Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Schroeder's Foolish Demand for a Veto...A roundup of German papers.
Spiegel Online ^ | December 10, 2004 | German Papers

Posted on 12/10/2004 12:23:06 PM PST by Cutterjohnmhb

The German chancellor's Thursday demand for veto powers in an enlarged United Nations Security Council is proving a tough sell. German papers call him everything from stupid to conniving. All, however, agree that he has no chance of success.

It's amazing that one simple sentence from German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder can cause so much ink to be spilled. Here's the sentence: "New permanent members of an expanded United Nations Security Council should have the same veto rights as those who currently hold seats." Seems innocuous enough, right? It's not. It was the first time that Schroeder had mentioned the idea of Germany being granted a veto right as part of potential UN reforms. And it is causing a bit of a ruckus. The opposition Christian Democrats already jumped on Schroeder's case on Thursday, saying that the Chancellor's demands make a permanent German council seat even less likely than before. On Friday, the press takes over.

(Excerpt) Read more at service.spiegel.de ...


TOPICS: Editorial; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; Germany; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: schroeder; un; unreform; veto
I love the comment Frankfurter Allgemeine Zeitung has at the bottom of the page. On target as usual.
1 posted on 12/10/2004 12:23:06 PM PST by Cutterjohnmhb
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Cutterjohnmhb

Yeah, the Chancellor is a bufoon, but there is only one UN reform that will be worth a damn, and that is tearing the place down so that something of value, like a Walmart, can be built on the site.


2 posted on 12/10/2004 12:32:14 PM PST by mak5
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cutterjohnmhb

I have an idea. Enlarge the S.C. to 120 members, and give each one a veto. Then no one need pay any more attention to this silly organization.


3 posted on 12/10/2004 12:32:53 PM PST by Starrgaizr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cutterjohnmhb
The German chancellor's Thursday demand for veto powers in an enlarged United Nations Security Council

Germany, France and all of the EU will have a veto through their EU government representative in Brussels.

4 posted on 12/10/2004 12:52:36 PM PST by RJL
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Starrgaizr

I would rather have the US start a association of Republics, with membership limited to nations that accept or duplicate the US first 10 amendments as limiting on their government.

Oh, we already have one, and their are 50 sovereign republics in it. My bad!


5 posted on 12/10/2004 12:52:53 PM PST by donmeaker (Why did the Romans cross the road? To keep the slaves from revolting again.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Cutterjohnmhb

As unfortunately as it is for the UK, with the EU constitution and the EU taking on more of the attributes of a large nation-state, I think the fair thing is for there to be one EU seat and one EU veto, not seats and vetos for UK and France (and definitely not Germany). I hope George Bush holds firm and vetos the veto.


6 posted on 12/10/2004 12:56:26 PM PST by Unam Sanctam
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cutterjohnmhb

Every time I read the list of P5 I can't help but think what a WASTE it is to have FRANCE there.

I mean c'mon.

There are sooooooooooooooo many more important and deserving nations (Japan?)


7 posted on 12/10/2004 1:03:41 PM PST by FreedomNeocon (2)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Cutterjohnmhb

Upon adoption of the EU constitution, all EU members begin to act as a single political unit - i.e. country. At this point, the EU should receive 1 seat and veto period.


8 posted on 12/10/2004 1:05:59 PM PST by Owl558 (Don't tread on me!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker

Would these republics also have to permit the murder of their unborn children and prohibit the public display or reverence for God?


9 posted on 12/10/2004 1:07:01 PM PST by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: donmeaker

Would these republics also have to permit the murder of their unborn children and prohibit the public display or reverence for God?


10 posted on 12/10/2004 1:07:23 PM PST by Mr. Lucky
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: FreedomNeocon

Well there is a firestorm brewing around the UN and they themselves have proposals to reform the Security Council.

The UN could be radically different, in the not too distant future.

Maybe one of the prices for the US to agree, is that France is kicked off. After all Condi Rice said "punish France".


11 posted on 12/10/2004 6:23:19 PM PST by crazycat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson