(robert arndt) wrote in message . com...
"Christians for Cheeseburgers." wrote in message . net...
"Michael Petukhov" wrote in message
m...
French block airlift of British troops to Basra 16.09.2003 [06:41]


Sooner or later there will need to be some serious payback for France and
Germany.


Not while US forces in Iraq are still dying and the new election year
is looming ahead. President Bush has recently praised German forces
for their participation in Afghanistan and their evolving role in the
region.
Berlin for its part would be willing to send German troops to Iraq
should the US properly cede military and political control of that
nation over to the UN.

Not gonna happen, not even in your wildest Wagnerian dreams, Robert.
Perhaps you would like to enlighten us as to the massive record of
past UN successes in this regard--like the Middle East, or Somalia?


The US could still have the biggest piece of
the peace dividend/restoration contracts... but Berlin wants a share
plus the reestablishment of its business contracts and monies owed.
Sounds fair enough to me. But then again, we live in the US and
consume an awful lot of gas. Iraq currently holds the second largest
oil reserves and when its industry and resources are properly
developed will surpass Saudi Arabia. For the US to relinquish control
of such a strategic asset now in the midst of unprecedented
international terrorism and national vunerability makes that proposal
unlikely.
Despite the rising death toll we will still probably arrogantly refuse
to budge until Bush's numbers start to seriously fall or another

Did you catch yesterday's poll results? Bush beats *every* Democratic
challenger by a wide margin? Where is this massive drop in Bush's
numbers you keep mumbling about?

conflict breaks out that requires calling up all the reserves.

LOL! We now have over 172K reservists on active duty; how much more
are required in order to meet this doomsday scenario you forecast?

US troops are already grumbling and we still have no exit strategy.

US troops always grumble; part of what makes US troops unique, I
guess.

This can't go on forever with Bush merely asking Congress for
ever-increasing funds for a failed mission.

Failed mission? My, you continue to demonstrate a tremendous
capability for fantasy. Is Saddam in control? No. Is the interim Iraqi
leadership accepting more responsibility for their own governance?
Yes. Are *all* of the schools, universities, and hospitals open again?
Yes. Are Iraqis being herded into the desert and gunned down by their
mass graves as they were throughout Saddam's reign? No. And you call
that *failure*?! God only knows what you require of our military to
acheive *success* if that is the case.

We can't go it alone no
matter how powerful we are and we look foolish on the international
scene with the conspicuous absence of any WMD proof or link of Saddam
to 9/11.

We are not alone. That you are terribly myopic to the point of
considering any venture that does not include French and German
participation as "solitary" does not change the fact that British,
Dutch, Polish, Spanish, Australian, Italian, Lithuanian, Latvian,
Estonian, Honduran, Czech, etc., ad nauseum, forces are now serving or
have served in Iraq.

Simply waving a flag and invoking 9/11 memories won't last
forever. The US is still vunerable, our missions in Afghanistan and
Iraq are failures (no Osama, no Saddam, no WMDs, no restoration),

So you say; but then again, you have not exactly told us how to define
"success", have you? FYI, military operations are usually not the best
manner to capture a single individual; merely dislocating him from
power is a rather good first step.

Brooks


snip further rant