www.washtimes.com/national/inbeltway.htm
Inside the Beltway
By John McCaslin
The Washington Times
Kerry out attack
During a 1997 debate on CNN's "Crossfire," Sen. John Kerry, now the Democratic presidential nominee, made the case for launching a pre-emptive attack against Iraq.
So reveals Rep. Peter King, New York Republican, who appeared with Mr. Kerry on the program.
Mr. King says the U.N. Security Council had just adopted a resolution against Iraq that was watered down at the behest of the French and the Russians. Yet the candidate who now criticizes President Bush for ignoring French and Russian objections to the Iraq war blasted the two countries, claiming that they were compromised by their business dealings with Baghdad.
"We know we can't count on the French. We know we can't count on the Russians," said Mr. Kerry. "We know that Iraq is a danger to the United States, and we reserve the right to take pre-emptive action whenever we feel it's in our national interest."
While no "Crossfire" transcripts from 1997 are available, Mr. King in recent days produced a tape of the show, sharing it with New York radio host Monica Crowley for broadcast, and this Inside the Beltway column for publication. Stay tuned.
Apples to Oranges. Kerry is saying he backed the idea of the U.S. looking after its own international interests not that he would not have enlisted the help of our traditional allies and gone it pretty much alone.
Trying to get the U.N. involved in the fighting after you have given all the rebuilding contracts to U.S. companies under no-bid contracts just isn't gonna work for W.
Whatever man.
after you have given all the rebuilding contracts to U.S. companies under no-bid contracts just isn't gonna work for W.
Of which have subcontracted to over 300 Iraqi companies, employing over 75,000. Those out-sourcing bas s.
As yes, trickle down rebuilding. Line your pockets with big rebuilding bucks and pay the poor Iraq laborers $3 per day.Of which have subcontracted to over 300 Iraqi companies, employing over 75,000. Those out-sourcing bas s.
Is that what they are getting paid?
I'm not sure, that may be generous to tell you the truth.
Just stick with "I'm not sure," 'cause you don't have a ing clue about much.
Yet more nuance...
JOHN SUNUNU, CROSSFIRE: Senator Kerry, in fact, in spite of the administration claiming it has restored unanimity, that has not occurred. All the strength of this resolution had to be pulled out of it get any votes at all other than our own. Isn't this exercise actually counterproductive in sending a signal to Iraq that the coalition still remains frayed?
SEN. JOHN KERRY, (D), MASSACHUSETTS, FOREIGN RELATIONS COMMITTEE: Well, John, you're correct that this resolution is less than we would have liked. I don't think anybody can deny that we would have liked it to have threatened force and we would have liked it to carry the term serious consequences
will flow. On the other hand, the coalition is together. I mean the fact is there is a unanimous statement by the security council and the United Nations that there has to be immediate, unrestricted, unconditional access to the sites. That's very strong language. And it also references the underlying resolution on which the use of force is based. So clearly the allies may not like it, and I think that's our
great concern — where's the backbone of Russia, where's the backbone of France, where are they in expressing their condemnation of such clearly illegal activity, but in a sense, they're now climbing into a box and they will have
enormous difficulty not following up on this if there is not compliance by Iraq.
...
SUNUNU: But isn't what [President Clinton] has seen is a loss of U.S. leadership and an erosion under an administration that has failed to lead?
KERRY: On the contrary. The administration is leading. The administration is making it clear that they don't believe that they even need the U.N. Security Council to sign off on a material breach because the finding of material breach was made by Mr. Butler. So furthermore, I think the United States has always reserved the right and will reserve the right to act in its best interests. And clearly it is not just our best interests, it is in the best interests of the world to
make it clear to Saddam Hussein that he's not going to get away with a breach of the '91 agreement that he's got to live up to, which is allowing inspections and dismantling his weapons and allowing us to know that he has dismantled his
weapons. That's the price he pays for invading Kuwait and starting a war.
...
SUNUNU: Senator Kerry, I think the issue that concerns a lot of us who have seen the process in the past and have been watching what has been going on now is that the previous administration, President Bush, Jim Baker worked to weave the fabric before rolling out the goods and the tough talk. This administration's got the tough talk now, but it let the fabric get unraveled and that is the problem. We have to at least understand that failure if we want to move forward correctly.
