Go Back to the B3 Home Page
Complaints, compliments, arguments? Email me.
[<< "Cali Goober Debate..."] [Archive Index] [>>"Oh my God."]
09/25/2003 Archived Entry: "Turkey and Bangladesh - maybe."
Turkey and Bangladesh - maybe.
UN to Bush - Screw you.
Few nations will soon contribute troops or money to rebuild Iraq, even if the U.S. succeeds in negotiating a new United Nations Security Council resolution, administration officials said Thursday.Secretary of State Colin L. Powell leaves today for Geneva to discuss a compromise that would trade some U.S. authority over Iraq for more international help. The United States initially resisted the idea of sharing authority in Iraq but shifted that stand as costs and casualties increased.
Now the Bush administration is warning that significant international help will not come quickly even if Powell strikes a deal at the Security Council, congressional, administration and diplomatic sources said. But a resolution could, over time, improve the diplomatic atmosphere and win more assistance.
"Those looking for a large number of personnel [from other countries] will probably be disappointed in the short run ... but the need for a Security Council resolution to form the basis for cooperation remains very, very important," said Sen. Richard G. Lugar (R-Ind.), chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
The only countries seen as likely to send troops are Turkey and possibly Bangladesh. Turkey and India have both made the sending of troops conditional on a U.N. resolution. Neither France nor Germany, which opposed the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq, is expected to offer troops, and prospects are dim for forces from Pakistan, where President Pervez Musharraf is already under pressure for his close alliance with the U.S., the sources said.
Funny how all the pundits were saying that Bush 'didn't back off an inch' yesterday - and today, Powell's negotiating away US authority. What a fucking joke. What an embarrassment.
Replies: somebody speaks up.
They don't want the UN in Iraq, because their illegal actions, such as building the Bagdad US airbase, are being carried out in secret.
That's why it is a reasonable guess that the CIA and not 'terrorists' bombed the UN building. It serves Bx interests to have the UN pull back. In the meantime, Bx gives a display of lipservice to the UN which he hates with a vivid passion.
So in his speech, he brings up sex slaves, as an extention of his disgusting speech in Africa. He does this to rub the UN's face in slavery, the way he did in Africa: "The middle passage was dark and cramp and full of disease and violence,' something like that. All threats about his power and what it could do to the blacks if they don't kowtow pronto.
To the UN this morphs into a kind of off-topic screw you. Bx's plans in Iraq are also a screw-you, to the whole world, to the Muslims, to the Arabs, to the liberals, and to the 'free' countries that he thinks are a joke compared to his totalitarian buddies in Pakistan or Spain or Eritreaa...the list goes on.
When the money is all spent, the truth will come out, and then we will all get to see the Smirk of Smirk, as he hightails it to the private sector with his loot.
Conviction is the only option, or our democracy no longer is a rule of law, but a farce.
Posted by Paul @ 09/25/2003 08:20 AM NY
