Mihai nu contest,nu am contestat nici 1 sec. problema securitatii si legatura cu dezvoltarea.De fapt discutia, general vorbind, a pornit de pe alte baze si anume afirmatiile despre "marxisti-leninistii" care ar manevra guverne din EU impotriva US.Am aratat parerea mea ca, de mai exista pe undeva marxisti-leninisti(R.Moldova, Kazahstan, Mongolia)ei chiar au participat si participa in Iraq. In ce priveste legatura intre scoli si militarii din Iraq,invatamantul e problema de politica interna.Militarii din Iraq tin de politica externa.Ambele sunt facute de ACELASI GUVERN!Nu exista guverne diferite!Asta e legatura.Un guvern poate pune accentul pe politica interna sau pe cea externa.Parerea mea e ca la nivelul Romaniei de tara in curs de dezvoltare, guvernul ar putea sa fie mai interesat de problemele interne.Desigur asta nu presupune retragerea din Iraq si mai ales acum, NU.
Facand insa abstractie total de chestiunea cu jurnalistii, ti-am dat acel link http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_orbat_coalition.htm ce exprima o pozitie oficiala, sperand sa observi ca DOAR ROMANIA si ALBANIA dintre tarile EU, au sporit numarul efectivelor din Iraq, deci destul de ciudat! Majoritatea tarilor EU au retras sau urmeaza sa retraga efectivele.Inseamna asta ca Ungaria, Polonia, Bulgaria nu vor mai avea garantii de securitate, dupa explicatiile generice de mai jos? Sa fim seriosi, e cam subreda explicatia. Cand toate tarile UE iau o hotarare si numai Romania si Albania fac PE DOS, atunci insemana ca ceva ne scapa.Sa fie cumva un sistem de spaga pe care il dau militarii care pleaca acolo?Nu prea cred. N-am inteles comparatia dintre Japonia si Norvegia referitoare la WWII/politica post WWII, dar in fine revin la ce mi se pare bizar si anume ca Romania face nota disonanta cu politica altor tari EU sau chiar cu tari ca Bulgaria. Oricare ar fi ratiunile, cert este un lucru pe care numai personaje ce fac confuzii pe lista intre Razboiul din Koreea, Iraq I, Yogoslavia, nu il vad si anume ca diferentele de opinii dintre tarile NATO in acest conflict, au la baza lipsa unei hotarari a Consiliului de securitate ONU care sa fi dat curs interventiei aliantei.In contextul asta, statele membre au ales sa aleaga singure dupa interesele proprii, de vor participa sau nu, de se retrag si cand, etc, incepand de la vecinii US(Canada si Mexico) pana la Norvegia,Olanda, Bulgaria, Turcia,etc.Toate aceste diferente de opinii cu siguranta insa ca nu au la baza nici un fel de conspiratie, ci doar interesele diferite din partea statelor aliantei si cu asta zic ca am incheiat discutia. Numai bine! Non-US Forces in Iraq - 15 March 2005 The size and capabilities of the Coalition forces involved in operations in Iraq has been a subject of much debate, confusion, and at times exageration. As of March 15, 2004, there were 25 non-U.S. military forces participating in the coalition and contributing to the ongoing stability operations throughout Iraq. These countries were Albania, Armenia, Australia, Azerbaijan, Bulgaria, Czech Republic, Denmark, El Salvador, Estonia, Georgia, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, South Korea, Latvia, Lithuania, Macedonia, Mongolia, Netherlands, Norway, Poland, Romania, Slovakia, United Kingdom, Ukraine. As of March 8, 2004, the MNF-I website incorrectly included Portugal in the list; that country's troops left Iraq in February. It also omitted Armenia which has about 46 troops in Iraq which it deployed in Jan. 2005. The Kingdom of Tonga's contingent of 40+ troops returned home on December 17, 2004. Hungary completely pulled its troops out of Iraq by December 22, 2004. Portugal withdrew its contingent of policemen after having been in Iraq for 15 months in February 2005. Moldova withdrew its contingent of 12 in February 2005. Fiji deployed 150 