Old: Spying on our friends. New: Using it to undermine peace

[G_j]

Wanting War
by Mark Engler
     Old: Spying on our friends. New: Using it to undermine peace.

http://www.tompaine.com/feature2.cfm/ID/10053

We now know, from disclosures in Britain and from senior officials at the United Nations, that United States and British intelligence aggressively spied on U.N. diplomats—from Kofi Annan and Hans Blix to allies from Mexico and Chile—to prevent any delay of an invasion of Iraq. As more nefarious details of the spying have come to light, it has become increasingly clear why U.S. news agencies that thus far have been uninterested in probing these revelations should take another look. The story raises important questions about whether the American public will have a chance to examine the full record of how our country was led to war.

For those who follow international diplomacy, it is no surprise to hear that spying takes place at the United Nations. But this fact should not obscure the bigger picture. In light of the president's crumbling case for the urgency of war in Iraq, many Americans would no doubt be interested to learn about underhanded efforts to stop allies from crafting a compromise U.N. resolution that would have given more time for arms inspections to proceed.

Last Thursday, former British cabinet member Clare Short came forward with charges that her government had secretly recorded Secretary General Kofi Annan's private conversations during the weeks of delicate negotiations before the invasion. On Saturday, U.N. arms inspector Hans Blix accused the proponents of war of spying on him as well, indicating that a Bush administration official had shown him photographs that only could have been taken by unscrupulous means.

These revelations are merely the latest pieces of bad news for President George Bush and Prime Minister Tony Blair, who face growing outrage about their treatment of allies like Mexico and Chile who disagreed with their militaristic stance on Iraq. Last March a whistle-blower from British intelligence leaked a memo to the London Observer showing that the Bush and Blair governments were secretly monitoring the six non-permanent members of the U.N. Security Council.
..more..

[sweetheart]

1. bull nuts, spying is normal and wise

The UN has many members who are NOT democracies and should not be
given equal votes with nations that are. On top of that, these
nations HAVE equal votes, that the UN ends up in difficult circumstances because of it.

Spying on the UN, allows US and british governments to better pursuade the gobal institution towards being wise, and not falling
in to divisive tactics of blocking by dictators.

Whilst i do not condone the iraq war in any sense, to NOT spy on
the UN would be a serious deriliction of duty in secret services.
Claire short has gone too far in this, and she is on a thin line
where one side is "whistleblower" and the other is "traitor".

Methinks traitor is closer to the mark, given her position (past
and present). Perhaps if she has left britain to be a citizen
elsewhere where nobody spies on the UN, then maybe, but as it
stands.. no.

It does not undermine peace to keep close monitoring on antidemocratic governments and their attempts to subert the interests
of democratic nations. You could say that bush is in power and
that makes all laws void... but were clinton the president still,
or gore perhaps, a cabinet minister who "outed" the CIA wiretaps
of UN delegations would likely face some rather serious charges.

[G_j]

2. I suppose bugging Hans Blix's mobile phone

serves our national security?

:shrug:

[sweetheart]

4. Yes it does

In all seriousness. The USA is running a global military empire
and was planning to invade iraq to control the middle east and
its oilfields. Everybody who ain't lying will confess to this
truth.

Given that FACT, all agents in the arena should be as well tracked
as possible, that the empire can predict and respond to actions
in the field. It is what the intelligence services are paid to do.

I am arguing against my own beliefs in this regard, as i find that
empire rather despicable, and the invasions of privacy rather "wrong headed". They unleased last-result-spying on friendly parties when
a war was avoidable. Were I president, it would never have happened... that is my REAL position.

Just "I" am not the USA imperial war machine. I can understand why
a war machine intent on invading in the spring before the weather
go too hot, who was using all agencies of multilateralism as a ruse
to further its goals and objectives... such a criminal effort would
need to monitor its friends and enemies very closely... and since
that criminal effort is one that *YOU* and most all DU participants
have paid to endorse via their taxes, surely we can understand how
the mafia needs to wiretap the FBI.

My point is that given the circumstances, the wiretaps make perfect
sense. Spying is never "fair". That is why spies get killed when
caught, and why we spend so many billions to bother. We really have
enemies from the past, who will not change their views of america
even if we had a mass hanging of all nazi-GOP party members.

If you were secretary of state in such a mess, even you would have
found hans blix's phone calls quite relevant.

[G_j]

5. well certainly I can understand the 'why'

in the context you describe, which is completely accurate btw. Just chalk it up as part of the overall crime, along with cluster bombs and forged documents.

[seabeyond]

3. to bad we didnt do

normal and wise in iraq before we invaded. then we would have known the embargos devestated the country and they had no wmbs adn certainly no nuclear

[sweetheart]

6. We knew that containment was working

Saddam has very clearly responded to containment policies over 3
decades. His behaviour was very predicatable and containable.

The war was avoidable and a terrible tragedy. As bad as saddam was,
it was not worth the extra 10,000 civilian iraqi deaths, let alone
the military ones.

Its too bad we gave saddam WMD. It's too bad eisenhower endorsed a
CIA overthrow of democratic Iran in 1956(?) and installed the shah,
as otherwise we'd not have arrived at the situtation to start with.
Its too bad we gave israel nuclear weapons without insisting they
join the "club". Its too bad we sold pakistan F16's and advanced
military weaponry given its non-democratic status.

The litany of mistakes and stupidity by the USA is impressive given
the great and wise that the country can afford advise from.

Military means (spying as well) should only be used in an absolute
absolute absolute last resort. There is no real question about the
military might of america... so going around proving it, does nothing
but weaking the real military power.

I have trained many years in martial arts (the arts of killing and
war). By learning the arts, what you really learn, is that you can
kill anyone easily... and once you realize that.... best not to use
it unless necessary, as the next time won't work so well given that
they'll be prepared. We've shown our hand in iraq.

Our military tactics are exposed and will not work again. Our
stupid attempt to recreate the viet-nam civil war scenario is also
a sign that the forces are berefit of intelligence, and not prepared
to fight a serious opponnt, or to defend the country.

Instead we bully and spy on weaklings. It is setting the nation
up for a big fall in the next REAL war. Likely the US will lose
10's of millions of civilians in the next war, most of our cities
and the nation state as we know it... and all that for the petty
behaviour of some criminal bosses who've stolen an election.

[G_j]

7. pretty dumb bunch alright

good points. :scared: