Stay updated with breaking news from L paul brimmer. Get real-time updates on events, politics, business, and more. Visit us for reliable news and exclusive interviews.
But when ambassador bremmer came over, that direction had changed. instead of quickly handing off power to a new iraqi government and getting out, the bush administration selects former ambassador l. paul brimmer to take over in iraq and remake iraq s entire economy, starting with the oil sector. we are not here to be a colonial power. we are here to help turn over as quickly as we can efficiently do it to the iraqi people their country. we had virtually no elbow room for major changes to anything unless we could get the oil going and that was our priority. ....
From everywhere, that we were going to go in there and we were going to set up an interim government as rapid as we could, but when ambassador bremmer came over, that direction had changed. instead of quickly handing off power to a new iraqi government and getting out, the bush administration selects former ambassador l. paul brimmer to take over in iraq and remake iraq s entire economy, starting with the oil sector. we are not here to be a colonial power. we are here to help turn over as quickly as we can efficiently do it to the iraqi people their country. we had virtually no elbow room for major changes to anything unless we could get the oil going and that was our priority. avo: with expedia you always get the lowest price book any flight or hotel and if you find it for less we ll match it and give you fifty dollars back that s the expedia guarantee ....
nuclear bomb, a rogue county building nuclear weapons recall threatening to proliferate that technology, stockpiling weapons of mass destruction. but when 9/11 happened and the u.s. government announced that those actions would now constitution a grave and unacceptable threat to the united states, there was no radical change in our actions toward north korea. there was no move by the u.s. to disarm that country after 9/11. instead, the u.s. went into iraq. if the threat of weapons of mass destruction was the driving force for u.s. action after 9/11, why iraq rather than north korea? at the time, north korea really was building a nuclear bomb and threatening to proliferate that technology. iraq wasn t. the case for war in iraq that was presented to the american people proved to be a smoke screen. there were no weapons of mass destruction. there was no reconstituted iraqi nuclear program. the case that was made publicly for that war turned out to be false. what was true? ....
and the world and claims to have set off an atomic weapon. that day in 2006, the secretive, repressive north korean regime showed the world that they had built and tested a nuclear bomb, a rogue county building nuclear weapons recall threatening to proliferate that technology, stockpiling weapons of mass destruction. but when 9/11 happened and the u.s. government announced that those actions would now constitution a grave and unacceptable threat to the united states, there was no radical change in our actions toward north korea. there was no move by the u.s. to disarm that country after 9/11. instead, the u.s. went into iraq. if the threat of weapons of mass destruction was the driving force for u.s. action after 9/11, why iraq rather than north korea? at the time, north korea really was building a nuclear bomb and threatening to proliferate that technology. iraq wasn t. the case for war in iraq that was presented to the american people proved to be a smoke screen. th ....