Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

BBC: US 'needs help in Iraq' (Funny, I didn't see this in US media)

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
BurtWorm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-03 12:28 AM
Original message
BBC: US 'needs help in Iraq' (Funny, I didn't see this in US media)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/3058469.stm

The Bush administration is coming under growing domestic pressure over its Iraq strategy amid continuing attacks on US forces in the country.

The US Senate has voted unanimously to urge President George W Bush to consider asking Nato and the United Nations for help in rebuilding Iraq.

The non-binding resolution said that while it was in the interests of the United States to remain engaged in Iraq, conditions there posed a serious threat to American troops.

Public opinion in the US appears to reflect this disquiet, with polls showing a marked decline in support for the Bush administration's policy on Iraq.

The Senate vote came after General Tommy Franks, until recently at the helm of US-led coalition forces in Iraq, warned that American forces might have to remain in the country far longer than anticipated.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Old and In the Way Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-03 12:52 AM
Response to Original message
1. Can you say qWagmire?
I guess the Senate had to ask unanimously.....kinda of surprisimg that the Republicans would want NATO and the UN helping out in Iraq, though....seeing that everyone is irrelevant other than the US.


Personally, I hope we get the collective finger from the world. George can explain why there was no planning for post-War Iraq to the American people as he explains why there was no real evidence to support the lie of WMD.

Saddam was a bad man, no doubt. But there are lots of bad men in this world. He was able to be bad because the very Republicans in this administration created him 25 years ago. But this bad man has lots of oil that a bunch of neocons thought belonged to us and their corporate benefactors (the oil companies).

So Saddam had to go....but absolutely no planning for post Saddam. We have a major league black eye in the world and no amount of FOX or MS-NBC spin is going to fix this.

I hope all Americans wake up and realize what we've lost politically, economically, and spiritually since this fraud was criminally installed as a puppet pResident.







Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
hedda_foil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-03 01:14 AM
Response to Original message
2. Rummy was pinned to the mat and forced to admit the cost is $4B/mo
Twice the original estimate of a couple months ago. Franks said, hey it could take two years, could take four ... your guess is as good as mine, guys.

Within a few hours, the Senate voted 97-3 to beg NATO and the UN for help!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jab105 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-03 01:20 AM
Response to Reply #2
3. $4B/month...
that equals $48B a year...which is MORE than half of the federal education budget....

I'm gonna puke!!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-03 01:35 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Don't forget $1 billion a month for Afghanistan.
.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Bossy Monkey Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Jul-12-03 01:33 AM
Response to Original message
4. US Media had it, even here in the hinterland
These days, Knight-Ridder just runs a chain-wide DC bureau, which no doubt saves them money but probably cuts down the Pulitzers a lot, too:
http://www.thestate.com/mld/thestate/6285256.htm
Not quite the same story; the Franks story was in the paper today, too, but I can't find it online. Oh, here ya go:
http://www.philly.com/mld/inquirer/6277296.htm
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue May 07th 2024, 10:56 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC