Principled Position?

[Ed]

As many of you are doubtless aware, a pattern of bribery has been associated with the oil for food program.

http://abcnews.go.com/sections/wnt/World/saddam_bribery030520.html

I have heard snippets (no links, I'd be curious to hear if anyone else heard these things) that suggest that aside from folks at the UN being bribed, the graft extended to Russia and France. Not wishing to sound like a cynic, I sorta thought that the fix was in. As Earthborne has so elequently suggested, if people are in a position where it has been demonstrated that bad things are likely to occur, if then an accusation is made, they are obligated to defend themselves.

So let's see: Political types, lots of money, crazed dictator, oil, UN, opportunity for US bashing.

Is it just possible that Saddam bought French and Russian votes at the UN?

[Mr Manifesto]

What if he did?

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Ed
Is it just possible that Saddam bought French and Russian votes at the UN?


Saddam's Iraq owed Germany roughly $4.6 billion. German law enforcement is investigating four firms for illegal arms trading with Iraq while the country was under a U.N. embargo. (KSB AG in Bavaria, Katex Textilien GmbH in Hesse, and MEA Machinery and MEA International North Rhine Westphalia).

Saddam's Iraq owed France roughly $3 billion and Iraqi govt. papers show Saddam bribed Chirac to oppose war (http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040128-094014-7323r.htm)

Russia intended to sign an economic and trade cooperation agreement with Saddam's Iraq, (The Emercom deal, approved by the UN), was worth an estimated $40 billion.


I'd say those three countries had billions ;) of reasons not to invade Iraq.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir



Saddam's Iraq owed Germany roughly $4.6 billion. German law enforcement is investigating four firms for illegal arms trading with Iraq while the country was under a U.N. embargo. (KSB AG in Bavaria, Katex Textilien GmbH in Hesse, and MEA Machinery and MEA International North Rhine Westphalia).

Saddam's Iraq owed France roughly $3 billion and Iraqi govt. papers show Saddam bribed Chirac to oppose war (http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040128-094014-7323r.htm)

Russia intended to sign an economic and trade cooperation agreement with Saddam's Iraq, (The Emercom deal, approved by the UN), was worth an estimated $40 billion.


I'd say those three countries had billions ;) of reasons not to invade Iraq.

Once again, so what?

[geni]

So the US couldn't outbid Iraq? And zenith-nadir don't bother quoteing sources that based thier findings on Iraqi gov paper there have been several "convenent" discoveries. So far they have been found to have about the same level of relabilatly eron shares for long term investment.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by geni
So the US couldn't outbid Iraq? And zenith-nadir don't bother quoteing sources that based thier findings on Iraqi gov paper there have been several "convenent" discoveries. So far they have been found to have about the same level of relabilatly eron shares for long term investment.


And you didn't bother quoting any sources for any of your allegations either...:) ... funny and ironic since it is the basis of your objection.




Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
What if he did?


It would mean that those countries were opposed to the Iraq invasion on monetary grounds and not the moral high ground they claimed.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir

It would mean that those countries were opposed to the Iraq invasion on monetary grounds and not the moral high ground they claimed.

To cut to the chase, does that mean that the war in Iraq was justified because France and Russia were bribed? That there was no other reason not to go to war in Iraq?

[geni]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir



And you didn't bother quoting any sources for any of your allegations either...:) ... funny and ironic since it is the basis of your objection.


http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3006166.stm

The telegraph fell for it too.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
To cut to the chase, does that mean that the war in Iraq was justified because France and Russia were bribed? That there was no other reason not to go to war in Iraq?


No. I never said anything remotely like that. But I do believe that France, Germany and Russia had other "motivations" not to invade Iraq. Primarily financial rather than moral.

Originally posted by geni
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/3006166.stm....The telegraph fell for it too.


Well your "source" does not address France, Germany OR Russia....but only adresses British Labour MP George Galloway and the Christian Science Monitor . So once again your objections are meaningless....sorry...

[geni]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir

Well your "source" does not address France, Germany OR Russia....but only adresses British Labour MP George Galloway and the Christian Science Monitor . So once again your objections are meaningless....sorry...

So you are going to rely on a source that has proved unrelible in the past? Well you're free to do that but I'm going to wait for this to come from a beliverble source. Now if you want to carry on with this level of critial thinking I suggest you go here (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/)

[Ed]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


Once again, so what?

If this pattern of bribery is true, it undermines arguments against the Iraqi war based on "the World Wasn't behind it" and that it was not UN sanctioned and that it was caused by a need for Iraqi oil.

