|
< Previous Post | Next Post >
5 Years After the Transatlantic Controversy over IraqPosted by Joerg Wolf in Transatlantic Relations on Sunday, March 23. 2008 Dialog International scans the German press coverage regarding the Iraq war anniversary and translates a Sueddeutsche Zeitung interview with Gunter Pleuger, Germany's ambassador to the United Nations during the run-up to the war. Pleuger speaks about his impressions of Colin Powell's presentation at the UN Security Council: It was all very surreal. Most of us in the UN auditorium knew that what Powell was presenting had no basis in reality. But we couldn't imagine that Colin Powell would deliberately present falsehoods. I beg to differ with Dialog International's the headline "Bush's War Enters its Sixth Year." It is America's war. A majority of Americans were in favor of the war in 2003. The United States is a democracy with various powerful branches of government and with a free press. Thus I would not blame the war on Bush only. Writing in Foreign Policy Magazine (subscribers only) Alasdair Roberts described Iraq as "The War We Deserve." And Gerd at Anglofritz is fed up with the Iraq Blame Game, specifically US accusations of Germany regarding "Curveball." Related post in the Atlantic Review: Schadenfreude? How the Smearing of Iraq War Critics Has Changed Endnote: Think Progress writes about a book by Chile's ambassador to the UN: U.S. ‘threatened’ countries that didn’t support Iraq war. (Link fixed)
Share on Facebook
Welcome! You are reading the ATLANTIC REVIEW -- a Press Digest on Transatlantic Relations edited by three German Fulbright Alumni. The horizontal menu bar at the top helps to navigate this site. Subscribe to one of our RSS-Feeds or to our newsletter, which is emailed twice per month.Trackbacks
Trackback specific URI for this entry
No Trackbacks
SC
- #1 - 2008-03-22 22:20 - (Reply)
Well, I remain amused by what, to me, seems an underlying assumption that there was a clear view provided by prewar intelligence from any source; particularly sources in Iraq itself. That the Iraqi regime was so dysfunctional that even high level contacts within the regime itself turned out to be inadequate sources is one possible conclusion of declassified portion of the US Joint Forces Command "Iraqi Perspectives Project" available in full here http://www.jfcom.mil/newslink/storyarchive/2006/pa032406.htm ,
John in Michigan, USA
- #2 - 2008-03-23 07:25 - (Reply)
In February, 2003, well before the Iraq invasion, I made the case for it in an article, "The United States is already at war with Iraq".
franchie
- #3 - 2008-03-23 09:34 - (Reply)
"about things that in fact were not certain, but that is more a gross failure in judgment than an outright lie. An outright lie would be what Clinton did -- he knew he had sexual relations with that woman (he was there, after all), but he stated otherwise."
SC
- #3.1 - 2008-03-23 16:01 - (Reply)
"(Y)our country helped Saddam then with all the weapons that your actual administration repproached him to hide."
John in Michigan, USA
- #3.1.1 - 2008-03-23 17:50 - (Reply)
Good point. Even in the 1990-2004 conflicts, Iraqi equipment was mostly USSR design or copies of same; Iraqi army organizational structure and tactics were a carbon copy of the Soviet army and doctrine.
John in Michigan, USA
- #3.2 - 2008-03-23 18:58 - (Reply)
"Saddam was no threat to the western world..."
David
- #4 - 2008-03-23 17:01 - (Reply)
"It is America's war. A majority of Americans were in favor of the war in 2003."
Anonymous
- #5 - 2008-03-23 17:12 - (Reply)
SC, yeah, your own sources of course !
SC
- #5.1 - 2008-03-23 18:51 - (Reply)
Well, not really: SIPRI stands for the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute.
SC
- #5.2 - 2008-03-23 19:33 - (Reply)
Also, the US Joint Forces Command "Iraqi Perspectives Project" is hardly a whitewash. Apart from trying to understand what the Iraqi government was thinking and doing from '89-'03, the project is part of a standard after-action assessment process undertaken after every significant conflict involving the US armed forces; a process to determine what went right and what didn't. If the US armed forces have improved qualitatively over the years - and really, that should be beyond debate. It is in no small part due to processes like that of which the IPP is a part: a whitewash would defeat the entire purpose of the exercise. Those who wish the US ill would wish it were: then you would get an armed force qualitatively like that in Iraq.
franchie
- #6 - 2008-03-23 20:23 - (Reply)
Sc, then you should have taken your references from the very SIPRI site that you quoted ; since how long is Wikipedia a reliable source ?
John in Michigan, USA
- #6.1 - 2008-03-23 20:37 - (Reply)
' John, yes I am the "poil à gratter" '
SC
- #6.2 - 2008-03-23 22:16 - (Reply)
Ok. But, as I wrote before, the numbers I cite have been around for quite some time now. I've had a bookmarked link to the SIPRI site's numbers for a long time for just such threads as this. You can choose to believe that or not; it matters not to me, because I know the numbers are there. Wikipedia was simply the most convenient reproduction. The Baathist regime in Iraq was simply a client of the Soviet Union: the arms transfer data is just one large indicator of this. France pursued its own mideast foreign policy and had its own reasons for its relationship with Saddam.
Pat Patterson
- #6.2.1 - 2008-03-23 23:32 - (Reply)
Here's a chart based on the SIPRI report but the actual report as you point out is unavailable till the 31st of this month.
franchie
- #6.2.1.1 - 2008-03-24 01:07 - (Reply)
There can be no 2003 missiles, since these missiles have not been made for 15 years
John in Michigan, USA
- #6.3 - 2008-03-23 22:36 - (Reply)
Franchie, I am curious, was Wikipedia correct about Laïcité?
franchie
- #6.3.1 - 2008-03-23 23:04 - (Reply)
john, there are many digressions and a caracterised BS as far as the paragraph that treats the french reality in scolarship ; did you provide yourself the english explanation ?
John in Michigan, USA
- #6.3.1.1 - 2008-03-24 03:24 - (Reply)
No, I didn't write anything on that Wikipedia page. As you can see from this, there have been no substantial changes in the month of March.
franchie
- #7 - 2008-03-23 22:33 - (Reply)
John, now, I understand why the people like you think we stink ; it's was incrusted in your brain in your chilhood, thus indelebile ! good job, journalist ? I hope the "Sun" will give you a column !
John in Michigan, USA
- #7.1 - 2008-03-24 03:29 - (Reply)
I wasn't suggesting French people are like Pepé Le Pew. I was suggesting your writing is like Pepé Le Pew. Pepé lives in Paris, all of his victims are other French people.
franchie
- #7.1.1 - 2008-03-24 13:01 - (Reply)
John,
Joe Noory
- #7.2 - 2008-03-24 14:33 - (Reply)
Really? Then why is it that a LT friend of mine ran across French special forces in the western desert of Iraq with very little HDRs and an lot of claymores 3 months after the fall of Baghdad?
franchie
- #7.2.1 - 2008-03-24 18:52 - (Reply)
what are you up to jojo ? still frustrated not being the star ?
Joe Noory
- #7.2.1.1 - 2008-03-24 19:14 - (Reply)
WHat in heaven's name are you talking about? Tell you what: don't be an adolescent and call me "jojo", and I won't call you a petit branleur.
franchie
- #7.2.1.1.1 - 2008-03-24 20:55 - (Reply)
jojo,
Merkel-4
- #8 - 2008-03-24 03:56 - (Reply)
Bush is not the only one to be blamed. The meida like CNN and BBC spreads lots of rumors against Iraq. They succed to describe people that Sudam regime sponser the 911 and Bin Laden. And Iraq regime was embracing nuclear bomb in full swing. When the whole wolrd was confused by BBC and CNN's disinformation campaign . No wonder NY senator Hilary Clinton vote for Iraq war.
Pat Patterson
- #9 - 2008-03-24 06:20 - (Reply)
I'm more than a little concerned about the bona fides of Heraldo Munoz's book, A Solitary War. First in that a former member of the Allende government might and actually still does harbor much resentment toward the US. And second in that the chronology doesn't make much sense as Sec. Munoz was still acting as spokesman for the Lagos Administration in Chile, Minister Secretary General of Government, when Sec. Powell spoke and subsequently recommended to the President to not seek any further resolutions from the UN in Feb. 2003. Sec. Munoz did not arrive in New York to take up his ambassadorship until either the 18th or 19th, mere days before the invasion took place on March 20th. And the UN essentially abandoned the Iraqis barely a month later.
Merkel-3
- #10 - 2008-03-24 09:29 - (Reply)
Five years ago , EU want to restrict US Military action in Iraq under the framework of UN security council's approval, They don't wanna see: US monopolize Iraq , then monopolize the whole middle east's resources in the name of promoting democracy,destrorying nuclear capability.
David
- #11 - 2008-03-24 11:29 - (Reply)
The surge in violence in Iraq has now brought the toll of dead US troops to over 4,000.
