Iraqiberia Teaches
@ 11:45 pm A small piece of news flew under my radar the other week, I had to echelonize it for a while. The Finns have this kind of a saying: “Siberia Teaches”, from the time of the Russian Empire if you were a civil servant who disliked your post you were sent to Siberia for a few years and then if you were lucky you could return. Somehow the whining stopped. Well, it seems that the US government is using a hot place instead of the cold one. HS International Edition on 18.5 wrote of one William Davnie, a former Press and Cultural Affairs Counsellor at the United States Embassy in Helsinki wrote a piece for the November 2006 issue of Foreign Service Journal.
Davnie wrote that most of the politically-appointed ambassadors are “profoundly handicapped in fulfilling their new duties”, regardless of the success of their former careers. They tend to alienate the local public with political talking points that are born out of the domestic political debate, fail to “switch mental gears” for the new milieu or make a connection there, and do not have a sufficient grasp of important issues. He also expressed a measure of sympathy for their plight in stepping from the radically-different corporate executive world into that of slow-moving diplomatic routines. Davnie added that the time of embassy staff is taken up in averting or smoothing over the faux pas of non-career ambassadors and getting them up to speed with local matters.
Note the former press Councellor.
“A position was offered to him to serve in Iraq and he took it”, said Davnie’s successor Chad Peterson on behalf of the Ambassador. Before coming to Finland, Davnie had learned to speak fluent Finnish, which he managed to use in Helsinki for less than two years before his instant transfer to Iraq.
Where he probably could have used his talent in private conversations with the Governor of Najaf. No wonder he decided for early retirement.
So, I guess Siberia and Iraq are high on the Pisa-scores whan it comes to civil servants no-whine training.
Looks as though those naughty kids at Freedom4um have got there first:
http://freedom4um.com/cgi-bin/readart.cgi?ArtNum=52956
I guess they’re just freer or something.
Comment by Ware's Wally — Mon, May 28th, 2007 @ 12:16 am
Bill Davnie is a fine officer who had served nearly two years in his post. (Aisignments are normally 2-3 years.) The simply fact of the matter is that Baghdad is a much more important post for a career diplomat that Helsinki — or any other European post.
Comment by Anonymous — Mon, May 28th, 2007 @ 6:19 am
So why the retirement then, eh?
Comment by Hank W. — Mon, May 28th, 2007 @ 9:18 am
#2 “The simply fact of the matter is that Baghdad is a much more important post for a career diplomat that Helsinki  or any other European post.”
And expertise in the Finnish language is naturally an essential asset for work in Iraq!
Comment by Kimmo W. — Mon, May 28th, 2007 @ 9:57 am
Italian Siberia used to be the Island of Sardinia, which is now a tourism resort. That’s why Italy is full of lazy whining bureaucrats. Tourism spoils the environment.
Comment by strudel — Mon, May 28th, 2007 @ 9:59 am
Well, the kind American taxpayers have poured billions of dollars into the new American embassy in Baghdad. They wouldn’t do that if it wasn’t really, really important, would they?
Comment by N. Siinistö — Mon, May 28th, 2007 @ 10:18 am
For a Libertarian, the issue of censorship should be paramount. See below for Kristian’s stance on the issue several weeks ago when the Finnish Tourist office in downtown Helsinki removed an issue of a certain magazine it felt was inappropriate.
http://www.finlandforthought.net/2007/04/10/free-magazine-censored-in-finnish-tourist-office/#comments
Gotta hide that stuff from the prudish Americans LOL!
Comment by Kristian  Tue, Apr 10th, 2007 @ 11:52 am
“it is my view that such publications do have a place in a tourist office, even if the focus is not on sight-seeing tours, souvenir shopping, restaurants, and accommodation.â€Â
I agree. And I don’t see why visitors should be denied access to information about the Finnish sex industry. Maybe they want to experience it for themselves. Why not?
Comment by Kristian  Tue, Apr 10th, 2007 @ 2:11 pm
#12 “Maybe because much of the sex industry is illegal and exploitative.â€Â
Maybe if it would be legal, it would be less exploitative. It works that way in, say, Amsterdam, Hamburg…. They even pay income taxes and get checked medically there.
