0
   

The UN, US and Iraq IV

 
 
hobitbob
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 07:02 am
The existence of Camp Xray is a big reason the US has such difficulty finding accomplices for Georgie-Poo II's criminal endeavors, but many Americans don't understand this. Many in fact, seem to have forgotten its existence. I brought the subject up to several friends yesterday, and received comments ranging from, "is that still there," to "they must be trying them by now...there is no way we would just let them sit there." The Muslim chaplain, who has been rumoured to have been a conduit for info to Human Rights Watch and AI, is now detained, awaiting charges, so I expect any info from our own "black hole of calcutta" to no longer slip past the event horizon. Sad
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 07:03 am
UN Secretary General Kofi Annan is to tell the General Assembly they have reached a crossroads over the issues of peace and security.
He is expected to take a swipe at President Bush's doctrine allowing the US to take pre-emptive military action when threatened.
Mr Annan will say this could lead to "a proliferation of the unilateral and lawless use of force".
He will ask if such moves should be supported by the Security Council.
-------------------------
UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - President Bush will ask the United Nations to share the burden of occupying and rebuilding Iraq Tuesday, a year after saying the world body risked becoming irrelevant.

Bush returns to the 191-member General Assembly, which he berated for its failure to back the U.S.-led war on Iraq, with what U.S. officials said were no plans to apologize for the situation there or failure to find weapons of mass destruction.

On the eve of debate, Bush, whose job approval ratings at home have been knocked in part by mounting U.S. casualties in Iraq, rejected a suggestion things were not going well.

"I don't think they're going badly. I mean, obviously I think they're going badly for the soldiers who lost their lives, and I weep for that person and their family. But no, I think we're making good progress," he told Fox news.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 07:05 am
Sofia wrote:
Are there more specific disagreements with our methods that I may have missed?


Role of the UN, for one? This is an old quote I admit (from CNN, 4 September), but:

Quote:
Schroeder said the proposal may get German support only if the United Nations could "take charge of the political process, and if indeed possible, to establish an Iraqi government responsible for functioning of the country."
0 Replies
 
Sofia
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 07:37 am
nimh-- One exchange. More to come, hopefully.
The Oct. 11, 2000 debate.

GORE: I haven't heard a big difference right, in the last few
exchanges.

BUSH: Well I think, it's hard to tell. I would hope to be able to
convince people I could handle the Iraqi situation better. I mean --

LEHRER: Saddam Hussein, you mean?

BUSH: Yes.

LEHRER: You could get him out of there?

BUSH: I'd like to, of course. And I presume this administration would
as well. But we don't know, there's no inspectors now in Iraq. The
coalition that was in place isn't as strong as it used to be. He is a
danger. We don't want him fishing in troubled waters in the Middle
East. And it's going to be hard, it's going to be important to rebuild
that coalition to keep the pressure on him.

LEHRER: You feel that as a failure of the Clinton administration?

BUSH: I do.

LEHRER: Mr. Vice President.

GORE: Well, when I got to be a part of the current administration it
was right after I was one of the few members of my political party to
support former President Bush in the Persian Gulf war resolution. And
at the end of that war, for whatever reasons it was not finished in a
way that removed Saddam Hussein from power. I know there are all kinds
of circumstances and explanations. But the fact is that that's the
situation that was left when I got there. And we have maintained the
sanctions. Now I want to go further. I want to give robust support to
the groups that are trying to overthrow Saddam Hussein. And I know
there are allegations that they're too weak to do it. But that's what
they said about the forces that were opposing Milosevic in Serbia. And
you know, the policy of enforcing sanctions against Serbia has just
resulted in a spectacular victory for democracy just in the past week.
And it seems to me that having taken so long to see the sanctions work
there building upon the policy of containment that was successful over
a much longer period of time against the former Soviet Union in the
Communist bloc, it seems a little early to declare that we should give
up on the sanctions. I know the governor's not necessarily saying
that, but you know, all of these flights that have come in, all of
them have been in accordance with the sanctions regime, I'm told,
except for three, where they notified. And they're trying to break out
of the box, there's no question about it. I don't think they should be
allowed to.

LEHRER: Did he state your position correctly? You're not calling for
eliminating the sanctions, are you?

BUSH: No, of course not. Absolutely not. I want them to be tougher.

-------------
Not the quote I'm looking for, but I thought I'd bring all pertinent that I found. After hearing Bush's comments (in totality), I knew he meant to rid Iraq of Saddam, one way or another. Going back to look for more specific quote, nimh.

