UN Urging the U.S. to get Baathist back & Naive Anti-War Europeans.

[KurtNilsen]

On another thread on LBN, there was a story about how the CPA now is trying to recruit former members of the Bath party into the administration of "new" Iraq.

Some critized the administration for this move, and stated, "Why didn't we just bring in the Nazis's back in Germany?"

Well, we did, by the thousands. Some nazis were even considered to valuable for "New" Germany and was instead promptly brought to the USA, and amongst other things helped America land on the moon.

Critizing the administration for this move is missing the point. This move is correcting a massive blunder commited by Rumsfeld and his crony, Chalabi. Against the advice of the British, international intelligence experts, and the first administrator in Iraq (who amongst other things was fired because he did not want to tow the Rumsfeld line), Bremer was sent to Iraq and the first thing he did was to send close to half a million Iraqis into unemployment. Ironically doing to Iraq, what Bush has done to America.

You have to remember that in Iraq the baath party was pretty much devoid of its original ideological content. It was rather a part of Hussein's power apparatus. Anyone who wanted to make a decent career had to be a member. We are talking about thousands of engineers, university lecturers, school teachers and civil servants. People without blood on their hands. Just ordinary folks trying to get by in a fascist state.

Now, with the UN slowly getting involved, UN envoy Lakhdar Brahimi have been urging a policy change so that former baathists can be brought on board. On the other thread several posters wanted links to confirm the UN stance, so here goes:

""It is difficult to understand that thousands upon thousands of teachers, university professors, medical doctors and hospital staff, engineers and other professionals who are sorely needed, have been dismissed within the de-Baathification process, and far too many of those cases have yet to be reviewed," Brahimi then said."

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/afp/20040422/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_us_baath&cid=1514&ncid=1473


This is a slap in the face to Rumsfeld, Chalabi and Bremer.


Now, on the other thread I was accused of defending the administration. No, I am condemining them for having so badly mishandled the situation in the first place. But, still I am happy to see it being corrected.

How should you feel? Should you wish for Rumsfeld's hairbrained schemes to turn the entire region (and world) into an unmitigated disaster in order to score cheap political points upon the blood of others?


Let me bring you back to a conference that took place in Capitol Hill as the 911 hearings got underway before Easter. It was a seminar which discussed the European-American relationship in the case of a Kerry victory this fall.

Among the attendants were both the German and the French ambassadors to the U.S. From the Democratic party Tom Lantos and Senaror Joseph Biden amongst others was present. Senator Biden went so far as to directly mock European politicians.

"They are going to be deeply dissapointed if they expect President Kerry to humbly come and appologize for the American power demonstration or the use of force". Senator Biden told the story of how he had talked to six European heads of government about the Iraq war. "What did they bring to the table? It was just bla, bla about the need for international cooperation. None of them had any realistic alternative", said Biden, and added with a deep sigh, "Give me a break!"

Congress member, Tom Lantos followed up. "How can Europeans expect that President Kerry would turn US foreign policy upside down, that Kerry will not pursue U.S. interests with equal seal to that of Bush? A new style in the Whitehouse, yes sure, but no redefinition of American interests."

The hopes and expectations of European politicians towards a Kerry administration reveal how they simply don't grasp American politics, Lantos and Ivor Daalder, foreign policy advisor to Howard Dean, both concluded. Madeleine Albright, former Secretary of State in the Clinton Administration had no objections.

Senator Biden, who is well known for his sharp tongue, summed up what he called European political fumbling and powerlessnes this way;

- I don't want to name names, but not long ago I had a conversation with a European head of state who was opposed to the Iraq war. I asked him straight out: Is it more important to get Iraq in order than to see Bush beaten this fall?


Senator Biden aped the head of state as he both cleared his throat and sighed, an attempted to start three sentences, before he said, "Well, yes I guess."



(The above account from the conference is my quick translation of parts the story published in the largest Norwegian Newspaper a few weeks back: http://www.vg.no/pub/vgart.hbs?artid=223041 )

On edit: Fixed a spelling error.

[rooboy]

1. You think Europe is being naive?

because Biden and Lantos declare that the US will be just as arrogant as before? I would suggest that it's naive in the extreme to think that you can take a 1.4 million man army and rule the world with it, when a large part of your economy is funded by those whom you wish to rule.

If Kerry wants to continue on Bush's path, then I would submit that it's all over for the United States.

And I would easily argue that it is MUCH more important that Bush is defeated in November than achieving peace in Iraq. Because a second Bush term will only create more Iraqs.

[KurtNilsen]

2. I think many European politicians are naive when it

comes to American politics.

Let's take land mines. Do you think Kerry would agree to ban them?

Off course he will not, and off course he should not.

I think anyways that the Iraqi affair has been such a lesson already that it has removed any desire for another military adventure of the same magnitude.

That said, it is very important to American's national security that the Iraqi project doesn't fail, not to even speak of in the Iraqis interest.

Cheers.

[KurtNilsen]

3. BUMP for 0007.