“Oh, and Dave….the workers may not be Finnish, but many of its customers are, even in Tallinn. â€Â
Yes, hypocrisy at its finest. If it doesn’t exist in Finland, then everything is A-OK in this part of the squeaky clean Nordics
Comment by Kristian  Tue, Apr 10th, 2007 @ 3:39 pm
Comment by Dave the Slave — Mon, May 28th, 2007 @ 10:43 am
Anyway, back to topic, salary “hostile environment renumeration” of State Dept. is huge. One can go from a simple 80,000 € per year in Helsinki to over 200,000 in Iraq.
Do the numbers…. Some find the status and salary too much to refuse.
Comment by Dave the Slave — Mon, May 28th, 2007 @ 11:24 am
“Bill Davnie is a fine officer who had served nearly two years in his post. (Aisignments are normally 2-3 years.) The simply fact of the matter is that Baghdad is a much more important post for a career diplomat that Helsinki  or any other European post.”
All well and good, though as an excuse it limps more than a lame duck.
Surely the entire point of Davnie’s comments - and those of others in the Foreign Service - is that the policy of “gift” embassies (and there are more than 40 of them and counting) for people who have no other credentials than stumping up a large sum of money for the man in the White House to remain there - is a BAD policy.
It reeks of a form of corporate nepotism, provides rewards for cash rather than talent, and apparently puts obstacles in the way of the “career diplomats” at the sharp end of the job. It is a kind of “incentive holidays” for executives, with the difference that the executives are likely to annoy foreigners and cause discomfort to diplomatic staff only for the one or two weeks they are on vacation. Equally, the lucky execs are not privy to the perks given to serving diplomats abroad - they have to PAY for their drinks.
The bottom-line is that the policy reeks of back-scratching, reminds people that the way to the White House is paved with money, and gives the US a bad name abroad. Presumably this will be spun to suggest that “anti-Americanism is rife, because they are jealous of us”. Go figure.
Comment by That's as may be — Mon, May 28th, 2007 @ 12:25 pm
So why the retirement then, eh?
Yeah, I’m a little curious to know that myself. But I’m sure it will be spin.
But hey… you got someone’s attention.
Comment by gopha — Mon, May 28th, 2007 @ 10:29 pm
“So why the retirement then, eh?”
Maby he saw the success we are having there:
day by day
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 12:42 am
Maby he saw the success we are having there:
Maby he just wayved the French white flag of surrender.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 12:55 am
Perhaps Halliburton is having a great success. I haven’t been following their stock for a while.
As for the Iraqi people…
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5uso1NcireQ
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 2:02 am
A well-written blog by a grunt who’s ‘there’. Makes you wonder about the success part.
http://armyofdude.blogspot.com/
Comment by Anonymous — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 2:05 am
Hell, they misspelled “troups”.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0iK9Wy-OIy8&NR=1
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 2:16 am
“Makes you wonder about the success part.”
I haven’t read the blog you linked, but generally if Iraqis continue to kill Iraqis then it can be seen as success for the US.
It’ll distract them from targeting the oil supplies.
http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/security/esar/esar_bigpic.htm
Comment by Kristian — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 2:49 am
And just for kicks, let’s see where all the military bases are…
Go to first link “Lets overlay a map of US bases in Iraq on a map of Iraqi oil fields.” Very interesting…..
http://search.yahoo.com/search;_ylt=A0geu8MZm1tGXy4AELFXNyoA?p=iraq+oil+bases+map+democraticunderground&ei=UTF-8&fr=yfp-t-501&fp_ip=FI&x=wrt&meta=0
Comment by Kristian — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 2:57 am
@17: Doesn’t work.
Comment by Anonymous — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 4:06 am
@16: Don’t know about that… one would think that with the civil war going on, and an occupation needed to protect the production & transport you end up with pretty damn expensive oil.
Btw 14 & 18 were mine.
Comment by aet75 — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 4:16 am
#18 That was a weird link in #17, but I fixed it.
“Don’t know about that… one would think that with the civil war going on, and an occupation needed to protect the production & transport you end up with pretty damn expensive oil.”
That’s ok. American tax payers have deep pockets.
Comment by Kristian — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 6:48 am
Finns have this other saying too: “Tälläistä mä oon aiiiiina halunnu!”
Mr. Davnie can use it when he’s given his first flak jacket and sent to oversee some Halliburton construction outside the green zone.
Comment by Lan Theroux — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 12:22 pm
Although the US tax payers have deep pockets, lets not forget who is making the profit from oil sales at the moment in these times of high oil prices……. Who is it that suddenly owns (controls) vast new oil resources and is also profitting from their own not too small local production?