troops to Iraq, but they are there under UN banner (UNAMI) and are therefore not be counted in the coalition. Singapore deployed a shipt to the Persian Gulf on Nov. 27, but since the country does not actually contribute troops on the ground in Iraq, it is not being included in the coalition count. Armenia deployed 46 troops to Iraq in mid-January 2005. Countries which had troops in or supported operations in Iraq at one point but have pulled out since: Nicaragua (Feb. 2004); Spain (late- Apr. 2004); Dominican Republic (early-May 2004); Honduras (late-May 2004); Philippines (~Jul. 19, 2004); Thailand (late-Aug. 2004); New Zealand (late Sep. 2004); Tonga (mid-Dec. 2004) Hungary (end Dec. 2004); Portugal (mid-Feb. 2005); Moldova (Feb. 2005) Countries planning to withdraw from Iraq: Poland (starting Jan.05 and completed by end.05(?)); the Netherlands (Mar. 05); Bulgaria (end of 2005, depending on circumstances); Ukraine (entire contingent, in stages until mid-October 2005), Italy (Sept. 2005) Countries which have reduced or are planning to reduce their troop commitment: Ukraine (-200 during Fall04 rotation); Moldova (reduced contingent to 12 around mid-2004); Norway (reduced from ~150 to 10 late-Jun.04, early Jul.04); Bulgaria (-50, Dec.04); Poland (-700, Feb.05). Countries planning or rumored to be planning to increase troop contingent to Iraq: Romania (rumor, 100+ in support of UNAMI); Albania (+50 April 05); Thailand (200(?)). Countries supporting UNAMI: Fiji (150+); Georgia Countries with other contribution, but no troops in Iraq: Singapore (LST ship with 180-person crew in Persian Gulf). Countries refusing to send troops because of security situation: Pakistan. Recent developments On March 15, 2005, Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi announced that Italy would begin to withdraw its troops from Iraq in September 2005. On March 15, 137 Ukrainian soldiers arrived home as part of the first group from that country's contingent in Iraq to withdraw from Iraq. Moldova withdrew its contingent of 12 troops from Iraq in February 2005. The withdrawal had not been previously noted. The Kingdom of Tonga withdrew its contingent of 40+ troops from Iraq in December 2004. The withdrawal had not been previously noted. On March 14, 2005, The London Daily Telegraph reported that on March 7, 2005, Dutch military forces in Iraq handed over command in the province Al Muthanna to the British, thereby officially ending its mission in Iraq. It also reported that, as of March 14, 2005, only 200 Dutch troops were reported to still be in the province. They were scheduled to leave Iraq by the end of the month. The Associated Press reported on Mar. 15, that 150 troops had returned home on Feb. 21. The BBC reported on Mar. 15. that another 150 had returned home that day, but 800 troops were still in Iraq. Ukraine's defense ministry announced that it would begin withdrawing its troops from Iraq on March 15, with the departure of 150 troops. Poland is slated to withdraw several additional hundred soldiers from Iraq by summer BBC News reported on Mar. 2, that Ukraine had outlined the timetable fo the withdrawal of its 1,650 or so troops in Iraq. They are to depart the country in three stages set between mid-March and October 2005. During the first phase, 150 troops would leave. They would be later followed by an additional 590 troops. The remaining Ukrainian soldiers are to leave Iraq by mid-October. A contingent of 558 troops, as well as 40 liaison officers, from Georgia deployed on Mar. 02 for Iraq, via Kuwaitm where they will stay for two weeks. The troops are assigned to the Shavnabada Battalion. As a result, Georgia will have 898 troops in Iraq. Albania announced on Feb. 25, that it would boost its troop contribution to Iraq by 50 in April 2005 during a regularly