Wolfowitz nominated by Bush to head World Bank

Link from MSNBC: http://msnbc.msn.com/id/7218202/

World reacts with skepticism to Wolfowitz World Bank nod

The Associated Press

Updated: 9:01 a.m. ET March 17, 2005

PARIS - Around the world, the notion of U.S. Deputy Defense Secretary Paul Wolfowitz leading the World Bank met with reactions that ranged mainly from official reserve to outright denunciation, but there was some support.

Wolfowitz, nominated Wednesday by President Bush, is widely seen as a key instigator in the U.S. push to topple Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein. International organizations worried about the nominee’s hawkish politics and questioned whether he is right for the job.

Bush, who has sought to mend ties with European allies that opposed the Iraq war, called French President Jacques Chirac to tell him the news.

Chirac, one of the staunchest critics of the war, “took note of this candidacy,” his office said, adding that “France would examine it in the spirit of friendship between France and United States and with an eye on the capital mission of the World Bank to the service of development.”

Japan, a U.S. ally in the Iraq war, gave its support to Bush’s choice.

The Japanese Foreign Ministry said in a statement that Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi expressed support for Wolfowitz in a phone conversation with his U.S. counterpart.

Chief Cabinet Secretary Hiroyuki Hosoda lavished praise on Wolfowitz. “He’s a great person and he is well-versed in issues regarding development in Asia,” Hosoda told reporters. “Japan would like to support Mr. Wolfowitz.”

One of those most vocally opposed to the idea was U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan’s top poverty adviser.

“It’s time for other candidates to come forward that have experience in development,” Professor Jeffrey Sachs, director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University and an Annan adviser, said in a speech to the U.N. Economic and Social Council.

“This is a position on which hundreds of millions of people depend for their lives,” he said. “Let’s have a proper leadership of professionalism.” The United Nations had no comment.

Chorus of criticism

Development and anti-poverty groups joined the chorus of criticism.

“As well as lacking any relevant experience, he is a deeply divisive figure who is unlikely to move the bank toward a more pro-poor agenda,” said Patrick Watt, policy officer at British charity Action Aid.

Dave Timms, spokesman for London-based World Development Network, called it a “terrifying appointment” that highlighted a lack of democracy in major lending institutions. A European traditionally heads the International Monetary fund, while an American takes the helm at the World Bank.

“You can’t have a situation where rich countries lecture developing countries about democracy and then aren’t prepared to exercise democracy in this kind of appointment.”

Sweden’s minister of International Development Cooperation Carin Jaemtin, said she was “very skeptical” with the choice, telling Swedish news agency TT, she had hoped for a candidate who would carry out the policies of outgoing bank president James Wolfensohn.

Wolfowitz, 61, was among the most forceful of those in the Bush administration in arguing that Saddam had weapons of mass destruction, and he had predicted that Americans would be welcomed as liberators rather than occupiers once they toppled Saddam’s government.

Wolfowitz’ reputation as a hard-liner made it difficult to cheer his nomination to head the World Bank, said Nigerian newspaper columnist Pini Jason. He said Wolfowitz’s selection could be a “bad omen” for the Third World.

“It is very likely that George Bush will want to link World Bank policies to his own vision of democratizing the world: Democracy according to the White House,” said Jason, who writes for The Vanguard newspaper.

George Bush is the man

Yet another example of Bush promoting his friends instead of putting qualified people into the proper positions.

This all makes no sense.

i heard the foreigners at work discussing this yesterday.

they were pretty damn troubled by it.

scary shit. indeed.

out un ambassador, now the world bank, i wonder whats next.

:nope:

No nomination has ever been refused, so this is a done deal.

Being a loyal american war architect will land you the seat as president of the world bank. The same thing happened with Robert McNamera.

What the fuck is Bush smoking, Wolfwitz has no expriance outside of warfare. The fucks he gunna do, plan military stratagies to defeat the evil bank robbers? :huh2:

the meak shall inheret the earth.

i'd violate wolfowitz.

You missed the part where he fucks you up because you cant fight worth shit.

how did you come up with that bob!? that's fucking brilliant!

and all this time i thought you were just some dipshit with

an obvious case of small dick syndrome.

Originally posted by bobthebuilder@Mar 17 2005, 11:50 AM

Wolfwitz has no expriance outside of warfare. The fucks he gunna do, plan military stratagies to defeat the evil bank robbers?

