Quote:
I think Germany has some answering to do for their part in providing weapons to Iraq and for doling out contracts in Iraq that they lost btw because we went in and got rid of the regime.
I think they need to sit back and seriously see where they further harmed the people of Iraq with those contracts before they whine about not being allowed a role in the reconstruction.
And Russia.
And France.
|
I'm afraid that even this administration has figured out that it doesn't work this way. Here's where we are:
1. The US/UK go to war without UN authorisation saying to the UN: "Sod you, we don't need you".
2. $76billion dollars later, Bush suddenly discovers that going it alone means paying for it alone. Oops! (and that $76billion doesn't even cover the cost of replacing all that spent ordinance).
3. Bush doesn't have the cash to rebuild Iraq so he goes to the World Bank and asks for a reconstruction loan for Iraq. "Not a chance" says the World Bank, "We don't lend money to governments not recognised by the UN". "Oh!" says Bush, then I'll go to the IMF.
4. The IMF says "What goes for the World Bank goes for us too, come back after you've been to the UN".
5. US Treasury Secretary, John Snow discovers that Iraq owes more than $100billion dollars to Russia, France and Germany and that those debts must be paid first or renogiated with any money that Iraq does get from loans. So he asks France, Germany and Russia to 'forgive' the debts! France Germany and Russia say "Perhaps you'd better tell us what is in it for us first..."
That's where we have gotten to. Bush now has a stark choice, he can either:
a) Underwrite the reconstruction loans to Iraq (not sure how he is going to do that given that he has so generously paid off his political allies with big tax cuts and didn't even have the cash to reward the veterns) or
b) Come to an economic agreement with France and Russia (and possibly Germany, depending on how much the others ask for)...
Humble pie anyone?
4.