Blair plays down the UN's role in rebuilding Iraq

The Daily Telegraph ^ | March 27, 2003 | George Jones, Ben Brogan and Toby Harnden

[CFC__VRWC]

Let's wait a bit and see what happens. I just cannot see George Bush and Tony Blair, after sending our boys into Iraq to bleed and die in an attempt to free the world of a bloodthirsty regime and major sponsor of world wide terrorism, after having expended every last bit of political capital they had and then some (not to mention billions of dollars), I just can't see these two blithely handing the country back to the same enablers and vermin at the UN that allowed and even encouraged the regime of Saddam Hussein to become such a cancer on the civilized world. Not without a fight, anyway.

[MadIvan]

Here is the Prime Minister's own words from the post you put up:

We are quite clear that any such administration has to be endorsed by the United Nations, it is important, and that is exactly what we said at the summit in the Azores. Now the details of that we will discuss with allies within the UN and with others.

Your disconnect is coming here - endorsed does NOT equal that the adminstration is UN run. In an ideal world we would not even be talking to the UN at all. But you know what, tough, this is the real world, and Blair has to be able to say he made the attempt to talk to the UN. He is also saying this in a context in which he knows that the French will shoot down anything that is proposed.

Your fears are misplaced and far too literal. Again, you are simply not subtle enough to grasp what is going on.

Ivan

[Mister Baredog]

Have Australian, British, American, Spanish, Polish and Danish administrators in the lead.

This sounds great. I think Mr. Blair has made his choice about the future of the UK, the English channel may become wider than the Atlantic. I think Japan is ready to jump in to help also.

[TLBSHOW]

And when is the Press conference going to be?

[Amelia]

You try and put things in the most negative way possible - I respect your honesty, but you're not subtle and that deficiency means you're missing the real story.

You're being too kind, Ivan. I believe that he's intentionally cutting and pasting to show things in the most negative way possible, just to stir up arguments.

[MadIvan]

I'm sure Blair and Bush will appear tomorrow. This is what I suspect will happen - they will go to the UN to cough up some money for humantarian aid, and the administration will be Anglo-American led. If Blair and Bush are as intelligent as I think they are, they will put it under "Coalition" administration.

Regards, Ivan

[TLBSHOW]

Here is what they must say, the un will have no part in the Iraq solution including oil for food or the rebuilding of it or the handing over of it to the UN forces.

[MadIvan]

Here is what they must say, the un will have no part in the Iraq solution including oil for food or the rebuilding of it or the handing over of it to the UN forces.

There is no "must" about it. Sorry, President Bush and the Prime Minister are not there to serve your whims; they are there to make measured, considered decisions based on the national interest.

Ivan

[TLBSHOW]

so glad to see you jump in but you are a little late for this party unless you would like to debate the role of the UN in the Iraq solution.

I will be glad to ping you over here. As the title is much more real than the title of this thread.

Blair to press Bush over UN role (to shift power to a UN civil administration not US military )
FT ^ | 3/25/2003 | FT


Posted on 03/25/2003

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/875534/posts?page=

[PhiKapMom]

Thanks for posting that -- I thought I had heard him publicly call for the UN to be totally involved!

[MadIvan]

FT is behind the Telegraph in reporting events. Sorry, you're attempting to stir up problems for no good purpose.

Ivan

[justshe]

"...simply not subtle enough..."

England must have a MUCH different definition of 'subtle' than we do. His codswallop is legendary!

[TLBSHOW]

You're welcome and it is good to see others are not blind to the truth here.

[MadIvan]

There are people who are going to go mad every time the UN is mentioned. I'm sorry to see you've abandoned reason to that extent.

Blair has little choice but to mention the UN thanks to the tensions in his own party - this is something you simply cannot deny, because it's true. The reality of the situation is that the UN is not going to be involved, at the very least due to the French veto. That you cannot deny because it is true. That still does not mean that the UN shouldn't cough up the food aid they have, which we have already paid for. This you cannot deny either, because it is true. Instead you would rather throw a tantrum about the rhetoric surrounding what will occur not meeting your expectations. Well, you must be sorely disappointed a lot of the time - we live in a real world where sometimes we have to acknowledge the whims of groups we'd rather ignore. Blair has to deal with the Left of his party, Bush has to deal with RINOs. You do what you can to pacify them and carry on.

Basic politics. For adults.

Ivan

[TLBSHOW]

You never answered my qustion about the Scottland paper I have asked you at least twice about, is it a good source or not. You know what I mean is left like Blair or to the right? Because last Sunday in that paper was the first time I even saw that there was a problem over the role of the UN.

And since now we know its true was that paper right on or not?

[dogbyte12]

Ivan, a wise person said, "Don't get in an argument with an idiot, because bystanders may not know the difference".

Regards... Go UK!

[MadIvan]

The Scotland paper is generally a good source; however as this article shows, it's not 100%. The only source that gets anywhere close to 100% is the Telegraph. Which is where this comes from.

Are you done now? I've indulged your tantrum for quite some time and patiently explained the situation; you may not like the truth, but it remains the truth nonetheless.

Ivan

[Rome2000]

Again, you are simply not subtle enough to grasp what is going on.

Could be taken as an insult, don't you think.

I had the misfortune of listening to some of the PM questioning today, a lot of "tell the Israelis to get rid of those settlements and everything will be fine" nonsense.

The ragheads will not rest until their ability to fight has been neutralized, or there is no more Israel, and then after that, no more West.

[MadIvan]

Could be taken as an insult, don't you think.

A mild rebuke.

I had the misfortune of listening to some of the PM questioning today, a lot of "tell the Israelis to get rid of those settlements and everything will be fine" nonsense.

Sadly the Labour Party is not a home for those who support Israel. That's a perogative of the Conservative and Ulster Unionist parties.

Regards, Ivan

[TLBSHOW]

Good then I will post it as a seperate thread like I should of done last Sunday to alert freepers of the UN problem we have with Blair.