Published: 9 Nov 10 18:02 CET | Print version
Updated: 10 Nov 10 07:00 CET
Online: http://www.thelocal.de/politics/20101109-31065.html
Gerhard Schröder has hit back at claims by former US President George W. Bush in his newly released memoirs that the German ex-chancellor broke his word over support for an invasion of Iraq.
What do you think? Leave your comment below.
French President Francois Hollande, attending the 150th anniversary celebrations of Germany's Social Democratic Party on Thursday, praised the unpopular welfare and labour reforms by former Chancellor Gerhard Schröder. READ () »
Much of Germany is heading for an autumnal weekend, with chilly temperatures an at times significant rainfall – just as May draws to an end and socks should be heading for the back of the drawer. Some areas will even see snow and frost. READ () »
A group of brewers has raised alarm that so-called 'fracking' for natural gas could jeopardize the legendary purity of German beer by contaminating the country's water supplies. READ () »
The German language has some rather colourful terms for describing parts of the human body. Turn to The Local List this week for a few anatomical alternatives. READ () »
Healthy dogs have wet noses, but cold and creamy canine noses may be a sign that they've been treated to a doggy frozen yoghurt made in Berlin. Rather than chocolate or pistachio, flavours include salmon and beef. READ () »
Germany is the most popular country in the world, according to a poll released on Tuesday asking people to rate the positive and negative influence of 16 major nations. READ () »
A hamstring injury has ruled Borussia Dortmund's Germany midfield star Mario Götze out of Saturday's Champions League final at Wembley against Bayern Munich – the club he will join next month after activating a release clause in his contract. READ () »
The small population of grey seals on the Baltic Sea has increased significantly, with hopes rising that they may start breeding soon, conservationists reported on Wednesday. READ () »
More news from France at thelocal.fr
More news from Norway at thelocal.no
More news from Sweden at thelocal.se
More news from Switzerland at thelocal.ch
See all ads | Join the Marketplace
949 jobs available
702 new jobs this week
127 new jobs today
Dating
Looking for your own blonde bombshell? Or is the strong, silent type more your
style? Find a German sweetheart here.
Weather
"After clouds comes clear weather," say the Germans. But what about after that? Find out in The Local's weather
section.
Blog
German stuff that's distracting us today.
Noticeboard
Whether you want to buy, sell, hire, announce or promote something, here's the place to do it - completely free of
charge.
Discuss
Debate the news, ask for advice, make friends - or just let off steam.
Register now for:
> Free use of noticeboard
> Special discounts
> Weekly news roundup
> Unlimited use of discuss
Your comments about this article:
No, no matter which way you cut it, the Iraq war was a major mistake, and this was already well known, judging by all the CIA analysis after the first Gulf War that counseled keeping Hussein in power to be a much better decision.
"The former Iraqi president may have been a bit of a rough diamond but . . . ."
HA! "Rough diamond." Please. Like Hitler was a rough diamond. How silly.
19:51 November 9, 2010 by Canadianhaggis
"Saddam was a totally controlled dictator"
Wrong. Again - He repeatedly ignored UN resolutions, including those pertaining to short-range missiles. The cowards and those with economic interests (France, Germany, Russia, China) refused to take action.
"Hans Martin Blix investigated all of Iraq and found no weapons chemical or otherwise in that country so there was no need of another invasion."
Before he was executed, Saddam admitted that, to gain leverage, he wanted the international community to believe that he had such weapons. Oops. That backfired. Regardless, anyone who thinks that this guy, in a few years, wouldn't have developed a chemical and/or nuclear arsenal has his head up his ass. One need only look to North Korea and Iran as proof of that.
"Saddam may have killed thousands of his own people"
Wrong. The Documental Centre for Human Rights in Iraq has compiled documentation on over 600,000 civilian executions in Iraq under Saddam.
"[S]ince the Americans invaded and have now left over a half a million civilian men women and children have been killed and is still going on."
Wrong again. It's around 100,000, and most of that is due to Al Queda knuckleheads. http://www.iraqbodycount.org/
"The country is in total ruin. . . ."