I smell a rat. What are the odds that oil prices will drop once the “occupation” is over and the US once again become oil importers rather than defacto oil sellers?
Comment by Punter — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 6:34 pm
Punter smells a rat?
And when Finland was bribed in the food-for-oil scam, changing its votes, and saying good things about Saddam, did you all smell the rat?
Naw, just wishing that the BBC was off again.
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 10:30 pm
Winter, I may be pro capitalism, pro globalisation and pro many things you think are great but don’t go down this path with me. Let me ask you all those years ago when good old Rummy was there kissing sadams ass and selling him weapons to fight those other nasty “towel heads” (without as much oil mind you) did you smell a rat? What about when you financed, trained and equipped everyones favourite terrorist (freedom fighter wasn’t it?) Bin Laden, did you smell a rat? Central America? South East Asia in the 60’s?
Don’t insult my intelligence with your stupid blind red necked comments. The only thing I regret is the fact that my countrymen are labelled with yours and the stigma of supporting America in the war is one that follows me as an Australian. That decision, more than anything else, will bring down the best Australian government for generations at the end of this year.
Winter RIP
Comment by Punter — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 11:05 pm
Punter
WOW WOW WOW! Dont start with the US taking control of middle east oil and writing the new iraqi oil laws on behalf of the iraqis. Just shut up about it! I’m not hearing it - you know why? BECAUSE there’s was this oil for food thingy in the UN. I’m not exactly sure what it was about, but it’s a controversy of some kind and it involves the UN and stuff. How can we accuse the US of starting a war on false pretences, when there was this oil for food incident involving the UN and white flags of surrender???
Comment by Lan Theroux — Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 11:41 pm
“Last week, the Lebanese army attacked a squalid Palestinian refugee camp that’s become infested with Islamist suicide terrorists and guerilla fighters. On May 20, government troops surrounded the camp, with tanks and artillery pieces shelling it at close range. Army snipers gunned down anything that moved. At least 18 civilians were killed, and dozens more injured. Water and electricity were cut off. By week’s end, much of the camp had been turned into deserted rubble. Thousands of terrified residents fleeing the camp reported harrowing stories of famished, parched families trapped in their basements.”
And what does Finland do? Support the thugs and killers the Lebanese army had to move in on.
Oh I forget, you were bought off again, this time by Iran.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 2:06 am
“US of starting a war on false pretences”
Huh, so which attack on US Aircraft did you Ignore. An act of war. Or maby the planned attack on a US President. An act of war. There were so many violations, were do we start?
Please get your facts first. The BBC will not give them out.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 2:11 am
Freeridin’ Franklin
look, I can’t use the frenchy flag thingy. The French have turned the corner, they know who the real bad guys are, and so French Fries are ok.
Now, when do you figure out who the bad guys are? By the way the Chinese are fueling the Darfur killing, so are they your new good guys to rule the world?
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 2:18 am
“Yes, but in particular those who consistently disagree with anything that’s written here…yet have no solutions of their own to share.
As for the rest of us, we’d actually like to improve things.
Comment by Kristian  Tue, May 29th, 2007 @ 11:13 pm”
This is one point I can agree with. Most posts are all critical, with no solutions of their own to share. Usually not one.
Improving the world, usually means have a moral value you are willing to stand up for. Action is all the world hears, not your empty words.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 2:24 am
Can we please get back to the original thrust of this thread?
Winter, rather than foaming at the mouth on your fave topics, and reminding us how addicted you are to the BBC, since you seem to be so aware of every word they say, how’s about you actually address the original issue: a government gives payback “gifts” to major financial contributors, in the form of allowing said major contributors to play at being diplomats in foreign countries for a couple of years, thereby possibly a) interfering adversely with the nations’s relations with people in the countries they are stationed in, and b) impeding the work of the professionals whose job it is to run the “foreign” section of the Foreign Service.
Do you approve of this policy? Are you comfortable with the fact that your President has appointed 43 heads of embassies and legations abroad based on campaign contributions? Does it not leave a rather icky taste in your mouth? Or is it your belief that being an ambassador is no different from being shot into space - if you’ve got the money, it’s a done deal?
And do you believe that suggesting otherwise is perfectly good cause for sending to Iraq a man who clearly was well suited to working in Finland?
As what looks suspiciously like an act of vengeance?