scheduled troop rotation. On Feb. 22, Australia announced that it would deploy an additional 450 troops to Iraq and would leave for Iraq within 10 weeks for an indefinite amount of time. The units are to be reportedly drawn from the 2nd Calvary Regiment and 5/7 RAR of the Darwin-based 1st Brigade and would include a Infantry company, a cavalry squadron and 40 or so LAVs. The unit would deploy for six-months to the Muthanna area. In addition, the deployment is expected to cost AU$300 million a year Xinhua reported on Feb. 21, that Denmark had rotated its contingent of troops in Iraq that weekend at Camp Danevang, inside the British Shaiba Log Base; its fifth contingent to be rotated in. A Feb. 17 MNF-I release reported that the fourth rotation of troops from El Salvador had taken place the day prior. AFP Reported on Feb. 10, that the unit was with the 4th Cuscatlan Battalion. BBC Monitoring reported on Feb. 17, that the Romania was deploying troops for its IV Engineer detachment to Iraq. The Italian Parliament voted on Feb. 16, to extend the deployment of its contingent to Iraq through June. According to a BBC Monitoring report from Feb. 14, the 2nd Infantry Battalion from Romania had relaced the 812th Infantry Battalion at camp Mittica at Tallil Air Base. On Feb. 9, it reported that the new unit was the 2nd Calugareni Battalion. AFP reported that Portugal would have withdrawn its troops from Iraq by Feb. 12. They left Iraq on Feb. 10, two days ahead of schedule Countries Supporting Ops in Iraq Country In Iraq In Theater Total Future 1 United Kingdom ~8,761 (includes 400 sent in Jan.05) 3,500 ~12,400 15,000 ~10,500 (?) 2 South Korea 3,600 3,600 3 Italy 3,085 84 3,169 0 [Begin Sept. 2005] 4 Poland 1,700 1,700 [0 by end of 2005?] 5 Ukraine ~1,450 ~1,450 0 [By mid-October 2005] 6 Georgia 898 (Some in support of UNAMI) 898 (Some in support of UNAMI) 7 Romania 730 730 8 Japan ~550 ~200 ~750 9 Denmark 496 496 10 Bulgaria ~450 ~450 11 El Salvador 380 380 12 Australia ~400 ~520 ~920 ~1,400 (+450) 13 Netherlands 200-800(?) 200-800(?) 0 [End Mar.05] 14 Mongolia 180 180 15 Azerbaijan 151 151 16 Latvia 122 122 17 Czech Republic ~110 ~110 10 18 Lithuania ~120 ~120 0(?) 19 Slovakia 105 105 20 Albania 71 71 ~120[April 2005] 21 Estonia 55 55 22 Armenia 46 46 23 Macedonia 33 33 24 Kazakhstan 29 29 25 Norway ~10 ~10 0 Singapore** 0 0 180 0 TOTAL ~23,900 ~28,500 UNAMI Fiji * 150 150 Hungary *** 0 Withdrew troops: Late-Dec. 2004 150 mid-2005 Nicaragua 0 Withdrew troops: Feb. 2004 Spain 0 Withdrew troops: Late-Apr. 2004 Dominican Republic 0 Withdrew troops: Early-May. 2004 Honduras 0 Withdrew troops: Late-May. 2004 Philippines 0 Withdrew troops: mid-Jul. 2004 Thailand 0 Withdrew troops: Late-Aug. 2004 New Zealand 0 Withdrew troops: Late-Sep. 2004 Tonga 0 Withdrew troops: mid-Dec. 2004 Portugal 0 Withdrew troops: mid-Feb. 2005 Moldova 0 Withdrew troops: Feb. 2005 * Fiji's troop contingent is deployed as part of UN Assistance Mission in Iraq (UNAMI) ** Singapore's token contribution is a landing ship tank deployed to the Persian Gulf. ** As part of NATO Training Force --- In [email protected], Mihai Zodian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Nu cred ca exista o legatura directa intre scoli si militarii din Irak. Tocmai ca nu prea avem atuuri, suntem o tara mica, saraca si altele recurgem la masuri gen trimiterea de trupe, ca sa compensam slabiciunile interne. Daca nu ne alaturam SUA, noi tot mici si saraci ramaneam, insa cine ne acorda noua garantii de securitate degeaba? Acest lucru este valabil indiferent de cine s-ar afla la guvernare. > > Japonia e alta poveste. Ei au alt statut, insa sunt in vigoare restrictii interne dure si se confrunta cu probleme mai importante de securitate in vecinatate, plus amintirile celui de-al doilea razboi mondial. E normal sa trimita