Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: Ripsnort on October 24, 2003, 07:35:11 AM
-
WARNING: COPIED AND PASTED
http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/10/23/sprj.irq.main/index.html
Iraqi official says limited German, French help won't be forgotten
U.S. soldier killed in northern Iraq
Friday, October 24, 2003 Posted: 12:41 AM EDT (0441 GMT)
U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell and L. Paul Bremer, the U.S. civilian administrator for Iraq, talk at a session of the International Donors' Conference in Madrid on Thursday.
MADRID, Spain (CNN) -- A top Iraqi official attending an international conference on raising funds to rebuild Iraq warned Thursday that France and Germany's limited donations would not be forgotten.
Ayad Allawi, the current head of Iraq's U.S.-appointed governing council, said he hoped German and French officials would reconsider their decision not to boost their contributions beyond funds already pledged through the European Union.
"As far as Germany and France are concerned, really, this was a regrettable position they had," Allawi said. "I don't think the Iraqis are going to forget easily that in the hour of need, those countries wanted to neglect Iraq."
U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan -- also attending the conference -- urged the international community to give billions of dollars to rebuild the nation, saying reconstruction cannot wait until a sovereign Iraqi government is established.
"The people of Iraq have a hard road ahead of them, filled with both risk and opportunity," Annan said at the opening of the donors' conference for Iraq in Madrid, Spain. "Let us not leave them to travel that road alone." (Full story; Facts: Iraq's needs and donors)
Some countries have balked at funding programs in post-war Iraq, citing the go-it-alone approach taken by the United States and Britain ahead of the conflict.
Germany, France and Russia -- the chief opponents of war before the U.S. invasion -- sent lower level officials to the conference. Those countries have been opposed to what they see as too much U.S. control of the reconstruction process.
The United States has committed $20 billion to the effort. Spanish Economy Minister Rodrigo Rato said last Friday he hoped $15 billion to $20 billion would be raised, but Foreign Minister Ana Palacio told CNN last week that as little as $6 billion could be raised for a trust fund that the World Bank, United Nations and Iraqi authorities would manage.
U.S. soldier killed in explosive attack
A bomb attack in northern Iraq killed a U.S. soldier Thursday morning, and military officials are investigating the deaths of two troops in Baghdad from causes unrelated to combat, according to U.S. Central Command.
In the latest fatal attack on U.S. troops, a soldier from the Army's 4th Infantry division was killed and two were wounded when their convoy was hit by an improvised explosive device about 11:30 a.m. Thursday, a military statement said. The attack occurred in Baquba, about 60 kilometers (38 miles) north of Baghdad -- a region where opposition to the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq runs high.
In addition, two soldiers from the Army's 1st Armored Division died on Wednesday in separate noncombat incidents, Central Command said.
The first was found "in need of medical attention" in the barracks about 3:50 p.m. Wednesday, Central Command said in a written statement. Medics were called in, but the soldier was pronounced dead at the scene.
Another soldier was pronounced dead after collapsing in an "off-duty area" about 9 p.m. Wednesday. The soldier was evacuated to the 28th Combat Support Hospital and was pronounced dead.
Other developments
• The wars in Iraq and Afghanistan will be "a long, hard slog," and the United States lacks good measures of its progress in the war on terrorism, Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld told top aides in a memo. The memo asked a handful of top military and civilian Department of Defense officials to consider several questions about the progress of the war. Much of the memo reiterates what Rumsfeld has said publicly, but it does provide insight into his management style and reflects some dissatisfaction with the progress in the war on terror. (Full story)
An Iraqi military policeman walks past a car in which U.S. soldiers found explosives in Baghdad on Thursday.
• Retired Army Gen. Tommy Franks, who planned and commanded the U.S.-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, told a crowd at a charity event Wednesday night in New York that the United States is in a serious struggle against terrorism, not only within its borders but also in the free world. The former head of Central Command said, "The prize we seek is another 200 plus years of freedom in this country."
• An investigation into the August bombing of the U.N. headquarters in Iraq calls for reforms in the way the international body handles security in Baghdad, saying its security system was dysfunctional at the time of the attack that killed 22 people and wounded more than 150 others. In a report issued Wednesday, a panel appointed by Annan said "security awareness ... did not match the hostile environment." The panel recommended that new security arrangements be in place ahead of the return to the Iraqi capital of U.N. staff members, most of whom were moved out of country after the bombing.
-
You know I really hope that they do remember who where their friends in their time of reconstruction and need.
The cynic in me says they will forget. But wouldn't it be nice if they did not?
-
And?
-
Originally posted by Habu
You know I really hope that they do remember who where their friends in their time of reconstruction and need.
The cynic in me says they will forget. But wouldn't it be nice if they did not?
I'm pretty sure they will remember that amongs other things. Like why they need to rebuild their infrastructure.
-
Hehe.. master of the obvious Staga. Well said. :)
They should realise nobody want's to bail the US out of the mess they insisted on creating despite of others resistance.