When you have presented your considered position on this subject, you can return to your usual programming. Until then, you are just, in the words of the Bard, a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
Comment by Eastern Front — Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 2:31 am
“Are you comfortable with the fact that your President has appointed 43 heads of embassies and legations abroad based on campaign contributions?”
No. And did the last President do the same thing? Yes.
In general I have seen appointed folks, assigned to posts where I get to see their actions, not always directly, but in some cases I get to see the questions they ask.
In general, the Republican ones, are focused on a better Government for the dollar.
In general, the Democratic ones, are focused on the current presidents message, and implementing it. They also tend to want their guys in lower posts, and are pushy on getting them jobs.
Also in general, both sides provide pretty good people, and when one is bad, removed.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 2:43 am
You KNOW that Clinton appointed 43 (count them) non-careerist ambassadors?
Did you read the article from the International Herald Tribune that clearly stated the policy has been ramped up of late and has become the norm rather than the exception?
Did you read Davnie’s own article? I question how much oversight you would have on the actions of the ambassador to say, Belgium, even though since it was to be Sam Fox, you would doubtless approve of his appointment.
And even IF you could monitor this individual in his or her job, by what right is the job given to cronies and those with a fat billfold that is directed towards the administration, rather than to those who deserve it on merit? Is not the United States a meritocracy? At least in its dreams?
Your comments about the alleged difference between Republican appointees and Democrat ones (and I do not excuse the Democrats their own excesses on this subject) seem out of kilter with Davnie’s remarks, which suggest that ALL those who have been active in campaigning on the home front fail to stay on-message when they are abroad, and go around behaving like a bull in a china shop. Because they are not equipped for foreign service. Period.
I hardly neede to mention FEMA, either. Would it not have been better from the start to appoint someone COMPETENT rather than appointing - and then firing - someone “suitable” but hopeless?
Read the two articles, please.
One last point: in the UK, the Prime Minister (our beloved Tony Bliar) came within a whisker of police prosecution for a “cash for honours” scandal that may still bring legal problems for his staffers. In the UK, such things as giving perks to people who pay a couple of hundred thou to the party cause are called “corruption”.
In the US, apparently, they are called “business as usual” and “modern diplomacy”. And heaven help you if you suggest otherwise.
Comment by Eastern Front — Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 3:00 am
#28 “look, I can’t use the frenchy flag thingy. The French have turned the corner”
How have they turned the corner? By electing a new president from the same party as the old one?
“the Chinese are fueling the Darfur killing, so are they your new good guys to rule the world?”
As far as I have been able to tell, they’re YOUR good guys. They practically own you.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 8:51 am
“Huh, so which attack on US Aircraft did you Ignore. An act of war. Or maby the planned attack on a US President. An act of war. There were so many violations, were do we start?
Please get your facts first. The BBC will not give them out.”
Those were the reasons?! Rewriting history much, Winter?
As you know perfectly well the reasons for the invasion were Saddams supposed links to Al Qaida and that he and his “WMD’s” were an immediate threat - so immediate that the weapons inspections that were working at the time were not allowed to continue. Those were the reasons Bush REALLY gave us on the run up to war and that is an objective fact! Both of those reasons have been debunked thoroughly.
Even Bush at the time didnt use Saddams plan to murder Bush senior in the 90’s or the shots at the planes as reasons. This is because even he knew those were not enough to get enyone to support his war. To suggest that those acts you mentioned somehow make the war justified is absolutely ludicrous. I have heard all kinds of crazy excuses for the war for example a story that russian spetnaz teams moved saddams nukes to Syria just before the invasion. But the reasoning you gave, murder plan and attacks on the no fly zone a casus belli - that’s a new low. Nobody died in those “act’s of war” and the US was guilty of the same so pleaaase.
About your BBC reference at the end. You have become a parody of your self.
Comment by Lan Theroux — Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 12:36 pm
“As you know perfectly well the reasons for the invasion were Saddams supposed links to Al Qaida and that he and his “WMD’s†were an immediate threat ”
Huh, that was just ONE reason (WMD). By the way last I looked we were over 600 and finding more.
You answer is standard BBC trash. Come on you can do better.
Now answer this question? If Finnish F18’s were shot at, but nobody died, what would Finland do?
Yea, call it an act of war. Which it is. Saddan shot to kill Americans, and that all I need to take him out.
By the way you forgot the planned attack on a US president? Or did you ignore that fact again.
Comment by winter — Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 3:15 pm
600 WMDs and counting??? Oh, right. I guess they were all hidden in the mobile labs? WANKER
Comment by Punter — Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 5:41 pm
“By the way you forgot the planned attack on a US president? Or did you ignore that fact again.”
