Memo to Kerry from Europe: Help (for Iraq) Is Not on the Way

[Larkspur]

http://www.commondreams.org/views04/0930-10.htm

<SNIPl
...John Kerry will describe the situation as a "crisis of historic proportions" and point to his four-point plan, outlined in a speech last week at New York University, to turn things around. The first point has now made it into his television ads as a four-word sound bite: "Allies share the burden."

I am in doubt about the exact meaning that Senator Kerry gives to the word "allies." He may well be thinking of Russia or Pakistan; but if, as I suspect, he means Europe, well, here is another four-word sound bite: "That will not happen."
<SNIP>

From a European perspective, ... Kerry is promising something whose likelihood is very close to zero. Help is not on the way for Iraq. Europe will not rush to "share the burden," nor to significantly reduce the cost of the Mesopotamian adventure to American taxpayers. Truth is, the United States will have to see Iraq through mostly by itself.

...European politicians are not suicidal and that won't change even if John Kerry is elected.
<SNIP>

[TexasSissy]

1. Well, Kerry has a better chance that *. That's a fact. Second, ....

there is still the possibility that our allies will commit money as well as training of Iraqi troops on the allies' soil, where danger is much less, in return for participating in reconstruction contracts or whatever.

[Larkspur]

6. France and Germany are already offering that

[Kellanved]

10. yes, but Kerry could force a lot more support

It is an open secret that the general consensus among "old" European Politicians is: "another four years of Bush would be a lot cheaper for us".

[Larkspur]

13. And France's and Germany's leaders have a larger anti-Iraq War

constinutency than Kerry does. Europeans, even if their government did send troops, turned out in greater force to oppose the Iraq war than Americans did.

[TexasSissy]

12. Not exactly.

There have been some discussions. Bush has asked them. They responded, "What's in it for us?" Bush's response was basically that it's in their best interest for Iraq to end up a democracy, that's what in it for them. They passed up Bush's offer.

Bush won't hear of diverting the Halliburton no-bid contracts regarding the oil, or of giving out significant reconstruction contracts. What few reconstruction contracts have been given were given as bribes to our "allies" in return for their contribution or participation in the war (some for only a few hundred troops).

Kerry has discussed this previously. He would be a little better at negotiating this sort of thing, without giving away the house. He's probably get rid of the no-bid Halliburton contracts and bid them out to other countries, in exchange for training Iraqi troops and police officers or monetary contributions.

[geek tragedy]

2. It's one thing to say no now, while Bush is in office.

It will be another when Kerry is actually in office and is humbly asking for the world community's help.

[sui generis]

3. well . . . some of that is because we aren't notably different from Bush

in our "plan" to handle Iraq.

I have a feeling that if we had proposed something really innovative we might see more support. Europe hates bush, but they are also standing around and telling us that we bought the entertainment unilaterally - we need to pay the fiddler.

It's a lesson that the evil repug bastards are going to be taught but all of us will be punished with. You can't go to war unilaterally, and then ask everyone to help you. If they start helping us now instead of letting us feel the pain, then they condone unilateral action by America.

We dems called this shot a long long time ago, and now it's come home to roost.

[toddzilla]

4. you could create allies in the ME region.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[billbuckhead]

7. Geography gives them no choice

Look at a map. if we leave Iraq in chaos they would would suffer more than us.

[DinahMoeHum]

8. He suggests that Kerry find a way to separate the war in Iraq

from the war against the al Qaeda, which the Europeans WILL back us on.


:smoke:

[Waverley_Hills_Hiker]

9. One of the points Bush has correct is about the Europeans.

We saw how they handled, or mishanlded, the Bosnian crisis,...a peackeeping force that stood aside while Bosnian Serbs engaged in genocide.

The US had to take the lead in the Balkans, and Europe followed.

So, Bush is correct about putting together adhoc coalitions as we cant really cound on our so-called allies. Some will join us, others wont.

[vinnievin777]

11. Bush is 100 percent wrong

And when he loses we will have a lot more credibility.
Vinnie
http://www.vinnievin.com