If you were Bush


Bartram

Bartram

Brand HBCUbian
ok so now that it looks like things are settling out a bit,,, it would seem that Bush is in "tall cotton" (as the old saying goes down south). If you were Bush, would you "punish" the UN/France/Germany/Russia for undercutting you when you needED them to have your back or would you let by-gones be by-gones and continue world diplomacy as usual?
 



If I were Bush I would be answering questions regarding...where are the weapons of mass destruction that I claimed that Iraqi has. Let's not forget the reason that Bush invaded.

Although I like this reason for invading Iraqi:

On David Letterman, he said once Bush takes over Iraq, it will be divided into 3 parts.
Unleaded, regular and super.
 
Typo.

Originally posted by unknown1
What do you mean punish them? Hell if anything they're in the position to do the punishing.
Click to expand...

that should have been "when the US needED them" (the UN, France, Germany, Russia) to have their back during the diplomacy phase.

by "punish" I mean, pay lip service but totally ignore the UN/France/Germany/Russia and their insistance on playing a "vital role" in the "rebuilding" of Iraq.
 
The US will need the international community to help rebuild Iraq. Look at Afghanistan. It is still a mess. The conservatives will not like that. But it is not like all of the Iraqis are completely unified despite their dislike of Saddam and the Baath regime.

Taliban Take Control Of Government Offices In Zabul

<a href=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030407/ap_on_re_as/reviving_taliban_7>Taliban Reviving Structure in Afghanistan</a>
 
Originally posted by EB
The US will need the international community to help rebuild Iraq. Look at Afghanistan. It is still a mess. The conservatives will not like that. But it is not like all of the Iraqis are completely unified despite their dislike of Saddam and the Baath regime.

Taliban Take Control Of Government Offices In Zabul

<a href=http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20030407/ap_on_re_as/reviving_taliban_7>Taliban Reviving Structure in Afghanistan</a>
Click to expand...

Point taken. To your points on Afghanistan; how many oil wells are there in Afghanistan and how many countries around the world are clammering for Afghani "assets" (whatever they may be)???
 
B, there are no oil wells that I know of in Afghanistan. But, there is the Caspien Sea which is NW of the country. The sea, the largest lake in the world according to the Guiness Book of World Records, is an oil rich area. It has Iran to the south, and the former Soviet republics to the north, south, and west.

Word has it that a pipeline is to run from the sea through Afghanistan although a shorter one could be created through Russia and Iran. I will not speculate about Russia right. I should not have to say anything about Iran. But I can definitely say that I am wondering about Afghanistan (HHHMMMMMM). As someone said on another message board, I would consider Harmid Karzai the "mayor" of Kabul and not the president of Afghanistan since he really does not control a lot of the country.

On the BBC I heard an Iraqi living in Britian talk about the US effort to rebuild Afghanistan. He was not impressed with the rebuilding. He was glad that Saddam was gone but felt that the UN had to be involved with the country's rebuilding.

As for the Middle East, I would like to think that it is finished with Iraq. But I wonder.

Rumsfeld Accuses Syria of Aiding Saddam

US Hawks Set Sights on Iran, Syria as Baghdad Falls

Understand that the Syrian Baath party was not too friendly with the Iraqi Baath party. But I still wonder.

Also, I still wonder about those WMDs.

Weapons of mass destruction still not found, Rumsfeld admits

Who are happier about Saddam's fall, the Iraqis or some American companies?

Democrats call for probe into Iraq postwar contracts

Maybe I need to read again the book of Revelations in the bible.

:o :o :o
 
Originally posted by EB
B, there are no oil wells that I know of in Afghanistan. But, there is the Caspien Sea which is NW of the country. The sea, the largest lake in the world according to the Guiness Book of World Records, is an oil rich area. It has Iran to the south, and the former Soviet republics to the north, south, and west.

The sea is not part of Afghanistan I don't think. Iraq, on the other hand, is known from current production to have from the 2nd to 4th largest reserves in the world. The point being, all these countries who are/were "so concerned" about a diplomatic solution and no military force being used against Iraq are basically full of it. They have more to lose as a result of US action than if there was a diplomatic solution and that's the only reason why they are so "outspoken" against US action.

Word has it that a pipeline is to run from the sea through Afghanistan although a shorter one could be created through Russia and Iran. I will not speculate about Russia right. I should not have to say anything about Iran. But I can definitely say that I am wondering about Afghanistan (HHHMMMMMM). Right now I would consider Harmid Karzai the "mayor" of Kabul and not the president of Afghanistan since he really does not control the country.

Well, while we can speculate on Afghanistan, there are tangible wells (hundreds of them) in Iraq that the US armed forces had as objectives to get to and protect, not to mention the reserves in the ground.

On the BBC I heard an Iraqi living in Britian talk about the US effort to rebuild Afghanistan. He was not impressed with the rebuilding. He was glad that Saddam was gone but felt that the UN had to be involved with the country's rebuilding.

That's not an unusual story. I would imagine there are many Iraqi who are of that opinion. In Iraq (or among Iraqi) just as in America, there will never be all Americans who agree on the same thing.


As for the Middle East, I would like to think that it is finished with Iraq. But I wonder.

Rumsfeld Accuses Syria of Aiding Saddam

US Hawks Set Sights on Iran, Syria as Baghdad Falls

Understand that the Syrian Baath party was not too friendly with the Iraqi Baath party. But I still wonder.

Well,,, it's very simple. If they want to test the US and republicans are in office, it will not stop here. If democrats gain control of government in the US, they will test the US and be very successful more than likely,, then later on when republicans re-gain the presidency,, we'll probably go through this again, but who knows if it will be a larger or smaller conflict.


Also, I still wonder about those WMDs.

Weapons of mass destruction still not found, Rumsfeld admits

Yeah,,, me too. If there are no WMDs, why/how did American soldiers get sick simply uncovering "suspected" sights?

Who are happier about Saddam's fall, the Iraqis or some American companies?

I'd say Iraqis. Rather Saddam falls or remained in power, family members of American companies were not going to die and suffer at the hands of some monolithic leader like the average Iraqi that didn't agree with Saddam.

Democrats call for probe into Iraq postwar contracts

Maybe I need to read again the book of Revelations in the bible.

No, I would recommend you read the book of Isaiah,, chapter 13.

Click to expand...
 
Afghanistan does not have a shoreline on the Caspien Sea. But a shorter pipeline could be built through Iran, Georgia and Russia. I will have to look for some articles on it.

As for the countries not wanting war, I would say that they had a lot to lose too. The US has a lot to gain. Look at my link on the potential Iraqi post-war contracts. (Whre are those WMDs?) Some people in this country are smiling for a lot of reasons ($$$$$$).

B, you seem to not like democrats. OK, I will not hate you for that. But understand that more Americans were killed during the eight years of Reagan than they were under the eight years of Clinton when it came to terrorism. This does not mean that Reagan was soft. I will say that he was a bit trigger happy. But I say it to say that the enemies of the US are not afraid of the democrats or the republicans. Remember that the attacks on 9/11/01 occured when a republican was in the White House.

Remember the tragic suicide bombing that the Marines suffered in Lebanon? Remember when the Navy pilot Robert Goodman (I think that is his name.) was shot over Lebanon or Syria? (I think it was Lebonon.) The year was 1983. Remember who was in office. You guess it. It was the "Great Communicator" Ronald Reagan, the republican. BTW Jesse Jackson got the pilot, a brother, freed.

With the rebuilding of Iraq, world help will be needed. The US record in Afghanistan is not good when it comes to nation building. I doubt that the Middle East wants Iraq to become another Afghanistan, where a lot of warlords are in control.

I will read Isaiah 13. But I will also read Revelation and Daniel and recommend that others do it too.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top