| Submit your comments on this article |
| Iraq-Jordan |
| Kofi wants 5,000 bodyguards |
| 2004-08-05 |
| EFL UNITED NATIONS — Secretary-General Annan believes it will take about 17 international troops to protect one U.N. worker. However, there are no volunteers for the job. Surprise, surprise. At a luncheon with the 15 ambassadors of the Security Council yesterday, Mr.Annan, according to participants at the lunch, said the U.N. would need more than 5,000 troops to protect an estimated staff of 300, if it ever decides to return to Iraq. Guess they're not coming back then. So sad. The number of troops cited by Mr. Annan sounded high even to some members of the secretary-general's team, who said that they had not heard that figure in previous assessments on the U.N. security need in Iraq. Saudi Arabia's idea for an Islamic force fizzled yesterday as Iraq's president, Ghazi al-Yawer, the Arab League, and Mr. Annan raised doubts about the practicalities of deploying such a force. Also, several key Arab and Muslim states, including Egypt, Pakistan, and Malaysia, explicitly declared they would not send any troops to Iraq. This leaves the U.N. no choice but to rely, at least for now,on the existing coalition in Iraq, with the 138,000 American troops at its core. Kofi, you really think we're gonna divert 5,000 troops just to cover your sorry ass? American envoy John Danforth told The New York Sun the American-led coalition would do the job "on an interim basis." "But our view is that this really is international responsibility." "The world needs a reminder of how effective blue helmets are, ASAP." At the U.N., the collapse of the Saudi option was met with a shrug. "If the Saudi idea is comes off, terrific," the British ambassador, Emyr Jones Parry, told the Sun. "If it doesn't, who else is going to provide a presence?" Indicating it was time to move on, he said there are negotiations with "a number of countries. Some have shown more interest than others." Get to work, Kofi. |
| Posted by:someone |
| #14 4000 to 5000 is a reasonable number - considering logistics and support for the actual security forces, and the fact that they need to secure their supply lines in some pretty bad parts of indian country (to support voting etc). |
| Posted by: Oldspook 2004-08-05 11:35:46 PM |
| #13 I don't believe the SS LAH was initially that big...this guy must have some ego... |
| Posted by: borgboy 2004-08-05 7:31:03 PM |
| #12 At a luncheon with the 15 ambassadors of the Security Council yesterday, Mr.Annan, according to participants at the lunch, said the U.N. would need more than 5,000 troops to protect an estimated staff of 300, if it ever decides to return to Iraq. It is always over lunch, isn't it? Bunch of piehole stuffers and not much else of substance. Hire Michael Moore to show you how it is done. Blechchchchch! |
| Posted by: Alaska Paul 2004-08-05 6:43:19 PM |
| #11 Ghana? That's where Freddy came from. |
| Posted by: someone 2004-08-05 5:05:37 PM |
| #10 i and probaly 99% of the public in the world didn't know and didn't care existed its good to know Brits are just as ignorant of geography as Americans. Perhaps you remember it as the Gold Coast, long part of the Empire on which the Sun never Set? For Yanks, its the country that Shirley Temple Black was embassador to. Its also a major source of chocolate. Ive known where it was since I was a teenager - but then I like geography. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-08-05 4:17:09 PM |
| #9 Give Kofi and his troops however many "bodyguards" they want, just so long as all of them are Rwandan. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2004-08-05 4:09:58 PM |
| #8 Shouldn't the UN workers be well protected in their ivory towers? |
| Posted by: yank 2004-08-05 4:05:59 PM |
| #7 that really is the best one yet 'Maybe Kofi should ask Ghana to send it's 5000 man army'. I'd love to be able to say that to kofi and see what his reaction is - where the fuck is that place anyway and why the fuck have we got a guy incharge of the world from a place i and probaly 99% of the public in the world didn't know and didn't care existed - hey great plan guys lets invade ghana for a laugh. Create a small force say 300 men and land them in ghana ,don't have them hurt anyone but i wonder if the UN route would be taken against them or would Kofi watch and frown again as he always has in the past when this time its his people in grave danger. make a good poll really 'How would Kofi react if Ghuna was invaded?'. |
| Posted by: Shep UK 2004-08-05 3:53:19 PM |
| #6 Yeah, think delivery and food tasters, given past UN indiscretions in Iraq... These Arabs hold grudges for centuries, Kofi. |
| Posted by: .com 2004-08-05 2:41:54 PM |
| #5 Have you thought this through, Kofi? This'll make it tough to get those dinner reservations at the five star restaurants. "Dinner for four" now becomes "dinner for sixty-eight". Even if you can get a reservation, try hiding that in an expense report. Let's rethink, Kofi. For the good of the Organization. |
| Posted by: tu3031 2004-08-05 2:29:52 PM |
| #4 Nope, no deliberately inflated numbers here... |
| Posted by: Raj 2004-08-05 2:18:08 PM |
| #3 The Iraqi’s need to take over the job themselves. Better to teach a man to fish than to allow the UN to eat his fish. |
| Posted by: B 2004-08-05 2:11:48 PM |
| #2 Maybe Kofi should ask Ghana to send it's 5000 man army. The numbers match perfectly and it covers LH's 3d world option. Plus, they'd be doing their favorite son a favor. |
| Posted by: GK 2004-08-05 2:10:55 PM |
| #1 get real - if the UN doesnt come in, than everything that goes wrong politically is going to be blamed on that fact - keeping them out isnt much of an option - not that they can do major harm, but as the poster says, diverting 5,000 troops isnt an option either. Hell, diverting the more realistic figure of 1000 troops isnt good. Thats why we still need some 3rd world, even muslim troops. As Ive said before. |
| Posted by: Liberalhawk 2004-08-05 2:00:16 PM |