Article

2007-07-15 Britain

Mark Malloch Brown: 'Let's not rely just on US'

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by ryuge 2007-07-15 01:48|| E-Mail|| Front Page|| [11129 views ] Top
File under: Global Jihad

#1 Can we have the invertebrate piccie? This guy epitomizes it.

Posted by twobyfour 2007-07-15 02:02|| 2007-07-15 02:02|| Front Page Top

#2 Let's not. Much better to suck on Soro's teats.

Posted by ed 2007-07-15 02:17|| 2007-07-15 02:17|| Front Page Top

#3 Another EU elitist anti-American that can just FOAD!

Posted by 3dc 2007-07-15 02:26|| 2007-07-15 02:26|| Front Page Top

#4 The former deputy secretary general to the UN divides opinion between those who see him as the great hope for Africa and a principled opponent of the war in Iraq, and those who believe that he is an anti-American egotist who defended Kofi Annan over the oil-for-food scandal.

Mark Brown probably regards the above points as great achievements. Little does he realize thatin factthey are but only in the devil's own cause.

The West, he thinks, needs to be more willing to negotiate with some extremist groups for the sake of peace. I used to have to speak to the Khmer Rouge.

"We used to meet Taliban leaders and all kinds of Palestinian factions. It is not because by doing so you are giving them political support but you have to find ways of dealing with issues. There has to be some flexibility against some very firm principles."

As if granting terrorists time upon the world's stage does not garner them legitimacy? Who's this wanker trying to fool? Ya gotta love people who try to mislabel spinelessness as "flexibility". It makes a jellyfish look downright ossified.

On Iran, he thinks it is unlikely that there will now be military action. "We can't all stand idly by, but I think the baton is now clearly with those who favour negotiations."

Methinks this chap's high esteem for "negotiations" betrays a lingering UN-installed hankering for caviar. Negotiating with Muslims is not just futile, it assists their ends at the cost of your own.

I look forward to the day when having worked for the UN poisons one's career.

Posted by Zenster">Zenster 2007-07-15 03:10|| 2007-07-15 03:10|| Front Page Top

#5 Negotiations are merely a means of communicating 'paths forward' so that parties may select the path which bests meets their own objectives. Paths which are too costly to party 'A' are rejected; those which inadequately meet the objectives of 'B' but are not costly enough are rejected.
If there are no credible costs threatened Iran will not yield in negotiation. Except in unusual circumstances (Hillary doing the talking, for instance), more talk is not, by itself, not a meaningful threat.

Posted by Glenmore">Glenmore 2007-07-15 07:46|| 2007-07-15 07:46|| Front Page Top

#6 On Iran, he thinks it is unlikely that there will now be military action. "We can't all stand idly by, but I think the baton is now clearly with those who favour negotiations."

And a five star dinner afterwards!

Posted by Raj 2007-07-15 07:58|| 2007-07-15 07:58|| Front Page Top

#7 When all is said and done, Britain does not bring all that much to the table militarily. I think that California probably has a bigger contingent of troops in Iraq than the UK and, for that matter, could probably take the Brits in a standup fignt. We would rather have them with us than against us, but can deal with it either way.

Posted by RWV 2007-07-15 08:46|| 2007-07-15 08:46|| Front Page Top

#8 The British troops are wonderful, but they are severely hampered by the politicians in London. Kipling had it right over a century ago.

Posted by trailing wife 2007-07-15 09:36|| 2007-07-15 09:36|| Front Page Top

#9 From TFA:

On Darfur, the British and Americans lost their moral authority, he said. "It frustrated me because Bush and Blair have led on this issue but their credibility was undermined by what had happened in Iraq."

Is there anything remotely redeeming about this transnational socialist?

Posted by badanov 2007-07-15 09:39|| http://www.freefirezone.org]">[http://www.freefirezone.org] 2007-07-15 09:39|| Front Page Top

#10 What a pathetic little man with an inferiority complex disguised as a superiority veneer. He did f**k all at the UN and was a poster boy for their overall corruption and incompentency. So, Brown in an effort to prop up his thumb sucking personality wants to show Bush he is so independent that he will make Lord Mark the Minister of Irrelevant Affairs. Africa and the UN are irrelevant to America's interest. And Asia is too much our common economic and political ally to be swayed too much by this twit.

Posted by Jack is Back!">Jack is Back! 2007-07-15 11:04|| 2007-07-15 11:04|| Front Page Top

#11 He believes he has always been in tune with mainstream America. "From Colin Powell to Condi Rice all the way through to Richard Holbrooke or Madeleine Albright, across that massive swath of American foreign policy, I would bet you a drink that you would find that I am their favourite multi-nationalist Brit. "Over a dozen years or more I am the man who they have gone to. They were as upset for me as I was upset for myself that I had to go into the ring against the neo-cons."

The ornate splendour of the Foreign Office could not be more different to the stark concrete blocks of the UN building in New York but he said: "The architecture is the least of the differences."

The biggest contrast was over Iraq. He confirmed that he was against the war but said that he did not think Britain and America should now "cut and run".

"When last year there was an attempt to put together a new partnership for Iraq, I was the one who was called. Condi Rice came to Kofi Annan and said, 'the only person we want to run this is Malloch Brown. It is too serious to have anyone else do it' ."

'Appalled' isn't the word for it but is it is printable.

Posted by Danielle 2007-07-15 12:34|| 2007-07-15 12:34|| Front Page Top

#12 Beyond appalling. A cretinous lightweight like this has a job, much less a job with any prestige? Gotta love the "massive swath" (he's inarticulate, as well as ignorant, stupid, and narcissistic) - across the entire spectrum of establishment mediocrities (Rice, Powell), opportunists (Holbrooke), and morons (Albright) who have recently perfectly embodied the ability and character of State ..... (a few career folks excepted).

Posted by Verlaine 2007-07-15 12:55|| 2007-07-15 12:55|| Front Page Top

#13 "Stripéd Trousers in the 21st Century: Mediocrities, Opportunists, and Morons" would be a great title for a book.

Posted by Seafarious">Seafarious 2007-07-15 13:02|| 2007-07-15 13:02|| Front Page Top

#14 Rely on France.

Posted by Nimble Spemble 2007-07-15 13:32|| 2007-07-15 13:32|| Front Page Top

#15 Wasn't Malloch the god that Carthage sacrificed children to? You suppose ole Mark's parents were clairvoyant?

Posted by Whomomble Barnsmell6531 2007-07-15 15:25|| 2007-07-15 15:25|| Front Page Top

#16 The future of democratic, peaceful, modern Africa depends on peaceful negotiations wid knowingly differentiated, radical or extremist hardline armed groups [wid or widout foreign backers]whom all sides know will de facto resort to violence and terror iff the same don't get their way = their share. D *** ng it, ITS NOT APPEASEMENT OR GIVING TRIBUTE TO EVIL!

Posted by JosephMendiola 2007-07-15 21:07|| 2007-07-15 21:07|| Front Page Top

23:55 Sigmund Freud
23:52 Angaiger Tojo1904
23:45 Sigmund Freud
23:33 Alistaire Sleating4235
23:31 Sock Puppet of Doom
23:27 Zenster
23:19 JosephMendiola
23:16 Zenster
23:13 Zenster
23:13 Abu do you love
23:12 Abu do you love
23:11 KBK
23:09 Zenster
23:07 KBK
23:05 anymouse
22:58 OldSpook
22:54 John Frum
22:52 Abu do you love
22:50 Zenster
22:46 OldSpook
22:45 Abu do you love
22:44 JosephMendiola
22:42 Ho Chi Spomosh2247
22:37 DMFD
Merry-Go-Blog