PDA

View Full Version : U.S. WON after ALL, UN is a piece of crap and many others.


Delta
05-22-2003, 11:40 AM
U.S. and "Britain" controls Iraq for all 100%.
Oil for Food program runs.
U.S.A. Laughs its ass off. at other countries who opposed the Uncle Sam!

The immediate impact of the new U.N. resolution on post-war Iraq


A look at some of the steps that will soon follow under the resolution on post-war Iraq approved Thursday by the U.N. Security Council. The resolution lifts sanctions that were imposed on Iraq after its 1990 invasion of Kuwait and authorizes Britain and the United States to run Iraq:

* The flow of oil exports will resume. There are 8 million barrels of Iraqi oil in storage points at the Turkish port of Ceyhan, one of Iraq's two export terminals, that can be sold immediately, diplomats said.

* U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan will appoint a special representative to work with U.S. and British administrators in running Iraq. Speculation for Annan's choice centered on U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Sergio Vieira de Mello of Brazil, who has Washington's support.

* The United States and Britain will take charge of a new Iraqi Development Fund, based at the Central Bank in Baghdad, controlling Iraqi oil revenues for use in rebuilding the country. The United Nations and other international bodies will monitor and audit the fund. It will get a $1 billion deposit, transferred from the U.N. oil-for-food account, as well as frozen Iraqi assets around the world which are required to be turned over by governments.

* The oil-for-food program will be phased out over the next six months. Annan will review $10 billion worth of contracts existing under the program to decide whether they are still needed. These contracts, many of them with Russian companies, range from food and medicine to plumbing and sanitation equipment, oil spare parts, and trucks.

* The resolution grants immunity from lawsuits involving future oil and natural gas sales until Dec. 31, 2007, to allow Iraq temporary relief from paying its estimated $400 billion debt and time to restructure the debt.

Source (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/news/archive/2003/05/22/international1307EDT0646.DTL) 8)

Delta
05-22-2003, 11:43 AM
UN is sanking, without U.S. money!!!


Article about it (http://famulus.msnbc.com/FamulusIntl/reuters05-22-094159.asp?reg=MIDEAST#body)

Mona Lisa
05-23-2003, 09:01 AM
the US and UK using every possible trick in the book
recent resolution, all 3 issues in one
1 Lift the sanctions
2 Iraqi oil and fund and its control
3 the UN's role in the process
Security council members stuck between the issues i.e. people relly want lift the sanction but opposed to UK and US's full control. So if you favour lifting sactions then you're automatically allowing above two countries to control Iraq's development process.
it looks like US's intentions behind the 'liberation' eventuallu come to light.

Delta
05-23-2003, 09:07 AM
When the lion sees the meat, it becomes unstopable.

-Delta

Royal
05-23-2003, 11:47 AM
I think in this Irak war game UK lost politicly & financially and morally .
US allready start to kicking the UK out from the development program and other activities, also Blair start getting much nervouse when talking regarding the Irak cases, he may loose the next term and this could be with help of big brother.
Becouse he is now useless after the job been acomplish.

lkjh
05-23-2003, 12:42 PM
the US and UK using every possible trick in the book
recent resolution, all 3 issues in one
1 Lift the sanctions
2 Iraqi oil and fund and its control
3 the UN's role in the process
Security council members stuck between the issues i.e. people relly want lift the sanction but opposed to UK and US's full control. So if you favour lifting sactions then you're automatically allowing above two countries to control Iraq's development process.
it looks like US's intentions behind the 'liberation' eventuallu come to light.

What is the most efficient way/source to fund the reconstruction of Iraq then?


Interesting yet an obvious fact about UN, is that it receives 70% of its funding from United States.

Ciao kakao,

lkjh

05-23-2003, 12:55 PM
Actually, I am not sure if the word "reconstruction" is appropriate in this context.

Mona Lisa
05-24-2003, 02:54 AM
Interesting yet an obvious fact about UN, is that it receives 70% of its funding from United States.

So does it mean US funds the UN hence it can manupulate whole world. Obviously they did not find any WMD but already killed and made homeles so many people. Furthermore what is the point of having UN then if it is restricted by the country who has got the most money???

CrazyDT
05-24-2003, 03:19 AM
lkjh: 2f3f8cca, Where did you get your stats/facts ?
Interesting yet an obvious fact about UN, is that it receives 70% of its funding from United States.


Read this: http://www.wfa.org/issues/unfund.html
A quote from this link: The U.S. will now be assessed 22% of the regular budget, and 26% of the peacekeeping budget.


And the US is barely fulfilling its obligations!

05-24-2003, 05:06 AM
lkjh: 2f3f8cca, Where did you get your stats/facts ?
Interesting yet an obvious fact about UN, is that it receives 70% of its funding from United States.


Read this: http://www.wfa.org/issues/unfund.html
A quote from this link: The U.S. will now be assessed 22% of the regular budget, and 26% of the peacekeeping budget.


And the US is barely fulfilling its obligations!



who do u think pays uzbekistan's share of financial contribution to UN? guess... :) officially, u are right, US contibutes roughly 25-30%, but in reality, the US pays almost for all 3rd world countries, which adds up to 70% +.

sorry, i cant give u the references to this info, still cant find the site. but it was quite credible source...