BOMB BLAST in Baghdad- U.N. HQ hit

Follow the money. World Bank announced it will pull out of Iraq.

Originally posted by Skadi_the_Evil_Elf
Follow the money. World Bank announced it will pull out of Iraq.

Seems that Whispers is increasingly accurate...

Have you noticed that all agencies needed to help the Iraqis rebuild are leaving?
Are we missing out on some important information as to the real reasons why?

regards
seekerof

There HAS to be MORE, MUCH MORE, to this than meets the eye... Even the eye of ATS for Christ's sake!

I'll not rest (too much anyway) until I at least get a beleivable load I can sleep on!

Much is askew in the world today...

P...
m...

Rumsfeld has apparently stated on the record that there are no plans at present to send more troops (that will encourage those there!), so one can only imagine things will get worse.
There is a great deal on the grapevine to suggest that the 4th Infantry Divison has just about lost the plot, so low is morale (it is claimed).
One remains amazed that anyone ever bought into the party line on this: quick and easy, "shock and awe" a new regime etc.etc.
The record shows that a lot of us here never did

I agree Springer.....that s what we been trying to tell you for quite some time....

...if it smells like dog poop; feels like dog poop; looks like dog poop......its diffently going to taste like it!

regards
seekerof

Originally posted by Estragon
Rumsfeld has apparently stated on the record that there are no plans at present to send more troops (that will encourage those there!), so one can only imagine things will get worse.
There is a great deal on the grapevine to suggest that the 4th Infantry Divison has just about lost the plot, so low is morale (it is claimed).
One remains amazed that anyone ever bought into the party line on this: quick and easy, "shock and awe" a new regime etc.etc.
The record shows that a lot of us here never did

Rumsfield hasn't asked for more troops because Bush is asking the UN for more involvement and is further seeking the assistance of other countries.

regards
seekerof

U.S. wants multinational force in Iraq
Powell, Straw head to New York for meetings with Annan

www.cnn.com...

Unbeleivable! I stand corrected Seeker Of... Reality is ALWAYS much stranger than fiction!

PEACE... (highly unlikely)
m...

"Bush in talks to bolster UN role"
www.guardian.co.uk...


As I posted in your other thread....

regards
seekerof

Just read it... Damn... I can't breath for the smell!

P...
m...

On the contrary "foreign troops" are a long way off, if they'll come at all without a UN mandate and there's no way NATO will get involved.
And Bremer insists more troops aren't needed: arguing that the force did not need to be enlarged, the Brainless One stated:"The security problem now has got a terrorist dimension, which is new, but the rest of the security is in better shape than it was three months ago when I arrived We have an element of terrorism. It does not mean chaos."
And of course it ties in with US proppaganda and Rumsfeld's assertions that US military forces did not need to be enlarged, in general.
There is a need for more troops and it's being denied purely for face-saving reasons.

thus the odor i smell... Saving face at the expense of human lives...

P...
m...

And on the original topic: we have our stories of "warnings" here, and we cannot all have forgotten the nonsense spouted by politicians and media concerning the Jakarta bombing two weeks or so ago and the suggestion that the hotel had been evacuated and that the US Embassy had been cancelling reservations beforehand.
That time it was Islamia Jemaya (whoever they might be): another "shadowy" organisation, of course. And once more: cui bono -who benefits -there we were told that Muslims had decided to serve Islam by blowing up other Muslims.
Here, we are told that blowing up UN staff served Iraq and Islam.
Odd.

As for the CNN link: even by the standards of the Drivel-Champoins it's a new high in vagueness "John Negroponte, U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, said Powell requested the meeting. He said the Security Council is exploring the possibility of a new Iraq resolution that would address the security situation.

"We're looking at the possibility of another resolution," Negroponte said. ....... but we don't have any specific proposal to put on the table at the moment."
Well, that should be a nice quick meeting then.
"Annan said Wednesday that discussions for a "multinational force" in Iraq were already under way, but he said he did not envision U.N. peacekeepers as playing a role in the region for now.

"( Annan said)..I don't think it's a job for blue helmets,"
So no specific requests and no "blue helmets", anyway.

This Commie Pinko editorial is far more accurate than anything coming out of the mainstream US media on Iraq.