After all, if true, the Russki's and French took their payment in cold hard cash.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by geni
So you are going to rely on a source that has proved unrelible in the past? Well you're free to do that but I'm going to wait for this to come from a beliverble source. Now if you want to carry on with this level of critial thinking I suggest you go here (http://www.abovetopsecret.com/)



The fact that Iraq owed Germany $4.6 billion, France $3 billion and Russia lost a $40 billion dollar contract is true. I maintain that those were pretty good reasons not to go to into Iraq for France, Germany and Russia.

Then you "regurgitate" a BBC article about British Labour MP George Galloway and the Christian Science Monitor to disprove my position and then scold me for my lack of "critical thinking".

Pretty funny stuff geni...;)


edited to add:

Iraqi govt. papers: Saddam bribed Chirac (http://washingtontimes.com/upi-breaking/20040128-094014-7323r.htm)
Iraqi minister: Bribes by Saddam routine (http://www.kansas.com/mld/kansas/news/world/7819591.htm)
Iraqi Council Verifying Saddam's Bribes to 270 Foreigners (http://www.naharnet.com/domino/tn/NewsDesk.nsf/0/BC7351925C60D8D2C2256E2A0037A95E?OpenDocument)
Saddam Supporters Received Lucrative Oil Contracts (http://abcnews.go.com/sections/WNT/Investigation/saddam_oil_vouchers_040129-1.html)

[geni]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir




The fact that Iraq owed Germany $4.6 billion, France $3 billion and Russia lost a $40 billion dollar contract is true. I maintain that those were pretty good reasons not to go to into Iraq for France, Germany and Russia.

You know this might suprise you but Europeans are not completely money fixated in their foren policy. Just because the above might infulence you does not mean it would infulence the above. Secondly last I check the Iraqi dept was still outstanding (you can buy some if you want) and probably has a better chance of being paid off than it did before the war (it's value has certianly risen on the international markets).

The BBC articles shows that in the past "Iraqi goventment documents" have proved to be unrelible as a source you can find the same issue covered by other news outlets (all though probably not US ones as this was a UK issue). If you want to build huge conspircoy theories based on third hand reports (you have the washington times reporting that an Iraqi news paper thinks it has some documents that show ) I can't stop you.

[Mr Manifesto]

Originally posted by Ed


If this pattern of bribery is true, it undermines arguments against the Iraqi war based on "the World Wasn't behind it" and that it was not UN sanctioned and that it was caused by a need for Iraqi oil.

After all, if true, the Russki's and French took their payment in cold hard cash.

Of course, it doesn't undermine the argument that the American government lied to justify the invasion of Iraq.

[Ed]

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto


Of course, it doesn't undermine the argument that the American government lied to justify the invasion of Iraq.

No, not at all. As you may know I only supported the war because of our lieing dwarf president's telling me that Iraq presented a "clear and present danger". He lied and now he will feel the wrath of my vote withdrawl. But that is another story.

I was posting this more to underscore the sanctimonious nature of some who oppose the war and use the UN card, in all of it's manifestations, as a rationale for a simple US bashing position.

One thing that should unite us all, Whites, Blacks, Americans, Brits, limp wristed Ozzies, Canuks, Frenchies, Germans, Russkies, Arabs is the crystelline clear fact that people that hold power are thieving, lieing, greedy, sheep abusing bastards. That really was my only point. That and that some will use any pretext to bash the US.

[zenith-nadir]

Originally posted by geni
You know this might suprise you but Europeans are not completely money fixated in their foren policy. Just because the above might infulence you does not mean it would infulence the above.
Where in my posts does it say all europeans?


Originally posted by geni
Secondly last I check the Iraqi dept was still outstanding (you can buy some if you want) and probably has a better chance of being paid off than it did before the war (it's value has certianly risen on the international markets).
Irrelevant to the issue.

Originally posted by geni
The BBC articles shows that in the past "Iraqi goventment documents" have proved to be unrelible as a source you can find the same issue covered by other news outlets (all though probably not US ones as this was a UK issue).
No, the article speaks to British Labour MP George Galloway and the Christian Science Monitor, not to all Iraqi government documents being unreliable.

Originally posted by geni
If you want to build huge conspircoy theories based on third hand reports (you have the washington times reporting that an Iraqi news paper thinks it has some documents that show ) I can't stop you.
I am not building anything, I already believe that the opposition of France, Germany and Russia to the Iraq war was based on economic loss rather than some counterfeit moral ground.

[geni]

Originally posted by zenith-nadir
Where in my posts does it say all europeans?

Ok then the europeans you are talking about.

Irrelevant to the issue.

Very relivant senice the money was owed to then and it now looks like they have a better chance of getting it back


No, the article speaks to British Labour MP George Galloway and the Christian Science Monitor, not to all Iraqi government documents being unreliable.

Very good and now look at what the Christian science moniter based it's story on.


I am not building anything, I already believe that the opposition of France, Germany and Russia to the Iraq war was based on economic loss rather than some counterfeit moral ground.

I don't care what you belive. I care about what you can prove.