It is not. It is now a democratic country trying to get on its feet that no longer is a threat to the world. Further, normalcy is returning. By example, regular flights from Europe have begun.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/first-european-flight-puts-iraq-back-in-business-2121851.html
Getting back to the article, its interesting to see that Schröder has now all but called Dubya a liar, not that we needed any confirmation of that. The fact of the matter is that Schröder had the temerity to stand his ground and say what his nation and others thought, unlike the fawning evangelist in-chief sat in Whitehall.
For that he deserves credit not condemnation.
That leaves aside the trillions we will spend there and the amounts we will spend now on wounded Veteran's health care.
From the IraqBodyCount website: "The IBC site states: "it should be noted that many deaths will probably go unreported or unrecorded by officials and media." Other studies have found much higher death rates. And, remember, before the US invaded, there was no al-Qaeda in Iraq.
Bush is on his book tour to whitewash his own complicity in war crimes and to excuse the invasion based on "faulty intelligence". Three separate government agency investigations showed that there were no WMDs in Iraq at least 3 months prior to invasion. And, no, you can't compare a contained Saddam, facing a revolt against him both south and north and no-fly zones, to North Korea.
Bush is either lying or was so drunk/ hungover that Cheney could have led him to believe anything (and did).
Let it go.
This comment must be a joke. Either that or it is the belief of someone with
very little knowledge of the man.
I understand German apprehension where there have been more terrorist acts due to its proximity to the Middle East and its porous borders (EU). Add to that a plethora of refugees (Kosovo and other Islamic countries) and a large Mideastern population plus the problems Germany has witness not just within its own borders but in neighbouring countries and it stands to reason that if one wants to win an election give the squeaky wheel the grease!!
And the most glaring difference was Germany was in the midst of an election, which prior to his change in direction, Fernsehen Schroeder was on the verge of losing. Pretty pragmatic choice if you ask me. That is what Schroeder did.
Perhaps the most interesting tidbit is how the Democrat Party "stood behind" then President Bush only to insert the dagger in the next election over this very situation. How ironic!!
Schröder could have disagreed with American policy without making it his main campaign issue in 2002. I remember hearing Schröder say over and over, "Wir sagen Nein zum Krieg gegen den Irak!" It became a bully pulpit issue and rhetorical punching bag for him during the election. I can see how Bush would be annoyed -- especially if Schröder did promise his support earlier.
Incidentally, I heard Schröder say in 2005, "Wir sagen Nein zu einem Krieg gegen Iran!" and thought, "Who the hell is talking about a war against Iran?" Is he going to play this card again? And we going to fall for it twice?
Schroeder was only partially elected on the pacifist platform. His re-election was really related to his reaction to the floods in Dresden, much in the way Bush's non-reaction to Katrina stands as a metaphor for his entire crappy presidency.
US "war against terror" in Iraq is nothing more than a lie and Bush is the biggest liar and a war criminal. It is so asthonishing to most european and also some US citizen that US people doesn't get that.
Unfortunately the consequences are not important as long as he can show after couple of weeks and say 'The war is over, mission accomplished", what an arrogant!
I really just feel sorry for the innocents ppl died in both side.
Anybody who thinks differently has either spent the last few years living in a hole in the ground or is related to Bliar or Bush or both.
Bush had been looking for a 'legitimate' reason to invade Iraq and he got it with 9/11. OIl is the question (and the answer) but the figures unfortunately don't add up thanks mainly to corruption within the Iraq construction industry but also due to some verx lax accounting by the US army and private contractors like Blackwater
Last available figures for fiscal costs (per month) in Iraq (Feb 2010) were 5.5 billion US incidentally now outstripped by Afganistan (last figures available 6.7 billion US per month). Oil revenue accounts for nearly 95% of Iraqs income.
Note: Nearly 8,7billion US is still missing from the oil revenue accounts set up by the UN security council specifically to rebuild Iraqi infratructure.
Obvioulsly Hussein was a nasty piece of work but I think quite possibly the lesser of two evils. The country is in ruins, the body count continues and services don't work.
