"The Blair government did not deny that any of this had happened. But its spokesman insisted today that the government believed "the text as published to be accurate" and that the document had been published because "we wanted to show people not only the kind of regime we were dealing with, but also how Saddam Hussein had pursued a policy of deliberate deception."
reminds me of the kitten that falls off the shelve while sleeping, looks around as if to say "i meant to do that!"
nks for the link, blatham.
"In the latest development, the German newspaper Welt am Sonntag has reported that the United States is reportedly putting economic pressure on Berlin. The paper says that the U.S. has decided to cut its planned multi-million investments in German military bases.
The Bush administration has also threatened to put economic pressure on German companies that do business with Iraq, the paper reports. A letter sent by the government in Washington to Germany's Economics Minister Wolfgang Clement reportedly names firms such as Siemens and warned that they would lose their business ties to the U.S. if they continued to export to Iraq. Germany has strong trade ties to Iraq worth some 336 million euro."
Munich Conference Opens With Sharp Differences Over Iraq
as Rumsfelt might say "Germany is free to do anything we tell it to do just as every other nation is free to cooperate with US or, of course, abet terrorism."
ci - Your response completely ignored every point I made to you. EVERY POINT. Why is that?
blatham wrote:Cobalt
That little quote in your signature is a dilly. In case anyone missed it...
"We must become the owners, or at any rate the controllers at the source, of at least a proportion of the oil which we require."
- British Royal Commission, agreeing with Winston Churchill's policy towards Iraq, 1913
Yes, and having been said in 1913, it has so much meaning and value in considering what is happening today.
Everyone hates sitting through a sales pitch. It's practically a modern torture device, reserved for those unfortunate souls destined for the 7th level of hell or out shopping for a mobile phone.
How much the worse when the pitch is eight pages long (8-point font! Single spaced!) and supported by a series of audio/visual aids that would make Ross Perot proud! Yet that's what Secretary of State Colin Powell's February 5th speech to the United Nations was.
What Powell took eight pages to say could be summed up in a single sentence: "The United States is of the opinion that Iraq is in material breach of its disarmament obligations laid out in UN Resolution 1441." This assertion is backed by scant new evidence: two intercepted conversations, satellite photos of trucks, and the fact that some Iraqi scientists had replaced the hard drives on their computers in the 4 years since inspectors last set foot in Iraq.
The remainder of the speech was belligerent rhetoric, from describing the horrors of chemical and biological weapons to building a tenuous web connecting Hussein to Al-Qaeda (Did you know that an Al-Qaeda operative once recieved medical treatment in Baghdad? The horror!), and repackaging the inspection reports into pro-war soundbytes for American media to regurgitate.
I am not surprised that our Secretary of State would get up in front of the diplomatic world to sell a war. Nor am I particularly surprised that the UN would waste its time listening to him. What really surprises me is the lack of evidence available to Powell to make his case. And that some of the "evidence" was in fact a plagiarized thesis by a British student.
Now don't get me wrong, I am a fan of Powell and I don't have any great love for Saddam. More to the point, I don't trust anyone who has or desires weapons designed to level cities or slaughter entire populations indiscriminately.
What I am strongly opposed to is bullshit. The argument that Powell puts forth, that the international community has the obligation to enforce, by force if necessary, Resolution 1441 is insulting and obnoxious. If the Security Council started attacking countries for ignoring their proclamations we'd be invading ourselves and our allies with disturbing regularity. Furthermore, nobody believes that we should go to war to deprive other countries of the nasty weapons we sold them or they came up with on their own. If we followed that policy we'd be invading our biggest allies in the area--Israel, Pakistan, and India.
No, the only real reason we have for attacking Iraq is that we are Americans and we're pissed off and someone brown messed with us and we don't put up with that. And the fact that Saddam is sitting atop of 10% of the world's remaining confirmed oil reserves certainly doesn't hurt.
Message to Bush, Powell, etc.: drop the bullshit. Hell, you almost got elected, and that was before September 11th! Play democratic. I'd give you a much better shot at getting the people to go along with your war if you just asked the people you claim to represent what they want.
