US Diplomats quit in protest

[a_unique_person]

Another US diplomat quits
March 12 2003
By Washington





A US diplomat resigned from government service in protest at President George Bush's preparations to attack Iraq. He was the second to do so in less than a month.

John Brown, who joined the US diplomatic corps in 1981 and served in London, Prague, Krakow, Kiev, Belgrade and Moscow, said in a letter to Secretary of State Colin Powell: "I cannot, in good conscience, support President Bush's war plans against Iraq.

"Throughout the globe the United States is becoming associated with the unjustified use of force. The President's disregard for views in other nations, borne out by his neglect of public diplomacy, is giving birth to an anti-American century," the diplomat wrote.



http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/11/1047144970310.html

[Tony]

Good riddance.

[subgenius]

Originally posted by Tony
Good riddance.
That answer is about as well-reasoned as your timely signature.

[LeFevre]

Originally posted by subgenius

That answer is about as well-reasoned as your timely signature.

dang Tony must be a very reasoned guy! :eek: :p

[crackmonkey]

Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. Later. Outta here. We release the dogs in 30 seconds... 29... 28...27...

[LeFevre]

Originally posted by crackmonkey
Don't let the door hit your ass on the way out. Later. Outta here. We release the dogs in 30 seconds... 29... 28...27...

you wanna start at 30!?

[Wolverine]

Originally posted by subgenius

That answer is about as well-reasoned as your timely signature.

Well, if reason has to enter the equation, let's look at the examples cited in Mr. Brown's letter of resignation:

The president has failed:

To explain clearly why our brave men and women in uniform should be ready to sacrifice their lives in a war on Iraq at this time;

To lay out the full ramifications of this war, including the extent of innocent civilian casualties;

To specify the economic costs of the war for ordinary Americans;

To clarify how the war would help rid the world of terror;

To take international public opinion against the war into serious consideration.

I seem to recall the President addressing these issues quite clearly over the past several months. Obviously John Brown has a differing opinion, to which he's entitled, even if it does come across as a melodramatic political statement.

Personally, I share Tony's opinion. Make sure you save an equally condescending comment for me. :rolleyes:

[corplinx]

I hate to say this, but its better to quit than be fired. These "diplomats" are mad because we are going to war without France's approval (which diplomats have not gotten) over something that diplomacy has not been able to resolve for 12 years.

Perhaps its time to clean house at the state department.

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by corplinx
I hate to say this, but its better to quit than be fired. These "diplomats" are mad because we are going to war without France's approval (which diplomats have not gotten) over something that diplomacy has not been able to resolve for 12 years.

Perhaps its time to clean house at the state department.

perhaps they know better than you what the ramifications of this will all be.

[subgenius]

Originally posted by corplinx
I hate to say this, but its better to quit than be fired. These "diplomats" are mad because we are going to war without France's approval (which diplomats have not gotten) over something that diplomacy has not been able to resolve for 12 years.

Perhaps its time to clean house at the state department.
Ala McCarthy.
They're mad for their own reasons.
By the way, I am for peace. I am against war, but I don't oppose what's going on, as long as we remember history (so we don't repeat it again).
We should have finished him off the first time.
Who's to blame for why we didn't 12 years ago, and why we created him and bin Laden in the first place?
We have found the enemy and he is us.

[Cleopatra]

I don't trust Civil Servants, especially Diplomats, who don't keep their mouthes shut when they resign...

Diplomats should have higher moral standards and nobility than the average people. That's why their country trusts them. If they think that they must quit, they can do it in a different way.

I despise Diplomats who quit like this, even if they come from the side of the opponent, in fact I wouldn't like to have enemies that don't serve their country with dignity.

Let's not confuse Liberalism with stupitidy.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by subgenius

We should have finished him off the first time.
Who's to blame for why we didn't 12 years ago, and why we created him and bin Laden in the first place?


Do we really want to rehash this? We _only_ had a mandate to liberate Kuwait. We tried to take him out since he was a legitimate target. Those smart bombs aren't psychic bombs though. Also, I am sure they tried to develop an insurgency from the shiites or kurds, however these groups are incapable of staging a real insurgency.

I don't blame us for creating Bin Laden. Bin Laden is responsible for what he does.

[UnrepentantSinner]

Good for you John Brown... assuming that is your real name. It's nice to see people standing up for what they believe in rather than be a cog in the President's war machine.

[subgenius]

Originally posted by corplinx


Do we really want to rehash this? We _only_ had a mandate to liberate Kuwait. We tried to take him out since he was a legitimate target. Those smart bombs aren't psychic bombs though. Also, I am sure they tried to develop an insurgency from the shiites or kurds, however these groups are incapable of staging a real insurgency.

I don't blame us for creating Bin Laden. Bin Laden is responsible for what he does.
You're in denial or something else.
"Only had a mandate..." Once someone starts shooting at you, much less torching wells, etc., all bets are off.
We have no mandate now, and that's not stopping us. Why did it then? If it was a mistake, acknowledge it rather than excuse it, or we don't learn from it. He doesn't acknowledge it because it was his daddy, why don't you?
We encouraged the uprisings and then backed out of promised support to let them get massacred. Why?
Why forget history? Binnie was CIA trained, when who was president? Why be so defensive about it?
Its not rehashing, all I said was let's not forget history and how we got ourselves into this. Why is that bad? Don't you ever learn from your mistakes, or don't you make any?
How do you get good judgement? Experience. How do you get experience? Bad judgement.
Yes bin Laden is responsible, so is everyone else who made mistakes. There isn't one simple cause/explanation for anything much less everything.
Thinking is the hardest work of all that's why so few of us engage in it.

[corplinx]

Originally posted by subgenius

We have no mandate now, and that's not stopping us. Why did it then? If it was a mistake, acknowledge it rather than excuse it, or we don't learn from it. He doesn't acknowledge it because it was his daddy, why don't you?

We have no mandate? We have launched a war against terrorism. Iraq is a terrorist regime and they sponsor other terrorists. During Gulf I Saddam's agents in Manila and somewhere else tried bombings but wound up blowing up their own cars instead thankfully.

We are an enemy of Saddam, his regime has attempted terrorist acts and supports terrorism. So why does this not fit in with the "war on terror" mandate? This isn't the "war on bin laden" sub.

I will admit that we stuck our heads in the ground about terrorism. Even while we were attacked 3 times by Bin Laden before the 4th attack woke us up.

We know now that we have to proactively fight terrorism instead of reactively. In hindsight, taking out Saddam during the first round of this war is a good idea. However, at the time we were still being diplomatic and expelling Iraq from Kuwait is where we stopped.

[Drooper]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/11/1047144970310.html

It's nice to be able to make such ethical stands without fear of torture or murder isn't it.

Wouldn't it be nice to give the Iraqis the same freedom?

[Troll]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2003/03/11/1047144970310.html

Two have quit? My gawd. Do we have any left? Two out of how many? We're screwed that two have quit. Holy crap how will we ever find people to speak for us to other countries? the horror. The horror.:rolleyes:

[a_unique_person]

Originally posted by Drooper


It's nice to be able to make such ethical stands without fear of torture or murder isn't it.

Wouldn't it be nice to give the Iraqis the same freedom?

Strangely enough, the impression I get, despite all the crocodile tears from dubya and friends, is that the iraqi people are way down on the list of priorities.

heard tony blair on the telly.

words to the effect of,

how can we let murderous dictators and tyrants run around doing all these bad things and do them to us too.

that is basically all it comes down to, what we think they might do to us. the actual subjects are good for a few sob stories, but they don't really count.

[Jocko]

Originally posted by a_unique_person


Strangely enough, the impression I get, despite all the crocodile tears from dubya and friends, is that the iraqi people are way down on the list of priorities.

heard tony blair on the telly.

words to the effect of,

how can we let murderous dictators and tyrants run around doing all these bad things and do them to us too.

that is basically all it comes down to, what we think they might do to us. the actual subjects are good for a few sob stories, but they don't really count.

I would suggest moving this thread to the paranormal forum, since AUP seems to be suggesting that he can read the minds of Tony Blair and George W. Bush based on some third-hand statement that no sane person could even disagree with.