-
of course they'll forget about that country known as "Freedom" everyone else does :p
-
You know I wonder if any other country in the world had the power the US has at this time in history how we would all be living.
Imagine China, or a middle eastern country like Iran, or perhaps France, or even Germany?
The US has the power and they choose when and how to use it. Iraq was a place that needed a regime change and got one. I am sure some people living in Stalin's day in the Soviet Union also thought life there was great. But there were millions perishing in the gulags who died without so much as a letter to their family to mark their passing, who did not.
Yes Iraq suffered a bit but the infrastructure can be rebuilt. A tyrant is gone. All secret weapons programs are gone. All terrorist funding in gone. All those bombers who kill themselves in Israel will have to make due without the $25,000 payment to their families. The prisons are no longer executing prisoners to create space for new ones. Sadaams idiot children are no longer killing and raping without fear of reprisal. The kurds in the north are free and and happy.
What remains of the Baath party and Sadaams loyal followers will continue to fight a terrorist style war there. The radical clerics will continue to preach Jihad and death to the enemies of Islam (ie anyone who is western regardless of who you are). Children will be brought up on this diet of hate and know no other point of view.
But there is a slim chance the US will pull it off and get Iraq back on its feet like it did Italy Japan and Germany after WW2. We can only hope. And if they do it will be all worth it and more.
-
I'm pretty sure they will remember that amongs other things. Like why they need to rebuild their infrastructure.
Sure they will remember the sack of Kuwait, why wouldn't they?
-
Originally posted by Staga
I'm pretty sure they will remember that amongs other things. Like why they need to rebuild their infrastructure.
We are not rebuilding their infrastructure, we are building their infrastructure.
-
Ayad Allawi, the current head of Iraq's U.S.-appointed governing council, said he hoped German and French officials would reconsider their decision not to boost their contributions beyond funds already pledged through the European Union.
So more money...better friends?
Tronsky
-
Let me sum it up:
So you want France and other countries to just give money away, money that will only go to US contractors like Haliburton?
Well,the deal is : money AND contracts, that's just business, we are all cynical capitalists here, c'mon!
cry weasel if you have to, welcome to the real world...
-
Habu what if the US wouldn't have supported Saddam in his fight with Iran and the Iranians would have invaded Iraq and freeing Iraq from the evil man in the process? If Saddam was so nasty, it should have been logical to let him be crushed by the way larger enemy.
Ever thought of that option?
Would that be a fundamentally worse situation to what you have there now?
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Habu what if the US wouldn't have supported Saddam in his fight with Iran and the Iranians would have invaded Iraq and freeing Iraq from the evil man in the process? If Saddam was so nasty, it should have been logical to let him be crushed by the way larger enemy.
Ever thought of that option?
Would that be a fundamentally worse situation to what you have there now?
Actually, yes. Key word is "fundamentally". ;)
-
LOL
This article would be analogous in 1939 to the German appointed commander in Poland complaining that the Polish people will be pissed off because Japan and Italy didn’t offer any assistance.
:p
-
Kieran I wouldn't be so sure about it though. As it's shown guerilla and terrorist activities in Iraq are only just kicking into effect.
If US or international troops are forced to leave the country in chaos, the following anarchy will automatically become as a terrorist breeding ground. Al khaeda must be actively looking for unorganised (free training areas) and people with despair enough to fall in the brainwashing methods used to recruit suicide bombers.
If Iran had it's way, the country would be fully occupied and religiously cleansed.
Heck, they (Iranians) could have had a chance to westernise their system if the Iraq support / mediate influence of U.S. wouldn't have raised the strong anti-US movement in the country. As things are now the fundamentalists have a nice little parade drum reminding of the western values that lead to countless extra Iranian deaths during the war.
Edit: Before you pour the rain on my parade, I'm only speculating of a highly theoretical alternative here.
-
Originally posted by Siaf__csf
Habu what if the US wouldn't have supported Saddam in his fight with Iran and the Iranians would have invaded Iraq and freeing Iraq from the evil man in the process? If Saddam was so nasty, it should have been logical to let him be crushed by the way larger enemy.
Ever thought of that option?
Would that be a fundamentally worse situation to what you have there now?
Yes I did. The reality is that people change and so do countries. The bellybutton kicking stalemate war with Iraq showed the radical clerics in Iran that war was not the way to export their revolution nor solve problems with its neighbors. They are mellower for the experience.
Saddam hated the Iranians and the US feared the repercussions of the radical Islamic government after the revolution. When the "students" took over the US embassy after the revolution they set the tone for the new governments relationship with the US. Jimmy Carter lost the election for his inaction against Iran. The thing to remember here is that the US at the time had the power to wipe Iran off the map a dozen times over both conventionally and of course with nuclear weapons. But they did not. They waited patiently for the hostages to be released then did not retaliate.