US President Bush briefly interrupted a game of golf to make a banal statement to the media condemning the UN bombing. �Every sign of progress in Iraq adds to the desperation of these terrorists and the remnants of Saddam�s brutal regime. The civilised world will not be intimidated,� he declared. �The Iraqi people have been liberated from a dictator. Iraq is on an irreversible course toward self-government and peace.�

His comments stand reality on its head. Washington has not liberated Iraq but replaced a brutal dictatorship, which it helped create, with a neo-colonial regime headed by Paul Bremer III, a proconsul with absolute powers. The Iraqi people are no freer under Bremer than they were under Saddam Hussein. Under the pretext of hunting down �Baathist remnants,� US troops routinely search people, vehicles and houses, killing or incarcerating anyone suspected of opposition. Thousands of people are being held, and in some cases tortured, in US-run jails and detention centres in flagrant breach of their basic democratic rights.

The purpose of the US-led invasion was not to bring �self-government and peace� but to loot the economy, particularly the country�s huge oil reserves. Much of the limited and decaying physical and social infrastructure that existed under the previous regime has been destroyed, leaving masses of people without jobs, basic services and essentials such as electricity, water and adequate food.

It is hardly surprising in these circumstances that young Iraqis are joining the ranks of groups advocating armed resistance. Attacks on US and allied troops are a daily occurrence. In recent days, basic infrastructure has been targetted with a bomb attack on a water main in Baghdad and the rupturing of an oil export pipeline in the north of the country. On August 7, a large car bomb detonated outside the Jordanian embassy in Baghdad, killing at least 17 people.

The most significant aspect of yesterday�s bombing was that the UN, and possibly even de Mello himself, were deliberately targetted. In condemning the blast, various governments in Europe and the Middle East have bewailed the fact that the UN was attacked. Syria, for instance, issued a statement urging the UN to continue its role �in helping the Iraqi people restore their freedom and independence.�

But there is no reason why the Iraqi people should see any difference between the US and the UN. For more than a decade, the UN has been complicit in all of the crimes of the US and its allies against the Iraqi people. The UN not only supported the 1990-91 Gulf War but, under the pretext of disarming Iraq, imposed and supervised the decade-long economic sanctions that resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths. While the UN Security Council drew back from giving a final seal of approval for the US invasion, all of its members, including Syria, supported last year�s resolution 1441, which set the course for war, and this May rubberstamped the US occupation of Iraq and the plundering of its oil.

That was OVER THE TOP. I won't argue the lighter points because I do not what is inside the hearts and minds of those in charge of the Iraq theater.

But to put forth that we are "plundering Iraq's oil reserves" as fact is simply wrong.

Let's start with FACTS.

We have US companies in country attempting to revitalize a THOROUGHLY neglected and out of date infrastructure. Doing this with no funding from Iraq.

Obviously they expect to be paid for work performed once the spigot is opened and the oil starts flowing.

At THAT point the truth will be known whether our intentions were to "plunder" Iraq's reserves and not one minute before.

Anyone that thinks these companies should not be paid for rebuilding the country's ONLY means of supporting itself should go do THEIR job without pay or be quiet.

The contracts that these companies are working under were vetted back in '91 and are only now being allowed to be performed.

I usually learn much from and respect what you post, when you are serious, regardless of the fact that we see the world through different perspectives (that IS the mark of intelligent folk is it not?) but this one blew me away...

PEACE...
m...

MaskedAvatar: "But there is no reason why the Iraqi people should see any difference between the US and the UN. For more than a decade, the UN has been complicit in all of the crimes of the US and its allies against the Iraqi people. The UN not only supported the 1990-91 Gulf War but, under the pretext of disarming Iraq, imposed and supervised the decade-long economic sanctions that resulted in hundreds of thousands of deaths. While the UN Security Council drew back from giving a final seal of approval for the US invasion, all of its members, including Syria, supported last year�s resolution 1441, which set the course for war, and this May rubberstamped the US occupation of Iraq and the plundering of its oil."

Lies. Or, um, mistruths. "For more than a decade, the UN has been complicit in all of the crimes of the US and its allies against the Iraqi people. " Nope, the US pushed through the sanctions and the US/UK were SOLELY in charge of the NO Fly Zones (wherein they bombed Iraq almost every single day since 1991).

"While the UN Security Council drew back from giving a final seal of approval for the US invasion, all of its members, including Syria, supported last year�s resolution 1441, which set the course for war..."

Nope again. Resolution 1441 did NOT sanction military action. It said there would be "dire consequences" and that if there was a material breach the UN would reconvene and renegotiate. Otherwise why else would the US snub the UN and invade anyway if it was in fact sanctioned.

