World's largest US embassy

The largest US embassy in the world. Guess where? Islamabad? Karachi? New Delhi? Mumbai? Kenya? Madagascar? Moscow? London? Beijing? Belgium? Dubai? No, none of the above.

i particularly like the part in the article where it states that eleven US government departments have requested permission to have personnel at the embassy. The US Department of Justice is named as one of the eleven; i wonder who the other ten constitute. Any sort of external interference, if it is not mandated under the auspices of the UN, in any future Iraqi war crimes tribunal, will taint the tribunal from beginning to end as being conducted unfairly. That is the most mildest criticism that will be levelled at it.

But why such a massive US diplomatic presence in Iraq, even subsequent to the official ‘handing over’ of power (the symbolic passing of the torch from one colonial power to their puppets)? oh yes :teary1: For peace, democracy, human rights, justice, and liberty. Bravo, i say :k: Let me wipe my eyes with my hanky.

There are no less than half a dozen African countries that could use some of that peace, democracy, human rights, justice and liberty as well. But then, this is all about Operation Iraq Liberation is it not?

US to open huge embassy in Iraq, Richard Allen Greene, BBC, 23 June 2004

The dissolution of the Coalition Provisional Authority at the end of June will not mean the end of the US presence in Iraq - far from it. The beginning of July will see the official launch of the US embassy in Baghdad, which many are describing at the largest US diplomatic mission in the world.

It will have a staff of 1,700 - roughly 1,000 Americans and 700 Iraqis - and be responsible for disbursing $18bn in US aid to Iraq. The embassy itself will have an operating budget of up to $1bn in fiscal year 2005 alone, the US State Department estimates.

And that does not include the cost of constructing the embassy building itself.

John Negroponte, who has been the US Ambassador to the United Nations for the past two-and-a-half years, is to be the new ambassador to Iraq. He will “provide policy direction and coordination for all US government activities in Iraq” except for military ones, he told the Senate.

The US Senate - which must approve the president’s ambassadorial nominations - confirmed him in record time, holding his confirmation hearing just eight days after he was nominated and approving him soon after. Mr Negroponte arrives in Baghdad at the beginning of July, but his deputy - Deputy Chief of Mission Jim Jeffrey - has been in place since the middle of May. Mr Jeffrey had been US Ambassador to Albania.

The State Department had also assigned more than 120 staff to the embassy by mid-May and begun interviewing Iraqis for local-hire positions. More than 600 CPA staff will stay in place at least temporarily after 1 July as part of the new embassy. Embassy staff will be responsible for a huge range of tasks, including human rights monitoring.

Eleven US government departments - other than State - had told Secretary of State Colin Powell as of mid-May that they wanted to have personnel at the embassy. The US Justice Department, for example, is seconding a team to the embassy to advise and assist the Iraqi war crimes tribunal.

American diplomats in Baghdad will be very heavily guarded. There were already 30 diplomatic security agents in Baghdad when the Senate held Mr Negroponte’s confirmation hearing at the end of April, and he estimated that the number would rise to at least 50. Some of the existing private security companies working for the Coalition Provisional Authority would probably be kept on, he added.

The embassy complex itself will be within the heavily-fortified Green Zone - a site chosen for security reasons. Plans call for it to consist of three sets of buildings, at least one of which is being built from scratch. Mr Negroponte told the Senate it could be constructed within two years of funding becoming available. Money has not yet been earmarked for construction; a spokesman for the Senate foreign relations committee said it might be included in the 2005 budget.

Until the new building is completed, main embassy functions will be carried out at a building known as the temporary Chancery.

There is some dispute about whether or not Saddam Hussein’s Republican Palace - currently used by the CPA - will be part of the embassy. Mr Negroponte told the Senate in April it would be used for “some support activities”.

But in mid-June, Iraq’s interim President, Ghazi Yawer, demanded that it be returned to the Iraqis, the Associated Press news agency quoted him as saying.

“It is a symbol of Iraqi sovereignty.”

This is great. I cannot wait for 10 years down the road when we go to Iraq and visit the Las Vegas of the Middle east The people in that region are dumb and need our help more than they need anything else. I also think the embassy would work as a place from where we can provide help to the ethnic africans in Sudan who are being ethnically cleansed by the arabs. It would be a good symbolic gesture. “hey, the arabs are not doing anything, but atleast Americans fromArabia are” :k:

My dear amigo, that sounds familiar. Where have i heard it before? :konfused: ah yes, that’s what the British colonial forces said about Indians too.

Funny thing, this colonialism business. At the time it is being implemented, it all seems so right. It’s only 50 years later, does the barbarity of it all manifest itself. That bloody naked fakir (Gandhi, i mean) was always a thorn in the side of the British. i mean why couldn’t he just be a good little Indian chap and shut up about liberation and all that crap. Same for that um what’s his name, that awful terrorist - Nelson Mandela. Damn all these freedom fighters. Why can’t they just be good little natives for once.

oh well. Let’s all be prepared for more bloodshed on our screens. It’s inevitable. With that type of a large diplomatic presence and the corresponding American personnel, in Iraq, well - it’s certainly not going to enhance stability anywhere in the country.

If colonial fears is what you are bent out of shape about then have no worry. We have colonized china, europe, almost India and most of the world with a mandate of progress, work ethic, entrepreneurship, freedom of movement and thought, and best of all Big Macs.