Pat Patterson
- #11.1 - 2008-03-24 15:39 - (Reply)
That hobby horse must be just about worn out by now. Unless of course that is just what a "typical white person" would write about, ad nauseum.
David
- #11.1.1 - 2008-03-24 17:34 - (Reply)
Pat, did you light another candle on your shrine to George W. Bush? This is another "Mission Accomplished" moment in a failed presidency.
Joe Noory
- #11.1.1.1 - 2008-03-24 19:41 - (Reply)
You soon find that David's "Dialog" is little more than one-sided and laced with underhanded invective. Note the allusions to "lighting candles at shrines" to someone he doesn't agree with as a sort of misguided religiosity, and so forth.
franchie
- #11.1.1.1.1 - 2008-03-24 21:02 - (Reply)
"It's always the same. The excercise of their "wisdom" about peace is so cheap and easy to dispense, so easy to digest, and it has never, ever worked for civilization"
Merkel-7
- #12 - 2008-03-25 05:32 - (Reply)
Bush government and EU are facing the problem of IRAN nuclear development. The enhanced transatlantic paternership will not guarantee Iran will yield to the pressure of the west .
Pat Patterson
- #13 - 2008-03-25 06:28 - (Reply)
Again that claim is absolute nonsense, US nuclear policy has always been no first strike against non-nuclear states unless they use either one of the three categories of WMD, chemical, biological and nuclear(one doesn't need an ICBM to deliver a nuclear device). When was there any proclamation of a preemptive strike against Iran other than it was one among dozens of options still under consideration. Again provide some links instead of wild accusations and fairy tales.
Merkel-4
- #14 - 2008-03-25 07:16 - (Reply)
REF:
Pat Patterson
- #15 - 2008-03-25 07:38 - (Reply)
Yes, that is exactly what I said and that is what happened. The British, French and even the laggard US, though greatly benefiting from slavery also effectively ended it. Plus you might notice that most of the decades of civil war and stupidity in Africa occurred after the colonizers left.
Merkel-4
- #16 - 2008-03-25 10:17 - (Reply)
There are so many facts about Britain colonization ,and its salve trade. US also get involved in this dirty trade. So President Clinton express his appology during his Africa vists. If you got problem to know such tragic hitory
franchie
- #17 - 2008-03-25 12:45 - (Reply)
Slavery still exist in Mauritania, and in many other african and ME muslim countries ; but is is disguished in a nowaday language : maids
Pat Patterson
- #18 - 2008-03-25 13:37 - (Reply)
Bringing up The Philippines is quite interesting, agreed that the Spanish and to a lesser extent the US have much to answer for, but both countries must be blameless for brining slavery to that country, in fact the US must be blameless as slavery was officially abolished, rather then by decree under the Spanish, in that country's constitution after 1898. No the wholesale deportation of that country's original inhabitants, who are still discriminated against today, began when traders and missionaries from Malay and Moghul India arrived in the 13th Century.
Merkel-3
- #19 - 2008-03-25 14:29 - (Reply)
Do i misunderstand your following messages?
Pat Patterson
- #20 - 2008-03-25 14:41 - (Reply)
I believe the first African and white slaves were brought to Jamestown in the early 17th Century while slavery already existed in Brazil, Mexico and the West Indies since the discovery of the New World. And before the arrival of the Spanish and Portuguese as Cortez's army that conguered Mexico consisted of a few hundred Peninsulares and tens of thousands of indigenous residents desiring to end being slaves to the Aztecs.
Joe Noory
- #21 - 2008-03-25 18:20 - (Reply)
Merkel: by the way, why not look at the history of Dutch slavery. They were in fdact the first to bring slaves to north america, and in fact it wasn't made illegal in the Netherlands itself until the Nazi occupiers expunged it from their laws as a formality.
Merkel-2
- #21.1 - 2008-03-26 02:10 - (Reply)
I am not a German. My posts are not a German guy leash out fires on Britain. So there is no need for me to crticize or defend Dutch's once crime.I use the account "Merkel" because i dislike this woman. Under differnt circumstance I air my discontentment towards chancellor Merkel and her government.
Pat Patterson
- #21.1.1 - 2008-03-26 03:28 - (Reply)
Jeez, the fun never stops. The Falklands Constitution of 1985 was approved by a vote of the citizens of the Falklands after presentation by the High Privy Council of the UK and the Falklands Council to the people of the Falklands then the Parliament and the Queen.