It wasn't. For you to compare the UN to the US is woefully misinformed. One is an organization dedicated to trying to HELP people, one is a country dedicated to killing foreign people.

Springer: "We have US companies in country attempting to revitalize a THOROUGHLY neglected and out of date infrastructure. Doing this with no funding from Iraq"

LOL! Why do you think the infrastructure is so bad? 12 years of US imposed sanctions and anything unnaffected by that was BOMBED BY THE US WHEN THEY INVADED.

"Anyone that thinks these companies should not be paid for rebuilding the country's ONLY means of supporting itself should go do THEIR job without pay or be quiet. "

Again, HAHA! Rebuilding a country that they bombed and crippled since 1991. Rebuilding a country only because they won a GOVERNMENT CONTRACT to do so (see Halliburton and Dick Cheney for more details).

Every single penny that comes from those oil sales should go to Iraq, every single penny. It's theirs! if Haliburton says "Well, it's going to cost us millions to get it started" well boo frickin hoo. Then pass up on the contract and let, oh, I don't know, an IRAQI company do it. Who was pumping the oil when Iraq was shipping out oil by the millions of barrels? Wow, Iraqis.

I mean, does the Pentagon think we're IDIOTS? All oil contracts go through U.S. companies (mostly employing American workers flown to Iraq)? All civil and domestic contracts go through the US?

If the US was really serious about "freeing" Iraqis and delivering them "democracy", they should let Iraqis decide for THEMSELVES, not have their decisions IMPOSED on them.

Get them voting right away. If they vote in an anti-American religious Shi-ite government, hey, that's democracy at work.

But don't try to convince me that the US is there under ANY good intentions. What was the ONE building that was protected by the US forces in Baghdad while all the looting was happening?

The Ministry of OIL. Not the museums, not any hospitals, not schools, not civilian bomb-shelters, the Ministry of Oil.

If the US is not willing to use any of their own cash to help rebuild the country they themselves destroyed, then they should drag their cheap, racist asses out of there and try the next Third World country they figure needs "liberating".

You made your bed by opposing the UN and going into Iraq anyway. If it bankrupts your country in so doing, too frickin bad, it was a US decision and you'll have to live by it.

jakomo

Jak,

The UN dedicated to HELPING people? Please, dont make me laugh. The Un is just as guilty as the US, for different reasons. The UN itself is a joke, yet is integral, ideologically, for the NWO.

The UN has its own agenda, its own goals, perhaps, the Arabs know things we dont. The UN has never been effective, never will be effective. Iraq's answer was not the UN.

And the UN gave full approval to the first gulf war.

Just in case anyone can't pick the authorship in my previous post:

1. I wrote the introduction (one para).

2. The rest is a socialist writer. If I linked to that writing at its home, it would get little readership just based on the name of the site.

3. I didn't say I supported the arguments. I said the assessment was more accurate than anything in the US mainstream media.

Just to clarify.

Jakomo,
You need to wake up a bit yourself.

LOL! Why do you think the infrastructure is so bad? 12 years of US imposed sanctions and anything unnaffected by that was BOMBED BY THE US WHEN THEY INVADED.

Umm, Bull hockey. The infrastructure was neglected because Saddam decided to use the Oil for food money for just about anything BUT food. The bombing campaign was very targetted and we avoided hitting ANY infrastructure as much as possible. Why were the lights throughout Baghdad working until it was clear we won? We did not F-UP the services, the retreating regime took care of that.

And you dare to say this

For you to compare the UN to the US is woefully misinformed. One is an organization dedicated to trying to HELP people, one is a country dedicated to killing foreign people.

Sometimes I wish this were true when listening to the crap people like you spew.
Do you have any idea how many people could have been killed in this past war if we were "dedicated to killing foreign people"? We are dedicated to killing as few as possible to achieve a goal. We are succeeding.

I mean, does the Pentagon think we're IDIOTS?

No, just people like you.

But don't try to convince me that the US is there under ANY good intentions. What was the ONE building that was protected by the US forces in Baghdad while all the looting was happening?

The Ministry of OIL. Not the museums, not any hospitals, not schools, not civilian bomb-shelters, the Ministry of Oil.

Oh, maybe, just maybe because it is the ONLY rescource the country has to survive in the future?

If the US is not willing to use any of their own cash to help rebuild the country they themselves destroyed, then they should drag their cheap, racist asses out of there and try the next Third World country they figure needs "liberating".

Like Britain?