Thread Tools
Old March 18, 2003, 11:30   #121
HershOstropoler
Settler
 
Local Time: 22:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally posted by Drake Tungsten
How many times do I have to explain that I'm angry with France because they actively opposed US interests, not because they "failed to back us"? I'm so tired of saying the same thing over and over...
And the US never actively acts against French or European interests? Please.

The funny part about this is that the so-called realist approach in foreign policy is totally unrealistic. The Bushies have told us that they give a flying **** about its old allies and will build ad hoc alliances. Now some old allies have told the Bushies to sod off and built an ad hoc alliance against this. If it hadn't happened on Iraq, it would have happened on something else, action and reaction.

But the Bushies thought they deserve a special role and support nonetheless, just like they have deserved the Presidency, their big tax cuts, their police state etc.

Dan:

The UK AG, sure. He's just an officer - like Kofi Annan. Who happens to speak for the UN though... why not trust Kofi on the matter? Cause you don't like what he has to say?
__________________
“Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)
HershOstropoler is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 11:36   #122
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
Quote:
Originally posted by GePap
Ned:


As for the second part: Yeah, the French have had this grudge since Dien Bien Phu.... come on Ned. The French do not see the coming war as benefiting their interests (in whichever way you decide to see that), so they did not back it, just as in 1956 the US saw the Anglo-French Israeli invasion of Egypt as being against its interests.
What interests? The US and the USSR combined together in the UN to demand that Britain and France withdraw. The Israeli's were given a guarantee about the Straights, and they withdrew.

I remember Eisenhower being very angry about the French and British on TV. He said that they had not consulted him prior to intervening.

I think this was more about cold-war polictics and Eisenhower's detente with the USSR than about American interests in the ME.
Ned is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 11:43   #123
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
Quote:
Originally posted by HershOstropoler


And the US never actively acts against French or European interests? Please.

The funny part about this is that the so-called realist approach in foreign policy is totally unrealistic. The Bushies have told us that they give a flying **** about its old allies and will build ad hoc alliances. Now some old allies have told the Bushies to sod off and built an ad hoc alliance against this. If it hadn't happened on Iraq, it would have happened on something else, action and reaction.

But the Bushies thought they deserve a special role and support nonetheless, just like they have deserved the Presidency, their big tax cuts, their police state etc.
Don't be so patronizing about Bush. There are literally millions, more like 200 million Americans, who feel the same way about France. The French are very unpopular in the US right now, regardless of their reasons for actively trying to sabotage the US at the SC.
Ned is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 11:46   #124
GePap
Emperor
 
GePap's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: of the Big Apple
Posts: 4,109
Actually, the US felt that by acting, well, like imperialist powers the UK and France undermined the US position that it was figthing for democracy in the ME against the godless commies. Notice how Nasser was driven further into the Spvoiet camp becvause of this. So yes, it was part of Cold War politics, in which the US saw the British and French action undermining the US position. Add to this the fact that the SU was able to invade Hungary that year with little comment initially because the world and UN were stuck on the Suez issue.

If the overriding concern for the US globaly was the fight against the SU, then any action that strenghtened the SU's hand was against US interest. After all, the main rationalization for the current war Bush gave yesterday was "invade Iraq as part of the greater war on terrorism", now wasn't it?

Quote:
How many times do I have to explain that I'm angry with France because they actively opposed US interests, not because they "failed to back us"? I'm so tired of saying the same thing over and over...
And how could France have not 'actively oposed US interests' without it willing to back us diplomatically in the UN? That is the art of your point I fail to see. Do you think they had anyting to do with our innitial failure to get the Turks on board? Do you have any evidence they did anything to try to convince Gulf states not to base us? Did they veto 1441. which si one of the resolutions we claim gives us the legitimacy for this war?( actually, according to Ari, the real legitimacy comes from ealier ones)? How on earth did they 'actively oppose Us niterest", except in the diplomatic way I spoke about, which does then become an issue of them backing us in the UN?
__________________
If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake :(
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw
GePap is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 11:49   #125
DanS
Apolytoners Hall of FameApolyCon 06 Participants
Deity
 
DanS's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Not your daddy's Benjamins
Posts: 10,737
The funny part about this is that the so-called realist approach in foreign policy is totally unrealistic.

FYI: The Bushies are a mix of realists and neocons (or neoreaganites). I think you have a beef with the neocons (Wolfowitz), not the realists (Powell).

The UK AG, sure. He's just an officer - like Kofi Annan. Who happens to speak for the UN though... why not trust Kofi on the matter? Cause you don't like what he has to say?