WTF man, you blind now!!! ??? Read my post it’s there. I wrote: “Even Bush at the time didnt use Saddams plan to murder Bush senior in the 90’s or the shots at the planes as reasons.” It still isn’t a casus belli so and any reasonable person knows it.
“Yea, call it an act of war. Which it is. Saddan shot to kill Americans, and that all I need to take him out.”
No it’s not enough. You are just making shit up, Winter. The US case for war was made by Colin Powel in his UN presentation. The presentation was just half truths and pure fabrications. All Powel’s points have been since thoroughly debunked. Watch this documentary:
Uncovered: The Whole Truth about the Iraq war
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-7371253996117324045&q=whole+truth+about+war
The film consist of interviews of U.S intelligence and defense officials, foreign service experts, and U.N. weapons inspectors — including a former CIA director. Point by point they shoot down the entire case against Saddam. There’s no bloggers or activist’s just experts, so you cant say it’s “BBC trash”. Get a clue.
“By the way last I looked we were over 600 and finding more.”
This is so unbelievably ridiculous. It’s the year 2007. Everybody knows no WMD has been found - even the fox news talking heads have admitted this, George Bush has admitted this. No one in the media (including the US mainstreammedia) is making that claim anymore. There’s no credible news source in the entire world that claims Saddam had WMD. The way you live under a rock and refuse to accept this fact is unbelievable. I dont what fuckt up blog you use to get your info. Come on, join the reality based community, why dont you?
Here Bush admits Saddam had no WMD and had nothing to do with 9/11. His original case is busted so he goes on about how the war was about spreading freedom:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f_A77N5WKWM
“You answer is standard BBC trash. Come on you can do better.”
You cant deny the facts so this is what you resort to: “BBC trash”. You cant do better.
Comment by Lan Theroux — Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 7:50 pm
Nice destruction job, Lan Theroux, but I wish you’d let us keep the reins on him and get him to answer the questions about quasi-corrupt practices and “cash for CD plates”. He does go off on these wild tangents so easily, and it really is his best means of escaping the awkward questions put his way.
Comment by Eastern Front — Wed, May 30th, 2007 @ 11:45 pm
“The US case for war was made by Colin Powel in his UN presentation. ”
Huh, we made a mistake of going to the UN and you hold that against us?
No way, Saddam had lots of UN violations to go to war for. Trying to get one more was the mistake, not the war.
BBC slant again.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 2:06 am
Anyone ask the Kirds about Saddams WMD? Oh, no, cause they are dead?
With over 600 found and growing. I will keep you up to date when new ones are found.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 2:08 am
@40: How do these 600? 80s-leftover artillery rounds (not all even filled?) constitute a WMD arsenal and a threat to the US or the world at large? That old, the agents are degraded and useless; I emit more hazardous gases after finishing a hangover kebab.
Why don’t you get back to us when they discover some working-condition, nerve-gas missile warheads or something like that.
FOX trash/slant again. They are the only ones making a fuss about this, and it really showcases their desperation.
Comment by aet75 — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 3:13 am
“No way, Saddam had lots of UN violations to go to war for. Trying to get one more was the mistake, not the war.”
Winter, you simply dont know what you’re talking about. You’re just talking out of you butt. Going to war is not a matter of you’re oppinion, it’s a matter of law. Here’s a little lesson on international law:
According to the United Nations charter participation in armed conflict is illegal in all but two situations:
A: Self-Defence
B: With the authorization of the UN Security Council
Article six of the US constitution says: “all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land”.
So ever since the US signed The United Nations Charter in 1945 it has been legally bound under international and domestic law to obey all articles of the charter. Any violation of the charter is also a violation of the constitution of the united states.
In the UN Powel claimed Saddam tried to buy uranium from niger. Shortly after the documents allegedly proving Iraqi attempts to buy uranium in Niger was proven to be a forgerys.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_Dossier
This is a good example of the way the Bush white house was misleading the american public and the entire international community. No proof what so ever has been shown that Saddam posed a threat so you can discout self-defence.
And since the invasion didnt get the UN Security Council
authorization, the war was illegal. Kofi Annan speaking of the invasion in 2004:
“I have indicated it was not in conformity with the UN charter. From our point of view, from the charter point of view, it was illegal.”
Lots of UN violations to go to war for??? Dang Winter, seems all you do is make shit up.
