Europe squaring up to U.S. over Iraq
 

"BRUSSELS (Reuters) - European Union and NATO ministers will tell U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell on Thursday the United Nations must play the leading role in the future of a post-war Iraq."

I think not.

http://www.reuters.co.uk/newsArticle...toryID=2500528

c'mon, UN has the right to PAY for reconstruction, I would never deny them that
;-)))

LOL too true. America pays for half the humanitarian aid for the entire world! And who are the first people the UN go squeeling to when they want something done? America. When money needs to be spent or some country has to put its soldiers lives on the line, its nearly allways America that does the most work.

Bugger the UN!

yeah!

let's have Russians, Germans and Frenchies finance UN from now on!

Yes, the UN shoud play a role. Why should we be allowed to set up a puppet government that lets us do whatever we want with the oil? The UN should oversee creating a democracy run by the Iraqi people. Otherwise, why are we there?

They do already. The US rarely pays its UN dues properly. Within the last few years, a private citizen paid the dues congress refused to approve.

We had military rule over Germany and Japan for several years after the Second World War and when we gave those countries back their independence we left them with constitutions and democratic governments (they seem to have fared quite well being the two wealthiest nations in the world second to the US). We will attempt to do the same with Iraq and should not allow the UN role to be dominate.

that was me

I was tricked into it, I thought I was buying some really cool knives for $19.99 and I must have dialed the 800 number wrong :(

Secretary of State, Colin Powell, clearly demonstrated that Iraq was, after twelve years and seventeen resolutions, still defying it.

The Security Council has shown little ability to thwart wars and other conflicts from its inception. It did nothing in 1994 to stop the Rwandan Hutu's from slaughtering 800,000 people in that nation.

It remained incapable of stopping Serbia's "ethnic cleansing."

A dozen years of on-again, off-again inspections in Iraq accomplished nothing.

The US still has troops in South Korea after the 1950's "UN Police Action."

The U.N. has failed miserably in preventing horrific mass murder in Rwanda, the Balkans and Cambodia. It has been totally ineffective in promoting peace in the Middle East, engaging in vicious slurs against Israel while coddling thugs like Yasser Arafat. It has been unable to prevent terrorism anywhere.

Meanwhile, the United States is expected to bear a ridiculous share of the cost of operating the United Nations. The U.N. assesses dues based on the member country's relative share of the world's economy. Since the U.S. economy represents about a quarter of the world's economy, we're expected to pay 25 percent of the costs of running the bloated, frequently corrupt U.N. bureaucracy.

Thanks to the UN, malaria has made a triumphant return, killing millions every year because of its ban on DDT. Then, of course, there was the UN ban on Freon, one of the most beneficial chemicals ever created. It no longer can be used in any air conditioner or refrigerator, nor as an effective fire-extinguishing agent.

The United Nations wants to impose its own tax on all financial transactions, exercise total power over land use throughout the world, require everyone to carry a national or international identity card, require population control, and has even instituted its own court to prosecute anyone for whatever it deems to be crimes against humanity. In addition, the UN wants its own independent military forces.

:1orglaugh :1orglaugh

Well, you're probably too young to remember the first gulf war so I'll fill you in.
We won. As part of the agreement for us to stop pounding the shit out of those scum, they agreed to disarm and surrender all of their weapons of mass destruction. They haven't.
Do you remember why we faught the first gulf war sonny?:1orglaugh

werd

European Union and USA must play the equal worth role in the future of a post-war Iraq. Otherwise USA wiil be aggressor.

Mark

thats pretty much the only way to show all those fucks that the war isn't about oil. if you guys manage the oil then you'll look like a bunch of liars. you'll just piss off more people and then you'll have another terrorist attack for sure.

Some observations:

• Few people in the United States and nobody in the Bush administration gives a shit if the rest of the world thinks this is about oil.
• Its surprising how little some people talk about how France and Russias opposition to the war in Iraq is ALSO ABOUT THE OIL. These countries are perfectly willing to let the Iraqi people be tortured, starved, and oppressed for the sake of their own oil contracts. That oil money was NOT going to the Iraqi people for food, education, or medicine. It was going to build weapons and palaces. And who do you think Iraq was buying its weapons from?
• The United States may have only painted a thin veneer of altruism over their self interest regarding Iraq, but anyone who thinks that international politics is driven by altruism is naive and should start educating themselves with rowanda.
• Iraq owes about $100 billion in debt to other governments including, oh surprise, Russia & France. There is some talk now about erasing this debt. This would be both to ease the burden on the new government of Iraq and to teach a lesson to those who loan money to brutal dictators. I think this is a splendid idea.
• Bush has allocated some $75 billion dollars in his budget to prosecute the war in Iraq. When the United Nations coughs up $75 billion + 1 dollars for Iraq, then we can talk about who controls things there.
• Its interesting that the United Nations does not want to be involved before the risks are taken, but only after things seem to be turning out well.
• I think that the United States attitude toward the United Nations controlling Iraq should be GO FUCK YOURSELF.

Is the UN going to pay the US back the cost of this operation?

I love the UN now.

DON'T DO IT-DON'T DO IT-DON'T DO IT-DON'T DO IT-DON'T DO IT-okay...you're doing it...we're in charge when you're done...

Actually they are not really democracies and neither is the US. france and Germany are socialist govts while the US is a republic.

:thumbsup

Where did I say democracy? I know that the US is not a democracy and is a democratic republic.

so wtf is a democracy to you?!

I just went back and looked up a post I made six months ago on this topic in this thread. Hmmm....

:)

A democracy is controlled by a direct vote of the people. We don't have that.

Edit: to be specific, that's what a pure democracy would be. We do have a democracy. That's just hair-splitting.

SpaceAce

I hope the US and UK will deal with it on their own. I dont want to pay tax dollars for it. Since you are all eager to pay for it on your own I hope you find your money well spent!

Not to mention failed to ever be tried for the war crimes of the first Gulf War.

They raped a woman soldier who had broken arms and legs, anyone remember this?

I bet the POWs who were beaten and killed in the first one have never forgotten the justice they were deserved.

http://www.cnn.com/US/9803/13/senate.iraq.vote/

Chemical Ali is in the same boat.