave", the US will not be among those who were left behind. I find it not unexpected that many nations might find that ominous, not for what The US "Will Become", but for what many of them will never regain.
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:13 am
Additionally, the parties need to assess the job at hand, not continue to belabor...what if...concerning their former pre-war positions.

If they refuse to become involved in the current state of affairs in Iraq, solely because they didn't like the way it came about (US decision without UN consensus), they should say so and be done with it. However, this decision WOULD be political, and not in the world's, or Iraq's best interests. IMO.

The UN had their say in the pre-war. They shouted it from the rooftops.

That situation has passed. Now, the Iraqis are free of Saddam, free of the horrors that tyrant perpetrated on them--but they are still not out of the woods. They need as much help as they can get. Withholding it due to political purposes isn't helping anyone, most notably the Iraqis.
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:29 am
An aside.

Major EU countries are now coming over to the US side, re: Iran. Seems the US preferred a 'harder line approach' concerning Iran's refusal to allow snap inspections of their nuclear facilities, while Brits, Germany and Russia, I think, were offering Iran some special incentive to comply.

Iran nixed, and now the EUs are seeing things Bush's way.

Good for across the pond relations. Still on-going concern for Iran's behavior. Do we have an Iran thread on the main board here? Anyone interested in recent stuff in Iran?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Mon 22 Sep, 2003 10:34 am
Sofia wrote:


Major EU countries are now coming over to the US side, re: Iran. Seems the US preferred a 'harder line approach' concerning Iran's refusal to allow snap inspections of their nuclear facilities, while Brits, Germany and Russia, I think, were offering Iran some special incentive to comply.


You mean this, Sofia?
Quote:
Britain, Germany and France defied the United States last month by offering Iran the prospect of sharing technology if it stops its disputed nuclear fuel enrichment program and accepts tougher U.N. inspections. ....
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 05/16/2025 at 05:42:36