The security council system was created in order to discourage a rogue nation from using violence as a means of achieving it’s own interest. Makes sense right. Only question is:
Why are you supporting a rogue nation, Winter?
Comment by Lan Theroux — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 3:47 am
#40 “Anyone ask the Kirds about Saddams WMD? Oh, no, cause they are dead?”
Saddam’s gassing of the Kurds merited little more than a few frowns from Washington. Beyond that, it was business as usual with a good trading partner.
Comment by Kimmo W. — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 12:20 pm
Saddam’s gassing the kirds merited not even a frown from the Europeans. Then the Europeans all lined up for Food-For-Oil, which showed with your feet your true thoughts.
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 4:18 pm
Lets see, we went to the Yugo war with no UN approval? But when we tried to get approval for Iraq, its called Illegal?
Sure. try again guys, you all are trying to change History to the BBC point of view.
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 4:35 pm
That’s right, winter, NATO started bombing Yugoslavia without UN security council approval. I would indeed call that illegal but still it was more justified than the invasion of Iraq. This is not because of anti-americanism as both wars were American led. It’s just the fact that there was a real need to do something about Yugoslavia - an acute crisis. Whereas the Iraq war was clearly a planned scheme, not a reaction to anything (anything truthful that is).
BTW could you even cite some source for that “600 WMD’s found” claim?
Comment by Pave — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 5:40 pm
A real need to do something about Yugoslavia?
Huh, where they attacking Americans? Were they shooting at USA aircraft? Were they plotting to kill a USA president?
You all need a better story than that.
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 5:53 pm
WMD’s.. Didn’t Clinton in 1998 say they were there? Hillary Clinton said so on Oct 10th 2002, John Kerry jan 2nd 2003, Byrd in 2002.
http://www.scaryjohnkerry.com/wmd.htm
So are these folks lying?
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 5:57 pm
So are these folks lying?
Either that or misinformed. Or then there were WMDs but they were destroyed by the time the UN weapons inspectors got there. Hence the great haste in starting hostilities. They were about to finish their work and establish, once and for all, that Iraq had no WMDs.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 6:02 pm
So the French President lied as well?
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 6:51 pm
So the French President lied as well?
Being the President of France, he just wayved the white flag of surrender.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 7:01 pm
And the Russian Intel service lied as well? British as well?
All those Demms lied? your hero Kerry lied?
Wow, when reality sets in, you sure find out where the WMDs are. Can you say “next door”? or is that not in your political reality the BBC has fed you? Did the BBC even cover the transfer of WMDs next door?
Trying to make an argument against WMD’s when the guy used them for 10 years, is like un frakin believable. But then again thats the European way.
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 8:09 pm
I did a search for “Al Qaeda torture manual ” on the BBC web site. Now we all remember the 6 000 articles on USA torture? Why not one on a released Al Qaeda torture manual?
Come on guys, why not one, just one? Is Al Qaeda torture not talked about in Europe?
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 10:01 pm
And the Russian Intel service lied as well?
The KGB lying? Can’t be!
British as well?
Yes, and it’s well documented.
Wow, when reality sets in, you sure find out where the WMDs are. Can you say “next door�
Maby they sent them to the moon, dude. Yeah, that gotta be it. How about spreading some cluster bomb democracy there next?
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 10:22 pm
“Wow, when reality sets in, you sure find out where the WMDs are. Can you say “next doorâ€Â? or is that not in your political reality the BBC has fed you? Did the BBC even cover the transfer of WMDs next door?”
The BBC isnt covering your fairytales Winter? You noticed that CNN or MSNBC or any other major network isnt covering them either? Must be the far reach of the evil communist BBC.
“Trying to make an argument against WMD’s when the guy used them for 10 years, is like un frakin believable. But then again thats the European way.”
So because Saddam had WMD capabilitys before the weapons inspections started in the 90’s it proves he also had them just prior to invasion in 2003??? Riiight, you are really becoming desperate Winter.
But but but oil for food… the white stripes performing in France… spreading freedom fries!
Comment by Lan Theroux — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 10:29 pm
By the way, since those pesky WMDs seem to be disappearing next door all the time, how long do you reckon it will take before it becomes necessary to bomb New York to find them?
The circle would kinda close there.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 10:44 pm
Best Weapons Inspectors in the world. The USA 3rd Infantry Division.
Sure made them move, or lose it.
