U.S.-French Rift Reopened as Powell Arrives for Talks (NYT)

[UpInArms]

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/09/13/international/europe/13DIPL.html?ex=1064030400&en=091203d39175b4b4&ei=5062&partner=GOOGLE

GENEVA, Saturday, Sept. 13 — Secretary of State Colin L. Powell, reopening the trans-Atlantic rift over Iraq — this time about expanding the authority of the United Nations there — said today that a French proposal to cut back the role of the American-led occupation was unacceptable.

Arriving in Geneva after midnight for intensive talks on Saturday about what role the United Nations should play, Mr. Powell also labeled as "totally unrealistic" a French suggestion that Iraq establish a provisional government in a month, write a constitution by the end of this year and hold elections next spring, all under United Nations auspices.

"It is delightful if one could do that, but one can't do that," Mr. Powell told reporters on the way here, adding that the French proposals were "interesting, but not executable."

His comments lent a sense of déjà vu to the Geneva talks, which were called by Kofi Annan, secretary general of the United Nations, expressly in order to avoid a repetition of the dispute that divided the United States from France, Germany and Russia in the weeks leading up to the Iraq war.

<snip>

But Mr. Powell's blunt dismissal of the French proposal on Iraq's political timetable reflected continuing difficulties on the subject with France, Russia and Germany.


...more...

[markses]

1. Not only is the timetable realistic

It is the only thing that will save Iraq, and save lives.

Powell is a digusting lying sonovabitch. Sickening.

[grytpype]

2. Did Powell mention when we COULD get those things done?

Because I don't think he mentioned it.

[Voltaire99]

3. Bush & Co. are willing to sacrifice American lives...

...by the bushel, you might say.

This is classic folly in the Tuchman sense: dig in, bury your head, reject feedback, forge ahead. A mulish policy, formulated by our home-grown mullahs. Disaster comes to those who court it!

[sistersofmercy]

5. Well put!!!

I don't think the french, germans and russians are going to give support anytime soon. Junior was doing his typical bully speak on sunday when he said it is the responsibilty and duty of the international community to aid in restoring order in Iraq. Bet they get a good laugh at that.

[U2Shark]

4. "interesting, but not executable."

Kinda like our OWN post-war plans, right colon?

[rustydog]

6. Bush is NOT going to give up the oil, period.

We are not going to give the Iraqi's a Democratic choice.
We are going to appoint a Democratic leader who will jump when Bush pulls on the strings.

This invasion hadnothing to do with deposing Saddam to give the Iraqi's a choice of who will lead the country.

I am so pissed that the Administration is still floating that line.

[Rose Siding]

7. That good ol' American "can do!"

that has always pulled us through. Wait. He said "one CAN'T do that". Oh.

Is "blunt dismissal" usually a good tact for diplomats to take?

Never mind, he got all that out of his system. Now the only place to go is up! Can do!

Good soldier.

[Tripper11]

8. Unreal...they want help then refuse it...

Here is another article along the same line.
Powell Rejects French Timetable for Iraq

...snip "It would be delightful if one could do that but one can't do that," Powell told reporters while en route to Switzerland.


The French, in effect, are proposing that "we stop everything we're doing," he said. "We have invested too much to consider such a proposal." ..and we haven't secured/stolen all their oil quite yet


In comments that appeared to be directed at France, Powell said the United States has a long record as a liberator of countries and not as an occupier." ....but we're about to show you what occupation is all about if you would just give us a chance

***obviously italics are my snide comments..snide is as snide does!

[KoKo]

9. First of all if Powell was as "honest diplomat" he wouldn't be blabbing

that we won't consider the French proposal. This stuff "Used to be" all done behind closed doors with heavy negotiating. But, Bush/Cheney/Powell blab everything they do out in the open (a total break from other Presidents) and make themselves look like bullies.

The only reason I can think of that they do this .......is that they aren't serious about getting results. They blab around and bully because they really "DON'T" want any international help....but want to make it "Look like" they do.....for some obscure reason.

If I knew the answer to this.......well......maybe they are determined to screw up the World for their PNAC reasons but just don't want anyone to know it.....so they throw up these "Fake Negotiations" (like going to the UN about Iraq invasion when all along they were going in without any help except GB) just as a cover or throwing a bone to their critics and meanwhile they destablize the whole Middle East just to expand our war with the Arab world for control of the oil.

I can't think of any other reason for this ridiculous trip of Powell's. It's the same stunt he pulled before and he's doing it again? To hoodwink the American People.......He doesn't want cooperation......he wants to look like he does.

[BattyDem]

10. These guys are unbelievable!

The Administration made it very clear that they didn't need an irrelevant bunch of chocolate makers to get things done. Now when they finally realize they do need help, what do they do? Apologize to the UN? Nope. Negotiate a deal that would be in everyone's best interests, including the Iraqis? Of course not!

They make demands, refuse offers and continually try to bully the world into doing what they want.

Hey Colin ... you can't strong-arm "Old Europe" when they're holding all the cards. :eyes:

[teryang]

11. Iraq- central front on the war on terror

The so called "war on terror" like the "war on drugs" has no end. There is no exit strategy. Therefore we are staying indefinitely.

What do the non neocon conservatives say about this? Nothing.

What do we hear from supposedly knowledgeable Senators with military experience on this subject? Nothing.