The US, The UN and Iraq

PDid, Washington has already warned the Iraq generals that they will be charged with war crimes if they engage in the use of WMD against American and allied troops. c.i.

Powell attacks European calls for delay on Iraq
He accepted Washington had not done enough to convince Americans and the international community that war was justified.

Other article with similar story says 'Colin Powell turns hawkish'. This headline says he 'attacked'...
What do you make of the way Powell's remarks are being reported?
Per the last sentence, "He accepted Washington has not done enough to convince Americans and the international community the war was justified."... Do you think Powell would be pushing so hard for support, were he not holding information that would convince the world?

Do you think the world will ease the anti-American rhetoric when (if) this is disclosed?

hard to say, the rhetoric coming out of washington keeps changing from finding the smoking gun, finding a gun, finding some bullets, finding something that might be used to make bullets, ok never mind we really dont need to find anything.

c.i.:

It's one thing to send this country's servicemen off to fight a war for oil. It's a whole 'nother level of cynicism and heartlessness to even consider lighting the casualties' bodies aflame, or bulldozing them into a mass grave in the desert.

Couple this with Rumsfeld's recent comments on armed forces circa Viet Nam -- and the government's wish to gut veteran's benefits -- and you start to see how they really regard the military. Chess pieces, cannon fodder, disposable resources.

Of course, that's JMO. I could be wrong...

Its The Second Law Of ThermoPolitico Dynamics ... for every spin, there is an equal but opposite spin. I tend to pay more attention to a speaker, than to what analysts say he said. Powell said his piece, Iraq is not cooperating satisfactorily and playing The UN for time, we're not happy with them, but we're not going to war with Germany or France, we may go to war without them, we hope war can be avoided, but if not, we will go to war when we are satisfied all other optiuons are exhausted, with the support of those who lend their support, is pretty much what he said to me. He didn't really say anything new or useful ... like who's gonna win The Superbowl. All of that is still "In The Air" ... whichever way anyone cares to spin it.


Oakland by 9


timber

I'll take Tampa and the 9 for 50, there, old bird...

timber--

What you are saying, in essense, is blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah..... approximately what Powell said......blah blah blah blah blah blah blah blah






Oakland by 7. You are close.

I took it pretty much as Official Blah Blah, yeah, you could say that. Yada Yada Yada.



timber

Whoa----let's put some things into perspective here. A lot of people on this thread say-----Mr Bush you can't go to war ----where's your proof Saddam has WoMD? The inspectors haven't found anything. Now----because the military planners must plan for the worst and hope for something better------have taken a hard pragmatic realistic look at the possibilities and have come up with a logical non-hysterical plan to prevent any more casualties. Whoa the hand wringers say---well he might have all these WoMD after all now look what that nasty DOD is going to do to our boys. You can't have it both ways.

Let's put something else into perspective-----people have very short memories. Just a few short months ago F-16s were patrolling the skies of America and were going to be ordered to shoot down a civilian airliner full of civilians that MAY have been hijacked and was about to be used for a human filled missile. We now have 2 pilots about to be court marchalled for accidentally dropping a bomb on some Canadians and killing 4. Does anyone here think that these two pilots got up that morning and said---let's kill some canadians tonight? Get serious----but yet they are on trial and could face 64 years in prison ------ for an accident. Now let's go back to the pilot about to shoot down an airliner full of civilians. Can he look into that plane and see that terrorists have killed the crew by cutting off their heads-----I don't think he can see that. Will that terrorist crew say Oh yeah we just killed the crew and now we're going to fly this baby into the White House. There again----I don't think so. But yet some General is going to say to this poor fighter jock------arm your missiles and shoot that plane down. Sure you bet-----now we're not talking about an accident ----- now we're talking Murder----Mass murder. Not one of you hand wringers said a word about this catestrophic event about to happen.

Some more interesting statistics for you to chew on-----45,000 people die every year in motor vehicle accidents. 75,000 die in accidents ---- yes accidents at hospitals just in the USA. 178,000,000 people were killed by totalitarian dictatorships in the just the 20th century.

Get real people ---- update your perspective.

This isn't disneyland ------ this is the real world.

If anyone wants to respond to this----I might answer it in about a week-------after I cool down.

relevant?

Ridiculous on several levels.

Dys

I agree but I sure had fun banging it out-----cheers and goodnight all.))))))))))))

Oh, great, our Secretary of State sits over a microphone or has someone write some sound bites which make him appear to be what he really is. A military man and not a diplomat. Instead of returning criticism by firing back more criticism like retalitory fire on a battlefield, he should be over there convincing them they should not delay and join a coalition.

Well, it looks you've easily got a week to cool down:

March Warplan?






I would anticipate a sudden blinding of air-defense assetts followed very closely on -like within minutes- by Night High Altitude Low-Opening Airdrops and Seal-Type Over-Beach Insertions to immediately sieze and secure the Oilfields. Close Combat Air Support, both fixed wing and rotary, with nearly impenetrable fighter escort and unparallelled Real-Time-Battle-Situation Awareness provided. Iraq's Electric Power Grid will go down in the first moments, along with the telephone, radio, and TV networks. All known communications nodes, civilian, military, and admininistrative will be crippled. Every runway not considered vital to Allied Interests will be cratered generously, then mined. The ones we think we want we'll just crater lightly and mine. Anything larger than a helmet moving hostilly toward a Freindly Ground Unit will very quickly become the centerpiece of a brief lightshow. Any Air-Defense weapon discharging or launching will effectively commit suicide. A few days of missles and bombs delivered to specific addresses and the nuetralizing of any threat that breaks cover and shows itself, let alone attempts to engage, a Freindly Unit should work quite well. Heavy Ground Units could be involved within days, shielding and reinforcing earlier light units in and around the oilfields, and should meet little if any effective resistance. Baghdad itself will be completely cut off from the rest of the country in very short order. Saddam's Palaces will have little future. Bridges will drop, trains won't run long, motor vehicles won't move far. Iraq WILL be paralyzed. Saddam probably vanishes into the world of legend, and sightings of him will blare from the headlines of supermarket tabloids a generation from now. Dealing with prisoners will be a major distraction. Civilian casualties will be reported, as will Freindly Fire Incidents. There may well be a calamity or two ... heck, its war, after all ... but vastly superior training, equipment, doctrine, morale, and logistic support may be considered likely to achieve the desired effect at historically low human cost over all. We'll win, we'll win quick, and we'll win big.


Or, Saddam could just leave, or there could be a coup. Iraq has at most six weeks or so to make up Saddam's mind. His position is no longer required, and he WILL leave the building. How he does it is still up to him. It would certainly be best all around if he woke up before the alarm goes off.



timber

timber says:



Got that right. IMHO, can even extend that and say there may have been a thimble of new or useful information over the last 2 months or so. Higher ups say the same ole same ole and the news analyst grab it on a daily basis and try to turn it into new/useful stuff. It's utterly amazing.

It sounds like an unfortunate, but rational step to take if we ever did in fact have to deal with a large volume of contaminated remains.

I've found a really good article in one of today's newspapers, by Edward Said, professor of English and comparative literature at Columbia University, New York.

It's a comment in The Guardian, so some of you must overcome their disgust :wink:

When will we resist?

Walter,

Interesting article. I note that Prof. Said lives, teaches, and writes in New York - in the very belly of the beast. With colorful rhetoric he denounces the views of all other expatriate Arabs, living, like him in the modern (non-Arab) world. In his expressed view, only he can speak with "authenticity" for the Arab world, which he (and they) have deserted.

Sweeping generalities - " The U.S. is preparing to attack the Arab world..." , "...the huge Capitalist machine seems to be faltering, even as it grinds down the vast majority of its citizens...", "...an unimaginably costly war...", "....humiliating difference between contempt for the Arabs and respect for North Korea..." , and so on.

It is a pity that a dispenser of such empty, but overheated rhetorical flourishes should have access to the pulpit he uses for such tripe.

There are, of course, many contradictions in the policies of the Western nations generally and the United States in particular. I would agree that ever since the first triumph of the Likud party in Israel in the mid-'70s, Israel has been steadily degenerating, becoming finally a caricature of the former oppressors of her people. The continued, unmodified support of the U.S. government for this regime - a consequence of the quite understandable political actions of a sizeable Jewish population in the U.S. - has become less and less justifiable.

At the same time it would be very difficult indeed to accuse the Palestinians in particular or the "Arabs" in general of any systematic progressive or constructive engagement with the modern world or the specific challenges they face. The contrast with Malaysia, an Islamic but non-Arab country could not be more stark.

One could hope for better, more insightful and accurate rhetoric, even from the Manchester Guardian, certainly from a Professor at Columbia University, and finally from a self-appointed expatriate spokesman for "the Arab World".

No, one can't. I submit the work is in keeping with character on the parts of both author and outlet. Stirring, inflamatory rhetoric is to be expected from either; combine them, and objective, insightful commentary would be amazing. The piece's headline alone:
dispells any suspicion of responsible journalism or objective position.
The piece forwards agenda, wrapped in buzzwords, cliches, contempt, and ridiculous hyperbole. It aims not to report, or even to analyse the issue; its purpose clearly is to exacerbate misperceptions and to pander to partisan Anti-Americanism. It fairly well accomplishes its evident goal.

And shortly, American lives will be at risk to provide opportunity, liberty and security for The Arab World ... to restore The People of Iraq to The World Community, and by implication, to affirm the commitment of Western Civilization to provide any who choose the right to publish such crap or to read it. In its own way, it validates the highest of our principles.



timber, who gives up any hope of correcting typos before clicking "Submit"

probably not of any interest to those who have their mind made up, but this morning on the telly was a panel discussion that boiled down to the main point of whether or not people find GWB credible and it appears the this is pretty much split about 50/50 in the US. no matter what your own bias/attitude is, this is a serious concern of very many people both pro and con. while we can argue the validity of any given policy the bottom line seems to be trust.