Iraqis and US Turn to UN to Resolve Transition Impasse

[tnitsuj]

from USATODAY.COM

 

[CADsortaGUY]

NYTimes

Lets see what the wise Annan has to say. Any bets on what the UN decides to do?

CkG

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
NYTimes

Lets see what the wise Annan has to say. Any bets on what the UN decides to do?

CkG

Hopefully something better than what the US has managed to do. What are we on revision 10 of the master plan now? Kurds wanting thier own state, Shiites agitating for an election, Sunnis getting worried, an ongoing insurgency......no they can only make it worse as the wise US is doing such a stunning job.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
NYTimes

Lets see what the wise Annan has to say. Any bets on what the UN decides to do?

CkG

Hopefully something better than what the US has managed to do. What are we on revision 10 of the master plan now? Kurds wanting thier own state, Shiites agitating for an election, Sunnis getting worried, an ongoing insurgency......no they can only make it worse as the wise US is doing such a stunning job.

Do you think the UN would have faired better?

And is it good to stick to a plan that is not working?

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
NYTimes

Lets see what the wise Annan has to say. Any bets on what the UN decides to do?

CkG

Hopefully something better than what the US has managed to do. What are we on revision 10 of the master plan now? Kurds wanting thier own state, Shiites agitating for an election, Sunnis getting worried, an ongoing insurgency......no they can only make it worse as the wise US is doing such a stunning job.

Do you think the UN would have faired better?

And is it good to stick to a plan that is not working?

Yes I do.

#1 we wouldn't be there if we had listened to the UN in the 1st place

#2 the UN would not be viewed as the occupier and would be a more acceptable broker to the Shiites and Sunnis (thier are many statements from high as the Grand Ayatollah himself saying this)

It is not good to stick to a plan that is not working, nor is it good to come in with an unrealistic plan based on your own twisted ideology and then continue to adapt it not based on the realities on the ground but mainly according to your own domestic political considerations.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
NYTimes

Lets see what the wise Annan has to say. Any bets on what the UN decides to do?

CkG

Hopefully something better than what the US has managed to do. What are we on revision 10 of the master plan now? Kurds wanting thier own state, Shiites agitating for an election, Sunnis getting worried, an ongoing insurgency......no they can only make it worse as the wise US is doing such a stunning job.

Do you think the UN would have faired better?

And is it good to stick to a plan that is not working?

Yes I do.

#1 we wouldn't be there if we had listened to the UN in the 1st place

#2 the UN would not be viewed as the occupier and would be a more acceptable broker to the Shiites and Sunnis (thier are many statements from high as the Grand Ayatollah himself saying this)

It is not good to stick to a plan that is not working, nor is it good to come in with an unrealistic plan based on your own twisted ideology and then continue to adapt it not based on the realities on the ground but mainly according to your own domestic political considerations.

#1 Saddam would still be in power, and we would still be trying to figure out if had anything.

#2 What would the UN occupy with?

 

[tnitsuj]

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
NYTimes

Lets see what the wise Annan has to say. Any bets on what the UN decides to do?

CkG

Hopefully something better than what the US has managed to do. What are we on revision 10 of the master plan now? Kurds wanting thier own state, Shiites agitating for an election, Sunnis getting worried, an ongoing insurgency......no they can only make it worse as the wise US is doing such a stunning job.

Do you think the UN would have faired better?

And is it good to stick to a plan that is not working?

Yes I do.

#1 we wouldn't be there if we had listened to the UN in the 1st place

#2 the UN would not be viewed as the occupier and would be a more acceptable broker to the Shiites and Sunnis (thier are many statements from high as the Grand Ayatollah himself saying this)

It is not good to stick to a plan that is not working, nor is it good to come in with an unrealistic plan based on your own twisted ideology and then continue to adapt it not based on the realities on the ground but mainly according to your own domestic political considerations.

#1 Saddam would still be in power, and we would still be trying to figure out if had anything.

#2 What would the UN occupy with?

#1. Who gives a f$ck he was no threat to us.

#2. That is exactly the point, the UN does not occupy it administers, and it has administered places way more screwed up that Iraq ever was. Cambodia comes to mind.

 

[tnitsuj]

"If the agreement is implemented under the supervision of the Americans alone or the coalition as a whole, it will be deficient because it will have been carried out under occupation," said Mahmoud Othman, a Kurdish Governing Council member.

"But if it's implemented under the supervision of the United Nations, the Europeans and the Arab League, then it will be much more acceptable."

The question of legitimacy has dogged Iraqi politics since the downfall of Saddam Hussein's regime in April. The Governing Council is viewed by many Iraqis as a tool of U.S. administrator Paul Bremer, who hand-picked its 25 members in July. Many council members are Saddam critics who spent many years outside Iraq before returning home.

 

[charrison]

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: charrison

Originally posted by: tnitsuj

Originally posted by: CADkindaGUY
NYTimes

Lets see what the wise Annan has to say. Any bets on what the UN decides to do?

CkG

Hopefully something better than what the US has managed to do. What are we on revision 10 of the master plan now? Kurds wanting thier own state, Shiites agitating for an election, Sunnis getting worried, an ongoing insurgency......no they can only make it worse as the wise US is doing such a stunning job.

Do you think the UN would have faired better?

And is it good to stick to a plan that is not working?

Yes I do.

#1 we wouldn't be there if we had listened to the UN in the 1st place

#2 the UN would not be viewed as the occupier and would be a more acceptable broker to the Shiites and Sunnis (thier are many statements from high as the Grand Ayatollah himself saying this)

It is not good to stick to a plan that is not working, nor is it good to come in with an unrealistic plan based on your own twisted ideology and then continue to adapt it not based on the realities on the ground but mainly according to your own domestic political considerations.

#1 Saddam would still be in power, and we would still be trying to figure out if had anything.

#2 What would the UN occupy with?

#1. Who gives a f$ck he was no threat to us.

#2. That is exactly the point, the UN does not occupy it administers, and it has administered places way more screwed up that Iraq ever was. Cambodia comes to mind.

#1 Would still be uncertain(salman pak, al queda camp in the north that we did not have access to),
still unknown weapons programs, non compliance with UN

#2 so rowando. The UN was not being nearly aggressive enough on weapons inspections in iraq.

BUt this has been beat into the ground.

 

[JackStorm]

Originally posted by: charrison


al queda camp in the north that we did not have access to

Only Al Queda related camp in Iraq, that I recall, was in Kurdish territory, which was under U.S/Kurdish control.