1 posted on
05/02/2003 2:25:54 PM PDT by
Shermy
To: Ernest_at_the_Beach; GailA; seamole; Dog; Dog Gone
Ping.
2 posted on
05/02/2003 2:27:12 PM PDT by
Shermy
(Backpedalling, backpedalling...)
To: Shermy
While the United States could just let the oil-for-food program lapse on June 3 by vetoing any resolution to renew it, such an action could raise legal problems and possibly deter multinational companies from doing business there. Our leverage will increase as that date approaches, and business always goes where the money is. That last phrase is baloney.
3 posted on
05/02/2003 2:29:00 PM PDT by
Dog Gone
To: Shermy
"If I were an adviser to George Bush, I would say: 'Listen to Colin Powell, not Donald Rumsfeld,"' he said when asked how he would advise Bush on managing post-war Iraq.
Now we know why this guy isn't an advisor to George Bush. :)
4 posted on
05/02/2003 2:30:02 PM PDT by
adam_az
To: Shermy
In a move to win allies, the United States is considering honoring contracts made by Saddam Hussein's government under the U.N. oil-for-food program if the Security Council lifts sanctions against Iraq, diplomats said on Friday. NOOOOOOO!!!!
5 posted on
05/02/2003 2:31:40 PM PDT by
pgyanke
(Appeasement isn't leadership!)
To: Shermy
"The proposal was made by U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte during a meeting of council members and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan on Thursday and reported by several participants in the session. It would reimburse firms whose contracts had been approved and funded under the multibillion dollar program." As long as they simply reimburse the firms and not seek fulfillment of contracts...what the heck would Iraq need with more weapons and munitions?
7 posted on
05/02/2003 2:35:31 PM PDT by
kritikos
(Truly true truth)
To: Shermy
Sure, why not honor agreements that allowed graft and corruption, and allowed nations such as France to sacrifice the welfare of the people of Iraq for the promise of cheap oil. Sure, we should protect these corrupt bargains.
8 posted on
05/02/2003 2:38:38 PM PDT by
My2Cents
("Well....there you go again.")
To: Shermy
" 'If I were an adviser to George Bush, I would say: 'Listen to Colin Powell, not Donald Rumsfeld,' he said when asked how he would advise Bush on managing post-war Iraq."Who is this idiot Greenstock? Is he advising Blair in the same way??
12 posted on
05/02/2003 2:44:29 PM PDT by
cake_crumb
(UN Resolutions=Very Expensive, Very SCRATCHY Toilet Paper)
To: Shermy
Mr. Negroponte is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and the American Academy of Diplomacy. He is former chairman of the French-American Foundation.
To: Shermy
While the United States could just let the oil-for-food program lapse on June 3 by vetoing any resolution to renew it, such an action could raise legal problems and possibly deter multinational companies from doing business there. The U.S. should allow the lapse. And the UN needs to show us the money. Open their books.
25 posted on
05/02/2003 3:13:23 PM PDT by
swheats
To: Shermy
"While the United States could just let the oil-for-food program lapse on June 3 by vetoing any resolution to renew it, such an action could raise legal problems and possibly deter multinational companies from doing business there."We should let it lapse. Who are we to honor past contracts. It's not our resources. It's not our country. Let the new Iraqi's decide if they are going to burden all that debt.
26 posted on
05/02/2003 3:20:21 PM PDT by
DannyTN
(Note left on my door by a pack of neighborhood dogs.)
To: Shermy
Dont listen to the globalists ...they made this mess in the first place ..as per usual...
27 posted on
05/02/2003 3:45:32 PM PDT by
joesnuffy
(Moderate Islam Is For Dilettantes)
To: Shermy
Reuters. We'll see how the story gets spun elsewhere.
I had some lovely UK relatives visiting me this week, and they told me that "most" Brits "assume" that Pres Bush is a liar and Tony Blair is toast. Umm, yeah. These particular UKers (university-affiliated), anyway, have a totally different way of looking at the world than we. It's very confusing to me how they can make such pronouncements and believe them.
Seriously, I'm much more worried about the World Bank involvement than the Reuters speculation right now.
32 posted on
05/02/2003 4:24:38 PM PDT by
LurkedLongEnough
(Living proof that a Conservative can spring from a "Liberal Arts" education.)
To: Shermy
Well heck..... I'm confused. I don't know if this is a good or bad idea. I like the lifting of sanctions.... I like the release of $12 Billion dollars...... but not to Russia and France.
I think I'd like the USA to just VETO anything France, Germany, or Russia support - just on general principles..... and also to basically screw them. And the UN can bite. I could care less about making friends there. 150 countries will STILL hate us, no matter what we do. Let's take care of Iraq with the help of the 30 - 40 countries that want to help, and screw the UN.
34 posted on
05/02/2003 4:58:56 PM PDT by
bart99
To: Shermy
This program has been a fraud and boondoggle that benefited primarily the UN bureaucracy, France, and Germany. IMO, the USA should declare it null and void, but I expected something like this. Too bad.
40 posted on
05/02/2003 7:30:55 PM PDT by
Mad_Tom_Rackham
(Open the pod bay door HAL.)
To: Shermy; Ernest_at_the_Beach; Dog Gone; BOBTHENAILER
The whacked out writers for Reuters have to be on iv drugs.
This story just broke my BS meter!
41 posted on
05/02/2003 9:28:57 PM PDT by
Grampa Dave
(Being a Monthly Donor to Free Republic is the Right Thing to do!)
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson