0
   

The US, The UN and Iraq

 
 
ul
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 01:52 pm
Embarrassed

Hope this works better

.http://www.unwire.org/unwire/current.asp#32401
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 02:09 pm
http://www.unwire.org/unwire/current.asp#32401

now try ul's url.
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 02:13 pm
Tres, thank you for the reply. I will continue to give full attention to your and all other posts here. Edgar, what did you do, Buddy, to give this thread such long legs? Smile

Quote:
I'd like to attempt to provoke you into considering one of your comments from a different angle, if I may. Let's assume that you are right that Saddam's primary motivation is to remain in power at all costs for as long as he may do so. What if Saddam views the existence of the US as the world's lone superpower as a threat to his goal?


Well, I'm sure he sees us as an obstacle to his staying on top of his little fiefdom because we are nipping at his heels and telling him that he is outa there. Thing is, we are not the only ones saying it, and he seems to have fewer and fewer friends every day. I can't believe he would think seriously that he could stand up to us in any way, considering the punch that resides behind our words. If other major countries were with us, and we spoke with one voice, and not necessarily a voice of war, he would have no choice but to live under restrictions or go into exile.
0 Replies
 
ul
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 02:14 pm
Very Happy
Thanks, BillW.
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 02:19 pm
ul velcome Smile
0 Replies
 
roger
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 02:30 pm
Do you really want the history of "edgarblythe's" thread, Kara?
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 02:34 pm
ul, Some meaty stuff in your link. Thanks, c.i.
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 02:47 pm
"Now I fear he has merely been emboldened by those who value their business interests over all else, including peace and freedom."

That's pretty gratuitous, Tres. (And it begs the question about US business interests propelling us into an invasion of another country.) As long as we have people, Tres, who are more interested in winning than doing the right thing, we will have pre-emptive strikes accompanied by a CNN/Fox Sugar Bowl orgy of battle coverage as entertainment, and whole new generations coming up for whom blood lust is perfectly acceptable.

If instead we were willing to acknowledge the complexities, to consider that France and Russia and Germany and others are in large part working to avoid war for moral reasons, we're being more honest. The kids are watching, learning. What should be be telling them through our actions? Are we showing them that we understand war is a difficult moral decision, or are we telling them it's merely a "practical" decision or "purely political" one?
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 03:19 pm
3 ½ minutes before timber posted U.S. Confident on U.N. Resolution, Protests Persist, I heard in the news about what the French, Russian and German foreign ministers said.

A (radio) commentary pointed out that the were looking for a way to present their results in a way, Bush could say "this all happens only because of me/us".
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 03:20 pm
deleted <doubled posting>
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 03:28 pm
Quote:


http://www.msnbc.com/news/842500.asp?vts=030520031315
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 03:45 pm
Bush diplomacy? MOSCOW - The United States on Wednesday warned that Russia could pay the price of damaged relations with Washington if it vetoes a U.N. Security Council resolution paving the way for war against Iraq.
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 03:53 pm
Diplomacy at the point of a gun - brutish, bullying, arrogant! <sigh>
0 Replies
 
trespassers will
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 03:54 pm
Kara - Again, a pleasure. Very Happy

I just heard on the news that in his comments today, Hans Blix stated specifically that he believes that what cooperation we are seeing from Saddam at this point is directly attributable to the pressure being brought by the threat of military action.

(I will look for a link to an article on-line with the text of his comments to support this.)
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 04:02 pm
dys

I'm irritated by your use of the quotation mark:
Quote:

merriam-webster: (2) diplomacy: skill in handling affairs without arousing hostility




tw
Quote:
05 Mar 2003 20:53
UN's Blix more upbeat on Iraq than U.S. officials

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


By Evelyn Leopold and Irwin Arieff

UNITED NATIONS, March 5 (Reuters) - In contrast to the Bush administration, chief U.N. arms inspector Hans Blix said on Wednesday that Iraq had stepped up disarmament cooperation recently.

While he said there were still many open questions about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction, Blix refused to join in the blanket U.S. condemnation of Iraqi cooperation.

Speaking at a news conference, two days before he presents another crucial report to the U.N. Security Council, Blix also said the outbreak of war would discredit inspections not only in Iraq but elsewhere.

And he said he would release "benchmarks" or unresolved issues for Iraq disarmament on Friday, a report wanted by several countries seeking a compromise between the U.S.-British position of invading Iraq and the French-German-Russian view that inspections should continue without limits.

Blix has been careful not to give ammunition to either side in the Iraq crisis. Diplomats said if his Friday report is too positive, it might influence those Security Council members who remain undecided on whether or not to vote for a U.S.-British-Spanish resolution that would authorize war.

His Friday report is the next big showpiece in the Security Council with foreign ministers from France, Britain, Spain, Syria, Germany as well as U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell due to attend.

Blix called the destruction of Iraq's al-Samoud 2 missiles "real disarmament." Iraq has scrapped about 19 out of 100 missiles since Saturday after inspectors said their range exceeded U.N. limits by a short distance.

"Here, weapons that can be used in war are destroyed in fairly large quantities. There's a whole program, and it is the various items that are related to that, like launchers, casting chambers, etc. These are being destroyed," Blix said.

He spoke shortly before Powell said Iraq was hiding machinery to make al-Samoud missiles and had no intention of handing over all the missiles and associated components to the United Nations for destruction.

