Seems only fair. They wanna share the joy of a freed people. They wanna share the glory of rebuilding. Fair enough. When’s the check coming?
Discuss.
Methinks you neither know the French position, nor the obligations the US has under the Geneva Conventions. But I assume what you REALLY want to tell us is that the war was, in fact, NOT authorized by the UN. Because if it was, it would be self-evident that the UN coordinates rebuilding efforts.
Since France thought this war unecessary,and probably a breach of international conduct,I think you’ll have to wait a long time before a checks forthcoming for the bombs and shells dispensed.
As for cleaning up the mess that’s left behind,I’d think it only fair for the US to foot that bill too,since their unsanctioned actions caused it.They (the architects of this attack) need to show a little concern for the fact that we’re living in a global scenario here,and ask for some input from the rest of the world as to how this might best be accomplished,before they pass the hat.
I’d think the UN (gasp) might be the place to hold a discussion.Theoretically this is the body that we pledged our support to way back when.Maybe time to mend some fences.
Asking for money without discussion seems like more of the jackboot approach to me.It’s not going over to well in the rest of the world.
We really need to get over this insulting mentality.
Well, if I was an Iraqi and knew the history of the abilities of nation-building of the UN compared to the US, i would pray the US had the primary role.
The UN is good for handouts, that’s it. Too much in-fighting and politicking. By the time they got around to an agreement on what the iraqi’s want, compared to what they should have, we will all be either dead and burried, or old enough to not give a shit.
France - Feed them
Germany - Give them water
US, England & Australia - Rebuild Iraq and get paid with contracts
NATO - Run the interim government
Russia, China - Shut up, watch and learn
France & Germany - acknowledge a faux pas when you see one, don’t act as if you don’t see it
And though i loath the french (in)action on this whole affair, I agree with Lure that the US has no right to demand anything from the French on this affair. The same way I feel the french have no right to demand the UN, or the French should be responsible for the democrotization of iraq. they chose their position, they never wanted a regime change to begin with. I’d be damned if I let them stick their nose in after the shit hit the fan and they practically ran.
Oh, is that so? The US record at nation-building is hardly something to be proud of, whereas the UN was involved in numerous successful examples.
Except, of course, that the US has no reason to give a shit already now to what the Iraqis want.
Um, France and Germany are not the one who have broken practically every body of international law there is. But it’s interesting that you consider trying to uphold the war as a faux pas. I take it, then, that Iraq was only wrong because they were weak?
Sorry, but there is no justification whatsoever for US, England or Australia to get paid by contracts. You break it, you rebuild it.
I like this, I like it a lot. Much better than the U.N.
Never happen. I’ll even bet money on it. Course my limit is a quarter. Game?
Sorry, but your claim that they never wanted a regime change is false. They always said that they were happy if it happened. They opposed the US scoffing at international law and ignoring other countries’ sovereignties ad libitum.
**
D’oh!
**
Put us on trial for war crimes after we finish rebuilding the Iraqi infrastructure, then slap our hands. Are you guys (France & Germany) pissed off knowing that a 5-year-old shouldn’t be holding a leash of a Pit-Bull? Ok, technically you would be slapping our paws. Your attempt at making us your lap-dog for a change didn’t work.
Ah, I see. I guess, then, that you are pissed at cops, too, and accuse them of trying to make bankrobbers lap-dogs?
It is interesting that you consider laws irrelevant. It’s even more interesting to see you be proud about having the same respect for the rule of law as Saddam.
Financially, wouldn’t it be a sound investment if the French and Germans DID contribute to the war costs at THIS point?
Not getting into the morality or the diplomacy, it would seem that France would JUMP at the chance to pay their “part” given an equal say in the rebuilding.
This war HAD to (or HAS to) be cheaper than anticipated.
To get a ground floor deal without the risk of a more costly campaign seems like a bargain.
It would be like being Microsoft in the mid 90’s at the IPO price.
Point of Order: the UN coordinating rebuilding efforts is an extremely new trend in world affairs, the first such instance being Cambodia in (when?) 1996 or so. IIRC, there have been a grand total of a mere four such instances, Cambodia, East Timor, Afghanistan and Kosovo. In fact, Afghanistan is the only instance where the UN has coordinated rebuilding efforts after a war it authorized (the other three were not authorized by the UN or were civil wars).
