0
   

The UN, US and Iraq IV

 
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Oct, 2003 07:35 pm
Bush already has a bloody nose. It's a matter of getting bopped in the head with something more solid than his brains.
0 Replies
 
Setanta
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Oct, 2003 07:35 pm
Kinda like when Truman and Marshall contemplated an invasion of the Japanese "home islands" . . . except for the part about the calibre of leadership then and now . . .
0 Replies
 
InfraBlue
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Oct, 2003 08:58 pm
On the calibre of leadership concerning the Iraq Issue

Italgato had brought up an analogy between Clinton forgoing UN sanction and ordering airstrikes on Iraq's military, security and suspected WMD sites, and Bush forgoing UN saction and invading Iraq.

Clinton ordered air strikes on military and security targets, and suspected WMD sites, because "Saddam Hussein [had] announced that he would no longer cooperate with the United Nations weapons inspectors, called UNSCOM," he stated in his Dec. 16, 1998 speech.

Clinton ordered air strikes because Hussein had flatly refused to comply with the UN demands.

Bush and Co. invaded Iraq because there was a discrepancy in a report provided by the Hussein regime to UNMOVIC, while complying, albeit grudgingly, with UN weapons inspections.

Compare the two Presidents' sense of propriety and prudence (Bush I's operating word) in their responses to the respective situations.
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Oct, 2003 09:46 pm
Quote:
What is an acceptable reason to have munitions? Would defense against the threat of an invading army count


Pretty good, Craven. And basic. Kinda like the North Koreans might think. And the Iranians, within striking distance of some few nuclear powers such as India and Pakistan and Israel.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Oct, 2003 10:58 pm
Craven de Kere wrote:
Timber, can you cite that? I was under the impression taht while the weapons did not fall into the categories that Iraq agreed to prohibit but rather that they simply violated the sanctions.

In the case of the sanctions the violator would be the arms merchant.

due to the nature of the internet, the April 14 denial by the French of their direct complicity in the Roland IIIs captured in Iraq during the war is the best I can immediately peg among free-access sources: http://www.france.diplomatie.fr/actu/article.gb.asp?ART=34034

BTW ... the Timberland Tavern Dart Team defeated the Indian Creek VFW crew 11 out of 21 tonight, the epic struggle carrying through the closefought final round. There will be hangovers aplenty tomorrow. Timberland advances to the seasonal championships.
0 Replies
 
Ethel2
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Oct, 2003 11:15 pm
Congratulations to Timberland!
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Fri 3 Oct, 2003 11:24 pm
I second that! Congrats to Timberland. Wink
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 12:15 am
I think, it was on this thread that timber poste something of a reuters/Kuweit source, re. weapons smuggling.

Could well be, it was just another one of the numerous mislleading rumours:


Quote:
UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The U.N. weapons inspection agency said Friday it had no independent confirmation of a report that Kuwaiti security authorities foiled an attempt to smuggle $60 million worth of chemical weapons and biological warheads from Iraq to a European country.

from: U.N. says it can't confirm Kuwaiti newspaper report of weapons smuggling operation from Iraq
0 Replies
 
Craven de Kere
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 01:24 am
Tiber, ise drunk as skunk. Haven;t been since I came stateside so I'll have hangovers too.

What I wanted a cite on is how the Rolands violated Iraq's agreement (not the sanctions).
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 03:14 am
Check this out


Awesome
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 09:16 am
Craven de Kere wrote:
Tiber, ise drunk as skunk. Haven;t been since I came stateside so I'll have hangovers too.

What I wanted a cite on is how the Rolands violated Iraq's agreement (not the sanctions).


UNSCR 661
Paragraph 3 Item C is the pertinent section:
The Security Council, Under Authority of Chapter VII of the UN Charter wrote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
S/RES/0661 (1990)
6 August 1990

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

RESOLUTION 661 (1990)

Adopted by the Security Council at its 2933rd meeting on 6 August 1990
The Security Council,

Reaffirming its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990,

Deeply concerned that that resolution has not been implemented and that the invasion by Iraq of Kuwait continues with further loss of human life and material destruction,

Determined to bring the invasion and occupation of Kuwait by Iraq to an end and to restore the sovereignty, independence and territorial integrity of Kuwait,

Noting that the legitimate Government of Kuwait has expressed its readiness to comply with resolution 660 (1990),

Mindful of its responsibilities under the Charter of the United Nations for the maintenance of international peace and security,

Affirming the inherent right of individual or collective self-defence, in response to the armed attack by Iraq against Kuwait, in accordance with Article 51 of the Charter,

Acting under Chapter VII of the Charter of the United Nations,

1. Determines that Iraq so far has failed to comply with paragraph 2 of resolution 660 (1990) and has usurped the authority of the legitimate Government of Kuwait;

2. Decides, as a consequence, to take the following measures to secure compliance of Iraq with paragraph 2 of resolution 660 (1990) and to restore the authority of the legitimate Government of Kuwait;

3. Decides that all States shall prevent:


(a) The import into their territories of all commodities and products originating in Iraq or Kuwait exported therefrom after the date of the present resolution;
(b) Any activities by their nationals or in their territories which would promote or are calculated to promote the export or trans-shipment of any commodities or products from Iraq or Kuwait; and any dealings by their nationals or their flag vessels or in their territories in any commodities or products originating in Iraq or Kuwait and exported therefrom after the date of the present resolution, including in particular any transfer of funds to Iraq or Kuwait for the purposes of such activities or dealings;

(c) The sale or supply by their nationals or from their territories or using their flag vessels of any commodities or products, including weapons or any other military equipment, whether or not originating in their territories but not including supplies intended strictly for medical purposes, and, in humanitarian circumstances, foodstuffs, to any person or body in Iraq or Kuwait or to any person or body for the purposes of any business carried on in or operated from Iraq or Kuwait, and any activities by their nationals or in their territories which promote or are calculated to promote such sale or supply of such commodities or products;

4. Decides that all States shall not make available to the Government of Iraq or to any commercial, industrial or public utility undertaking in Iraq or Kuwait, any funds or any other financial or economic resources and shall prevent their nationals and any persons within their territories from removing from their territories or otherwise making available to that Government or to any such undertaking any such funds or resources and from remitting any other funds to persons or bodies within Iraq or Kuwait, except payments exclusively for strictly medical or humanitarian purposes and, in humanitarian circumstances, foodstuffs;

5. Calls upon all States, including States non-members of the United Nations, to act strictly in accordance with the provisions of the present resolution notwithstanding any contract entered into or licence granted before the date of the present resolution;

6. Decides to establish, in accordance with rule 28 of the provisional rules of procedure of the Security Council, a Committee of the Security Council consisting of all the members of the Council, to undertake the following tasks and to report on its work to the Council with its observations and recommendations:


(a) To examine the reports on the progress of the implementation of the present resolution which will be submitted by the Secretary-General;
(b) To seek from all States further information regarding the action taken by them concerning the effective implementation of the provisions laid down in the present resolution;

7. Calls upon all States to co-operate fully with the Committee in the fulfilment of its task, including supplying such information as may be sought by the Committee in pursuance of the present resolution;

8. Requests the Secretary-General to provide all necessary assistance to the Committee and to make the necessary arrangements in the Secretariat for the purpose;

9. Decides that, notwithstanding paragraphs 4 through 8 above, nothing in the present resolution shall prohibit assistance to the legitimate Government of Kuwait, and calls upon all States:


(a) To take appropriate measures to protect assets of the legitimate Government of Kuwait and its agencies;
(b) Not to recognize any regime set up by the occupying Power;

10. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Council on the progress of the implementation of the present resolution, the first report to be submitted within thirty days;

11. Decides to keep this item on its agenda and to continue its efforts to put an early end to the invasion by Iraq.

In the Safwan Accord, which established the terms of the ceasefire, Iraq agreed to abide by all previous pertinent resolutions, with specific reference to UNSCR 661 among others.
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 09:20 am
Current NY Review has the following essays...
Quote:

Quote:
Iraq: What Went Wrong
By General Wesley K. Clark
The decisive phase of the American campaign to invade Iraq and seize Baghdad was remarkably successful. But there were also problems that should not be ignored.

Quote:
Un-American Activities
By Anthony Lewis
The harsh treatment of aliens since September 11 has had little political attention. Relatively few Americans know or care much about it. In his powerful book, Enemy Aliens, David Cole shows why we should care, as a matter not only of humanity but of self-interest. The repressive measures that President Bush and Attorney General Ashcroft first took against aliens are now being applied to citizens.