Quoted post

hey mr. phd, do some elementary research.

No, its the DIck in your mouth syndrome. He has over 35 years of military expiriance, you have a fucking didlo. Think about it "id violate him" My ass. He would mop the floor with your ass.

Get out of my office.

hahaha, wow, you're a bigger fucking retard than i thought.

congratulations, you just won the small dicked retard award.

i'd have to agree, bob now seems like a grown man who should be standing in a schoolyard with a bunch of thirdgraders fighting over a limp fruit roll up.

and i'm not sure how the military strategizing experience would make him a good fighter?

he is just the type of dipshit that has sat back and planned wars that affected millions of people, both at home and abroad, but has NEVER gotten his hands dirty.

Originally posted by symbols@Mar 18 2005, 10:10 AM

i'd have to agree, bob now seems like a grown man who should be standing in a schoolyard with a bunch of thirdgraders fighting over a limp fruit roll up.

 

 

and i'm not sure how the military strategizing experience would make him a good fighter?

he is just the type of dipshit that has sat back and planned wars that affected millions of people, both at home and abroad, but has NEVER gotten his hands dirty.

Quoted post

He wasnt a fucking general from the start you retards.

Yes, im acting like the little kid. "I would violiate him"

your ignorance is almost overwhelming.

a general?

hahahaa dude has never even been a soldier.

he is a war architect, NOT a warrior.

he's what they call an "armchair general"

never heard the term?

i guess grunt don't care who's sending them off to die for a pack of lies.

guy got a ton of his experience working in higher education.

hahaha

you better do some research before you try to debate asshole.

oh and, when you lower yourself to the level of what you are railing against, you invalidate your point

cronyism...

sick of it

War Is A Racket

By General Smedley Butler, USMC

(Speech originally-delivered in 1933)

8-21-2

War is just a racket. A racket is best described, I believe, as something that is not what it seems to the majority of people. Only a small inside group knows what it is about. It is conducted for the benefit of the very few at the expense of the masses.

I believe in adequate defense at the coastline and nothing else. If a nation comes over here to fight, then we'll fight. The trouble with America is that when the dollar only earns six percent over here, then it gets restless and goes overseas to get 100 percent. Then the flag follows the dollar and the soldiers follow the flag.

I wouldn't go to war again as I have done to protect some lousy investment of the bankers. There are only two things we should fight for. One is the defense of our homes, and the other is the Bill of Rights. War for any other reason is simply a racket.

There isn't a trick in the racketeering bag that the military gang is blind to. It has its "finger men" to point out enemies, its "muscle men" to destroy enemies, its "brain men" to plan war preparations, and a "Big Boss" Super-Nationalistic-Capitalism.

It may seem off for me, a military man, to adopt such a comparison. Truthfulness compels me to. I spent thirty-three years and four months in active military service as a member of this country's most agile military force, the Marine Corps. I served in all commissioned ranks from Second Lieutenant to Major-General. And during that period, I spent most of my time being a high-class muscle-man for Big Business, for Wall Street, and for the Bankers. In short, I was a racketeer, a gangster for capitalism.

I suspected I was just part of a racket at the time. Now I am sure of it. Like all the members of the military profession, I never had a thought of my own until I left the service. My mental faculties remained in suspended animation while I obeyed the orders of higher-ups. This is typical with everyone in the military service.

(Speech originally-delivered in 1933)

Originally posted by Æ°@Mar 17 2005, 03:19 PM

Being a loyal american war architect will land you the seat as president of the world bank.

Quoted post

And thats doing a horrible job too.

Very scary.

villain: that is a great post, thank you.

*oops, wrong thread

Originally posted by ghost citizen@Mar 22 2005, 08:26 AM

villain: that is a great post, thank you.

Quoted post

Originally posted by bigpoppa.k+Mar 19 2005, 07:14 PM--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (bigpoppa.k - Mar 19 2005, 07:14 PM)</div><div class='quotemain'><!--QuoteBegin-Æ°@Mar 17 2005, 03:19 PM

Being a loyal american war architect will land you the seat as president of the world bank.

Quoted post

And thats doing a horrible job too.

Very scary.

[/b]

I'll second that. Running the world bank pretty much means waging economic warfare against the world, mostly the poor third world.

any one see another depression in the works ????

liquidation of everything will do the rich well .... they will own more for less ..... the banks owning any house not paid off in full.

scary stuff indeed !!!