Powell now says “let’s not hold grudges”, huh? Here is what he was saying just a few short months ago:
Iraq had contracts for the sale of oil with France, Russia, China and other countries. They were mentioned over and over again by the Americans as the self-interested reasons why those countries would not support the war.
As for reconstruction contracts, it is the American CPA, headed by L. Paul Bremer, who is awarding contracts, not the (non-existant) Iraqi government. The CPA has been repeatedly accused of handing out contracts without bidding and of rigging the bidding process so the contracts would go to who they want. Read the news. The award process is secretive and nobody gets any clue of what’s going on or why contracts were awarded to whoever gets them
The CPA was saying it wanted to use CDMA and not GSM which was just plain crazy but which favored US firms. As the process is quite secretive I do not know where that stands right now. But installing a CDMA network in Iraq rather than GSM would be as crooked as you can get. If they have changed over to GSM it is clearly after pressure was exerted because CDMA just makes no sense.
And, it is in this climate that they are asking the UN for help? Hah! The first thing France and other countries should say to the USA before they consider lending any help is that they have to clean up their act in Guantánamo. Then we can talk.
Well, Guantánamo is a sad and embarrassing story. But it seems to me that appart from the dopers nobody cares. France deffinitely doesn’t.
But here is acctually a very important point. Handing over resposibilties and power to the UN would simply disturb american business. So then that’s exactly what the UN should demand before they do anything!
In fact the Brits were more worried about Guantanamo than the french…
An article I read did mention that if clean and open bidding processes were done... that most American companies would probably win anyway. Due to expertise and experience, etc... So in the end maintaining US control just to make SURE those companies get their contracts shouldnt be that big a issue to Shrub. Its more I guess due to security issues and pride.
Is that what you think this is? Poster-bashing? You have no basis to believe there’s anything personal in it at all, as comforting a thought as that may be, relieving you as it does of any requirement to reconsider your facts and your reasoning. No, friend, it isn’t about you personally at all, and I’m sure I’m not the only one here tired of that dodge from you. It’s ignorance-bashing, falsehood-bashing, thoughtlessness-bashing, fact-filtration-bashing, dishonesty-bashing. Those are required of us here regardless of the source. Est-ce clair maintenant, monsieur?
France had no oil contracts in Iraq. According to MEES: “…it should be pointed out that only two such contracts were signed during this [sanctions] period – one with Lukoil, the other with a Chinese consortium led by the China National Petroleum Company (CNPC – 9 June 1997). While several other IOCs, including TotalFinaElf, Agip and Repsol, were in discussions over potential projects, no contracts were signed (for details of all these projects, see MEES, 14 October).”
The only oil business concerning France was done through the oil-for-food program which is afaik still in effect until the end of the year. Claims that we repudiated any of their contracts is a lie, and they really should shut up about it.
Russia is in a better position with Lukoil, and their contract is opposed by the new Iraqi gov’t and Russia intended to go to court over it. Fine, except for one thing: the old regime cancelled it last year, citing Lukoil in breach of terms. The US has little to do with it. I wish them the best.
The Chinese…have we barred the Chinese? If so there’d be a cite for it somewhere…
Likewise, an American company winning a GSM contract is evidence that the rebuilding process is clearly skewed towards American interests, not Iraq’s. Well that makes much more sense.
Tee, the impression I have of French and Russian interests is from what was said by the US government before the war. They said France, Russia and China were interested in keeping their oil contracts which they would lose in case of war. You can look up threads of that time and you will find it. So, if I am in error it is befause I believed what the US government was saying.
Still and notwithstanding the above, from what you say it seems they did have contracts which, I would assume, they expected to renew and which now are going to US companies. Maybe the adequate word is not “repudiated” but the fact is that the French are losing oil contracts in favor of American companies.
Which is what in the cocky days before the war US officials were threatening to do with France and aother non-collaborators: shut them out of the immense riches which were to flow from Iraq.
Now it seems those words and attitudes are coming back to haunt the US government who is begging for those countries to lend a hand.
So, you see, the attitude is still there. Yeah, let the eat shit! But please help us out! But let them eat shit! Great diplomacy there. Sure fire way to get results.
Probably the idea is to direct public attention away from horrific reality, and re-direct it towards mind numbingly idiotic clown acts.
depending on your point of view, horrific reality might be the (mostly unreported) mutilation of young US soldiers, or the (completely unreported) wholesale slaughter of Iraqis
Mostly, only incidents with US deaths are (reluctantly) reported. 12 to 15 US soldiers are wounded each day. Due to immediate quality assistance on the field and fast transportation to high-tech medical surgical centers, survival rate is very very high.
Iraqi deaths and wounded go almost completely unreported. Not because the US military won’t reveal the numbers, but because they simply don’t keep track and don’t care.
Say they shoot 10 civilians in a crowd. The bodies stay where they fall until family comes to take them away. If they’re wounded, they can crawl to the local “hospital” and proceed to rot from the inside out.
but, oh yeah, we’ll just rename french fries and everything will be OK.
I’m not sure the French are insulted. Personaly I thought it was the most hilarious thing I have heard in a long time. But ChaosGod is of course right. People are dying and some congressmen debate junk food. Now it’s not funny anymore…
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by T. Mehr *
I’m not sure the French are insulted. Personaly I thought it was the most hilarious thing I have heard in a long time.
[QUOTE]
I thought it quite scary how easily a supposedly civilised people could be whipped up into a frenzy by their government and the media.
No, not hilarious at all. How would you have felt if that bile of hate had been directed at Germany?
As I said, the French position was entirely misrepresented. There was never a “we will reject anything” ultimatum, they were merely insistent that the UN Inspectors must finish their work before war was sanctioned.
The UN’s business was to monitor Iraq for compliance with the UN mandates on weapons of mass destruction. And sure enough, there were indeed NO weapons of mass destruction. NPR reported just today that Hans Blix believes Iraq did in fact ditch its weapons program over ten years ago, but maintained a veil of secrecy as a cheaper deterrent to attack than an actual weapons program. It’s too bad GWB (Genius Whitehouse Boy) and his stooges didn’t ever consider that possibility.
The UN, in retrospect, was doing fine keeping the Iraqi situation down to a low simmer before the US had a hissy fit. True, a dictator was in power, but since there was no firm plan as to how to deal with the anarchy that (as all leaders with real international experience already knew) almost inevitably follows the loss of a dictator, it was the least of all possible evils.
It’s not as though Bush’s crew, with their practices of allowing looters to decimate the record of culture, instigating puppet governments under US business control, and shooting the police have brought the happiness and autonomy to the Iraqi people that he claimed (at one point or another in his random attempts to convince us he was right) was his goal.
Other than cutting Iraq completely loose, the UN looks like the best bet, given our track record. But we’re gonna have to play ball with them.
If I were the UN or any other country I would be extremely prudent before I went into Iraq which is a hornet’s nest right now. Anyone who is considered to cooperate with the Americans is and will be fair game and the situation is getting worse. Nobody wants to be doing the fighting for the Americans or to be taking bullets for them.
As a sign of how things are going:
Other countries do NOT need to get entangled in this and a war of attrition fought by the USA alone favors them. The more difficult the situation for the USA, the stronger their relative position. They have nothing to gain from helping the USA and a lot to lose.
No they didn’t. You’re flat out wrong in that assertion.
Maybe it was true in the US. The Murdoch Press in Australia and the UK seemed to agree. Other media all over the world were severely critical within hours.
This one says “Mr Powell also seemed taken aback when Dr Blix questioned the US interpretation of satellite photos that the Secretary had presented to the council last week as proof of Iraqi malfeasance.”
In other words, a mere one week on from the speech, the “proof” was being questioned. I’m sure it would be very easy to find more. Pity google doesn’t archive news for over 2 months.
You are right it is scary. But the fries business is so absurd that I can only laugh about it. Wonder what the French think. In Germany there is a certain type of ‘Bratwurst’ called *Polish sausage * - and it had this name all through the cold war…
As for the hate. Have you ever picked up a british tabloid when there was a soccer match between England and Germany? You can read things there that are much worse than anything comming from the US. So what? I simply think it’s redicolous and I take it as a joke.
Hey, wait actually I’m a little proud to be bashed by an idiot like Bush. At least it shows I’m not on his side!
This is a hydra with 42,000 heads. Myths such as the ones espoused here by Sam, Msmith and other usual suspects (as well as some promisingly blind new ones) have been shot down over and over since the beginning of this year. It’s the middle of September!
Never mind the foolish characterizations of the UN that keep popping up, I remember similar items of ignorance from the very first days I signed up to this board, which was a fair while ago.
Regarding what really happened with France and early views of the “diplomatic” strategy of the US as concerns the war Bush was so desperate to get into, I once again link to a couple discussions it may benefit the more unilateralist and uninformed posters here to review.
Tony Blair’s Speech to His Parliament reactions to Blair’s famous speech to parliament from before the war, showing that scepticism was more than warranted all along this sordid affair. If there was anyone who made a “slam dunk” regarding the war proposal it was Tony Blair with his precise and impassioned rhetoric – and even that was a far cry from a “slam-dunk”. Powell is a good guy and I do wish he were listened to more, but aside from selective citations you will have a hard time proving that he established the kind of ironclad case you are talking about, Sam. Perhaps some initial reactions to Powell’s case were generally more favourable than later ones, but what’s the difference of a couple days? Such a delay is to be expected given the usually poor quality and/or bias of US news media, as well as the fact that many viewers in the US who don’t get the kind of news they like tend to switch to another channel or read another medium (doesn’t make for very good reporting, but it explains FOX News’s popularity).
I don’t recall (at the moment) discussing Powell’s presentation per se, however I don’t remember it being earth-shaking. Maybe the view you are talking about, Sam, was held primarily in the US immediately following the presentation? It certainly was not in the rest of the world.
Mass Psychosis in Bush Administration? – a rather good analysis of the whole Blix and France controversies, separating the wheat from the slanderous propaganda. As I say every time I post this link, please ignore the seemingly administration-bashing title of the thread, it is somewhat misleading. If you want to open your mouth and wag your jaw about France on the topic of Iraq, please read this thread first and be aware of exactly what you are talking about.
How often must these points be repeated until the hydra is slain?