 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
There's a strong temptation to let the US clean up what they have messed up for no reason. It would be more rational and in our own interest though to support the reconstruction.
I'm just very sceptical that appropriate agreements on this could be made with or would be upheld by the Bush administration.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
There may be some initial euphoria for the US and the UK, but whatever comes next is bound to make a lot of people unhappy. Gratitude isn't exactly a strong political force...
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
HershOstropoler
|
|
"They won't want French or German help in rebuilding their country."
They'll want every help they can get, and they'll like the added bonus of not being too dependent of one particular country that will try to have a very tight grip on the new government anyway.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
yah
but we learned are lesson
why haven't you?
Jon Miller
|
|
|  |
 |
|
CerberusIV
|
|
The question is really who is going to pay for the reconstruction of Iraq in the short term?
Eventually the oil production will be put back on its feet and the Iraqi government at that time will have money but estimates vary on how many years that is going to take and how much it will cost.
In the short term there will be a need for foreign aid and support. The test is whether it is a US monopoly (and the Iraqi government a US puppet) or whether all those who wish to assist are allowed to do so and the Iraqi government can choose where it gets help from.
This is the issue IMHO that will show whether the talk of a democratic beacon in the ME is genuine or not.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Bereta_Eder
|
|
There is a hypocricy involved.
First we say (us Europeans - Brits apart) we don't want the war.
For countries like France this is because of
_ nice oil contracts already in place with Iraq
For other big countries like Germany it is because
_huge cost of the former war on the gulf.
As an example the countries which payed for the previous war were:
Germany
Japan
Saudi Arabia
and at the bottom of the list only it was the US.
So there are reasons other than preventing the slaughter of hundrends of thousands by the angloamerican bombs.
Now,
despite all this, and maybe because of this - this gives a window of explanation in real politik terms,
we allow the use of NATO bases on our soil.
If we are against the war we shouldn't.
But we do because we are realists.
BUT, we do not (we as for France, Germany and other big countries) want to pay for this war.
This is one of the major reasons for not giving consent.
If the US/UK go alone they know, they'll pay for everything.
And they should.
We allow use of NATO bases (and even provide military support as we speak in the region itself) OTOH we don't want to be burdened with the cost of a war we don't agree with.
In short the answer is hell no.
P.S. our gov's real politik interests shouldn't drift our eyes away from the ball which is the slaughter of hundrend of thousands by the agloamericans for no reason at all besides american hegemony and oil exploration.
A murder for oil.
For that we oppose the war and for that we support anyone who opposes it too.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:26. Apolyton Time is 00:26. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|