-Caveat Lector- In the article below is a shrewd person plotting in a major media publication how to start a war that nobody wants and justify it. - Wasn't the whole purpose to disarm Iraq? It appears that this person is somehow seeing the point as being to bomb down Iraq. What the hell for? Why would anyone want that? Least of all Americans? - This mystery is explained when you learn that the writer is Jewish and the history of MSNBC being a forum and a voice for Israel's extremist foreign policy advocates craving for genocidal destruction and war.
Disarming Iraq doesn't need a war or the unnecessary deaths of millions. Oil barons and madmen, such as one writing below, need the war for their own personal economic benefits. Plotting U.N. to somehow approve of aggression is still against the founding UN charter and the International Law. Only criminally insane madmen want war. Lock them up, I say! http://www.msnbc.com/news/874319.asp?0sl=-23 How To Beat France There are a few simple tricks the Bush White House could use to defang French opposition to military action in Iraq NEWSWEEK WEB EXCLUSIVE Feb. 18 . This weekend, NATO.s great crisis was averted with a cunning old trick: keep your opponents out of the room. In a deal struck in Brussels, the Americans won NATO support for beefing up Turkey.s defenses.including providing NATO surveillance planes, Patriot missiles and chemical and biological units. So the transatlantic alliance survives-and Turkey can plan its defenses before war begins in neighboring Iraq-thanks to a simple sidestep around the French. Of course, there was also snowstorm of political pressure dumped on the heads of the last holdouts.mighty Belgium, notably.and some finessing of the final public statements. Yet the real genius behind the weekend.s talks was to move the debate to a venue where France has no seat.the arcanely-titled Defense Planning Committee. FRANCE HAS EXCLUDED itself from the main task of NATO.military defense.since 1966. It.s useful to recall those heady days to understand a little better just what.s going on with France right now. (It.s also useful to remember that period to debunk all the breathless talk about how unprecedented the current transatlantic crisis is.) President Charles de Gaulle mistrusted NATO from the outset because it left France in a relatively weak position.effectively under the American defense umbrella. So when he returned to power in 1958, he made it clear he was reclaiming French independence with its own nuclear bomb and its withdrawal of French forces from NATO.s American-led command. The Soviets were delighted, while the Americans and British were predictably furious (there were even anti-French demonstrations at the time). France never abandoned the alliance, but de Gaulle famously pointed his missiles to all points of the compass, or .tous azimuts.. >From NEWSWEEK's Feb. 24 issue: A Great Divide Around the same time as de Gaulle was encouraging French-speaking Quebec to separate from Canada, Jacques Chirac was starting his political career. It was inside the cabinet of prime minister Georges Pompidou, who was once de Gaulle.s chief of staff, that Chirac earned himself the nickname .le bulldozer. for his gentle political touch. Of course since then.and the end of the cold war.France has edged away from pure Gaullism and a little closer towards NATO. Yet Chirac remains the forceful.if unsubtle.leader of a neo-Gaullist party, and those Gaullist traditions are part of his political DNA. That forcefully independent streak has been center-stage since President George W. Bush took his case against Iraq to the United Nations last September. Blocking, denying and refusing American policies come naturally to any self-respecting Gaullist. Offering alternatives is a little more difficult.especially serious alternatives that might work in practice in Iraq. Yet those tactics have proved hugely successful for the French over the last five months.until now. What the great NATO compromise shows are three easy steps to halting the French bulldozer in its tracks: Split apart the French from their main allies, the Germans. (Sorry Belgium, but you.re not yet part of the major league.) With the French out of the room, the Germans could not bear to deny a country such as Turkey (and the rest of its allies). For months the Bush administration has been working on the premise that the Germans were the tough opponents of war.ever since Gerhard Schroder annoyed the White House and won re-election by opposing war in Iraq. Yet it turns out that the French.not the Germans.have dug themselves in deeper against war. Memo to the White House: keep working on the Germans. Take the dispute behind closed doors. Without the public gallery, it.s a lot easier to get things done. Even at the United Nations, the Americans won strong support at a private session of the Security Council that followed France.s on-camera applause. Behind the scenes with the inspectors, the United States won strong support from the Chileans and Bulgarians.in addition to the public cheering from the British and Spanish. Even the inspectors sounded happier with Washington. Hans Blix conceded that there was no .breakthrough. in terms of Iraqi cooperation, even though there were signs of .procedural. progress. Both Blix and Mohammed el- Baradei admitted they had only made that progress because of the threat of U.S. force behind them, according to U.S. officials. Tone down the rhetoric. This is where the Bush administration.s foreign policy experts need to learn from its domestic whiz kids. Karl Rove would never want Bush.or his cabinet.to engage in public name-calling on domestic politics. (He.d get someone else to do it for them.) So why allow Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld to pour fuel on the fire in Europe? It.s a repeat of what happened during Schroder.s re-election. Condoleezza Rice, Bush.s national security adviser, accused the Germans of poisoning relations with Washington on the eve of the German election. That only helped Schroder.s vote, by making him look tough and making the White House look heavy-handed. If you want to talk like a cowboy, expect the Indians to shoot back. Powell tried to avoid that cowboy routine at the Security Council. But he was also frustrated by his opponents. grandstanding.and the applause they won. When the secretary of State ditched his prepared remarks, he was trying to engage his French and Russian critics head on, his aides said. .Colin Powell knows how to give a speech that gets a lot of applause,. said one senior State department official. .It.s one thing to go the circus and get cotton candy. But now it.s time to bring this one home.. Bringing a second resolution home is likely to involve a combination of all three of the tactics above. Powell was particularly encouraged by German proposals for a series of substantive tests for the Iraqis to prove yet again whether Iraq is serious about disarming. Those tests.coupled with a re-statement of the previous resolution.could still deliver the U.N. stamp of approval for war in Iraq. But that depends if the White House wants to give Colin Powell the time and space to build support behind the scenes. If the Bush White House chooses instead to play the Gaullists at their own game, the war of words.and the transatlantic dispute.will only get much, much worse. © 2003 Newsweek, Inc. <A HREF="http://www.ctrl.org/";>www.ctrl.org</A> DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion & informational exchange list. Proselytizing propagandic screeds are unwelcomed. Substance—not soap-boxing—please! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory'—with its many half-truths, mis- directions and outright frauds—is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRLgives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html <A HREF="http://peach.ease.lsoft.com/archives/ctrl.html";>Archives of [EMAIL PROTECTED]</A> http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ <A HREF="http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/";>ctrl</A> ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
