Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon (L) is escorted by Israeli Ambassador Danny Ayalon (R) and Ayalon's wife, Ann, as he arrives at Andrews Air Force Base, Maryland, Oct. 15, 2002. Sharon arrived in Washington Tuesday for talks with President Bush, which are expected to focus on setting ground rules for Israel before and during a possible U.S. war on Iraq. Photo by Mike Theiler/Reuters

little George meets with Sharon, ignores Arafat and can't understand why the Arab/Muslims distrust the U S

little George is an arrogant war monger who is without question one of the greatest impediments to peace in the world.  

The Middle East problem can be solved easily if the United States pushes it.  The United States controls Israel.  Cut off the funding from the U S and Israel collapses.  Consequently, little George can control Sharon and demand peace in the Middle East.

But this is not the agenda.  The agenda is to secure the oil in the Middle East for the U S.  If little George can take over Iraq, then the oil problems of the U S are solved long into the future.  And if the U S and England are the only two countries to attack Iraq, then I guess they will be the only two to share in the oil there.

The European Union is coming together and eventually will gain a significant presence on the international stage. The coming together of all of Europe will not rival the United States (because it would be a union of nations as opposed to a union of states and so the power of the E U federalist structure would not be as great) but it will assert a significant influence in world affairs.

There is no doubt that little George wants to continue to solidify the power of the United States in world affairs.  At the present we have no rivals but our dominance is greatly dependent on oil.  Oil is the life blood of the United States economy.  There is no denying this.

The problem is how do you secure the oil and at the same time promote peace in the world.  This is a problem that little George is not intellectually or morally qualified to solve.  little George is too arrogant to consider that the world has changed and that it demands justice and that the real security of the future of the U S has to do with long term economic integration with the world and not the exploitation of it.  

The long run future has to do with economic growth while maintaining a sustainable environment.  little George and his close buddies are interested in exploiting the world's oil reserves. The cover story is for the security of the U S.  The reality is that little George and his buddies want to be the richest men in the world.  little George wants to leave the presidency as the King of Oil.  Daddy George made $500 million last year brokering oil contracts.

Don't look for little George to follow in the steps of Jimmy Carter after he leaves office.  Look for little George to ride around the world like a king.  Unless of course the whole world erupts into war and terror.

We need to consider what will happen to the value of oil if Indonesia and the Middle East are bogged down in religious wars of terrorism.  

Secure the oil in Iraq and then the U S becomes a member of OPEC. Right?  Secure the oil in Iraq then create chaos in the other oil producing nations and make an unlimited amount of money on the world oil market.

Meanwhile people starve, go without medical care, the environment continues to deteriorate, human rights are ignored.  

The office of president of the United States affords its occupant the opportunity to bring about sweeping and lasting change to the world.  It allows the opportunity to create a legacy that spans millennium as opposed to decades. 

little George is a decades man.  In the end, like everyone else, he dies.  And historians will have trouble remembering what Daddy George did and what little George did.

John WorldPeace
October 16,  2002

Bush to urge less tension in Mideast

Talks with Sharon to focus on Israeli security if Iraq attacks

Copyright 2002 Houston Chronicle Washington Bureau WASHINGTON -- President Bush will urge Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon today to ease tensions with Arab neighbors as the two address possible consequences for Israel of a war with Iraq.

"The president is looking forward to talking to the prime minister about the fundamental issues involving peace in the Middle East between Israel and the Palestinians," said White House spokesman Ari Fleischer.

But with a war possibly looming between the United States and Iraq, Israel's bitter enemy, the two leaders also will discuss defending Israeli cities against missile attacks, experts said. And Bush may also raise the issue of what the United States would expect from Israel if Saddam Hussein launched Scud missiles at Tel Aviv or Jerusalem.

Fleischer said it was "premature" for the leaders to discuss specifics about a possible war with Iraq. Bush "has not made any decisions about anything military," he said.

But Fleischer added, "In all cases, we have close consultations with all our friends in the region as events move forward."

Israeli officials have vowed to respond with swift strikes if Iraq fires missiles at Israeli cities as part of a war with a U.S.-led coalition.

In 1991, Israel agreed to President Bush's request not to respond to Scud attacks on its cities during Operation Desert Storm to avoid rupturing an anti-Iraq coalition that included many Muslim nations.

But it was not clear if Israel would be asked to show similar restraint if another war with Iraq led to more Scud attacks.

Fleischer said Tuesday that consultations with Israel and other nations such as Saudi Arabia, which was also targeted by Saddam's Scuds in 1991, were ongoing.

A Bush foreign policy official said, "We know Iraq has an aggressive invading regime so it would be expected that there will be talks with the Israelis about how to reduce the threat of attacks against that country."