Shame I say on Bush AND the UN who folded like a deck of cards when pressured by the US administration.
What a mess!
This is probably the basis of Bush's claim. Schroeder is not in favor of the war because Iraq was not involved in the 9/11 attacks, but Bush kept saying it was so often that maybe he believed it. (Except for that one press conference where the reporter asked "Was Iraq involved in the 9/11 attacks?" and Bush answered "No.".)
And we all agree that Saddam Hussein was a very bad man, but that doesn't necessarily justify the war. If it did, there would be a coalition of the willing invading Iran, North Korea, Myanmar, Zimbabwe, Sudan, .... The list goes on and even the USA doesn't have enough bombs...
However, it is equally accurate to say that the case Bush presented as justification for his actions in Iraq was based entirely upon falsehoods, lies, and, at best, inaccuracies. Given that, the war was started with, perhaps, the best of intentions but for the worse of reasons.
Setting aside all of that, and I'm not suggesting we can or should, the second fact remains: Bush had no plan for what should be done after the government of Iraq fell. The complete disaster that ensued was not an accident. It was the result of poor planning and a complete lack of insight into the situation.
I did not support going into Iraq, but I never feared for winning the war. Being a Vietnam veteran, I feared for winning the peace, and once again, the US demonstrated a complete lack of understanding of another culture. The lies that provided the foundation for the war only made it worse.
wa
...oh yes they do!
(and whatever is lacking in individual conventional GBUs can be compensated for in sheer megatons per warhead)
Bush reacted properly when he sent the responsible government agency FEMA to the state to work on the disaster of Katrina. Fernsehen Schroeder would have been there for a good photo shoot.
Some facts:
Over the five years of President Bush's administration, Louisiana received more money for Corps civil works projects than any other state, about $1.9 billion versus $1.4 billion for California, even though its population is more than seven times larger.
Bush administration's funding requests for the key New Orleans flood-control projects for the past five years were higher than the Clinton administration's for its past five years.
There was actually a plan to upgrade the miles of levees to Cat 5 standards, but that was multiple billions of dollars and more importantly 30 years to complete.
Lt. Gen. Carl Strock, Chief of the Army Corps of Engineers, has said that in any event, more money would not have prevented the drowning of the city, since its levees were only designed to protect against a Category 3 storm.
This latest Gerhard Schröder matter shows that war criminal and mass murderer Bush continues to lie.
UK Deputy PM Mick Clegg recently told the House of Commons that the Iraq invasion was illegal. Former head of the top UK intelligence agency MI5, Dame Elizabeth Manningham-Buller, recently told the UK Chilcot Inquiry into the Iraq War that there were no Iraqi Weapons of Mass Destruction (as asserted by top UN weapons inspectors back in 2003) and that the Iraq invasion had increased the threat of terrorism.
It gets even worse. Scientific, engineering and intelligence experts provide compelling evidence that the US did 9-11 (indeed some say that the Israelis were also involved) (for details Google "US did 9-11").
20 years of US sanctions, war and occupation (1990-2010) have devastated Iraq with 4.4 million violent deaths or non-violent deaths from deprivation, 2.0 million under-5 infant deaths, 90% avoidable and due to US Coalition war crimes, 5-6 million refugees - an Iraqi Holocaust on a scale similar to that of the World War 2 Jewish Holocaust (5-6 million killed, 1 in 6 dying from deprivation) and an Iraqi Genocide as defined by Article 2 of the UN Genocide Convention (Google Iraqi Holocaust, Iraqi Genocide)..
Respected NGOs should set up a new Nuremberg War Crimes Tribunal of eminent scholars top try Bush Senior , Clinton, Bush Junior and Obama (US), Blair, Brown and Cameron (UK), Howard, Rudd and Gillard (Australia) and their associates for war crimes in Iraq and also in Afghanistan (post-invasion Afghan violent and non-violent avoidable deaths 4.9 million).
Don't make us come over there and pimp slap you bums.. again..
But one thing is clear that rather than invading Iraq which was defenceless, the crisis could have been solved with some other method rather than using the military and killing so many innocent soldiers,civilians and so on.