Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
EU Might Not Fund Iraq Aid If War Illegal-Patten  
User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 2 hours ago) and read 924 times:

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=578&e=5&cid=578&u=/nm/20030312/ts_nm/iraq_eu_dc

I hope they do stay out of it, and that the UN keeps out too. I think they will only screw it up.

Charles

15 replies: All unread, jump to last
 
User currently offlineAmir From Syria, joined Dec 1999, 1254 posts, RR: 12
Reply 1, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 921 times:

Charles: what do you mean to say exactly?

Rgds
Amir


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 2, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 908 times:

Two things:

One: As they say, "Too many cooks spoil the broth". Having a whole bunch of different countries involved in rebuilding Iraq, many of which bringing their own agendas, will just create a confusing mess of half-assed compromises and half-measures, pleasing nobody and pissing off everyone.

Two: As the UN and many nations blocked a regime change in Baghdad, why should they be allowed to jump in and start dictating how things should be run, after others have paid the price? The only nations which should be involved in rebuilding Iraq, in my opinion, are the nations which liberate Iraq and Iraq's territorial neighbors (including Iran), as they have a direct interest.

Charles


User currently offlineAmir From Syria, joined Dec 1999, 1254 posts, RR: 12
Reply 3, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 902 times:

..what a thrilling mind you have charles!
You can fool all the people some of the time, or some of the people all the time, but you can't fool all the people all the time!

So, the US became the police of the world! Have fun building up Iraq, the poeple are waiting for you.

Rgds
Amir



User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 4, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day 1 hour ago) and read 894 times:

Hey, I'm just saying that if you want to play, you have to get into the sandbox. For the past 6 months countries like Russia nad France have said that they are happy with Saddam as he is, and don't want to do anything. They have their chance, and unless they change their mind in the next few days, they have made their choice.

It is not the U.S. which has told them "We are going in, and we don't want you involved." They made that decision themselves.

Charles


User currently offlineAmir From Syria, joined Dec 1999, 1254 posts, RR: 12
Reply 5, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 880 times:

Again Charles, you are saying nonsense.

France and Russia never said that they are happy with Saddam.
You are really acting according to the US pricciple: if you are not with me then you are against me.

Rgds




User currently offlineMD-90 From United States of America, joined Jan 2000, 8502 posts, RR: 12
Reply 6, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 875 times:

If you don't get in the sandbox you can't take credit for the sand castle that gets built, you know.

User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 863 times:

You are the one spouting nonsense:

France and Russia never said that they are happy with Saddam.

Actions speak louder than words. (I'm heavy into cliché today).

If the French and Russians had their way, we would be at the same situation as throughout the last 12 years: Saddam in power, Iraqis starving to death and blaming the US/UN. The US forces the issue by building up forces, and the rest reluctantly follow but desperately trying to prevent any actual regime change.

So, the US became the police of the world!

Clearly society does need a policeman of some sort. In the modern world it is supposed to be the UN, but as we have seen they are completely toothless, and unable to exert the willpower to make itself obeyed. Look at all the resolutions flouted. Not only by Iraq, but all nations, including Israel. The UN is like an unarmed English Bobby cop. Fine when all the criminals play nice, but sometimes, when all else fails, you have to call on Dirty Harry.

I would seriously recommend that the UN start examining itself, and asking itself why are they so poorly percieved, and why nobody respects UN resolutions. They just might be able to reform the UN into a body that can actually DO things rather than generate reports and consume large amounts of money.

Make no mistake: If a regime change campaign does not start in the next couple of weeks, it won't start at all. It will be too hot to do anything this year, and the U.S. will not put its neck out again next year to let the French and others cut it off again. So what would you rather have - another 12 years of Saddam and sanctions, or get rid of him now?

Charles


User currently offlineAviatsiya From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 8, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 862 times:

A rolling stone gathers no moss, and those who live in glass houses shouldn't throw stones.

User currently offlineMD-11 forever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 1 day ago) and read 852 times:

Another good one Charles, so the police is setting the law it is enforcing by themselves?? I always thought that democracy is based on the strict partition of forces, so that you don't end up having all the powers concentrated on one spot. This can't be your honest intention! otherwise we will end up that sooner or later all states on this planet have to accept the American constition or otherwise be bombed to "democracy"??

This is simply ridicoulus!

Cheers, Thomas


User currently offlineEg777er From United Kingdom, joined Feb 2000, 1836 posts, RR: 14
Reply 10, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 831 times:

Charles........if you think the US can rebuild Iraq alone you're deeply deluded.

The Economist recently reasoned that it would cost $25bn a year just for peacekeepers (100,000 x $250k a head), and that total necessary reconstruction costs approach $100bn a year (when you factor in Iraq's existing crippling debt - which won't get written off easily!).

If you go it alone, in 12 months your economy will be screaming for all the help you can get. But with your attitude, who'd give it to you?


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 830 times:

Thomas, you raise a good point. Of course what is happening now is not the ideal - far from it. But the UN is suffering from the same problems that strangled the League of Nations out of existence.

And of course a major issue is sovereignty. If the nations of the world want a UN which will be obeyed, they must also be willing to give up some of their sovereignty. Will they be willing to do this?

The UN also suffers from inequalities in its system. The 15-member or so security council is enough to pass resolution, but a great part of the world has absolutely no vote at any particular time. Five countries like France have absolute veto power on anything the UN wants to do (the General Secretary is not like a president or prime minister, who has some leeway to act on his own). Is this really a good way to run the world (if that's what you want the UN to do)?

At the present time, we have an unsustainable situation. We have:

- a dictator in power who has not disarmed and has not fully lived up to UN Res. 1441.
- A military force in place which has forced some concessions from Saddam, but which becomes useless after April due to weather, and loses its effect as an incentive.
- Sanctions that continue to kill 15000 people per month.
- A stalemated UN that can't get their thumbs out until the military threat is no longer a threat.

Something has to be done to get us out of this mess, and the UN doesn't seem to be doing it.

Charles


User currently offlineAmir From Syria, joined Dec 1999, 1254 posts, RR: 12
Reply 12, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 828 times:


Charles you say:
So what would you rather have - another 12 years of Saddam and sanctions, or get rid of him now?

This is not the point! You can't just jump out and declare some as being evil and destructive and create an enemy picture and then start a war. Iam not seeing Saddam as a nice guy but if the US stops interfering in the internal affairs of other nations a lot of problems will not have the size they have today.
The fact is the US aims to control the region, once they are finished with Iraq they will leave mot of their troops there so the oil in question if not just Iraq's Oil rather the whole Oil of all the Gulf Region, this is the real reason.

And do you really think that the people in the middle east are seeing the US as the good guys risking their lives just to free them from their dictator?

Besides if the US really only wants to get rid of Saddam don't tell me that in 12 Years the CIA and FBI were never able to liquidate him! This is ridiculous

Rgds
Amir


User currently offlineMD-11 forever From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 827 times:

...and the US doen't know any better thing to do than distabilize the whole UN!!

"- a dictator in power who has not disarmed and has not fully lived up to UN Res. 1441."

In all the various other threads you can find the numbers of resolutions an ally of the US doesn't obey and is not threathened to be bombed to democracy.... also it has been mentioned before that Saddam, as were the Taliban, once was Uncle Sam's friend and got weapon aid..... Ironic, isn't it?

- A military force in place which has forced some concessions from Saddam, but which becomes useless after April due to weather, and loses its effect as an incentive.

If time is so important, why don't the US put more effort into convince the doubting majority of the world that they really have evidence!

- Sanctions that continue to kill 15000 people per month.

As in another thread stated, the US have NO intention to lift the sanctions at all. not in the past and not now.

- A stalemated UN that can't get their thumbs out until the military threat is no longer a threat"

So you favour to rush in, and find out that indeed he had WMD the hard way??? Not very intelligent! And, at least UN should handle the issues and concerns of the large majority (I remember that there was a public UN session about this issue, and if memory serves me right, the majority was against a fast war!).

Cheers, Thomas


User currently offlineAmir From Syria, joined Dec 1999, 1254 posts, RR: 12
Reply 14, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 820 times:

Charles;

since you are so keen to free the poeple from dictatorships that don't comply with UN resolutions then ask the army to pass by the west bank and the Gaza strip to free the people which have beein subject to dictatorship since ages!

Paying moeny to Israel and attacking Iraq on the other hand, what a moral....

Rgds
Amir


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 15, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 23 hours ago) and read 819 times:

Amir,

I would agree entirely, if at the same time you would authorize the capture and prosecution of the Palestinian terrorists. And the ruthless crushing of their movement after the settlements have been disbanded.

Charles


Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Iraq War Illegal, Says Annan posted Thu Sep 16 2004 11:01:56 by Zak
Powell Not Sure If War Minus WMD's Was Justified posted Tue Feb 3 2004 17:15:35 by Alpha 1
If War Commences In Iraq..... posted Sun Feb 23 2003 17:26:48 by Alpha 1
EU Finally Unites To Warn Iraq And Calls War ... posted Tue Feb 18 2003 02:00:32 by NoUFO
Iraq - Was It A War, And Is It Lost? posted Sun Oct 22 2006 17:14:13 by NAV20
Iran: A Bigger Threat Than Iraq Was Before War? posted Sat Feb 4 2006 20:48:57 by Virgin744
The Transfer Of Which Might Not Technically Ouch posted Wed Dec 21 2005 23:57:04 by Matt D
What If: War With China Part 2 posted Sat Nov 26 2005 07:54:04 by Kevin
Michael Jackson Might Not Call The USA Home Soon posted Thu Jun 16 2005 08:23:42 by 777ER
Opec Wants Aid If Kyoto Treaty Happens posted Sat Dec 13 2003 10:29:18 by L-188