Steve
I would think you could better expend your energies by congratulating your PM----Yes I wish our President could speak half as eloqently but I must be content with his resolve and convictions---instead of criticising a member of your closest ally
Blatham
Thought you might be interested in extracts from this letter. [In the Daily Express, which does not appear to have an on line version, so I have to copy from the paper - hence the extracts]
from Robert Logan
Edmonton Alberta Canada
CANADIAN LEADER SHOULD HAVE BLAIR'S COURAGE
FOR the first time in my life I am ashamed to be Canadian.
I am talking about Saddam Hussein and his reign of terror...
Where were all the protesters when Iraq was torturing and killing their own people?
....lets look at the alliances. The UK Australia and the US are on one side, and Syria, Russia, France and China are on the other. Canada has unfortunately chosen to stand on the sidelines while Blair and Bush have risked their own political lives to meet this ruthless dictator head on, to liberate the people of Iraq and dismantle Saddam's deadly weapons of mass destruction.
Thank you the people of Britain for doing the right thing.
[Is there something funny in the water in Edmonton?]
Forgive the digression ... I want to acknowledge and thank all who expressed concern and well wishes for my son. I appreciate that very much, and I treasure the freindship and regard of all of you.
Again, thank you very much. We are not so very different from one another despite our arguments or positions on this, that, or another issue. You folks are great. Even those of you who are just plain boneheaded WRONG (that's a joke, now ... I hope it is understood as such)
Timber
If it's joke then I suggest you retract it!
Timber
On second thought no need to retract it the damage is done already.
Here is the speech of one man, whom I greatly respect and whose shoes I would not want to be in right now for anything in the world. It saddened me greatly and deepened my worries about the future to come - the future of the UN, the future of the EU-U.S. relations, and international relations in general.
New York, 19 March 2003 - Statement by the Secretary-General to the Security Council
Thank you, Mr. President.
Excellencies,
Needless to say, I fully share the regrets expressed by many members of the Council at the fact that it has not been possible to reach a common position. Whatever our differing views on this complex issue, we must all feel that this is a sad day for the United Nations and the international community.
I know that millions of people around the world share this sense of disappointment, and are deeply alarmed by the prospect of imminent war.
Let me here pay tribute to the United Nations staff - both international and Iraqi - who have worked so hard in Iraq up to the last possible moment. That includes the inspectors, whose work has now sadly been suspended. I would like to pay special tribute to Dr. [Hans] Blix, Dr. [Mohamed] El Baradei and [Ramiro] Lopes da Silva, the Humanitarian Coordinator, under whose leadership the staff worked in Iraq.
Mr. President, it is the plight of the Iraqi people which is now my most immediate concern, and I have been glad to hear that sentiment shared by all the speakers in this debate.
In the past twenty years, Iraqis have been through two major wars, internal uprisings and conflict, and more than a decade of debilitating sanctions.
The country's vital infrastructure has been devastated, so that it no longer meets the most basic needs for clean water, health or education.
Already, Iraq's most vulnerable citizens - the elderly, women and children, and the disabled - are denied basic health care for lack of medicine and medical equipment.
Already, nearly one million Iraqi children suffer from chronic malnutrition.
Already, Iraqis are heavily dependent on the food ration which is handed out each month to every family in the country. For more than sixty per cent of the population, this ration is their main source of income. Yet many families have to sell part of it to buy clothes or other essentials for their children.
All that is true as we speak. And in the short term, the conflict that is now clearly about to start can only make things worse - perhaps much worse.
Mr. President,
I am sure all members of this Council will agree that we must do everything we can to mitigate this imminent disaster, which could easily lead to epidemics and starvation.
Under international law, the responsibility for protecting civilians in conflict falls on the belligerents; in any area under military occupation, responsibility for the welfare of the population falls on the occupying power.
Without in any way assuming or diminishing that ultimate responsibility, we in the United Nations will do whatever we can to help.