Anyone remember all those airplane flown to Iran in the first Gulf war? The Iranians repainted them in their own colors? Hint: They were never given back?
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 11:01 pm
Lets see. Who told you all the WMDs were gone? Saddam? Guess you made my case.
Comment by winter, "Yea, Proton Power, now in remission" — Thu, May 31st, 2007 @ 11:03 pm
winter, my UNIX fortune for the day:
“I refuse to have a battle of wits with an unarmed person.”
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Fri, Jun 1st, 2007 @ 12:06 am
@58: No, first it was the UN inspectors, and then the CIA.
Comment by aet75 — Fri, Jun 1st, 2007 @ 12:10 am
Ah the famous UN inspectors that Saddam kicked out of the country in violation of how many UN mandates?
Wow, good come back. You really made your point.
I do find it interesting that for a war in Europe, all it takes to ask the USA is a civil war. Heck we don’t even have to bother the UN.
But have a civil war in Iraq, and you all want the USA to leave. Kinda interesting insite to your viewpoint.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Fri, Jun 1st, 2007 @ 12:32 am
Ah the famous UN inspectors that Saddam kicked out of the country in violation of how many UN mandates?
That’s the problem with basing your world view on Faux Noose and shady websites run by right-wing nutjobs. The weapons inspectors were thrown out by the US in 2003 as they were getting dangerously close to finishing their job.
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Fri, Jun 1st, 2007 @ 1:49 am
This is great to watch, but the barrel is getting shot so full of holes, there soon won’t be any water left for the poor fish. And, gents, fun though it is, it doesn’t have much to do with the topic, does it?
Comment by Eastern Front — Fri, Jun 1st, 2007 @ 2:40 am
Finishing the job? The ones where they were shipping material, and they were never allowed in? Good job. I really like their story of what they did not find, on inspections Iraq blocked. But then again you would.
By the way, do you know what was in all those trucks? Maby the BBC had a story on it? Like the zero stories they have had on the training manual:
“US mainstream media ran over 6000 stories on the Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse scandal, and they’re still coming up with new ones. But nine days after pictures from an Al Qaeda torture manual were released, the silence is deafening.”
My search of the BBC showed no hits on “Al Qaeda torture manual”
Nada one story. It sure is fun to polk holes in your prime media outlet.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Fri, Jun 1st, 2007 @ 4:19 am
By the way, do you know what was in all those trucks?
Maby white flags from France?
Comment by Freeridin' Franklin — Fri, Jun 1st, 2007 @ 1:28 pm
french wine, french fries are all good to go now. After years of giving up, like our own Jimmy Carter did, the French have had it, and its nice to see the change.
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Fri, Jun 1st, 2007 @ 2:18 pm
@64: Everybody knows that these extremists are assholes who don’t give a shit about international law, or any law for that matter. Nobody is trying to make them look good, and if you suspect the US mainstream media (or the BBC) of doing that, you’re simply paranoid.
A little better, however, is expected from a superpower that claims to fight for democracy, freedom, the rule of law etc. So, what is your point? That the media should’ve reported more about a dubious ‘torture manual’ that just popped up in the internet, or that they should’ve stayed silent about Abu Ghraib and other transgressions?
Comment by aet75 — Fri, Jun 1st, 2007 @ 4:12 pm
Point? just how slanted the news gets on the BBC. If its not on your BBC agenda like “Three Kurdish provinces were handed over ” this week, with no hits on the BBC, one had to ask why not cover good news? Why zero coverage at all?
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Fri, Jun 1st, 2007 @ 11:50 pm
“A superpower that claims to fight for democracy?” Now that you have killed that idea, who will you get to do it?
Not the USA anymore. So how do you like China and Russia fighting for well, its not democracy?
Comment by winter “Yea, Proton Power, now in remission†— Fri, Jun 1st, 2007 @ 11:54 pm
http://www.xfire.com/blog/cheappharmacy/197149/
Comment by musicbox — Mon, May 26th, 2008 @ 3:34 am
http://www.xfire.com/blog/cheappharmacy/197694/
Comment by birthday — Mon, May 26th, 2008 @ 11:44 pm
http://www.imeem.com/people/ee_Qua_/blogs/2008/05/27/jnWosvT2/free_online_slots
Comment by musicbox — Tue, May 27th, 2008 @ 7:39 pm
http://www.xfire.com/blog/bestloans/199134/
Comment by planotac — Wed, May 28th, 2008 @ 2:55 pm