Re: our UN/Iraq convo-- I will go back to look at the proposed resolution, but I DO think it has a high role for the UN in the Iraqi political process-- I think the problem is they want to direct US troops in Iraq-- and I am almost sure that ain't gonna happen. And, why should it?
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 07:56 am
Thats cool, Sofia, that you bring the actual quotes. Thats good, then at least we're not just talking from opposing personal memories.

Still, I cant help noting that this quote actually makes Cleland's post.

In the debate, Bush posited that Saddam was "a danger" and that the region would be better off without him. What solutions did he propose? "Rebuild [the] coalition"; "keep the pressure on him"; and imposing "tougher" sanctions. Plus he implied it was a bad thing that there were no inspectors in there anymore.

Note that this is pretty much the program the UN has argued throughout the US/UN crisis this year. The UN, France, Germany - they argued exactly for that combination of inspectors, sanctions and "keeping the pressure on him".

It was the Bush admin that suddenly argued that those means were insufficient and that military intervention was necessary - and was necessary straight away, without any extra months respite.

You can defend that argument if you want (with a reference to 9/11 if you will), but it was nothing Bush had prepared his voters for in the campaign (edit: well, not judging on this example, in any case), and that was what you were arguing Cleland about.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 08:38 am
Did you listen to Kofi Anan?

And Walter, did you see our friend Bill sitting with Jack Straw and clapping enthusiastically?

It was only yesterday that I nearly bumped into Bill (literally) at a roundabout in Harlow, when this old VW Golf came round...you know the car, and there he was driving it...or sort of driving it, probably had his mind on bigger things at the time.

Then today I look at CNN and its the same bloke, and it looks like the same shirt and tie!
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 08:52 am
(for anyone interested Bill Rammell, MP Under Secretary of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth office is sat 2 to the right of Jack Straw...) no I don't suppose you are
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 09:35 am
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
(for anyone interested Bill Rammell, MP Under Secretary of State at the Foreign and Commonwealth office is sat 2 to the right of Jack Straw...) no I don't suppose you are


I am, and suspect many others are....
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 09:47 am
Anan paid lipservice to the need to recognize the world and its threats are not the same as when the UN was founded. The institution has now been put on notice to get with the times or get out of the way. The next few weeks will be critical to the survival of the UN, and to the near-term relevance of "Old Europe" on the world stage. The choice is theirs to make. Chirac is about to speak ... his comments could well be indicative of the choice some have made.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 09:52 am
timberlandko wrote:
Anan paid lipservice to the need to recognize the world and its threats are not the same as when the UN was founded. The institution has now been put on notice to get with the times or get out of the way. The next few weeks will be critical to the survival of the UN, and to the near-term relevance of "Old Europe" on the world stage. The choice is theirs to make. Chirac is about to speak ... his comments could well be indicative of the choice some have made.


Arrogance and hegemony.

Not quite the right foundations to rebuilding a relationship.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 10:07 am
I don't see recognition of the existing state of affairs as arrogance, nor do I see any hegemony involved. You may if you choose, of course. Time will tell. Despite the "Blame America First" and "Bush is Evil" doctrines, there is reality. Reality often suffers from unpopularity. It remains real, however.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 11:51 am
http://www.newsday.com/news/nationworld/world/ny-wobushtext0923,0,5674419.story?coll=ny-worldnews-headlines

Text of Bush's Speech




By The Associated Press

September 23, 2003, 1:04 PM EDT

A text of President Bush's speech Tuesday to the U.N. General Assembly as provided by e-Media, Inc.

Mr. Secretary General, Mr. President, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen, 24 months ago--and yesterday in the memory of America -- the center of New York City became a battlefield and a graveyard and the symbol of an unfinished war. Since that day, terrorists have struck in Bali, in Mombasa, in Casablanca, in Riyadh, in Jakarta, in Jerusalem -- measuring the advance of their cause in the chaos and innocent suffering they leave behind.

Last month, terrorists brought their war to the United Nations itself.

The U.N. headquarters in Baghdad stood for order and compassion, and for that reason the terrorists decided it must be destroyed.

Among the 22 people who were murdered was Sergio Vieira de Mello. Over the decades, this good and brave man from Brazil gave help to the afflicted in Bangladesh, Cyprus, Mozambique, Lebanon, Cambodia, Central Africa, Kosovo and East Timor, and was aiding the people of Iraq in their time of need. America joins you, his colleagues, in honoring the memory of Senor Vieira Mello and the memory of all who died with him in the service to the United Nations.

By the victims they choose and by the means they use, the terrorists have clarified the struggle we are in. Those who target relief workers for death have set themselves against all humanity. Those who incite murder and celebrate suicide reveal their contempt for life itself. They have no place in any religious faith, they have no claim on the world's sympathy, and they should have no friend in this chamber.