WAR DISCREDITS CONCEPT OF INSPECTIONS

Blix also regretted that inspections would probably be curtailed through military action and said war would discredit the concept of disarmament through inspections, not just in Iraq but elsewhere.

"If war breaks out, I think that it is a serious failure for the approach through inspections to disarmament," Blix said.

But Blix acknowledged that it was clear the stepped up activity by Iraq was motivated by the U.S. military threat. "There is a great deal more cooperation now and the threat certainly has brought it there," he said.

In answer to questions, he said his inspection teams could not verify claims that Iraq had destroyed anthrax or VX chemical agents by digging in areas Baghdad said the poisons were buried.

But he also said Iraq had for the first time in recent weeks allowed seven private interviews with scientists and other officials -- without minders or tape recorders.

He said that, in addition to Cyprus, he had asked an Arab country, which he did not identify, to host inspectors and Iraqi scientists who agree to be interviewed outside Iraq.

The United States and Britain still have not won enough support to pass a U.N. resolution authorizing war against Iraq and now face new threat from France and Russia to veto such a resolution.

At the United Nations on Tuesday, U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan at his monthly lunch with Security Council ambassadors, appealed for unity and compromise among the major powers on the council.

He also asked Canadian Ambassador Paul Heinbecker to brief him on a proposal that would set benchmarks or tests for Iraqi disarmament by March 28. If Iraq failed to adhere to them the council would face the possibility of war.

Blix indirectly is helping the Canadian proposal by producing a list of unresolved tasks this week that could be used as benchmarks.

"He (Annan) is supportive of the concept behind it," Heinbecker said. "I don't know if he would endorse every detail of it. But the idea of a compromise between the two positions is what he is talking about."
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 04:17 pm
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&ncid=578&e=2&cid=578&u=/nm/20030305/ts_nm/iraq_dc

Quote:
Top Stories - Reuters

US Ready for War Despite French, Russian Opposition

10 minutes ago

By Alan Elsner and Mark John

UNITED NATIONS/PARIS (Reuters) - The United States said on Wednesday it would disarm Iraq (news - web sites) with or without United Nations (news - web sites) backing, after France, Russia and Germany vowed to block a Security Council resolution authorizing war.


The Resolution appears to be irrelevant to The Administration. Several Governments are advising their nationals to leave Iraq in calm, but urgent manner. Saddam may have much less time than many, Saddam included, may believe. While the most recent US Troop and Naval deployment announcements would indicate another two or three weeks or so, the Staff charged with executing the campaign have stated publicly that they are operationally ready to accomplish their mission. The Travels of Tommy Franks bear watching.

I have little concern for the outcome of The War. There are risks, of course. None the less, the capabilities of The US Military are considerable enough to inspire considerable confidence. The Administration, I suspect, lacks comparable competence in its field of endeavor. Frankly I would be unsurprised were The War, and The War on Trerror, to turn out well for Bush The Younger, for The Economy to strengthen, and for Foreign Policy repercussions to be tremendously thorny poroblems for The Admisistration by Election Time. Bush the Younger will have, and will win his war. He may well fail to win a second term. Iraq, and The War With Iraq, may be of little note among the preoccupations of the times. I suspect things are going to get very much more complicated before any settling down begins.



timber
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 04:18 pm
Quote:
JDAM the Torpedoes

The weapons and tactics we will use in Iraq.
By Gregg Easterbrook
Posted Wednesday, March 5, 2003, at 10:10 AM PT
According to CBS News, an attack on Iraq will begin with 300 cruise missiles aimed at Baghdad. According to Newsweek, an attack would begin with 3,000 bombs dropped across the country. According to the New York Times, the attack will commence on a moonless night. According to the Washington Post, air and ground offensives will begin simultaneously. According to USA Today, U.S. tanks could reach Baghdad in just 48 hours. According to Aviation Week & Space Technology, Iraq tactics will be influenced by a Pentagon study of how New York City reduced street crime. According to rumors I heard from people who sort of know this stuff, the initial air assault will focus on Tikrit as much as Baghdad.



http://slate.msn.com/id/2079667/
0 Replies
 
Tartarin
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 04:35 pm
Was interested just now to hear (on NPR) a report on the Pope's effort to stop the invasion. He genuinely fears that such an action will become a catastrophe, large scale. He has told the Islamic community that the invasion should in no way be taken to represent a war of Christians on Islam -- possibly a side swipe at Bush. Listening to the Pope's assessment while remembering what other respected analysts have been saying about the humungous risks we are running, it's odd to read Timber's "I have little concern for the outcome of The War. There are risks, of course..." Bill's quote from Easterbrook that "..according to CBS News, an attack on Iraq will begin with 300 cruise missiles aimed at Baghdad. According to Newsweek, an attack would begin with 3,000 bombs dropped across the country..." makes me wonder what 3,000 retaliations against the US, Britain, and Spain will look like and how we will handle them.
0 Replies
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 04:44 pm
I agree with the Pope and my fear is that you have grossly underestimated the part where
Quote:
He genuinely fears that such an action will become a catastrophe, large scale.


Thanks Tartarin
0 Replies
 
trespassers will
 
  1  
Reply Wed 5 Mar, 2003 04:48 pm
Tartarin wrote:
He has told the Islamic community that the invasion should in no way be taken to represent a war of Christians on Islam -- possibly a side swipe at Bush.

How could it be when Bush has said the exact same thing repeatedly?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 11/15/2024 at 01:14:48