I would trust both on the matter, but on this one they seem to disagree. By and large, Kofi's arguments were about legitimacy, not legality, however.
__________________
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
DanS is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 11:49   #126
HershOstropoler
Settler
 
Local Time: 22:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 0
In the next round of this, we will see actual "active opposition". If the Bushies decide to take their jihad to Iran, it will get really ugly among western nations.
__________________
“Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)
HershOstropoler is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 11:52   #127
HershOstropoler
Settler
 
Local Time: 22:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 0
Quote:
Originally posted by DanS
FYI: The Bushies are a mix of realists and neocons (or neoreaganites). I think you have a beef with the neocons (Wolfowitz), not the realists (Powell).
That's the same as with "liberal". So Wolfowitz and co are new-speak realists, while Powell would be more on the classic realist side. What I'm missing is the real realism - the classic liberal view.
__________________
“Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)
HershOstropoler is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 11:54   #128
DanS
Apolytoners Hall of FameApolyCon 06 Participants
Deity
 
DanS's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Not your daddy's Benjamins
Posts: 10,737
So Wolfowitz and co are new-speak realists

Eh? No, a realist would think the neocons are a bit crazy, because a plank of the neocon movement is democratization.
__________________
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
DanS is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 11:55   #129
GePap
Emperor
 
GePap's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: of the Big Apple
Posts: 4,109
Quote:
HershOstropoler
There is nothing "realist" about the neo-con point of view. Most of the most ardent realists I know of are deeply opposed to this war.
__________________
If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake :(
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw
GePap is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:01   #130
HershOstropoler
Settler
 
Local Time: 22:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 0
"Eh? No, a realist would think the neocons are a bit crazy"

"There is nothing "realist" about the neo-con point of view."

No need to argue this. I had the impression though the neo-cons were often thrown in with the realist camp, and the rightwing think tanks where this came from saw temselves in that vein.

As for Wolfowitz's Democracy campaign, yeah, that doesn't fit at all. I've just never taken it seriously.
__________________
“Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)
HershOstropoler is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:07   #131
DanS
Apolytoners Hall of FameApolyCon 06 Participants
Deity
 
DanS's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Not your daddy's Benjamins
Posts: 10,737
I've just never taken it seriously.

I have to admit that it's appealing to me.

If Iraq were to have a more representative government. If Iran could rewrite its constitution to remove the mullahs from power. If North Korea were to collapse, opening the way for peaceful unification under South Korean control. This would be a neocon trifecta that would make me very happy.
__________________
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
DanS is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:13   #132
HershOstropoler
Settler
 
Local Time: 22:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 0
Right goal, wrong means.
__________________
“Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)
HershOstropoler is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:18   #133
DanS
Apolytoners Hall of FameApolyCon 06 Participants
Deity
 
DanS's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Not your daddy's Benjamins
Posts: 10,737
Different situations, different means.
__________________
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
DanS is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:25   #134
HershOstropoler
Settler
 
Local Time: 22:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 0
Different means perhabs, reasonable means though - where?
__________________
“Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)
HershOstropoler is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:29   #135
DanS
Apolytoners Hall of FameApolyCon 06 Participants
Deity
 
DanS's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Not your daddy's Benjamins
Posts: 10,737
Removing Hussein from power through force is reasonable, except perhaps in a tactical way (he might blow his wells, he might use chem weapons, he might terrorize the US, etc.).
__________________
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
DanS is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:36   #136
GePap
Emperor
 
GePap's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: of the Big Apple
Posts: 4,109
Removing Saddam Hussein form power by force, and then occupying Iraq for several years with many thousand of US troops in an operation that begun with minimal international support: that is so reasonable?

Imaigne Saddam as a alrge tumore: now, obviously we want the tumor out..but how do we do it? patient and careful surgery? Or by hacking the person open with an ax and scooping it out with an ice cream scoop? Bothe ways lead to the same aim: but they are hardly equal.

The job here is not getting rid of Saddam..its remaking Iraq. And we are off to a shaky start.
__________________
If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake :(
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw
GePap is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:38   #137
DanS
Apolytoners Hall of FameApolyCon 06 Participants
Deity
 
DanS's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Not your daddy's Benjamins
Posts: 10,737
that is so reasonable?

Sure.

The job here is not getting rid of Saddam..its remaking Iraq.

Why the false choice? It's getting rid of Saddam and remaking Iraq so we have a lesser chance of a future Saddam.
__________________
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
DanS is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:44   #138
HershOstropoler
Settler
 
Local Time: 22:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 0
"It's getting rid of Saddam and remaking Iraq so we have a lesser chance of a future Saddam."

And this administration will screw up the remaking part, if they get to it at all.
__________________
“Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)
HershOstropoler is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:45   #139
DanS
Apolytoners Hall of FameApolyCon 06 Participants
Deity
 
DanS's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Not your daddy's Benjamins
Posts: 10,737
Tough to know, Hershell.
__________________
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
DanS is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:49   #140
GePap
Emperor
 
GePap's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: of the Big Apple
Posts: 4,109
Quote:
Originally posted by DanS
that is so reasonable?