REad up in todays NYtimes piece by Tom Friedman on CHina. While dumbasses in the middle east are too busy blowing up their future, Chian and INdia are already on the way to become world powers. Not because of hatred of the US, as it is in the arab sihtholes, but because they emulate and deliver upon what America is about. While the arab world is cutting off heads of contractors, the Chinese have GE, MOtorola, Caterpillar, design centers popping up in the mainland.

WHile there might be some false sense of bravado among the arabs, in reality their contribution to the manking has been pitiful. And the future adn looking so good either. That's why the embassy is a great idea.

Was the US presence in Western Europe and Japan post WWII "colonialism"? Did it not enhance stability in the countries? Did continued bloodshed occur? Did it not led to freedom, democracy and prosperity for those countries? There are still US forces present in those countries but they represent the freest, most advanced and most prosperous countries in the world. I wish there was a Ghandi or Mandela to speak for the Iraqis but unfortunately those speaking the loudest for the Iraqi people are the ones blowing up their bretheren and diminishing any chance for a free and prosperous Iraq.

I guess the size of the diplomatic mission coincides with the enormity of the tasks it will be assigned.

** “It will have a staff of 1,700 - roughly 1,000 Americans and 700 Iraqis - and be responsible for disbursing $18bn in US aid to Iraq.” **

Hey Nadia: You think we ought to just cut a check for $18 billion and give it to some mullah so the money can disappear down a few private ratholes? Even the Arabs don’t give Arafat money anymore because they’re tired of seeing it go poof in the night.

This is pretty strong evidence that some nutjobs cutting off a few heads every month isn’t going to shake the US commitment to rebuild a better Iraq.

:k:

Well isn't this sweet.

If we had a nice small embassy we would be accused of cutting and running. If we had a medium sized embassy, we would be accused of not helping ENOUGH, and then we would be subject to the Afghanistan allegations all over again.

A big embassy means that the US will be committed to the stability of Iraq under the "you break it, you bought it" doctrine. It means that reconstruction dollars will keep flowing, and national figures will be supported.

This is certainly a damned if you do, damned if you don't situation.

The damning has already begun by those who would take a cheap shot no matter what is done....

Will there be an Iraqi High Commission on the Potomac in Washington DC and a Ministry of Oil attaché on Massachusetts Ave?

I don’t see any problem with it all, if normalcy returns to Iraq.

I don't really see point of an embassy in Iraq, considering its arleady a colony of the US. Talk about waste of taxpayer money. Maybe they can put that money into actually enforcing law and order so there might be some sense of security which was the basis of this phony war.

i think this is a win-win for all.

you see, they will make a massive building (or buildings) to accomodate all these 1,700 people, plus housing and all that, so that will give a lot of construction work to iraqi people. good good.

then, they have 1,000 americans there. that provides even more targets for zarqawi and his group. good good.

really, come to think of it, a smaller us embassy would not be so good, anyway.

:k: :k: :k:

30th June the occupation ends :eek:

Who ever belived that lie is a fool.

The US are increasing there forces and so are the british and they want everyone to belive its the end of occupations what a joke!

who on earth ends occupation by increasing the number of occupying forces, talk about trying to spin and lie this is just a complete farce any person with sense can see straight through this!

As for the largest embassy in the world in bagdad need we say any more!

ak...when you say US, do you mean amrekkka by that? It's nice to see puberty in progress.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Madhanee: *
It's nice to see puberty in progress.
[/QUOTE]

I think you need help!

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
Was the US presence in Western Europe and Japan post WWII "colonialism"? Did it not enhance stability in the countries? Did continued bloodshed occur? Did it not led to freedom, democracy and prosperity for those countries? There are still US forces present in those countries but they represent the freest, most advanced and most prosperous countries in the world. I wish there was a Ghandi or Mandela to speak for the Iraqis but unfortunately those speaking the loudest for the Iraqi people are the ones blowing up their bretheren and diminishing any chance for a free and prosperous Iraq.
[/QUOTE]

I agree. There needs to be a Mandela, Martin Luther King, Gandhi type to lead the Iraqis toward prosperity. They cannot win as long as there are leaders advocating military might against the West and/or terrorism (beheadings, bombs, hostages) to scare them away. It won't work. It may have worked with Spain temporarily, but it will not scare away the Americans.

America and the American military has seen some crazy s#!! in its time and fought away much stronger powers. Americans had the guts to stand up against a power (Soviets) who had the ability to destroy the entire Western world with a push of a button. A couple of gangsters terrorizing innocents is just a nuisance on the ground for them, which the media continues to blow up to crazy proportions by 24 hour coverage. The media has a reason for doing this because it understands American mentality. The terrorists are actually helping to promote a continued war because as long as the media can feed images of brutally beheaded innocents, the American public will support the War on Terror and occupation.

really waiting for suicide attack on embassy from al qaeda or al sadr...well lets see when this great day will come

^^

Lets see your reaction when al-Q beheads a Pakistani.

^ al qaida beheads a pakistani hmmm intresting you know who these people are then, what are your sources and evidence!

^^

Are you more loyal to al-Q than your subse pahale Pakistan?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Arvind: *
^^

Are you more loyal to al-Q than your subse pahale Pakistan?
[/QUOTE]

^ do you have a source or not, obviously you dont or too embarssed to provide one!