Skip to main content

Top Stories - Reuters

Bush to Issue 'Call to Action' to U.N. on Iraq
Sat Sep 20,12:13 PM ET

rotflmao rotflmao

By Steve Holland

WASHINGTON (Reuters) - President Bush (news - web sites) will issue a "call to action" to U.N. member states to help out with postwar reconstruction in Iraq (news - web sites) and Afghanistan (news - web sites) when he addresses the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday, senior Bush administration officials said on Saturday.

The move comes a year after Bush challenged the United Nations (news - web sites) to back its anti-Iraq resolutions with the threat of force or risk becoming irrelevant, opening an ultimately doomed bid for a U.N.-backed resolution authorizing war against Iraq.


With U.S. military forces in Iraq under daily guerrilla attack, the costs of the U.S. effort swelling the budget deficit, and no conclusive evidence of weapons of mass destruction discovered, Bush goes before the U.N. General Assembly this year looking to put the bitter pre-war debate behind him and seek international assistance.


He faces increasing criticism at home about postwar Iraq, particularly from Democratic presidential candidates, and his popularity has eroded since a Sept. 7 speech in which he told Americans it will cost $87 billion to pay for the U.S. military deployment in Iraq and reconstruction over the next year.


Bush will lump his appeal for assistance for Iraq and Afghanistan together with efforts to combat the spread of weapons of mass destruction, fight AIDS (news - web sites) as well as the trafficking in human beings.


"It really is an opportunity to say to the international community: We have real challenges, we can't ignore them, we have to meet them. It's a call to action," said one official, speaking on condition of anonymity.


BITTER DISAGREEMENT


Bush will acknowledge the bitter disagreement within the U.N. Security Council, which eventually led the United States and Britain to go to war without U.N. backing, and will portray the current situation as an opportunity to have a stable Afghanistan for the first time in decades and a democratic Iraq in the center of the Middle East.


"The president believes we are all focused on the future now," the official said.


And he is not troubled by the fact that the promised weapons of mass destruction have yet to be found. In its defense, the United States has pointed out that 300,000 bodies have been found in mass graves and that Saddam Hussein (news - web sites) was a brutal dictator who needed to be toppled.


Bush, said a senior official, goes to New York "proud that Iraq is liberated and that Saddam Hussein is out of power. That should be a source of pride not just for the coalition but for the entire world."


During his two-day trip, Bush will meet the leaders of the main anti-war coalition, French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder.


He will also meet Afghan President Hamid Karzai and Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf, whose assistance to the United States after the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks was critical to the U.S. toppling of the Taliban in Afghanistan.


It will be Bush's first substantive meeting with Schroeder in a year and a half, ending a feud triggered by the German leader's re-election campaign during which he argued against U.S. policy in Iraq.


There have been signs of a thaw for weeks, as Germany has been helping out in postwar Afghanistan.


The visit will be an opportunity for Bush to press his case for a new U.N. resolution creating a multinational force for Iraq, something that has been bogged down due to French and German concerns that a U.S.-written draft resolution does not cede enough control to the United Nations nor transfer Iraqi sovereignty to its people quick enough.


The United States has recast the draft and is hoping to bridge the differences.
Original Post

Replies sorted oldest to newest

I'm sure that those countries that Bush snubbed are laughing their heads off right now!! rotflmao
I'm sure Mr. Annan is laughing the hardest since he gets zero respect from this administration. brosmile

Our people have made the mistake of confusing the methods with the objectives. As long as we agree on objectives, we should never fall out with each other just because we believe in different methods, or tactics, or strategy. We have to keep in mind at all times that we are not fighting for separation. We are fighting for recognition as free humans in this society
Malcolm X, 1965
Where's the desperation?

Would appear that keylargo has hugely contradictionary views on this issue. On the one hand he characterizes Bush's going to the UN as 'getting desperate', despite Bush having gone to the UN prior to the war as well.

On the other hand keylargo writes, "he's going to TELL them what he wants them to do". If he's 'telling' them what he wants them to do, does that sound like 'desperation' to anyone?

In reality, the pressure on the UN is great, they are fighting for 'relevancy' after their inaction on so many fronts in the last decade, not the least of which have been in Africa.

Never heard of someone who's 'desperate' TELLING others how things are going to be, have you keylargo? Please elaborate on where you see your notion of 'desperation'. Judging from Bushes actions so far, he's going to do what he thinks is right despite inaction from the UN. Wouldn't you agree?

The real issue here is whether the UN has become 'irrelevant' beyond repair, and this is a chance for the UN to mend that image somewhat. With the 30+ nations already assisting in Iraq, I doubt getting France is going to matter that much anyway.
Sergeant, are you a Bush apologist or what? Bush is begging these countries to come along, and he can forget about France and Germany coming along w/ out a complete reversal of the US stated policy on Iraq. Putin has already publicly said he will not endorse sending Russian troops to Iraq unless it is w/ UN mandate. If I were France or Germany under no circumstances would I help the US on this one, w/ out a public apology and an admittance that the original impetus to war as stated by US Secretary of State, Collin Powell, was a complete and utter fabrication.

As far as the current Bush rhetoric, everybody can see right through it. His language "demanding" help from the UN is laughable, and it aint going to go over very well. He is just trying to seem tough. It may work w/ poorer 3rd world countries, but the other countries w/ money (Germany, France, and Russia) can see through this crap w/ both eyes closed. Tony Blair is in trouble of getting impeached by his own Labor Party. This thing is "quagmire" indeed.
You are kidding me right blaqfist? Frances economy is in shambles and they have no military to really speak of its so small, and Germany is in economic recession and already have all their sparable troops in Afghanistan now.

But to play nice, lets take Canada, S Korea, Australia, Japanese money, Russian military (who is getting involved), I mean the list goes on and on my friend. France has a very small weak military, much of which is already committed elsewhere anyways. Germany has a problem with their constitution, that says they aren't permitted to fight off German soil, despite ALREADY having sent troops in Afghanistan. Both nations have NO money to spare in Europe's economic doldrums these days.

That helpful?

[This message was edited by sergeant on September 22, 2003 at 11:06 AM.]
You need to do a little more research b4 you start popping off at the mouth like that. You can forgett abbout Canada ever committing troops to the "War on Iraq", they were one of the 1st countires to come out against it at the UN, John Howard, Australias PM, is about to lose his job over his support of the war. S. Korea is a maybe, Japan also a maybe, Putin has allready gone on record that he would not send Russian troops w/ out UN mandate. So tomorrow is a big day for J-Dubya., He better get a good night sleep.
quote:
Originally posted by sergeant:
Where's the desperation?

Would appear that keylargo has hugely contradictionary views on this issue. On the one hand he characterizes Bush's going to the UN as 'getting desperate', despite Bush having gone to the UN prior to the war as well.

On the other hand keylargo writes, "he's going to TELL them what he wants them to do". If he's 'telling' them what he wants them to do, does that sound like 'desperation' to anyone?

In reality, the pressure on the UN is great, they are fighting for 'relevancy' after their inaction on so many fronts in the last decade, not the least of which have been in Africa.

Never heard of someone who's 'desperate' TELLING others how things are going to be, have you keylargo? Please elaborate on where you see your notion of 'desperation'. Judging from Bushes actions so far, he's going to do what he thinks is right despite inaction from the UN. Wouldn't you agree?

The real issue here is whether the UN has become 'irrelevant' beyond repair, and this is a chance for the UN to mend that image somewhat. With the 30+ nations already assisting in Iraq, I doubt getting France is going to matter that much anyway.


We all know that Bush would much rather do this without the UN. Remember, originally he said we can do this without the UN. He's going back to them because he knows he has to-he's getting desperate. It's just his ego acting out right now by giving orders to the UN. Eventually, he'll have to put his ego aside and welcome the ideas of others.
For those of you waiting for our gov't to start crawling, your wait is almost over. After the UN bombing yesterday and our inability to stop all these attacks there is little choice. The "enemy" has put in his first string so this is becoming a quagmire whether anyone believes it or not.

Just keep watching the news for the apology.....

As far as what countries are already here, none in the "conventional" sense but "non-conventional" and elements that go by letters and numbers are here in a great quanity.

Add Reply

Post
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×