John in Michigan, USA
- #22 - 2008-03-25 21:48 - (Reply)
I can't help noticing that no one has directly refuted my posting that the Iraq war began in 1990-1 and continued to the present day.
Merkel-2
- #23 - 2008-03-26 04:54 - (Reply)
Falklands Election is anything but a joke. How can a local government which pledges its loyalty to Queen held a fair election. Queen dispatch her governor and military force managing Falklands . The election is by no means carried out free will voters.
Pat Patterson
- #24 - 2008-03-26 05:25 - (Reply)
Now we have truly entered the twilight zone! If an election doesn't go the way you want then it most be corrupt. Or better yet what is surprising that British subjects wish to remain with access to the EU trading bloc instead of being tied to another desperately incompetent Argentinian government. Why would the islands residents want to become part of a country that has barely half the GDP per capita as the Falklands($13,000 for Argentina and $25,000 for the Falklands). Plus over the last decade the Falklands has a balanced budget and stable currency of which Argentina knows about only via Wikipedia.
Merkel-2
- #25 - 2008-03-26 08:52 - (Reply)
It's very interesting the cursed robber (Britain) is decribed as a benign gentleman by you. While the oppressed country - Argentina was defiled as a autarchy. AS far as i know Argentina government's policy on Flaklands' sovereign had earn full supports from its people .
Pat Patterson
- #25.1 - 2008-03-26 10:33 - (Reply)
I guess when one is confused on the facts its easy to simply see some things that are not there. Where have I mentioned anything about Britain being benign? Especially considering the original retakeover of the islands came about after Argentina abandoned its settlements there in the 1830's after a mutiny of those inhabitants.
Merel-3
- #26 - 2008-03-27 02:06 - (Reply)
[Pat Patterson - #13 - 2008-03-25 06:28 - (Reply)
Merkel-3
- #27 - 2008-03-27 03:35 - (Reply)
Transatlantic relationship is really so important? Yes! EU and US mutually need. does the 5 years of Transatlantic-Controversy exert much negative impacts ? No,
Merkel-5
- #28 - 2008-03-27 08:10 - (Reply)
Pat Patterson - #25.1 - 2008-03-27
Pat Patterson
- #29 - 2008-03-30 01:05 - (Reply)
I would suggest that you might want to find the US's statement in a language that you might understand. The NPT comment expressly lays out that the US will only respond with nuclear weapons if first attacked by nuclear, chemical or biological weapons. Plus there are 192 nations in the UN and 189 signatories of the NPT so that leaves only outside of the guarantees of the NPT.
Merkel-2
- #29.1 - 2008-03-31 03:13 - (Reply)
Those blatant threats (including nuclear bomb threat) were called "blackmail" by many developing countries . Using violence and threat to attain its goal is hegemony. Considerind US double-standards and hypocritical conducts, I guess there is no other choice for those "hostile" countries to promte its military strength.
merkel-6
- #29.2 - 2008-04-02 04:37 - (Reply)
Pat:
merkel-2
- #30 - 2008-03-31 09:38 - (Reply)
[ For example, the Free Tibet Campaign in London (of which I am a former director) and other groups have long claimed that 1.2 million Tibetans have been killed by the Chinese since they invaded in 1950. However, after scouring the archives in Dharamsala while researching my book on Tibet, I found that there was no evidence to support that figure.”
Angela_Merkel
- #31 - 2008-04-01 02:57 - (Reply)
Alex:
Merkel_65_angela
- #32 - 2008-04-01 10:08 - (Reply)
Nicolas Sarkozy "skum" the Muslim youth. He indulges in violence to retore Paris peace. Never think about why the whole tragedy happend in France again and again .Nicolas Sarkozy has an picky eye on fashion models but short of political wisdom. He make France mess as its personal life looks like.
USER001
- #33 - 2008-04-03 05:39 - (Reply)
Comment: Add Comment
We appreciate any thoughtful comment!
Would you like to read more? Have a look at our directory of Atlantic Review posts. Or check out the constantly updated reading recommendations from our readers in the sidebar: "Tips From Our Readers." More information on this project in this post. Feel free to comment on any article recommended in the sidebar. BBCode format allowed. You can make a clickable link with this code: If you write "[url=http://america-germany.atlanticreview.org]Carnival of US-German Relations[/url]", then this will be displayed: "Carnival of US-German Relations". And if you write "[url]http://atlanticreview.org/mustreads.html[/url]", then this will be displayed: "http://atlanticreview.org/mustreads.html" |
Sponsor |




