Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: stockman_scott who wrote (14129)	3/7/2003 3:55:12 PM
From: Sully-	Respond to of 89467

Iraq strengthens air force with French parts washtimes.com A French company has been selling spare parts to Iraq for its fighter jets and military helicopters during the past several months, according to U.S. intelligence officials. The unidentified company sold the parts to a trading company in the United Arab Emirates, which then shipped the parts through a third country into Iraq by truck. The spare parts included goods for Iraq's French-made Mirage F-1 jets and Gazelle attack helicopters. An intelligence official said the illegal spare-parts pipeline was discovered in the past two weeks and that sensitive intelligence about the transfers indicates that the parts were smuggled to Iraq as recently as January. ___________________________________________________________ {French} Ties with Iraq iht.com .....Throughout the 1980-1988 Iran-Iraq war, right up to the UN embargo imposed after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1990, France sold Iraq $25 billion worth of weaponry. Industry sources say French companies still haven't been paid for everything they supplied to Iraq. If Saddam goes, those debts will be a write-off. The UN embargo hit the volume of French exports but, once the UN oil-for-food program was introduced in 1996, the French share of the Iraqi market became larger than ever as Saddam rewarded the closest thing it had to a Western ally. A report commissioned by the French Parliament and published in September 2002 put the value of French exports to Iraq since sanctions were eased at $3.5 billion. France's pharmaceutical firms, for example, are well-placed on the Iraqi market - even if their fortunes vary according to the way the political winds are blowing. Industry experts say that in July 2001, when relations with France went through a chilly period, Saddam froze these pharmaceutical companies' contracts. They were unfrozen once diplomatic relations returned to normal. France still managed to sell Iraq $650 million worth of goods in 2001, more than any other country. The telecommunications firm Alcatel, the engineering company Alstom and Renault's utility vehicle division all made substantial sales. Another car maker, Peugeot, did well in 2000 and 2001. France, unsurprisingly, was the Western country with the largest number of stands at last November's Baghdad Trade Fair..... ___________________________________________________________ From: paul_philp Friday, Mar 7, 2003 12:47 AM View Replies (1) \| Gertz: U.S. intelligence discovers French company selling Iraq military spare parts as recently as January... Developing...

To: stockman_scott who wrote (14129)	3/7/2003 4:01:28 PM
From: Sully-	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 89467

From: paul_philp Friday, Mar 7, 2003 3:47 PM Unite This! George W. Bush tells the United Nations that he's going with or without them--but he wants to see their cards anyway. by David Brooks weeklystandard.com. THE MOST SIGNIFICANT THING President Bush said during his press conference--just about the only significant thing he said--is that regardless of the whip count, he will put a second resolution up for a vote in the U.N. Security Council. This is remarkably bold. The normal thing to do, especially if three of the major powers are threatening vetoes, is to withdraw the resolution, and thereby try to diffuse the showdown. But Bush has chosen the path of maximum confrontation. So imagine this scenario: The United States puts forward its resolution. It gets vetoed, or even voted down by a majority of the members. And then, on the heels of U.N. rejection, the United States still launches an attack against Iraq. This would give the expression "in your face" new dimensions of meaning. Maybe Bush thinks that by essentially threatening the diplomatic equivalent of the doomsday scenario, he can induce Russia, China, and France to abstain, rather than veto the resolution. But it is an incredible gamble. It certainly does nothing to help Tony Blair, who has been trying to somehow finesse things at the United Nations. If the resolution fails and the United States acts successfully, then the consequences will be amazing. The U.N. process will have been fully discredited. I happen to believe the East River will run gold with champagne before another U.S. president, of either party, takes another problem of this sort to the United Nations anyway. The process there is simply too treacherous and too dishonest for any president to trust. But this would really ruin the organization. If on the other hand the United States acts over a negative U.N. vote and the action is not successful, then some of the American public, and much of the American elite, would lose confidence in non-U.N. actions of all sorts. The multilateralists would gloat and Kofi Annan and his successors would suddenly emerge as powerful global figures. I hope the administration has thought all this through. I do suspect that the decision to pursue this confrontational course emerges from Bush's own nature. He is a man of his word. He expects others to be that way too. It is indisputably true that Saddam has not disarmed. If people are going to vote against a resolution saying Saddam has not disarmed then they are liars. Bush wants them to do it in public, where history can easily judge them. Needless to say, neither the French nor the Russians nor the Chinese believe that honesty has anything to do with diplomacy. They see the process through an entirely different lens. The rest of the press conference was a bore. The reporters tended to ask the same questions over and over again. Bush was repetitive and often long-winded. He broke no news in his opening statement, and spoke remarkably little about the recent captures in Pakistan. Still, we are on course for war, a week from Monday if you want my guess. Bush set the bar for Hans Blix incredibly high. After that, to switch metaphors, he is forcing everyone to show their cards. The 12-year diplomatic game is coming to a close.

To: stockman_scott who wrote (14129)	3/7/2003 5:27:48 PM
From: lurqer	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

America's Democratic Imperialists Thanks for the post. An interesting taxonomy of the current ruling clique. I don't agree with their analysis. Perhaps that why I like it - forces me to think. I don't believe there's that much "room between" Cheney and Rumsfeld and the neo-cons. Also, much of what these authors use differing types of conservatives to explain, can better be accounted for by "wrapping and agenda". A classic example of the prevalence of the latter is Message 18671826 lurqer