Edward Djerejian, former ambassador to Israel and Syria, said the Bush-Sharon meeting will focus on several issues critical to stability in the region.

"This meeting comes at a very sensitive time of intense policy formulation," said Djerejian, director of the Baker Institute for Public Policy at Rice University. "The region is obviously in a troubled state."

Djerejian and other experts said Bush will express concern that Israel has not honored its pledge to ease a blockade of Palestinian towns in the occupied territories on the West Bank.

Last week the Bush administration sent Israel a pointed message expressing disappointment about the blockades, and Israel's failure to turn over to the Palestinian Authority taxes collected on behalf of Palestinian workers.

Israeli officials said after a Sunday Cabinet meeting that lifting restrictions on Palestinians could lead to a renewal of suicide bombings.

The Bush-Sharon meeting will also be an opportunity for both sides to address tensions accumulating from Sharon's aggressive reactions to suicide bombings.

"This will be more an effort to make sure some mild strains that have been out there recently between the White House and Sharon don't fester," said Judith Kipper, an analyst with the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington.

Arab-American leaders said they were disappointed that Bush will continue a series of several meetings with Sharon while he has yet to meet with any Palestinian leader.

James Zogby, president of the Arab American Institute, said from the Arab perspective the Sharon visit only highlights an increasingly biased U.S. policy in the Middle East.

"If this meeting is simply designed to get the Israelis to calm things down with the Palestinians so the United States can go to war with Iraq, I don't think there is any reason for a meeting," Zogby said.

"It is not lost on people in the Arab world that there have been a handful of meetings with one side and no meetings with the other side," he said. "This administration has already tested the limits of what Arab nations can ingest."

Bush will also seek assurances from Sharon that a dispute with Lebanon on Israel's northern border will not flare into conflict, greatly complicating efforts to get some Arab backing or at least Arab neutrality for military strikes against Iraq, experts said.

Israel and Lebanon have quarreled over a Lebanese plan to increase the amount of water pumped from the Wazzani River for use by villages in southern Lebanon. The river eventually flows into the Jordan River and then south to the Sea of Galilee in Israel.

Seeking to avert a "water war," the United States sent an assessment team to the region in September.

But uppermost in Sharon's mind is likely to be Israel's security in the event of war with Iraq, experts said.

During the 1991 Gulf War, 39 Scuds were fired toward Israel, killing a number of civilians.

By George Parker in Brussels 

Published: October 16 2002 5:00 | Last Updated: October 16 2002 5:00  FT.com

Javier Solana, the EU's foreign policy chief, warned yesterday that the creation of a powerful new EU president was not a "panacea" to solving the problem of Europe's lack of clout on the world stage.

France and Britain are among the countries which want to create a high profile president of the EU council to give European policy more visibility, and to open doors to the White House.

But Mr Solana said the problems facing EU foreign policy went deeper than personalities and titles.

"If this new architecture is just about empowering somebody to talk to President Bush - well there should be better arguments than that," Mr Solana said.

Mr Solana said foreign policy needed to be revamped across the board, and that nobody should imagine that having an EU president would necessarily create a single voice.

"No matter who the EU president was, the prime ministers and presidents of member states will still want to go to Washington to see President Bush," he said.

Mr Solana told a working group in the convention on the future of Europe that the EU needed more political will, more continuity and more money to create a successful foreign policy.

He said the current rotating six-month EU presidency was destabilising and said his €35m ($34.8m, £22m) budget was "laughable".

"To make but a few random comparisons, the Community disposes of €12m to finance twinning of European cities and the European parliament will spend €29m on publications and information."

Separately, the plan for an EU council president has been strongly attacked by Pascal Lamy, the EU trade commissioner, who said it would cause serious damage to the union.

Speaking in Brussels, he said: "This change would certainly be to the detriment of the Commission, which would be transformed into an administration serving the council," he said.

"Only the Commission - because it is pluralistic in terms of nationality, culture and political allegiances - can hope to represent the general interest," he said.

His decision to speak out reflects growing fears in the Commission that it is losing the argument over the proposed new EU president.

Deep divisions among the 20 EU commissioners make it hard to put forward a collective position, while smaller countries which dislike the plan have failed to present a united front.

Meanwhile, Britain yesterday published its version of a draft EU constitution, with ministers claiming they were "winning the battle of ideas" over the future of Europe.

Peter Hain, Europe minister, said the draft constitution, drawn up by Prof Alan Dashwood of Cambridge University, enshrined Britain's view that Europe should develop as "a union of sovereign states".

How can we manifest peace on earth if we do not include everyone (all races, all nations, all religions, both sexes) in our vision of Peace?

The WorldPeace Sign

To the John WorldPeace Galleries Page

To the WorldPeace Peace Page