KERRY: John, again, I think you're prejudging this. I mean, the fact is that over a period of time France and Russia have indicated a monetary interest. They on their own have indicated the desire to do business. That's what's driving this. I mean, as Tom Freedman (ph) said in a great article the other day, France, Inc. wants to do business with oil and they are moving in the exact sort of opposite direction on their own from the very cause of the initial conflict, which was oil.
SUNUNU: But that's not new, Senator Kerry. You're pretending that this desire...
KERRY: Correct, but ...
SUNUNU: ...of commercial interest is new. That's always been there. They were there in 1990, they were there in '91, they were in the tough times and they stood with us.
KERRY: Correct, absolutely correct, and I believe, and they stood with us today and I am saying to you that it is my judgment that by standing with us today and calling for the unrestricted, unconditional, unlimited, you know, access,
they have now taken a stand that they are duty bound to enforce and if Saddam Hussein doesn't do that, the president, I think, has begun a process which you remember very well, John, was not done in one week, in one day, in one month. It took months to weave together the fabric to lead up to an
understanding of what was at stake. I am convinced that many people have not yet even focused in full measure on what is at stake.
SUNUNU: All right ...
KERRY: This is not just a minor confrontation. This is a very significant issue about the balance of power, about the future stability of the Middle East, about all of what we have thus far invested in the prior war and what may happen
in the future.
God! Do your own homework
The EconomistBefore the war, Kifah Karim, a teacher at a Baghdad primary school, took home monthly pay equivalent to just $6. Her husband earned $13 as a factory overseer. Today, with a combined income of close to $450, they no longer rely on gifts of meat from Mrs Karim's brother, a butcher, to buttress a diet dominated by government food rations.
Asuming that they are working a combined 60 hours per week
450 per month / 240 hours per month = $1.875 per hour.
Prior to war: $19 per month
After war: $37.50 at least. You could read the article and come away with the impression it was $450 per month.
I'm not quite sure how this is a bad thing for the Iraqis.For many Iraqis, living standards have already risen a lot. Boosted by government make-work programmes, day labourers are getting double their pre-war wages. A university dean's pay has gone up fourfold, a policeman's by a factor of ten.
Before the war, Kifah Karim, a teacher at a Baghdad primary school, took home monthly pay equivalent to just $6. Her husband earned $13 as a factory overseer. Today, with a combined income of close to $450, they no longer rely on gifts of meat from Mrs Karim's brother, a butcher, to buttress a diet dominated by government food rations. They buy 2-3 kilos of meat a week, and have recently purchased a new fridge, a television, a TV satellite dish, a VCR and a CD player.
Also, if they are making $1.875 per hour then they wouldn't have to work even two hours to make $3 in a day.
Whatever they're making it's a of lot more than they were making.
God! Do your own homework
If I were at home, I would have.
They only made $19 per month but with price controls that $19 went a long way. Money was an issue, but with the U.S. enforcing economic sanctions against Saddam its not like there was much to buy anyway.Whatever they're making it's a of lot more than they were making.
Iraq currently has an unemployment rate of 60-70%.
Um they are making $450 per month now as opposed to $19 per month. As the section of the article you quoted states, they are enjoying a lifestyle they did not enjoy before the Hussein regime fell.
Before the war, Kifah Karim, a teacher at a Baghdad primary school, took home monthly pay equivalent to just $6. Her husband earned $13 as a factory overseer. Today, with a combined income of close to $450, they no longer rely on gifts of meat from Mrs Karim's brother, a butcher, to buttress a diet dominated by government food rations. They buy 2-3 kilos of meat a week, and have recently purchased a new fridge, a television, a TV satellite dish, a VCR and a CD player.
Stacks of such goods now crowd the pavements of Baghdad's main shopping streets, shaded by ranks of bright new billboards. Prime commercial property, says a real estate broker in the Karada district, easily fetches $1,000 a square metre, four times the level this time last year. For sure, he says, there is some risk in securing proper legal le, but even under strict Baathist rule there lurked the danger that some official would take a shine to your property and seize it.
Such price rises have yet to spur much inflation. Subsidised food and petrol remain in adequate supply. Some prices have even dropped. Used cars cost one-third less than last year, the market glutted by a flash-flood of imports. Conversely, porous borders have pushed meat prices up 30%, as smugglers sneak their flocks to more lucrative markets in Saudi Arabia and elsewhere. Baghdadis complain, but Bedouin herdsmen are doing just fine.
I think I read someone post that "different situations need different responses" or something like that.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote