Clinton: NATO should intervene in Iraq

AFP ^ | July 12, 2003 | AFP

[ejdrapes]

NATO should intervene in Iraq: Clinton

Sat Jul 12, 4:14 PM ET

LONDON (AFP) - NATO (news - web sites) and European states should step forward to take part in rebuilding Iraq (news - web sites) to internationalize the reconstruction process, former US president Bill Clinton (news - web sites) urged at the "progressive governance" conference near London.

AFP Photo

"I was trying to think about some way the international community could come back together in the fight against terror.

"Europe should take the lead, the Iraq nation-building process should be internationalized. NATO should offer to go in. That will give United States a continued big position there," Clinton told the centre-left political gathering.

The former leader appealed to the United States and nations involved in restoring peace to Afghanistan (news - web sites) to double or triple their forces there to support President Hamid Karzai and prevent a return of the radical Islamic Taliban regime ousted by US forces in 2001.

"The poor Mister Karzai is the president in Kabul with al-Qaeda and the Taliban coming back," he said.

But Clinton warned that the greatest threat came from North Korea (news - web sites), due to its development of nuclear weapons.

"(North Korea) was a far bigger threat than Iraq ever was. (...) They're not going to use them (nuclear weapons), they are going to sell them (...) to eat and stay warm and to be important," Clinton predicted.

"I think this is a very major deal, much bigger than is being presented in the press, and it requires urgent action."

Clinton called on the United States to work together with China, Russia, Japan and South Korea (news - web sites) to find a solution to the escalating problem.

"But what we really need is for the United Nations (news - web sites) (...) to support this and to be able to help fund it," Clinton added.

"It's not a lot of money by the standards of what we're spending every month in Iraq -- it's peanuts -- and it could save the world one hell of a lot of trouble and a lot of lives."

Clinton, a Democrat, criticised the right-wing Republican administration that took over the White House after his mandate ended in 2001.

"We are not dealing with an old right in the United States, we are dealing with a new right, with radical changes. (...) Their first value is power and control."

"We live in an independent world where it is impossible, even for the United States, to kill or occupy all our adversaries or potential adversaries," the former president said.

Clinton was speaking at the "progressive governance" conference of some 400 think-tank analysts and centre-left leaders from 14 nations.

The conference aimed to give a boost to the "third way" that informed the politics of the centre-left in the 1990s.

[Loyal Buckeye]

"The conference aimed to give a boost to the "third way" that informed the politics of the centre-left in the 1990s."

We know about Monica and others, but tell me more about this third way thing.

[DoughtyOne]

My first inclination is to move on when I see an atricle quoting Clinton.  That's probably a mistake.  As you say, he is a horrible person.

Thank you for the nice comments.

[pyx]

+

[Nick Danger]

The only thing Clinton accomplishes by playing Foreign Policy Sage at some European gathering is that he diminishes the candidates the Democrats are grooming for 2004.

The Democratic faithful look at him, and then they look at the pathetic collection of minor-league players they have to field next year, and it must knock the air out of them.

He's too smart to not know this, so this is an item of strategy between the Clintons. He is either trying to mow "the nine" down early so that Hillary can come rushing to save the party in 2004 (she may have a struggle with Al Gore if such a slot opens up), or he's weakening them so as to make sure there's no incumbent Democrat in the White House come 2008.

In either case, the Clintons are now openly operating at cross-purposes with the rest of the party. That might be lost on a lot of the faithful, but the party's elected officials understand it very well. There's a rift there, and maybe even a "struggle for the soul of the party" if the wiser heads over there decide they'd better have it out now, than have it blow open with an election on the horizon.

We'll know how it's going by whether Terry McAuliffe discovers that he needs to spend more time with his family. Dean is already calling for his head... a move like this from Clinton could leave Gephardt and Lieberman thinking the same thing: these two have got to go. And their little Gore, too.

[gov_bean_ counter]

suitable comment?

I'll save you the trouble.
There are simply no words that could adequately describe the total contempt I have for this man, his wife and those who enable them.

[Ragtime Cowgirl]

That explains our enemy press grilling our honorable SOD last week:

 

Q:  Mr. Secretary, can you clarify, just help us understand the question of whether NATO has been called or not? This would seem to be something you'd know and perhaps make that phone call yourself. Can you clarify for us what is the Administration's position as far as reaching out to NATO and NATO to provide troops for --

     Rumsfeld:  I don't know what else I can add. The Department of State has been the instrument through which the United States of America has been consulting with many, many dozens and dozens of nations and organizations around the world. They deal with NATO, they deal with the UN, they have been doing it.

     I do know for a fact that NATO is involved. They have been doing the force generation and assistance for Poland. I also know they are currently under discussions as to additional ways they might help.

     I tend to be very precise when I answer a question and I answer what I know and I don't answer what I don't know. Can I say precisely what the request was made or requests plural were made by the United States of NATO? No. You may think it's something I ought to know, but I happen not to. That's life and that's a very honest answer.

     Q:  As a former Ambassador to NATO, is there a formal procedure, a formal request that must be made?

     Rumsfeld:  No, in answer to your question. It can be self-generated with the Secretary General; it can come from another country other than ours; it can come from another nation that's not part of NATO. There are any number of ways that things can get started within the North Atlantic Treaty Organization.

---

 

Clinton urged to head NATO  ^ , soss (same old socialist s*it silliness from OLD Europe)

 

Hillary: "New Political Icon" Clinton's European Triumph[Benedict Rodham dissing CIC in Old Europe]
International News Analysis Today ^ | July 8, 2003 | Toby Westerman

The TRUE Capitol Hill Blue story the PRESS IGNORED:'Dems plan to undermine America to beat Bush'

---

Character counts:

 

Rice Says France, Germany Took NATO 'Hostage' ^

[libsrpoo]

The only difference is the U.S. can succeed where nato has failed. We have never lost a war, only to ourselves. What has the U.N. ever done that would suggest they have the ability to take over Iraq. Last time I checked every single country they have been to is worse off now then before the U.N. decided to "help out". I think the democrats are suggesting that we internationalize this so Iraq will turn out badly and it will look like they were right...either that or they are even more stupid then we originally thought they were. I don't think we need to be reminded of france's ability to overcome or the lack thereof their record speaks for themselves, so why are they so vocal about what we need to be doing. The UN did not support the war they were not willing to fail at yet another attempt to make the world a better place, I for one am glad we were fortunate enough to not have their assistance. Although it would be nice for additional funding resources, the price we would have to pay would be too great, and that price my friends is failure.