Quote:
Israel: The Alternative
By Tony Judt
The Middle East peace process is finished. It did not die: it was killed. Mahmoud Abbas was undermined by the President of the Palestinian Authority and humiliated by the Prime Minister of Israel. His successor awaits a similar fate. Israel continues to mock its American patron, building illegal settlements in cynical disregard of the "road map." The President of the United States of America has been reduced to a ventriloquist's dummy, pitifully reciting the Israeli cabinet line: "It's all Arafat's fault." Israelis themselves grimly await the next bomber. Palestinian Arabs, corralled into shrinking Bantustans, subsist on EU handouts. On the corpse-strewn landscape of the Fertile Crescent, Ariel Sharon, Yasser Arafat, and a handful of terrorists can all claim victory, and they do. Have we reached the end of the road? What is to be done?
http://www.nybooks.com/
0 Replies
 
blatham
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 09:34 am
And I think it is time to remark that the US made a big show of the "Road Map" for Israel/Palestine when it was becoming a necessity to help out Blair, but that the hollowness of this public relations trumpet blast is rather evident now, what with Israel's moves to increase housing in the West Bank and with their decision to build the wall through areas which, by UN resolution 242, is illegal. And we'll note that Sharon's assistant's statement to Israeli press is that they understand the US to approve.

And we'll note that there isn't a mid-east analyst alive who hasn't spoken to the centrality of the Israel/Palestine issue to the fact of Muslim anger and terrorism recruitment.

You gotta get rid of this administration. You gotta.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 09:39 am
the road map to hell:
"JERUSALEM, Oct. 4 (Xinhuanet) -- At least 18 people were killed and 40 others injured, six seriously, in a suicide bombing attack inside a restaurant in northern Israel's coastal city of Haifa,local rescue workers confirmed.

  The explosion occurred at around 14:15 p.m. (1115 GMT) inside the "Maxim" restaurant on the Ha'hagana street at the southern entrance to Haifa. The restaurant has been completely demolished by the powerful blast.
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 09:43 am
Quote:
Well, technically the Weapons o'Mass Destruction category includes Nukes. The difference is that Korea actually has them (as well as Bio and Chem weapons), therefore we will not attack them.


So so obvious but thanks for bringing it up, hobitbob.

Blatham, I will read all of your links (I liked the first one, but Schlesinger) and comment. Thanks.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 11:29 am
The difference is that unlike Iraq, North Korea has powerful neighbors interested, to their own purposes, in a peaceful resolution. Iran, however, is entirely another, and far more worrisome, matter.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 02:12 pm
Iran may be something else ... at least the war there for some Britons:

Quote:
The families of British soldiers killed in Iraq have fiercely criticised Tony Blair's decision to attend a remembrance service for Britain's war dead.

One grieving relative - the father of the helicopter pilot Philip Green killed in a crash - said the Prime Minister should stay away from the service at St Paul's Cathedral on Friday.

Richard Green, a businessman from Grantham, Lincolnshire, claimed Mr Blair had lied to the nation about the need for war and was ultimately to blame for the deaths of 51 British troops. "He shouldn't be there because he's the one that killed them," he said. The attacks are highly damaging for Mr Blair - coming only days after he avoided an embarrassing clash with Labour activists over his decision to attack Iraq without United Nations backing.


from tomorrow's Independent on Sunday: Blair 'not welcome' at war service
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 02:32 pm
French Cut Polish Sausage

Quote:
Poland: French Missile Report Was Wrong
By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS
Published: October 4, 2003
Filed at 3:08 p.m. ET



WARSAW, Poland (AP) -- After a protest from French President Jacques Chirac, Poland said Saturday it had been mistaken in reporting that its troops found new French-made anti-aircraft misiles in central Iraq.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 02:44 pm
Quote:
No uranium, no munitions, no missiles, no programmes

As the first progress report from the Iraq Survey Group is released, Cambridge WMD expert Dr Glen Rangwala finds that even the diluted claims made for Saddam Hussein's arsenal don't stand up


link to full article
0 Replies
 
Kara
 
  1  
Reply Sat 4 Oct, 2003 03:11 pm
timber, I posted a congrats for your darts win, but it seems to have flown off into cyberspace (less successfully meeting its target than did your darts.) Is the amount of beer consumed proportional to the closeness of the score as the matches wind down? It all sound like grand fun.
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
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2025 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.1 seconds on 07/27/2025 at 01:22:14