Events during the past two years have set before us the clearest of divides: between those who seek order and those who spread chaos; between those who work for peaceful change and those who adopt the methods of gangsters; between those who honor the rights of man and those who deliberately take the lives of men and women and children without mercy or shame.

Between these alternatives there is no neutral ground. All governments that support terror are complicit in a war against civilization. No government should ignore the threat of terror, because to look the other way gives terrorists the chance to regroup and recruit and prepare. And all nations that fight terror as if the lives of their own people depend on it will earn the favorable judgment of history.

The former regimes of Afghanistan and Iraq knew these alternatives and made their choices.

The Taliban was a sponsor and servant of terrorism. When confronted, that regime chose defiance, and that regime is no more.

Afghanistan's president, who is here today, now represents a free people who are building a decent and just society. They're building a nation fully joined in the war against terror.

The regime of Saddam Hussein cultivated ties to terror while it built weapons of mass destruction. It used those weapons in acts of mass murder and refused to account for them when confronted by the world.

The Security Council was right to be alarmed. The Security Council was right to demand that Iraq destroy its illegal weapons and prove that it had done so.

The Security Council was right to vow serious consequences if Iraq refused to comply. And because there were consequences, because a coalition of nations acted to defend the peace and the credibility of the United Nations, Iraq is free. And today we are joined by representatives of a liberated country.

Saddam Hussein's monuments have been removed and not only his statues. The true monuments of his rule and his character -- the torture chambers and the rape rooms and the prison cells for innocent children -- are closed. And as we discover the killing fields and mass graves of Iraq, the true scale of Saddam's cruelty is being revealed.

The Iraqi people are meeting hardships and challenges, like every nation that has set out on the path of democracy, yet their future promises lives of dignity and freedom. And that is a world away from the squalid, vicious tyranny they have known.
Copyright © 2003, Newsday, Inc.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 11:59 am
Watching Wire Service headlines auto-updating furiously; predictably, "The Speech" appears better received in The US than in some other quarters. One thing is assured; the issue will generate more headlines in the coming hours.
0 Replies
 
PDiddie
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 12:03 pm
What follows is a transcript of the "President's" speech at the UN today. Don't trust those other transcripts -- Mahablog's is better. :wink:

Mr. Secretary General, Mr. President, distinguished delegates, ladies and gentlemen:

24 months ago--and yesterday in the memory of America -- the center of New York City became a battlefield and a graveyard and one hell of a photo op.

You may wonder why I'm bringing up September 11 in a speech on Iraq, since I've admitted there is no connection between Iraq and September 11. Well, the only reason the American people supported me in the great effort in Iraq is that most of 'em believe there is such a connection, and I want them to keep thinking that.

Since that day, terrorists have struck in Bali, in Mombasa, in Casablanca, in Riyadh, in Jakarta, in Jerusalem--and mostly this terrorism didn't have much to do with Iraq either. But last month some different terrorist bombed the UN headquarters in Baghdad.

The UN headquarters in Baghdad stood for order and compassion, and for that reason -- and because the CIA got some boys liquored up and told 'em I was there -- the terrorists decided it must be destroyed.

By the victims they choose and by the means they use, the terrorists have clarified the struggle we are in. And I'm glad they did, because otherwise I wouldn't understand it myself. Those who target relief workers for death have set themselves against all humanity. Those who incite murder and celebrate suicide reveal their contempt for life itself. They have no place in any religious faith, they have no claim on the world's sympathy, and they should have no friend in this chamber. But you let me speak here, anyway, and I thank you.

The Taliban was a sponsor and servant of terrorism. When confronted, that regime chose defiance, and that regime is no more. [Pause; Karl Rove runs to podium, hands Bush a note.] Oh, wait; it says here the Taliban is making a comeback. Well, never mind.

Afghanistan's president, who is here today, now represents a free people who are building a decent and just society. They're building a nation fully joined in the war against terror. [Pause; Rove runs to podium and whispers in the President's ear.] Well, we acknowledge that the decent and just society extends to just a few square blocks of Kabul, and the rest of Afghanistan is a mess. But you got to start somewhere.

The regime of Saddam Hussein cultivated ties to terror with weapons of mass destruction. We knew they had those weapons, because we had the receipts. It used those weapons in acts of mass murder and refused to account for them when confronted by the world. Saddam had written down where and when the weapons had been dumped on the back of a napkin and tossed the napkin, but how were we to know that?

