Powell: U.S. Won't Hand Iraq Over to U.N.

SlowwHand · September 12, 2003, 18:23

25 minutes ago
By BARRY SCHWEID, AP Diplomatic Writer

WASHINGTON - Heading for talks with reluctant allies, Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) says the United States won't turn over all authority in Iraq (news - web sites) to the United Nations (news - web sites).

"The U.N. isn't ready to handle it

," Powell told ARD, a German television station, in an interview released Friday as he flew to Geneva for the talks.

"We want to work with the U.N., but we can't simply cede all responsibility and authority to the U.N.," he said in advance of meetings Saturday with British, French, Russian and Chinese foreign ministers and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan (news - web sites).

The United States, hoping its allies will provide troops and money in the face of continued attacks and mounting costs in Iraq, has proposed a U.N. Security Council resolution creating a multinational force under a unified U.N. command with an American commander.

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin, in an article published Friday in the newspaper Le Monde, said a provisional Iraqi government should be set up in a month and a draft constitution should be ready by the end of the year.

State Department deputy spokesman Adam Ereli said in response that "the question of the time-scale first and foremost is for the Iraqis to answer. It's their country. We want to see them take sovereignty over that country as quickly as possible."

Powell, in an interview with France's TV2 that was taped Thursday and released Friday, said France keeps saying sovereignty should be given back to the Iraqi people.

"My answer to that is: 'Yes, as soon as we can. But to whom do we give it? We have to create a government. We have to create a parliament. We have to put in place a constitution after it's been written. We have to have elections,'" Powell said.

He said there obviously would be spirited discussion in Geneva, but "France is not an enemy. France is a friend and an ally."

Still, Powell said, the United States and its coalition partners in Iraq have invested a great deal of political capital, financial resources and the lives of young men and women. "We can't be expected to suddenly just step aside," he said.

Chances of nailing down an agreement this weekend in Geneva and at the United Nations in New York appear slim.

But Powell said, "I don't think there is a need to have a fight about this."

"Clearly the U.N. has a vital role to play," Powell said. "We've said this from the very beginning. And we should discuss and describe in the resolution what that role is."

Asked if the United Nations should play a leading role, Powell replied: "I said vital. I don't know what leading means."

Powell said Wednesday in an interview with Al-Jazeera, the Arab satellite network financed by Qatar, that Iraq would face "total chaos" if the United States surrendered to demands for a hasty U.S. transfer of authority to Iraqi control.

Powell also said it was not practical at present for the United States to transfer control to the United Nations.

"We want to transfer sovereignty for Iraq from the Coalition Provisional Authority to the Iraqis as fast as we can, but we must do it in a responsible way," Powell said.

Nubclear · September 12, 2003, 18:30

Why should the UN come in? Were doing a great job.

Chemical Ollie · September 12, 2003, 18:55

Told you so! As US decided to run this war against the majority of the international community, we are happy to sit by and see how you learn your lesson. You created the mess, now it's your duty to clean it up!

This is not going to be another Vietnam. It's going to be another Afghanistan - the Sovjet type. You roll over the army like it wasn't even there, but you fail to win the low-intensity guerilla war and the hearts of the people.

MichaeltheGreat · September 12, 2003, 19:30

Tomorrow's always another day.

Boris Godunov · September 12, 2003, 19:32

It's reverse psychology! We're trying to trick the UN into taking over totally so it pulls our asses out of the fire, and then we can point, laugh and say "look, the UN ****ed it up!"

Nubclear · September 12, 2003, 19:45

No, I don't think the US is that smart.

*Two days later, Bush uses that very line of rhetoric in a speech*

SlowwHand · September 12, 2003, 20:18

It's to laugh.

The U.N. waits for the USA and Britain to plow the field, plant, irrigate, weed, chase off varmints, and harvest; all with their equipment, seed, and labor
Then the U.N. wants the food, as it's their right.

Chemical Ollie · September 12, 2003, 20:21

Haliburton waits for the US tax payers to plow the field, plant, irrigate, weed, chase off varmints, and harvest; all with their equipment, seed, and labor
Then Haliburton wants the oil, as it's their right.

SlowwHand · September 12, 2003, 20:24

What a dork.

Still on the oil thing?

