eCharcha.Com   Support eCharcha.Com. Click on sponsor ad to shop online!

Advertise Here

Go Back   eCharcha.Com > Current Affairs > Taaza Khabar - Current news

Notices

Taaza Khabar - Current news Discuss the latest news making waves...

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old March 4th, 2003, 10:04 AM
Ravi's Avatar
Ravi Ravi is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Liberal Oasis
Posts: 2,518
Ravi has a reputation beyond reputeRavi has a reputation beyond reputeRavi has a reputation beyond reputeRavi has a reputation beyond reputeRavi has a reputation beyond reputeRavi has a reputation beyond reputeRavi has a reputation beyond reputeRavi has a reputation beyond reputeRavi has a reputation beyond reputeRavi has a reputation beyond reputeRavi has a reputation beyond repute
Thumbs up U.S. Diplomat's Letter of Resignation

http://www.nytimes.com/2003/02/27/in...b73078931a0906


U.S. Diplomat's Letter of Resignation

February 27, 2003

The following is the text of John Brady Kiesling's letter of resignation to Secretary of State Colin L. Powell. Mr. Kiesling is a career diplomat who has served in United States embassies from Tel Aviv to Casablanca to Yerevan.

Dear Mr. Secretary:

I am writing you to submit my resignation from the Foreign Service of the United States and from my position as Political Counselor in U.S. Embassy Athens, effective March 7. I do so with a heavy heart. The baggage of my upbringing included a felt obligation to give something back to my country. Service as a U.S. diplomat was a dream job. I was paid to understand foreign languages and cultures, to seek out diplomats, politicians, scholars and journalists, and to persuade them that U.S. interests and theirs fundamentally coincided. My faith in my country and its values was the most powerful weapon in my diplomatic arsenal.

It is inevitable that during twenty years with the State Department I would become more sophisticated and cynical about the narrow and selfish bureaucratic motives that sometimes shaped our policies. Human nature is what it is, and I was rewarded and promoted for understanding human nature. But until this Administration it had been possible to believe that by upholding the policies of my president I was also upholding the interests of the American people and the world. I believe it no longer.

The policies we are now asked to advance are incompatible not only with American values but also with American interests. Our fervent pursuit of war with Iraq is driving us to squander the international legitimacy that has been America's most potent weapon of both offense and defense since the days of Woodrow Wilson. We have begun to dismantle the largest and most effective web of international relationships the world has ever known. Our current course will bring instability and danger, not security.

The sacrifice of global interests to domestic politics and to bureaucratic self-interest is nothing new, and it is certainly not a uniquely American problem. Still, we have not seen such systematic distortion of intelligence, such systematic manipulation of American opinion, since the war in Vietnam. The September 11 tragedy left us stronger than before, rallying around us a vast international coalition to cooperate for the first time in a systematic way against the threat of terrorism. But rather than take credit for those successes and build on them, this Administration has chosen to make terrorism a domestic political tool, enlisting a scattered and largely defeated Al Qaeda as its bureaucratic ally. We spread disproportionate terror and confusion in the public mind, arbitrarily linking the unrelated problems of terrorism and Iraq. The result, and perhaps the motive, is to justify a vast misallocation of shrinking public wealth to the military and to weaken the safeguards that protect American citizens from the heavy hand of government. September 11 did not do as much damage to the fabric of American society as we seem determined to so to ourselves. Is the Russia of the late Romanovs really our model, a selfish, superstitious empire thrashing toward self-destruction in the name of a doomed status quo?

We should ask ourselves why we have failed to persuade more of the world that a war with Iraq is necessary. We have over the past two years done too much to assert to our world partners that narrow and mercenary U.S. interests override the cherished values of our partners. Even where our aims were not in question, our consistency is at issue. The model of Afghanistan is little comfort to allies wondering on what basis we plan to rebuild the Middle East, and in whose image and interests. Have we indeed become blind, as Russia is blind in Chechnya, as Israel is blind in the Occupied Territories, to our own advice, that overwhelming military power is not the answer to terrorism? After the shambles of post-war Iraq joins the shambles in Grozny and Ramallah, it will be a brave foreigner who forms ranks with Micronesia to follow where we lead.

We have a coalition still, a good one. The loyalty of many of our friends is impressive, a tribute to American moral capital built up over a century. But our closest allies are persuaded less that war is justified than that it would be perilous to allow the U.S. to drift into complete solipsism. Loyalty should be reciprocal. Why does our President condone the swaggering and contemptuous approach to our friends and allies this Administration is fostering, including among its most senior officials. Has "oderint dum metuant" really become our motto?

I urge you to listen to America's friends around the world. Even here in Greece, purported hotbed of European anti-Americanism, we have more and closer friends than the American newspaper reader can possibly imagine. Even when they complain about American arrogance, Greeks know that the world is a difficult and dangerous place, and they want a strong international system, with the U.S. and EU in close partnership. When our friends are afraid of us rather than for us, it is time to worry. And now they are afraid. Who will tell them convincingly that the United States is as it was, a beacon of liberty, security, and justice for the planet?

Mr. Secretary, I have enormous respect for your character and ability. You have preserved more international credibility for us than our policy deserves, and salvaged something positive from the excesses of an ideological and self-serving Administration. But your loyalty to the President goes too far. We are straining beyond its limits an international system we built with such toil and treasure, a web of laws, treaties, organizations, and shared values that sets limits on our foes far more effectively than it ever constrained America's ability to defend its interests.

I am resigning because I have tried and failed to reconcile my conscience with my ability to represent the current U.S. Administration. I have confidence that our democratic process is ultimately self-correcting, and hope that in a small way I can contribute from outside to shaping policies that better serve the security and prosperity of the American people and the world we share.
__________________
() => new Beer();

Last edited by Ravi; March 4th, 2003 at 10:06 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old March 4th, 2003, 01:08 PM
Big-G's Avatar
Big-G Big-G is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Mar 2001
Posts: 11,578
Big-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud ofBig-G has much to be proud of
Thumbs up

Amazing!!!

I wonder why no one responded to this thread.

By the way, I think I know why certain desis are pro-war. That's cos they have nothing to lose. None of their near-dear ones are in the US army, nor are they in Iraq. They got nothing at stake.
__________________
Having a smoking section in a restaurant is like having a pissing section in a pool!
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old March 4th, 2003, 01:47 PM
Shringarey Shringarey is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 2,842
Shringarey has a reputation beyond reputeShringarey has a reputation beyond reputeShringarey has a reputation beyond reputeShringarey has a reputation beyond reputeShringarey has a reputation beyond reputeShringarey has a reputation beyond reputeShringarey has a reputation beyond reputeShringarey has a reputation beyond reputeShringarey has a reputation beyond reputeShringarey has a reputation beyond reputeShringarey has a reputation beyond repute
On the day after Pearl Harbor, ex-President Herbert Hoover wrote this - (to associates) -

"You and I know that this continuous putting pins in rattlesnakes finally got this country bitten."
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old March 5th, 2003, 12:15 AM
Netra's Avatar
Netra Netra is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Posts: 6,661
Netra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally posted by Big-G
Amazing!!!

I wonder why no one responded to this thread.

By the way, I think I know why certain desis are pro-war. That's cos they have nothing to lose. None of their near-dear ones are in the US army, nor are they in Iraq. They got nothing at stake.
Not only that, Biggie. Saddam Hussein happens to be a Muslim and SOME desis want all Muslims exterminated. I don't see the difference between such desis and jehadis. Both are trying to cleanse the planet. The difference is that whereas jehadis will undertake to do the work themselves, their desi counterpart will want America to do the job.

P.S. By Desis I meant the Desis living in India. Don't want Sunit to think I was referring to him. Sunit, rightly or wrongly, believes what Bush and his cronies are saying. There is no religious angle to it.

Last edited by Netra; March 5th, 2003 at 01:56 AM.
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old March 5th, 2003, 04:29 AM
Madhav Madhav is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 564
Madhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally posted by Netra
Not only that, Biggie. Saddam Hussein happens to be a Muslim and SOME desis want all Muslims exterminated. I don't see the difference between such desis and jehadis. Both are trying to cleanse the planet. The difference is that whereas jehadis will undertake to do the work themselves, their desi counterpart will want America to do the job.

P.S. By Desis I meant the Desis living in India. Don't want Sunit to think I was referring to him. Sunit, rightly or wrongly, believes what Bush and his cronies are saying. There is no religious angle to it.

LOL. Netra, kya analysis hai . Pata bhi nahin chal raha ki ishara kiski taraf kar rahi ho

In reality,
SOME desis are always confused.
But remaining desis know that --Iraq is far away .If they have to weep over civilian casualiteis they have thier hands full. Hindus are being cleansed from Kashmir in the name of Freedom Struggle. Hindus are being opressed in bangladesh . Terrorism has made life insecure, maderch0d type of historians are busy abusing Savarkar whie keeping quite about rajiv gandhi. Kiilers of Godra cant still be arrested without protests from 'minority community' . Tableegh is spreading..so are madarsas. Secularism has come to mean defence of illigal imigration, madarsa culture, 'defence comittees for parliment attack accused" and boycotting Sarsawti Vandana .

Remaining desis are more concerned wheather we may, under goebbles like propaganda , loose the will to fight against terrorism and accept partition of india as a recurring phenomenon .More things to worry about than obsession with "injustice to iraq"
__________________
Madhav
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old March 5th, 2003, 04:39 AM
Netra's Avatar
Netra Netra is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Posts: 6,661
Netra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant future
Agreed that the Hindu Pandits are suffering in the hands of Kashmiri terrorists and the Bangla Deshi Hindus are not in a good situation either. But does it mean that Iraqis - jinka ees se kuchh bhi lena dena nahin, should be exterminated just because they are Muslims?

And the partition was just a proposal. I had given both, the pros and the cons for such an action. If people prefer to look only at the pros, its their business.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old March 5th, 2003, 04:52 AM
Madhav Madhav is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 564
Madhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally posted by Netra
Agreed that the Hindu Pandits are suffering in the hands of Kashmiri terrorists and the Bangla Deshi Hindus are not in a good situation either. But does it mean that Iraqis - jinka ees se kuchh bhi lena dena nahin, should be exterminated just because they are Muslims?

And the partition was just a proposal. I had given both, the pros and the cons for such an action. If people prefer to look only at the pros, its their business.
Netra , its not personal .

Who said Iraqis are being exterminated, even afghanis were not.

Moreover Desis have other concerns closer home , cant be obsessed with "alleged injustice to iraq (as some sees it) which MAY be commited in future "


USA is giving option to Saddam to leave power and save war . it is Saddam who wants to stck to power at the cost of iraqi casualities in a possible war .
And yes Saddam treid to kill Bush Sr.

(for record --Saddam is not a muslim fanatic , personally i had no problem if he kept kuwait)
__________________
Madhav
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old March 5th, 2003, 05:00 AM
Netra's Avatar
Netra Netra is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Posts: 6,661
Netra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally posted by Madhav
Netra , its not personal .


USA is giving option to Saddam to leave power and save war . it is Saddam who wants to stck to power at the cost of iraqi casualities in a possible war .
And yes Saddam treid to kill Bush Sr.

(for record --Saddam is not a muslim fanatic , personally i had no problem if he kept kuwait)
But that's exactly my point. Who is USofA to say whether Saddam should or should not stay in power? Do they consider themselves the führer of the world?

About Saddam trying to kill pop Bush. So the whole attack on Iraq comes as an attack for personal reasons and nothing to do with global war on terrorism. If as you say Saddam tried to kill Bush sr. why wasn't a case lodged in the international court of justice? Was there any proof as to his culpability? And if he did try to kill Pop Bush, it was not during his time as a President of USofA. So Bush jr. has no business to use the tax payer's money to seek personal vendetta.
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old March 5th, 2003, 05:14 AM
Madhav Madhav is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 564
Madhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally posted by Netra
But that's exactly my point. Who is USofA to say whether Saddam should or should not stay in power? Do they consider themselves the führer of the world?

About Saddam trying to kill pop Bush. So the whole attack on Iraq comes as an attack for personal reasons and nothing to do with global war on terrorism. If as you say Saddam tried to kill Bush sr. why wasn't a case lodged in the international court of justice? Was there any proof as to his culpability? And if he did try to kill Pop Bush, it was not during his time as a President of USofA. So Bush jr. has no business to use the tax payer's money to seek personal vendetta.
Saddam treid to kill papa bush for his actions as President of USA. He was trying to threaten the freedom of Office of USA's President .


If A kills Daddy of B , will police not chase A , arrest him ,prosecute him , hang him/ jail him. And if A evades arrest by force , will he not be killed in police encounter. Will police forward a bill to B saying "buddy why do you think taxpayers money be wasted to bring killer of your dad to book? it was all personal"

When attacked on parliament did we go to internatinal court of justie against pakistan?? by your logic USA should have gone to court of justice against OBL also instead of atacking Afghanistan.
__________________
Madhav
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old March 5th, 2003, 05:47 AM
Netra's Avatar
Netra Netra is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Posts: 6,661
Netra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally posted by Madhav
Saddam treid to kill papa bush for his actions as President of USA. He was trying to threaten the freedom of Office of USA's President .


If A kills Daddy of B , will police not chase A , arrest him ,prosecute him , hang him/ jail him. And if A evades arrest by force , will he not be killed in police encounter. Will police forward a bill to B saying "buddy why do you think taxpayers money be wasted to bring killer of your dad to book? it was all personal"

When attacked on parliament did we go to internatinal court of justie against pakistan?? by your logic USA should have gone to court of justice against OBL also instead of atacking Afghanistan.
Saddam's attack on Pop Bush came when he was NOT the President of USofA.

Point 2: Its one thing if police are chasing B for the murder of A. But totally another if police are told that B is a terrorist and should be booked under POTA. If son Bush is after Saddam for the attempted murder of his dad, he should come out and say so instead of bulshitting his people about Saddam's links with Al-Qaeda

Point 3: Did India go attacking Sri Lanka because the Tamilian Tigers were responsible for the killing of Rajeev Gandhi? Would US have permitted it? Was Indonesia attacked because of the terrorist attacks which took place.
Reply With Quote
  #11  
Old March 5th, 2003, 06:15 AM
Madhav Madhav is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 564
Madhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally posted by Netra
Saddam's attack on Pop Bush came when he was NOT the President of USofA.

Point 2: Its one thing if police are chasing B for the murder of A. But totally another if police are told that B is a terrorist and should be booked under POTA. If son Bush is after Saddam for the attempted murder of his dad, he should come out and say so instead of bulshitting his people about Saddam's links with Al-Qaeda

Point 3: Did India go attacking Sri Lanka because the Tamilian Tigers were responsible for the killing of Rajeev Gandhi? Would US have permitted it? Was Indonesia attacked because of the terrorist attacks which took place.
If Prabhakaran was given State protection or if he himself became PM of lanka , india had a case of attacking Lanka .

OBL was given state protection.
saddam is Prez himself .
__________________
Madhav
Reply With Quote
  #12  
Old March 5th, 2003, 06:17 AM
Netra's Avatar
Netra Netra is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Posts: 6,661
Netra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally posted by Madhav
If Prabhakaran was given State protection or if he himself became PM of lanka , india had a case of attacking Lanka .

OBL was given state protection.
saddam is Prez himself .
Concede to the points. What about points 1 and 2, especially 2.
Reply With Quote
  #13  
Old March 5th, 2003, 06:22 AM
Madhav Madhav is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 564
Madhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally posted by Netra
Concede to the points. What about points 1 and 2, especially 2.
Point 2 --answer is-- anybody killing trying to kil PM will be branded a terrorsist, even in india.
__________________
Madhav
Reply With Quote
  #14  
Old March 5th, 2003, 06:30 AM
Netra's Avatar
Netra Netra is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Geneva, Switzerland
Posts: 6,661
Netra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant futureNetra has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally posted by Madhav
Point 2 --answer is-- anybody killing trying to kil PM will be branded a terrorsist, even in india.
We are not talking about a PM but an ex-PM or Pres. That person happens to be like you and me. Nothing special. So why is his murder considered an act of terrorism whereas the murder of another citizen considered as a normal assassination?

You also haven't answered as to why Bush is not giving the attempted assassination as the reason for the Iraqi attack.
Reply With Quote
  #15  
Old March 5th, 2003, 06:34 AM
Madhav Madhav is offline
Senior eCharchan
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Mumbai
Posts: 564
Madhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant futureMadhav has a brilliant future
Quote:
Originally posted by Netra
We are not talking about a PM but an ex-PM or Pres. That person happens to be like you and me. Nothing special. So why is his murder considered an act of terrorism whereas the murder of another citizen considered as a normal assassination?

You also haven't answered as to why Bush is not giving the attempted assassination as the reason for the Iraqi attack.
papa bush was not ordinary citizen
bush said it in two press conferances ....
Bush also believs, and he is at elast partially right, that becuse of this blood feud, saddam is likely to help anti-US terrorists so it has terrorism angle also
__________________
Madhav
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Karunanidhi renews resignation threat over Sri Lanka natkhat Indian Politics 0 January 23rd, 2009 05:03 PM
Letter to primeminister clik Indian Politics 9 December 3rd, 2008 03:58 AM
Let me understand this letter aashoo Friday Special 2 June 15th, 2007 01:53 PM
Poetic Resignation Cooldude Jobs 1 January 14th, 2006 12:25 PM
Modi gives in, submits his resignation Zorro Taaza Khabar - Current news 28 April 12th, 2002 01:46 PM


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Site Copyright © eCharcha.Com 2000-2012.