The Security Council was right to be alarmed, because we raised enough stink about Saddam to drown out every skunk in North America. And because a coalition of at least a couple of nations acted to defend the peace and the credibility of the United Nations, even while we called you "irrelevant," Iraq is free.

Saddam Hussein's monuments have been removed along with that mosaic tile picture of my daddy in that Baghdad hotel. Plus the torture chambers and the rape rooms and the prison cells for innocent children, which are now occupied by US soldiers who never got the barracks Brown and Root was supposed to build. And as we discover the killing fields and mass graves of Iraq, the true scale of Saddam's cruelty is being revealed.

Of course, my daddy shouldn't have mouthed off about an uprising against Saddam and then sit by while Saddam wiped out his opposition, but that's not my fault.

The Iraqi people are meeting hardships and challenges, like every nation that has set out on the path of democracy, yet their future promises lives of dignity and freedom. And that is a world away from the squalid, vicious tyranny they have known. Instead of squalid, vicious tyranny, they now enjoy squalid, viscious anarchy. That's entirely different.

Across Iraq, life is being improved by liberty whenever people can get out of the way of the airstrikes. Our actions in Afghanistan and Iraq were supported by many governments and America is grateful to each one. Your checks are in the mail.

So let us get over that little disagreement we had last year and move forward. There are challenges we must meet together.

First, we must stand with the people of Afghanistan and Iraq as they build free and stable countries. Free people embrace hope over resentment and choose peace over violence, unless they are Republicans.

The United Nations has been a friend of the Afghan people, distributing food and medicine, helping refugees return home, advising on a new constitution, and helping to prepare the way for nationwide elections. And it's a good thing, because the United States ain't doin' it.

NATO has taken over the UN-mandated security force in Kabul. American and coalition forces continue to track and defeat Al Qaida terrorists and remnants of the Taliban, even the same guys we defeated last year. They are persistent little buggers.

By the end of 2004, more than 90 percent of Iraqi children under age 5 will have been immunized against preventable diseases, such as polio, tuberculosis, and measles, thanks to the hard work and high ideals of UNICEF. Iraq's food distribution system is operational, delivering nearly a half-million tons of food per month, thanks to the skill and expertise of the World Food Programme. And as soon as you guys are done in the Middle East, we're gonna need you in Mississippi. Probably Texas, too.

Our coalition has made sure that the former dictator will never again use weapons of mass destruction. They'll need a new dictator for that.

We are interviewing Iraqi citizens and analyzing records of the old regime to reveal the full extent of its weapons programs and its long campaign of deception. [Rove runs up to podium gesturing frantically, speaks to President.] We're not supposed to mention the David Kay report? Can we edit the tape? This is live? Oh, crap ... Karl, you promised me this wouldn't be live! Well, forget I said that.

And at the same time, our coalition is helping to improve the daily lives of the Iraqi people. The old regime built palaces while letting schools decay, so we are rebuilding more than a thousand schools. The old regime starved hospitals of resources, so we have helped to supply and reopen hospitals across Iraq. The old regime built up armies and weapons while allowing the nation's infrastructure to crumble, so we are rehabilitating power plants, water and sanitation facilities, bridges and airports.

However, as we do this, the schools, hospitals, and infrastructure in the United States is going to hell, so I've come here today to ask for help. Even if you don't help, I can blame you guys if the power goes out again.

And I have proposed to Congress that the United States provide additional funding for our work in Iraq, the greatest financial commitment of its kind since the Marshall Plan, which was a big important thing that happened when I was a baby. The primary goal of our coalition in Iraq is self-government for the people of Iraq, reached by orderly and democratic process; just not in the immediate future.

A second challenge we must confront together is the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The deadly combination of outlaw regimes and terror networks and weapons of mass murder is a peril that cannot be ignored or wished away. 'Course, I don't like to waste time tryin' to figure out what makes these people tick, either. Let's just bomb 'em. Shock and awe -- let God sort 'em out.

A third challenge we share is a challenge to our conscience. We must act decisively to meet the humanitarian crises of our time. The United States has begun to carry out the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief, aimed at preventing AIDS on a massive scale and treating millions who have the disease already. We have pledged $15 billion over five years to fight AIDS around the world, although of course we won't release this money unless people prove to us they aren't having sex outside of heterosexual marriage.

There's another humanitarian crisis spreading, yet hidden from view. Each year an estimated 800,000 to 900,000 human beings are bought, sold or forced across the world's borders. Among them are hundreds of thousands of teenage girls, and others as young as 5, who fall victim to the sex trade. This commerce in human life generates billions of dollars each year, much of which is used to finance organized crime. The victims of sex trade see little of life before they see the very worst of life: an underground of brutality and lonely fear. Governments that tolerate this trade are tolerating a form of slavery.