It may be proper, beneficial or necessary for the UN to run the reconstruction of Iraq. It is not “self-evident,” nor is it required - or even contemplated - by the UN Charter or international law.
Sua
France has already pledged an astoundingly generous [Dr. Evil] one millllliiiiioooonnnnnnnn dollars [/Dr. Evil] in humanitarian aid to Iraqi refugees. What France needs is a leader with better diplomatic skills, like that fin de siecle French vaudeville farting guy - at least he didn’t insult my intelligence when he talked out of his ass.
http://abcnews.go.com/wire/World/ap20030408_1259.html
What France needs is a leader with better diplomatic skills, like that fin de siecle French vaudeville farting guy who
Reeeeeeaaally? Ever hear of the Marshall Plan? Not counting the other European governments it helped in dire need, The US was primarily responsible for helping create the second and third largest economies in the world. The top 3 if you count the US itself. Surely the Germans and Japanese citizens made a significant effort, but compare East Germany to West Germany and you will see they hardly did it on their own. But I degress that the US must at least put as much effort/money/backing into the rebuilding as they did in the war. and intend to do it with substance and not some paper puppet regime for the long run. If you look at Japan, even a short-term military governance would be better than any attempt by any other entity (nation or entity like the UN) has ever done.
What nation has the UN ever rebuilt to a significant degree? Sua has opined with some. From what I hear the UN is shying away from it because of the experience it has had, and the outcomes. Mr Annan has always shied from the question or flat out rejected French’s “demands” and agreed with the US/UK on Iraq doing it on it’s own. With the lead of the US of course.
Well, you see, the US has never been fond of hanger’s on and money pit’s that ill run nations tend to garner. We are, however, fond of stability, especially where we get our primary resources, like oil from. So therefore, it would behoove anyone with more than street knowledge of nation-states to attempt to give the people what they want. That does not change the fact that it would also behoove the US to make sure they want stability and peace.
Sorry, but your claim is disengenuous to say the least. If france and Germany wanted a regime change, then they would have not attempted to block a “legal” resolution to make it happen. Therfore they are the ones that made it “illegal” because their desire was status quo.
Remember they wanted inspectors to continue? as well as the dabilitating sanctions that only helped cripple the Iraqi people under that murderous regime? Inspectors can’t even find WMD, much less remove Saddam from power, so you tell me how you can assert, with a straight face, that Their desire was a regime change and they only wanted it done under UN legitimacy, WICH THEY MADE “ILLEGAL” IN THE FIRST FRIGGIN PLACE!
You’re from Germany, right? And you people complain that Americans have no knowledge of world events?!!
As I noted, there have been four and only four instances of the UN running the rebuilding of a nation: Cambodia, East Timor, Afghanistan and Kosovo. Let’s look at the results.
Cambodia: a one-party state run by a former leader of the Khmer Rouge, whose followers have a nasty habit of killing opposition MPs.
Afghanistan: Repeatedly held up as an example of a US failure in nation-building. However, the UN is in charge, ergo it is actually an example of a UN failure.
East Timor: I’ll try to track this down, but I recently read a quote from an East Timorese leader, “if we could afford to buy guns, we’d be in a civil war right now.”
Kosovo: Ongoing, so too soon to tell. Currently, large problems exist concerning protection of the Serb minority and gangsters becoming involved in politics.
Let’s contrast the US’s record at nation building. There have been two instances - West Germany and Japan. Both are multiparty democracies with the second and third largest economies in the world.
OliverH, the criticism of the US record on nation building is not assertions that the US does a bad job of it. Instead, the criticism is that the US has failed to engage in nation building when it should have.
Those criticisms certainly have validity, but the fact remains that the US is the only nation/entity in the world to successfully rebuild any other nation.
Sua
Either Oliver thinks Germany sucks…
That’s not nation-building. We reformed their governments and rebuilt their economies, but Germany and Japan already had clear identities as nations when we came around.
Captain Amazing, by that definition, only (and arguably) East Timor would be the only instance of nation-building ever. Iraq certainly won’t be an instance of nation-building. Kosovo is out of the picture, as the UN policy there is explicitly not to build a nation - the UN considers Kosovo part of Serbia.
I’m defining “nation-building” as reforming government and rebuilding economies. I believe that is how the phrase is being commonly used.
Sua