As you know, the humanitarian agencies of the United Nations have for some time been engaged in preparing for this contingency, even while we hoped it could still be averted.
We have done our best to assess the possible effects of war, in terms of population displacement and human need, and to position our personnel and equipment accordingly. For these preparations we requested 123.5 million dollars from donors a month ago, but only 45 million have been pledged, and 34 million dollars received, to date. I'm afraid we shall very soon be coming back with an appeal for much larger sums, to finance actual relief operations - and I earnestly hope that Member States will respond with generosity and speed.
We have also examined the situation caused by the suspension of the activities of the Oil-for-Food Programme in Iraq, and ways that the Programme could be adjusted temporarily, to enable us to continue providing humanitarian assistance to the people of Iraq during and after hostilities.
Such adjustments would require decisions by this Council. I will therefore submit my specific proposals for the Council's consideration - as suggested in your note, Mr. President.
In conclusion, Mr. President, let me express the hope that the effort to relieve the sufferings of the Iraqi people, and to rehabilitate their society after so much destruction, may yet prove to be the task around which the unity of this Council can be rebuilt.
Thank you very much.
Who has expressed contempt for all soldiers?
By the way, there was news at the top of the hour that the legality of the US invasion is being questioned seriously.
Tartarin wrote:By the way, there was news at the top of the hour that the legality of the US invasion is being questioned seriously.
That's fine, so long as you don't expect us to take those who question it seriously.
That would include the UN, tw.
Wow, Dagmaraka. That's a wonderful (and very revealing!) statement by Kofi Anan. He doesn't say how much we didn't ante up...
dagmaraka wrote:That would include the UN, tw.
If anything I have written gave you any indication that I take the UN seriously, let me clear up your confusion. I think the UN has gone from being inconsequential to dangerous and I have no interest in their rulings or further involvement by my government with them.
tartarin, yes. i was quite shaken after I read it. In his very polished and sensitive manner he reveals just how deep in trouble we, as an international community, are.
I will only say this: the situation the UN is in now is due to the U.S. and its allies- my honest opinion.
You've been quite clear, tw.
Now I understand what you meant, in another thread, about the US acting, this time, for both its principles and its interests.
If I'm correct, you adhere to the position of the Project for The New American Century, which states, among other things:
"We need to increase defense spending significantly if we are to carry out our global responsibilities today and modernize our armed forces for the future;
we need to strengthen our ties to democratic allies and to challenge regimes hostile to our interests and values;
we need to promote the cause of political and economic freedom abroad;
we need to accept responsibility for America's unique role in preserving and extending an international order friendly to our security, our prosperity, and our principles."
I find their agenda sound, logical and clearly imperialistic.
There is really no place in it for multilateral instances, like the UN.
The last paragraph is key. I deeply disagree with it.
Grrr, fbaezer. That is a nasty quote, is that for real? Once again I have to ask myself where did I hear something similar? Ah yes, Khrushchev speeches sounded quite like that, replace 'freedom' with 'socialism' and ' rule of the working class' and you get pretty much an identical speech.
We would like to have European defense forces. Right now we prefer to talk a lot about them instead of making them work, because we can't agree who will pay for them and how much. Good old Europe, two steps forward, one step back, three sideways and stall.
Dagmaraka,
Of course the site exists, so does the project.
http://www.newamericancentury.org/defensenationalsecurity.htm
These are the founding members: Elliott Abrams Gary Bauer William J. Bennett
Jeb Bush Dick Cheney Eliot A. Cohen Midge Decter Paula Dobriansky
Steve Forbes Aaron Friedberg
Francis Fukuyama Frank Gaffney Fred C. Ikle Donald Kagan Zalmay Khalilzad I. Lewis Libby Norman Podhoretz
Dan Quayle Peter W. Rodman Stephen P. Rosen Henry S. Rowen
Donald Rumsfeld Vin Weber George Weigel Paul Wolfowitz
Now shiver!
[edited to provide a working link]
