Bush May Heal Rift With Europeans

[LeadMagnet]

Article

President Bush stands a good chance of healing a rift with European allies over the U.S. war in Iraq if he pursues a partnership with Europe, a senior German legislator said Thursday.

With nearly 2,000 troops in Afghanistan and willing to help train Iraqi police, Germany is contributing to U.S. efforts in both countries, Wolfgang Schaeuble, deputy chairman of the conservative opposition in the Bundestag, said.

Schaeuble said he had told Condoleezza Rice, President Bush's national security assistant, during talks here that there is a need for Europe to become a stronger partner of the United States.

The German legislator said Bush would meet with Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder next week in New York while the two leaders attended the U.N. General Assembly session.

The meeting may help to close the gap between the United States and Germany on Iraq, he said. If Bush "shows he is not going a unilateral way he could bridge the differences," Schaeuble said.

Germany opposed the war with Iraq, lining up with France. Schroeder met in Berlin Thursday with French President Jacques Chirac and they will meet also with British Prime Minister Tony Blair this weekend.

Chirac said in Berlin that he would like to see a transfer of power in Iraq in a matter of months. Earlier, he had called for an end of the U.S. occupation in one month's time.

Chirac also voiced support for an offer by Schroeder to help train new Iraqi security forces in Germany, which Schroeder renewed at Thursday's news conference outside the chancellery in Berlin.

In Washington, a senior U.S. official hesitated to assess Chirac's apparent willingness to delay a handover of power to Iraqis for months. The official, speaking on condition of anonymity, said the United States also wanted to see Iraqis taking charge of their country. But he said the timetable was up to the Iraqis to set.

At the same time, the official said the United States and Germany agreed on several Iraq issues and Germany's offer to train security forces reflected a shared interest in a free, prosperous and stable Iraq.

Schaeuble said he hoped the Schroeder-Chirac-Blair meeting on Saturday would help close the gap with France and Germany.

Pondering the reasons for the rift, Schaeuble said it is very difficult for Americans to understand what is going on in Europe and it is very difficult for France to accept the loss of its position as a world power.

He advised all sides to look to the future, and not to the past.

Article

 

[tcsenter]

Translation:

Bush will be meeting with the 'principled and peaceful' European nations and saying "Looky what I have, oil money and reconstruction contracts for you, too!"

And it will work, because Europe is so 'principled and peaceful' and all.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: tcsenter
Translation:

Bush will be meeting with the 'principled and peaceful' European nations and saying "Looky what I have, oil money and reconstruction contracts for you, too!"

And it will work, because Europe is so 'principled and peaceful' and all.

Europe would be justified just to leave Bush twisting in the wind. If they choose to help you better be grateful.

 

[tcsenter]

Europe would be justified just to leave Bush twisting in the wind. If they choose to help you better be grateful.

Let's be perfectly clear about what is happening...

The US will take all the risk, shed the blood of its citizens, while European leaders capitalize politically from anti-Americanism back home by both feeding it and publicly taking stances against the US, then they will profit economically from opportunites our blood-shed has created, all the while never having to appear as though they are 'caving-in' to the Americans....just the way Europe always likes it.

 

[sandorski]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Europe would be justified just to leave Bush twisting in the wind. If they choose to help you better be grateful.

Let's be perfectly clear about what is happening...

The US will take all the risk, shed the blood of its citizens, while European leaders capitalize politically from anti-Americanism back home by both feeding it and publicly taking stances against the US, then they will profit economically from opportunites our blood-shed has created, all the while never having to appear as though they are 'caving-in' to the Americans....just the way Europe always likes it.

They told Bush to wait. They didn't encourage him to invade on some false pretense, if they choose to now join the fray they'll be doing the US a big favour. If you or Bush can't accept that, then perhaps you'll be happier twiddling your thumbs in Iraq alone.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: sandorski

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Europe would be justified just to leave Bush twisting in the wind. If they choose to help you better be grateful.

Let's be perfectly clear about what is happening...