This problem has appeared in my own country and we are working on it. We are investigating sex tour operators. We are comparing rates and figuring out when we can get away for a couple of weeks... wait a minute; how'd this letter from Neil get mixed up in my speech?

As an original signer of the UN Charter, the United States of America is committed to the United Nations. And we show that commitment by working to fulfill the UN's stated purposes and giving meaning to its ideals, as we interpret them, whether you like it or not.

May God bless you all.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 12:06 pm
timberlandko wrote:
The [UN] has now been put on notice to get with the times or get out of the way. The next few weeks will be critical to the survival of the UN, and to the near-term relevance of "Old Europe" on the world stage. The choice is theirs to make. Chirac is about to speak ... his comments could well be indicative of the choice some have made.


Timber, I do wish you would bring fewer assertions and more arguments - or more arguments to go with your assertions, at least.

timberlandko wrote:
Despite the "Blame America First" and "Bush is Evil" doctrines, there is reality. Reality often suffers from unpopularity. It remains real, however.


Please ... I am not of the "Bush is evil" persuasion and I still seem to see a wholly different reality than you do. Sometimes I turn out to be right, sometimes you turn out to be right. Its just plain silly for any of us to claim to be the one seeing the "real" reality - the one the others (living in "fake" reality, I suppose) - are just too blind to see. When you get to that point there's no point to discussing anymore, period.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 12:08 pm
Now, I can't speak for all of either The Left or The Right, PDiddie, but I hope most of both realize this real, not a standup routine.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 12:12 pm
Transcript of Secretary-General Kofi Annan's address to the UN General Assembly
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 12:20 pm
I'm prolly guilty as charged, nimh ... at least in regard to having a different perspective. I don't dispute that Bush/The US is arrogant. I wish that were not so. I fully understand the suspicions, and animosities, aroused by current US action. I don't argue that the US is "Correct" in the face of the "Incorrectness" of others. What I do argue is that right or wrong, The US can, and is the sole entity on the planet so capable, successfully prosecute at least it near-to-mid-term agenda. That naturally is perceived as a problem by some, but none can deny that it is real.
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 12:32 pm
nimh wrote (about certain Americans)

'if you dont agree with us, you must have bad intentions or ulterior motives' is ... simply exasperating.

...and annoying and provocative and an inspiration to America's real enemies to act.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 23 Sep, 2003 12:33 pm
Transcript of President Jacques Chirac's speechto the UN.

Quote:
In an open world, no one can live in isolation, no one can act alone in the name of all [..]

Against the risk of a world without order delivered up to violence, let us work to establish one governed by the rule of law.


Specifically, on the US/UN/Iraq crisis:

Quote:
The United Nations has just weathered one of the gravest trials in its history. The debate turned on respect for the Charter and the use of force. The war, embarked on without Security Council approval, has undermined the multilateral system. [..]


On the next steps for Iraq:

Quote:
In Iraq, the transfer of sovereignty to the Iraqis, who must have sole responsability for their future, is essential for stability and reconstruction.

It is up to the United Nations to give legitimacy to this process. It is also up to the United Nations to assist with the gradual transfer of administrative and economic responsibilities to the present Iraqi institutions according to a realistic timetable and to help the Iraqis draft a constitution and hold elections.

Lastly it is up to the United Nations to give a mandate to a multinational force, commanded naturally by the main troop contributor, in order to ensure the security of Iraq and all those helping with the country's reconstruction.

In this way the international community and the Iraqi people, united around a common project, will together end the tragic decades of this great country's history.


On peace in the Middle East:

Quote:
In the Middle East, undermined by despair and hate, only firm political resolve to apply, on both sides, the law as formulated by the United Nations will pave the way to a just and lasting solution.

The international community must [..] be resolutely involved in the implementation of the road map. [..] France believes the idea of a monitoring mechanism still holds and that an international conference is an objective to be achieved as quickly as possible.

Given the present tension, France calls on the parties to resist the temptation to engage in a trial of force and never-ending radicalization.

The fight against international terrorism is another key challenge. [..] The threat goes to the very heart of our democracies and societies. We are using force to combat terrorism, but that is not enough. It will return over and over if we allow extremism and fanaticism to flourish, if we fail to realize that it uses the world's unresolved conflicts and imbalances as its justification.


On WMD:

Quote:
In the face of proliferating weapons of mass destruction, we reject all "faits accomplis". [..] France has proposed the creation of a permanent corps of inspectors under the authority of the Security Council. We need to give fresh impetus to this policy. [..]
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 05/17/2025 at 04:34:22