putine forte, cand sunt principalul aliat al SUA in Asia de Est. A fost in primul rand un gest politic de solidaritate cu America. Acelasi lucru este valabil si pentru Norvegia (o mica rectificare si Turcia avea frontiera cu URSS de pilda). > > Revenind la Romania, ideea nu era sa tinem pasul cu statele cele mai dezvoltate ale lumii, ci de sustinere a Statelor Unite, care sunt principalul aliat si de la care dorim sa obtinem protectie, sprijin pentru anumite politici regionale, o ancora in lumea occidentala samd. Fara securitate e greu sa vorbesti de dezvoltare. > > dan_d_n <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > --- In [email protected], Mihai Zodian > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Nu cred ca e vorba de exces de zel, ci de o tentativa de a compensa > unele dezavantaje in plan extern. Pana la urma, daca vrem garantii de > securitate credibile, trebuie sa platim un pret, nimic valoros nu se > obtine gratuit. > > > > Pe de alta parte, sa nu uitam ca au existat si vechi aliati care au > mers cu Statele Unite "pana la capat", gen Marea Britanie sau Japonia > (care daca vroia, putea sa contribuie numai cu fonduri), fiinca asa > si-au perceput interesele. > > > > Mihai daca arunci o privire pe link-ul de mai jos > http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/ops/iraq_orbat_coalition.htm > poti observa ca Romania si Japonia au cam acelasi numar de militari > acolo.Doar atat:ce nivel economic are Japonia si ce nivel are Romania? > Romania, o tara cu cca.45% din populatie traind sub pragul saraciei > castigand sub 100euro/luna, cu peste 30-35% traind fara canalizare si > doar cu o cismea in curte in cel mai bun caz, cu copiii orfani, cu > problemele idescriptibile in domeniul medical, in invatamantul > ravasit si braburizat dupa "involutie"/dilutie/aglomeratie(si de mai > inainte), cu atatea probleme caracteristice unei tari in curs de > dezvoltare ce pare sa nu mai iasa odata din stadiul asta, cred ca > este exagerat sa incerce sa tina pasul cu tari puternic dezvoltate in > razboaie/pe plan militar.Sa ne intrebam doar cate scoli in Romania nu > au incalzire, sunt sub orice critica,plua in ele, cati elevi si > studenti au nevoie de burse/sustinere/ajutor, etc, si sa comparam > imaginar cu Japonia sau Norvegia, un alt aliat vechi din NATO in care > alianta a investit enorm ca singurul membru care avea granita cu URSS > in timpul Cold War, si care acum participa in Iraq cu:))) > incredibilul efectiv de 10 MILITARI! > Dupa parerea mea chiar si actual ambitiile Romaniei in plan extern, > in general, sunt PESTE masura posibilitatilor sale, exprima mai mult > sau mai putin o politica de exces de zel, de incercare exagerata de a > se remarca in fata marilor puteri ale momentului(in cazul de fata US) > din partea politicienilor romani.Ambitiile astea sunt irealiste si > oarecum legate de vechea problema a "imaginii noastre in lume" si au > radacini mai vechi in trecut intr-o mentalitate deplasata din > perioada in care intr-o Romanie cu caldura, electricitate, alimente > si apa calda pe spongi, "impuscatul" ceausescu tremura de ambitia de > a ajuta cu bani, alimente si produse, tari africane sau tari arabe > sau de a se face cunoscut pe plan extern ca un "mare geniu > carpatin"... ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Give underprivileged students the materials they need to learn. Bring education to life by funding a specific classroom project. http://us.click.yahoo.com/FHLuJD/_WnJAA/cUmLAA/RR.olB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> *** sustineti [romania_eu_list] prin 1% din impozitul pe 2005 - detalii la http://www.europe.org.ro/euroatlantic_club/unulasuta.php *** Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/romania_eu_list/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