Nubclear · September 12, 2003, 20:25

Quote:

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
Haliburton waits for the US tax payers to plow the field, plant, irrigate, weed, chase off varmints, and harvest; all with their equipment, seed, and labor
Then Haliburton wants the oil, as it's their right.

Bad troll.

Quote:

What a dork.
Still on the oil thing?

Bad troll.

Chemical Ollie · September 12, 2003, 20:33

Troll is a word often used by those who lack valid arguments

MichaeltheGreat · September 12, 2003, 20:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
Troll is a word often used by those who lack valid arguments

And it's more often done by those who lack valid arguments.

Chemical Ollie · September 12, 2003, 20:38

So what exactly do you consider unvalid in my arguments?

MichaeltheGreat · September 12, 2003, 20:45

Did I refer specifically to you?

I was responding back about your post about use of the word "troll"

DinoDoc · September 12, 2003, 20:51

Quote:

Originally posted by MichaeltheGreat
Did I refer specifically to you?

He has a guilty conscience.

Chemical Ollie · September 12, 2003, 20:59

Quote:

Originally posted by DinoDoc
He has a guilty conscience.

No, but he quoted my post, so I wanted to know if he referred to me. Obviously not.

Lonestar · September 12, 2003, 21:20

Quote:

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
Haliburton waits for the US tax payers to plow the field, plant, irrigate, weed, chase off varmints, and harvest; all with their equipment, seed, and labor
Then Haliburton wants the oil, as it's their right.

Haliburton filed Bankruptcy a few years back, now it's 200,000+ Employees are saved.

Don't you care about the working man?

Bereta_Eder · September 12, 2003, 21:21

Lonestar has become a communist!

Lonestar · September 12, 2003, 21:24

Quiet! Do you want me to get eject as chairman of the AECCP?

Alls I'm saying is it worked out for everyone. The Oilmen are happy, the workers are happy, everyone is happy.

Well, not the guys in the Sunni Triangle. They have a bug up their ass.

Nubclear · September 12, 2003, 23:09

Quote:

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
Troll is a word often used by those who lack valid arguments

And I agreed with your arguement.

Therefore, because I agreed but used the word troll (indicating that I lack a valid arguement), i suppose that comes around and makes YOU lack a valid arguement

Urban Ranger · September 12, 2003, 23:13

If this is not Sillithink^TM at its best, I don't know what is.

Ted Striker · September 13, 2003, 00:13

Why aren't we training Iraqi locals to handle a large share of the burden of keeping the peace?

Boris Godunov · September 13, 2003, 00:27

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Why aren't we training Iraqi locals to handle a large share of the burden of keeping the peace?

We have been, but we keep shooting them by mistake.

Ted Striker · September 13, 2003, 00:45

Shut up that's not funny

LoneWolf · September 13, 2003, 00:45

Hey, isn't it great how all of our "allies" are pulling for us. Just makes me feel warm all over!

Boris Godunov · September 13, 2003, 00:52

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Shut up that's not funny

Indeed, it is quite, quite sad.

Urban Ranger · September 13, 2003, 01:04

Quote:

Originally posted by LoneWolf
Hey, isn't it great how all of our "allies" are pulling for us. Just makes me feel warm all over!

Allies < > puppets

MichaeltheGreat · September 13, 2003, 01:08

Quote:

Originally posted by Ted Striker
Why aren't we training Iraqi locals to handle a large share of the burden of keeping the peace?

It's also a bit dicey to separate out the ones we can trust, train them to our standards wrt communication procedures, coordination, support requests etc. without giving away too much of the store (a la our work with Ruffpuffs in 'Nam), and to count on them keeping their minds right when things hit the fan and they have the opportunity to shoot at us or at fellow Iraqis.

Training locals is a mid to long term goal, not a short term one.

LoneWolf · September 13, 2003, 01:10

I think you meant =. But anyway, no, but you might think that people who were our "friends" might not be quite so happy to see things be difficult for us.
But don't worry for us, we'll be fine without you.

Nubclear · September 13, 2003, 01:12

As Lonestar is slowly beginning to realize, the US is losing "friends" very quickly.

[QUOTE ] But don't worry for us, we'll be fine without you. [/QUOTE]

Ya know, there are certain situation when I hear this....