Sure.
No comment.

Quote:
Why the false choice? It's getting rid of Saddam and remaking Iraq so we have a lesser chance of a future Saddam.
The choice is so different: one bomb, one bullet gets rid of Saddam, while rebuilding Iraq will be a monumental job far beyond remaking either Germany or Japan, and back in 1945 the American people were willing. Today we are not. Have you seen anyone of this admin. yet broach the issue of occupation in front of an auience besides a few congressional committees asking what it will cost? I hear all these people supporting the war saying: "get it done and bring the boys back home". Fine sentiment, only half or more of the "boys" won't be coming home anytime soon, as they have to stay there.
We are undertaking a massive job (not the war, but the aftermath) very glibly and that is very dngerous.
__________________
If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake :(
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw
GePap is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:50   #141
HershOstropoler
Settler
 
Local Time: 22:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 0
They managed to piss off 80 % of the public in your allies in a few months by simple rhetoric. Now imagine what those clowns will do in a hostile environment like Iraq where they will be actually responsible for everything.

But most likely they won't even try. Big fat rhetoric and no follow through, unless it's about something you can bomb.
__________________
“Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)
HershOstropoler is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 12:53   #142
DanS
Apolytoners Hall of FameApolyCon 06 Participants
Deity
 
DanS's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Not your daddy's Benjamins
Posts: 10,737
It seems that you think "no follow through" is inevitable. This administration hasn't shown that trait. I think you have the last administration in mind.
__________________
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
DanS is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 13:01   #143
GePap
Emperor
 
GePap's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2001
Location: of the Big Apple
Posts: 4,109
When this admin. brought out their budget they had not included one cent for Afghanistan: congress ahd to put it in. The admin.s excuse: they forgot. On the topic of Afghnaistan, were is the Afghan army? has central authority moved beyond Kabul. According to the UN there were more cases of hunger this last winter (2002-02) than last (2001-02) while the Islamic police is back out arresing people for doing "unIslamic" things. And this is in a state were we have only 10,000 troops.

Now Iraq: we expect 100,000 troops in occupation for at elast 2 years (accoridng to the White House). one geenral said we might need 200,000 but the Whj sayed he knew not what he was speaking about. The US has not mae a commitmen of that size for 30 years, and in this age of 24 hour news, expected quick wars and instant gratification, how long do you think the country will back that? And it has to back it..this is not a policy the admin. can carry out without congress, if simply because of the massive cost.

Given that this amdin. has yet to fully deliver all the money it promised for Homeland security and their track recodr in Afghanistan, and admin. that kept saying "Turkey is on board' just to be shot down the first time aound, and admi. that kept saying "we ahve the 9 votes' only to withdraw the resolution, am I supposed to be optimistic about a job orders of magnitude greater? Why?
__________________
If you don't like reality, change it! me
"Oh no! I am bested!" Drake :(
"it is dangerous to be right when the government is wrong" Voltaire
"Patriotism is a pernecious, psychopathic form of idiocy" George Bernard Shaw
GePap is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 14:33   #144
orange
Civilization III Democracy GameNationStatesDiplomacyApolytoners Hall of Fame
Emperor
 
orange's Avatar
 
Local Time: 16:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: It doesn't matter what your name is!
Posts: 3,601
It'll be Marshall Planish. Nations will invest a lot of money and make out like bandits. Will it rebuild Iraq - yes, but make no mistake about who is truly profiting.
__________________
"Chegitz, still angry about the fall of the Soviet Union in 1991?
You provide no source. You PROVIDE NOTHING! And yet you want to destroy capitalism.. you criminal..." - Fez

"I was hoping for a Communist utopia that would last forever." - Imran Siddiqui
orange is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 14:41   #145
HershOstropoler
Settler
 
Local Time: 22:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Nov 2002
Posts: 0
"This administration hasn't shown that trait."

Where has it shown that it puts the money where its mouth is, apart from having a war on Iraq and tax cuts for the rich?
__________________
“Now we declare… that the law-making power or the first and real effective source of law is the people or the body of citizens or the prevailing part of the people according to its election or its will expressed in general convention by vote, commanding or deciding that something be done or omitted in regard to human civil acts under penalty or temporal punishment….” (Marsilius of Padua, „Defensor Pacis“, AD 1324)
HershOstropoler is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 16:06   #146
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
I think Bush said something in a speech about continuing the UN oil for food program. However, this time, the money will actually go to buy food. But also, the UN limitations on how much oil the Iraqi Government can sell will certainly be lifted. This will provide a lot more cash that will be available to provide for reconstruction of Iraq. I don't know whether to be any substantial need or outside sources to pay for reconstruction.