The US will take all the risk, shed the blood of its citizens, while European leaders capitalize politically from anti-Americanism back home by both feeding it and publicly taking stances against the US, then they will profit economically from opportunites our blood-shed has created, all the while never having to appear as though they are 'caving-in' to the Americans....just the way Europe always likes it.

They told Bush to wait. They didn't encourage him to invade on some false pretense, if they choose to now join the fray they'll be doing the US a big favour. If you or Bush can't accept that, then perhaps you'll be happier twiddling your thumbs in Iraq alone.

Either that or Germany/France is about to be left completely in the cold when it comes to Iraq.

 

[mastertech01]

We certainly dont need to start another long drawn out cold war, especially with our allies. We also need not lay down in bed with them either.

 

[tcsenter]

They told Bush to wait. They didn't encourage him to invade on some false pretense, if they choose to now join the fray they'll be doing the US a big favour. If you or Bush can't accept that, then perhaps you'll be happier twiddling your thumbs in Iraq alone.

You're rather ignorant when it comes to international geopolitics and Europe's proven history.

"They" didn't tell Bush to wait. "They" were trying to obstruct the US from getting UN support for the invasion, on the bet we would crack under the pressure and not pursue the invasion. "They" stood to lose hundreds of billions of dollars from "their" well-documented financial stake in the Hussein regime if it were deposed and "they" weren't in a position to wield substantial influence over Iraq's post-Hussein economic and reconstruction fate.

I guarantee we will not be 'twiddling' our thumbs alone in Iraq, because Europe will automagically drop all of their 'principled' opposition to assist or support regime change and nation building in Iraq when we wave a few bills in their face.

 

[phillyTIM]

I think we're already in a new cold war with major EU members.

And it won't defrost now until we cleanse the White House of the current Regime.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Europe would be justified just to leave Bush twisting in the wind. If they choose to help you better be grateful.

Let's be perfectly clear about what is happening...

The US will take all the risk, shed the blood of its citizens, while European leaders capitalize politically from anti-Americanism back home by both feeding it and publicly taking stances against the US, then they will profit economically from opportunites our blood-shed has created, all the while never having to appear as though they are 'caving-in' to the Americans....just the way Europe always likes it.

Wow it would have been nice if we were told that we were sending troops there for economic reasons instead of being lied too about the imminent threat of WMD's to our National Security! Funny but our Government never presented Iraq as some sort of Economic Prize when trying to convince the American Public to support the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq.

 

[PatboyX]

Wow it would have been nice if we were told that we were sending troops there for economic reasons instead of being lied too about the imminent threat of WMD's to our National Security! Funny but our Government never presented Iraq as some sort of Economic Prize when trying to convince the American Public to support the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq.

funny like a corn flake.

 

[tcsenter]

Wow it would have been nice if we were told that we were sending troops there for economic reasons instead of being lied too about the imminent threat of WMD's to our National Security! Funny but our Government never presented Iraq as some sort of Economic Prize when trying to convince the American Public to support the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq.

Hey Red, do you have a point? I realize this would be the first time in 17584 posts that you would, but heck there's a first time for everything.

 

[Red Dawn]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Wow it would have been nice if we were told that we were sending troops there for economic reasons instead of being lied too about the imminent threat of WMD's to our National Security! Funny but our Government never presented Iraq as some sort of Economic Prize when trying to convince the American Public to support the Invasion and Occupation of Iraq.

Hey Red, do you have a point? I realize this would be the first time in 17584 posts that you would, but heck there's a first time for everything.

Ahahaha..Ahahaha.. you are so funny..Ahahaha

 

[rchiu]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Europe would be justified just to leave Bush twisting in the wind. If they choose to help you better be grateful.

Let's be perfectly clear about what is happening...

The US will take all the risk, shed the blood of its citizens, while European leaders capitalize politically from anti-Americanism back home by both feeding it and publicly taking stances against the US, then they will profit economically from opportunites our blood-shed has created, all the while never having to appear as though they are 'caving-in' to the Americans....just the way Europe always likes it.