At that time Iraq was not the despotic regime that it was even 5 years later. Iraq had very close ties to France and Germany through their business relationships and Saddam even hosted Jacques Chirac a number of times in Iraq.
So at the time the US supporting Iraq over Iran was not surprising at all. The Iraq of those times is not the Iraq of last year and Saddam became much more despotic against his own people after the war. His hate of the west was probably a result of him believing he was set up to invade Kuwait then invaded as the west could not stand to have a strong country in the middle east. This is a great theory if you are a conspiracy guy but just a load of crap in reality.
Finally with regards to how people can change. At that time the most reviled dictator in the world was perhaps Kadaffy in Libya. He was funding terrorist attacks against the US and Britain (Lockerby and the German disco bombing), giving safe refuge to terrorists and probably providing training and logistical support as well.
Now after seeing the light (his actions only brought sanctions and isolation) he has moved to bring his country back into the sphere of responsible countries. Soon the last sanctions against Libya will be lifted and trade relations with the US will be restored.
So your argument as I understand it is really rather pointless. The US did not create Saddam, they only had the courage to correct the situation when no one else would.
I have a question for you. Do you ever wonder what the world today would be like if Israel is not pre-emptively take out the nuclear reactor France was building in Iraq in the 80's?
-
Originally posted by Spooky
Let me sum it up:
So you want France and other countries to just give money away, money that will only go to US contractors like Haliburton?
Well,the deal is : money AND contracts, that's just business, we are all cynical capitalists here, c'mon!
cry weasel if you have to, welcome to the real world...
Beats it going to Fina Elf like the food for oil did.
-
Originally posted by Fatty
Beats it going to Fina Elf like the food for oil did.
now fatty that's not fair. he can't help it his country supported a terrorist dictator even after his lovely UN said not to.
-
Originally posted by Fatty
Beats it going to Fina Elf like the food for oil did.
see? the discussion gets a lot healthier when we agree it's all about oil and money anyways !
and I'm not trolling, I can understand going to war to secure oil reserves and market shares: it's basic survival.
hiding behind moral principles to do it may be comforting to some ( holier-than-tho bible thumpers and whiny libs alike)
but when all is said and done, every war so far has been for money and power, this one included.
-
C'est pas vrai on m'aurait menti ?
C'est que pour le pognon ?
muahaha :lol
(franco-french joke non translatable)
-
Really what does the Iraqi appreciation mean?
No seriously...
1. we're giving them 87 million...
2. we've kicked the evil Baath party and their dictator out of power.
3. We're establishing a democratic government
4. We're rebuilding their infrastrature - probably even going to modernize it.
5. Bringing them mobile phones... electricity, medicine, sewage plants, McDonalds, Pepsi cola, KFC, American TV, and American Christianity!!
Why do they continue to resist us?
We are the good guys...We're Christians! Jesus loves them.
Hey we'll even throw in 1/2 million American jobs, once the Ford manufacturing plants are open.
So why are they still killing American soldiers ever day?
Bunch of rag head ingrates!
I told Dubya we'd be better off attacking and rebuilding North Korean.. Japan, Philipines, and South Korea are good examples, that Asians are more open to America's way of forced Western Democratization.
Oh well! Whatcha gonna do when you have a Dubya in your name.
-
Originally posted by DmdNexus
America's way of forced Western Democratization.
yes, we all know saddam and his idiot sons raping, torture, and murder were much better for the iraq people.
-
I'm pretty sure they will remember that amongs other things. Like why they need to rebuild their infrastructure.
====
Heres what I think:
30 years of neglect of the nations infrastructure under hussein is what has lead to the widespread and devastating condition of Iraqs infrastructure. I would be surprized if coalition military action over 13 years accounted for even 10% of infrastructure loss......Im thinking 3 or 4% tops.
Hussein spending tens of billions of Iraqs oil revenue on millions of tons of weapons and ammunition and several dozens of lush palaces for the Iraqi people to enjoy. Hussein made sure that only his supporters recieved any wealth at all. The Iraq people were treated as barely worthy animals by Hussein. Hussein Killed tens of thousands of iraqi children by denying them medicine expressely allowed by the UN to enter Iraq in spite of the embargo just to build anti western sentiment.
Just to name a few glaring examples.....
-
Yeager speaks a bit of truth here, on Public TV (you know, the left-based Public TV) actually had an hour long program done by independents about how badly Iraq's infrastructure really was under Saddams power. That country was impoverished beyond belief except for a handful of fortunates that happed to be related to Saddam somehow.
If anyone perceives what Iraq had as an "infrastructure", then I guess you must have been raised in a ghetto...nothing wrong with that, but your perspective changes when you go from the gutter up.
-
Rip, that was our fault. We destroyed it in 1991 because we didn't love Saddam anymore and did not support his peaceful integration of Kuwait into his Democracy. And before that, it was the Isralies fault for destroying his peaceful Nuclear plant. And before that it was Irans fault for attacking him, etc.