Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Sat 04/26/2003 View Fri 04/25/2003 View Thu 04/24/2003 View Wed 04/23/2003 View Tue 04/22/2003 View Mon 04/21/2003 View Sun 04/20/2003
1
2003-04-26 International
UN heads for new rift over Iraq role
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Steve White 2003-04-26 01:52 am|| || Front Page|| [3 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 Watch the fun!

Here's the joke: If the SC votes down the US resolution (Russia or France issues a veto), the US will act as steward of Iraq's natural resources pursuant to the 1907 Hague Convention on Land Warfare -- and sell the oil on the open market. Every major power ratified this treaty.
Posted by Norman Rogers  2003-04-26 08:29:00||   2003-04-26 08:29:00|| Front Page Top

#2 Meet the new rift, same as the old rift!
Posted by Spot  2003-04-26 09:02:44||   2003-04-26 09:02:44|| Front Page Top

#3 As David Warren reports on the administration's "attitude to Mr. Blair: 'Thanks for your help but your tail doesn't wag this dog.'"
Posted by someone 2003-04-26 10:33:13||   2003-04-26 10:33:13|| Front Page Top

#4 Read all of Warren's article linked above. As te sausageman says it's GOOOOOOOD.
Posted by Anomalus 2003-04-26 12:07:36||   2003-04-26 12:07:36|| Front Page Top

#5 I love David's conclusion:
For decades foreign powers have been able to influence U.S. policy simply by fomenting anti-American displays. This is what Arab regimes do, to put pressure on the U.S. State Department -- it's called the "Arab Street" -- and what President Chirac did, in touching off a frenzy of anti-Americanism in the "European Street", as a way to pressure President Bush to stand down, and Prime Minister Blair to fall down. The Americans, and British, went into Iraq anyway; and the former at least seem now convinced that anti-Americanism should no longer be either subtly or overtly rewarded. It will instead be subtly ignored, or overtly punished.
It's what I've been saying all this time: "We do we have to please them? Why don't they ever have to please us?" Bush must have wondered the same thing...
Posted by Fred  2003-04-26 14:03:40||   2003-04-26 14:03:40|| Front Page Top

#6 As it is said in management, in this situation we must be Highly Directive. The Arab Street will not love us, many do not respect us, so they must fear us if they f--k with us. We must always offer another way (out) but they must realize the consequences of f--king with us and harboring terrorists...and they know EXACTLY what we are talking about when we say Terrorists.
Posted by Anonymous 2003-04-26 16:51:50||   2003-04-26 16:51:50|| Front Page Top

10:05 anon1
08:12 anon1
08:02 Frank G
07:51 Dishman
06:00 anon1
05:37 Chuck
01:18 John
01:11 John
01:05 John
23:37 OldSpook
23:12 John Phares
22:43 Fred
22:36 Ptah
22:34 Ptah
22:33 Ptah
22:31 Ptah
22:13 Ptah
21:38 Ptah
21:29 John Phares
21:26 Mark IV
21:17 Frank G
21:15 Frank G
19:25 djohn
18:30 Fred









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com