That's good, that's exactly the way it is. But whose fault is that for not anticipating it and put the US in this situation?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

They told Bush to wait. They didn't encourage him to invade on some false pretense, if they choose to now join the fray they'll be doing the US a big favour. If you or Bush can't accept that, then perhaps you'll be happier twiddling your thumbs in Iraq alone.

You're rather ignorant when it comes to international geopolitics and Europe's proven history.

"They" didn't tell Bush to wait. "They" were trying to obstruct the US from getting UN support for the invasion, on the bet we would crack under the pressure and not pursue the invasion. "They" stood to lose hundreds of billions of dollars from "their" well-documented financial stake in the Hussein regime if it were deposed and "they" weren't in a position to wield substantial influence over Iraq's post-Hussein economic and reconstruction fate.

I guarantee we will not be 'twiddling' our thumbs alone in Iraq, because Europe will automagically drop all of their 'principled' opposition to assist or support regime change and nation building in Iraq when we wave a few bills in their face.

Ahh so your argument could be extended further. The US knew this, and realized that starting a war would get them those lucrative contracts and US companies would profit as a result (well documented, as you put it). So when did you come to the conclusion that this was about getting Iraqs oil? Because if you want to reduce others to that level, the sword cuts both ways.

 

[lozina]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I'm seeing here is tcsenter implicitly admitting that the war in Iraq is all about economics (specifically oil) rather then the glorious noble honorable facade of democratization and 'freedom' ?

 

[Corn]

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I'm seeing here is tcsenter implicitly admitting that the war in Iraq is all about economics (specifically oil) rather then the glorious noble honorable facade of democratization and 'freedom' ?

Yes, you are wrong, here's the correction: tcsenter is stating that the "principled" European countries' principles were driven solely by economics rather than the glorious noble facade of compassion for those people living under the rule of a dictator who profited off European commerce while he let everyone who wasn't in his little clique starve.....

 

[freegeeks]

the cheap labour conservative YABA's are so funny

they are spinning a new story every week. The latest story is that it's now Europes fault that it's going bad in Iraq

in one thread they are whining because Europe is not willing to help Bush catastrophic Iraq politics
in this thread they are whining because Europe is willing to help out

get a grip

 

[Ldir]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Europe would be justified just to leave Bush twisting in the wind. If they choose to help you better be grateful.

Let's be perfectly clear about what is happening...

The US will take all the risk, shed the blood of its citizens, while European leaders capitalize politically from anti-Americanism back home by both feeding it and publicly taking stances against the US, then they will profit economically from opportunites our blood-shed has created, all the while never having to appear as though they are 'caving-in' to the Americans....just the way Europe always likes it.

You're such a tool.

 

[tcsenter]

Ahh so your argument could be extended further. The US knew this, and realized that starting a war would get them those lucrative contracts and US companies would profit as a result (well documented, as you put it). So when did you come to the conclusion that this was about getting Iraqs oil? Because if you want to reduce others to that level, the sword cuts both ways.

Right, because the United States needs to incur the enormous costs of deposing regimes in order to maintain the engines of economic growth, while France and Germany are in such great economic shape it won't even notice the loss of its financial stake in the Hussein regime worth billions and billions (think Sagan billions).

You keep working on that argument, maybe it will even make some sense someday!

Oh and I see that Bush, Chirac, and Shroder have finally arrived at the right price. I'm sure the timing was just a big coincidence.

Its good to see that Germany and France are finally joining the US - after most of the bullets have stopped flying - in taking some responsibility for the mess they in no small way helped create by forging economic ties and military assistance programs with a despotic aggressor regime. I wonder how much it took to get them to see the error of their ways?

 

[Hayabusa Rider]

Originally posted by: tcsenter

Ahh so your argument could be extended further. The US knew this, and realized that starting a war would get them those lucrative contracts and US companies would profit as a result (well documented, as you put it). So when did you come to the conclusion that this was about getting Iraqs oil? Because if you want to reduce others to that level, the sword cuts both ways.