I also presume that Iraq oil revenues will be used to pay Iraq's debts to Russia, Germany, France and Kuwait.

If, however, that oil money is not sufficient to both reconstruct Iraq and pay Iraq's debts, then American reconstruction aid, in essence, will simply been paying off Iraq's debts to France, Russia and Kuwait. I would have a very hard time with this. Perhaps, any USA reconstruction aid should be in the form of a loan rather than a gift.

Obviously, France, Germany and Russia will have similar issues. They want to be repaid. They also want a piece of the reconstruction contracts. But where's the money going to come from, if not from Iraqi oil? Are the European's, other than France Germany and Russia, going to provide financial aid to Iraq that will, in effect, only pay back the Iraqi debts to France, Germany, Russia and Kuwait?
__________________
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en
Ned is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 16:15   #147
Kramerman
Prince
 
Kramerman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UT, Austin - The live music capital of the world
Posts: 884
Quote:
Originally posted by TheStinger
Its not a question of helping the Iraqis. The people of Iraq will be be helped whoever gets involved in reconstruction. The question is should the Germans and rench get any of the contracts. If I was in the new Iraqi government I would be more likely to award a contract to the country that got rid of the dictator in my country, rather than the ones who were happy for him to remain.
__________________
"I bet Ikarus eats his own spunk..."
- BLACKENED from America's Army: Operations
Kramerman - Creator and Author of The Epic Tale of Navalon in the Civ III Stories Forum
Kramerman is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 16:27   #148
Kramerman
Prince
 
Kramerman's Avatar
 
Local Time: 15:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: UT, Austin - The live music capital of the world
Posts: 884
Quote:
Originally posted by Ned
I think Bush said something in a speech about continuing the UN oil for food program. However, this time, the money will actually go to buy food. But also, the UN limitations on how much oil the Iraqi Government can sell will certainly be lifted. This will provide a lot more cash that will be available to provide for reconstruction of Iraq. I don't know whether to be any substantial need or outside sources to pay for reconstruction.

I also presume that Iraq oil revenues will be used to pay Iraq's debts to Russia, Germany, France and Kuwait.

If, however, that oil money is not sufficient to both reconstruct Iraq and pay Iraq's debts, then American reconstruction aid, in essence, will simply been paying off Iraq's debts to France, Russia and Kuwait. I would have a very hard time with this. Perhaps, any USA reconstruction aid should be in the form of a loan rather than a gift.

Obviously, France, Germany and Russia will have similar issues. They want to be repaid. They also want a piece of the reconstruction contracts. But where's the money going to come from, if not from Iraqi oil? Are the European's, other than France Germany and Russia, going to provide financial aid to Iraq that will, in effect, only pay back the Iraqi debts to France, Germany, Russia and Kuwait?
Maybe France, Germany, and Russia would be kind enough to nullify the debt, no? But this would cancel out half the purpose of their long and fierce oppostion to the war in the first place...

The debt was technically with Saddam's regime, not the new one, so does the new reginme even have to pay the debt to begin with?
__________________
"I bet Ikarus eats his own spunk..."
- BLACKENED from America's Army: Operations
Kramerman - Creator and Author of The Epic Tale of Navalon in the Civ III Stories Forum
Kramerman is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 16:34   #149
Ned
King
 
Ned's Avatar
 
Local Time: 13:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Oct 1999
Location: of Aptos, CA
Posts: 2,596
Kramerman, there is a general priniciple of international law that a change in goverment does not automatically cancel the debts of the foreign government.

One could just see the consequences if any other principle pertained. Governments would constantly be replaced by revolutions simply to cancel debts.
__________________
http://tools.wikimedia.de/~gmaxwell/jorbis/JOrbisPlayer.php?path=John+Williams+The+Imperial+M arch+from+The+Empire+Strikes+Back.ogg&wiki=en
Ned is offline  
Old March 18, 2003, 16:45   #150
DanS
Apolytoners Hall of FameApolyCon 06 Participants
Deity
 
DanS's Avatar
 
Local Time: 17:56
Local Date: November 1, 2010
Join Date: Dec 1969
Location: Not your daddy's Benjamins
Posts: 10,737
Where has it shown that it puts the money where its mouth is, apart from having a war on Iraq

Afghanistan.
__________________
I came upon a barroom full of bad Salon pictures in which men with hats on the backs of their heads were wolfing food from a counter. It was the institution of the "free lunch" I had struck. You paid for a drink and got as much as you wanted to eat. For something less than a rupee a day a man can feed himself sumptuously in San Francisco, even though he be a bankrupt. Remember this if ever you are stranded in these parts. ~ Rudyard Kipling, 1891
DanS is offline  
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 17:56.


Design by Vjacheslav Trushkin, color scheme by ColorizeIt!.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2010, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Apolyton Civilization Site | Copyright © The Apolyton Team