Walterand dys ...big fat angry ladies should fall out of the sky onto washington. Diplomacy = "Do it MY way and if not I'll hurt you big because I'm promoting DEMOCRACY!" It was entirely predictable and is just further fuel to the 'reasons to despise the US' sentiments. I'm beginning to really dislike this crowd.
A somewhat different assessment of US/Western Mid-East motivations:
http://www.nationalpost.com/commentary/story.html?id={6F031E0C-8785-400D-9D96-BE50AAE4E06E}
Quote:American hawks are not hicks
Charles Moore
The Daily Telegraph
Friday, February 07, 2003
... Violence is the problem, and violence will continue if the Arab world and the EU continue to abet it, and if the Palestinian people are offered no beginnings of a plural society with institutions of law, property rights -- and, as an eventual consequence, a proper ballot. That was what Mr. Bush's speech on June 24 last year was all about ...
And an intriguing proposal from France:
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=535&e=2&cid=535&u=/ap/20030208/ap_on_re_mi_ea/germany_france_iraq
Quote:France Said to Favor Peacekeepers in Iraq
Sat Feb 8, 8:48 AM ET
By TONY CZUCZKA, Associated Press Writer
... the plan would have international peacekeepers "in effect take control of the country for years," declare all of Iraq a no-fly zone and lead to agreements with Iraq's neighbors to crack down on smuggled exports of Iraqi oil as part of strengthened economic sanctions ...
(emphasis added by timber)
timber
Quite interesting that the 'Spiegel' is now quoted as a reliable source. :wink:
The original article is to be found here (in German):
'Old Europe' plans an invasion of blue helmets
(Obviously this will be announced on Thursday coming week, according to the Spiegel. And according to the same paper, Senator McCain said today in Munich, France and Germany were showing "a desinformed, primitive Anti-Americanism" - this was just shown [and confirmed by video] on TV while typing. )
McCain's anti-European Blackout
http://www.iraqwatch.org/bulletins/vol2iss1jan03.htm
Quote:Before the Gulf War, Iraq received sensitive, dual-use equipment useful for making mass destruction weapons from Austria, Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Liechtenstein, the Netherlands, Portugal, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, the United Kingdom and the United States. German firms supplied over half of the total
In dollar terms, Germany and France supplied the bulk of the 'Inappropriate" materiel, well over half the entire known, reported volume. The US contributed some 3.5% of the overall total. The US deals occurred in the late '70s, early '80s. German and French participation has been ongoing including essentially "turnkey" facilities for the production of gasses and of sophisticated electronics. Some of this has been quite recent. The overwhelming bulk of the Iraqi military capability was supplied by The Former Soviet Union and by France, with significant Chinese involvement as well.
Perhaps a desire to avoid embarrassment is among the factors motivating the resistance of some nations to fully expose and bring to an end Iraqi perfidy in which they themselves have been major players.
timber
timber, The info you provided in your last post explains why the French and Germans are won't to go to war with Iraq. However, can you provide the source of your info? c.i.
I'm still reading the proliferation of posts and links here. Good stuff.
But I must comment on PDiddie's post. Do you think Powell is practicing his run for President? I do..
Here, c.i.; a large PDF file, but one of my "sources". There are others, including several which are pay-subscription based, and accessible only to paid members.
http://www.iraqwatch.org/suppliers/whoarmediraq.pdf
Kara, I doubt for a variety of reasons that Powell has his eyes on The Whitehouse, but anything is possible.
timber
have to zip away for weekend...have fun everyone...I've chartered a plane and am filling it with big fat angry ladies
Is blatham planning a massive, preemptive nude protest?
Gotta run off awhile myself, back later today, though. My plans involve neither aircraft nor disrobing. Just mundane real-world distractions ... like work.
timber
timber, I already accessed that link from your earlier post, but what caught my eye was your statement, "German and French participation has been ongoing including essentially "turnkey" facilities for the production of gasses and of sophisticated electronics." c.i.