Right, because the United States needs to incur the enormous costs of deposing regimes in order to maintain the engines of economic growth, while France and Germany are in such great economic shape it won't even notice the loss of its financial stake in the Hussein regime worth billions and billions.

You keep working on that argument, maybe it will even make some sense someday!

Oh and I see that Bush, Chirac, and Shroder have finally arrived at the right price. I'm sure the timing was just a big coincidence.

Its good to see that Germany and France are finally joining the US - after most of the bullets have stopped flying - in taking some responsibility for the mess they in no small way helped create by forging economic ties and military assistance programs with a despotic aggressor regime. I wonder how much it took to get them to see the error of their ways?

It makes as much sense as yours. People in this administration can personally benefit their friends and acquantainces. Wanna bet Cheney gets money from Halliburton after he gets out of office? "Consulting fees"?

Your explanation of the situation is put forward as if it were the only and overriding factor. Chirac rubbing his greedy little hands laughing like Renfield perhaps?

You are putting forward an argument of opinion, and that is fine. It is not the only explanation though. I think there is more to it than contracts for France or money for Cheney. The reasons for or against this war were more complex than you suggest. Tell me, if Chirac supported Bush, would he be representing his country? No. What if the thought it was wrong? He might have. I don't know, and neither do you. I dont really care for Chirac, but I believe motivations are more complex than you suggest.

 

[phillyTIM]

Wow Corn - I'm honored to have made it into your sig! Thanks! Great quote by me, by the way!

 

[lozina]

Originally posted by: Corn

Correct me if I'm wrong, but what I'm seeing here is tcsenter implicitly admitting that the war in Iraq is all about economics (specifically oil) rather then the glorious noble honorable facade of democratization and 'freedom' ?

Yes, you are wrong, here's the correction: tcsenter is stating that the "principled" European countries' principles were driven solely by economics rather than the glorious noble facade of compassion for those people living under the rule of a dictator who profited off European commerce while he let everyone who wasn't in his little clique starve.....

Oh, right I forgot the part about Europeans being the only slimy bastards who are fueled by economic self-interest, while America is the little sweetheart who only wants peace and justice to the people of the world.

But anyway, aside form European companies being listed in that dossier, American ones were also referenced. Did you forget that part?

 

[tcsenter]

Oh, right I forgot the part about Europeans being the only slimy bastards who are fueled by economic self-interest, while America is the little sweetheart who only wants peace and justice to the people of the world.

The United States shares responsibility with France, Germany, and Russia for nurturing Hussein's dictatorial agressor regime in Iraq.

Granted, the US bears far less culpability than any one of France, Germany, and Russia, let alone together, whose forging of lucrative economic relationships including military transfers (and a nuclear reactor) with the Hussein regime were far greater contributions to the creation of this monster than a few satellite photos of Iran's military movements the US provided Hussein back in the early 80s, but we are not blameless in all of this, either.

So France, Germany, and Russia, if truly interested in doing "the right thing", should have been willing partners with the US in ridding the region once-and-for-all of an undeniable menace and tyrant we all share responsibility for nurturing, right?

Now my memory is a little foggy, perhaps you could refresh it: whose servicemen are dying in Iraq besides the US and Britain?

 

[Rockhound]

So far tcsenter is hitting every point correctly, but just to add to the assertion that "while America is the little sweetheart who only wants peace and justice to the people of the world" - America seems to be the one AND only country in the world looking out for not only itself but others as well, namely France, Germany, Russia, the rest of Europe, middle east, etc. with regard to security and the prevention of another 9/11. Just as America has been looking out for all of Europe for the past 60+ years in terms of its defense and economic stability. I haven't seen us pulling out our troops from Germany after all this time, have you? Why have they been there so long? Obviously, to protect Germany and the rest of Europe from being invaded again. So who else promotes peace and justice to the people of the world if not America? Surely not France or Germany. Remember, they did not want to get involved in Serbia at all! Their backyard. They left it all up to us because they surely don't have the will to do anything of that nature.