Color commentary by yours truly.
Quote:
September 29, 2003
European Union Ministers Support Iraq Handover
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Filed at 10:59 a.m. ET
BRUSSELS, Belgium (AP) -- The European Union, whose members were bitterly divided over the war to oust Saddam Hussein, disagreed Monday on a timetable for a handover of power to a sovereign Iraqi government.
|
Article seems interesting. Since when did EU leaders have a say? Hmm... guess I'll read on....
Quote:
Meeting behind closed doors, the foreign ministers of the 15-member European Union issued a unanimous statement that a transfer of power in Iraq should occur ``as soon as feasible'' and that the United Nations should play a ``vital'' role in the transition.
|
If this is an epiphany, it's a bit late. The first statement was made before the US even went to Iraq, and the second was made by Bushie-boy to the <s>Neutered</s> United Nations not too long ago.
Quote:
The EU foreign ministers also asked foreign policy chief Javier Solana to develop proposals on an ``enhanced EU role in Iraq,'' including the possible dispatch of peacekeepers.
|
Right. Peacekeepers are needed ASAP. So, let's have someone develop some proposals to get them there, and then our committees can review it. Don't forget to send it to the Committee on Committees (don't laugh -- they exist, even in the US Congress) and the DORD (Department of Redundancy Department). Maybe by 2005 they can take a decision as to whether or not they ought take a decision (for you Yanks "take a decision" is EU-speak for our "make a decision").
Quote:
The statement did not detail the positions of member nations about a timetable, but French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin over the weekend called for a transfer by the end of the year.
|
Proving once again he does drugs. [img]graemlins/bonghit.gif[/img] What kind of crack are these people on? First, it ain't gonna happen - duh - so this is just a statement "to give the big middle finger to the USA." Second, by the end of the year, these idiots won't have figured out whether or not they're going to think about thinking about doing something.
Quote:
The United States has proposed that Iraq adopt a new constitution in six months, with elections to follow, and a greater U.N. role in the country's reconstruction.
|
Sounds fair.
Quote:
EU foreign ministers said a new U.N. resolution was essential to formalize a transfer of power from the U.S.-appointed Iraqi Governing Council and that the United Nations ``should play a vital role'' in Iraq's reconstruction.
|
Oops, pass the bong again. [img]graemlins/bonghit.gif[/img] Yeah, Reslutions have such sweeping success at getting things done. Tell you what, you guys spend between now and 1/1/04 hammering out a resolution and we'll veto it. Seems simple to us. Call when you're ready, mmkay?
Quote:
Their statement said it was necessary to reach a deal ``on a realistic schedule for handing over political control to the Iraqi people ... as soon as feasible.''
|
Well, handing Iraq over to the Iraqis ASAP is agreeable all-around. But, as this article demonstrates, we have not found a veritable font of wisdom regarding what is "realistic."
Quote:
The issue over how and when power should be given to an independent Iraqi government is thwarting a deal at the United Nations, pitting France against the United States.
France, Germany and Belgium were the most vocal EU nations in opposition to the war while Britain sent troops and sided with the United States. The Netherlands, Denmark, Italy, Portugal and Spain have also recently sent troops.
Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini, whose country holds the EU presidency, sought to bridge the divide between France and Britain over a new U.N. resolution.
Dutch Foreign Minister Jaap de Hoop Scheffer said a lot of work remained to be done to get consensus on Iraq both in Europe and at the U.N. ``This (proposed resolution) could be the beginning of a solution, but we are not there yet,'' he said.
The ministers said the appointment of an interim Iraqi Cabinet and moves toward writing a new constitution marked were ``significant'' steps. But they remained concerned over the security situation, and condemned the recent attacks against U.N. aid workers.
|
Right. Condemn those darned attacks. Evil attackers. Horrible attacks. We'll have our fellow Americans there dying while you're busy waving fingers of chastisement at both sides. Thanks a heap for your latest input. Tell you what, if you want a say-so in the matter, you should have to send at least 1000 troops first. Get some of your guys on the line dying to put this nation back together and then you get some respect. Like those nations in the list, none of whom were the ones whining and bitching (and typically doing so) mentioned in this article.
[ 09-29-2003, 12:13 PM: Message edited by: Timber Loftis ]