0
   

The US, UN & Iraq II

 
 
BillW
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:01 am
Quote:
Iraq war planned long in advance; banned arms not the priority: Blix

MADRID (AFP) - The invasion of Iraq (news - web sites) was planned a long time in advance, and the United States and Britain are not primarily concerned with finding any banned weapons of mass destruction, the chief UN weapons inspector, Hans Blix, said.

There is evidence that this war was planned well in advance. Sometimes this raises doubts about their attitude to the (weapons) inspections," Blix told Spanish daily El Pais.

"I now believe that finding weapons of mass destruction has been relegated, I would say, to fourth place, which is why the United States and Britain are now waging war on Iraq. Today the main aim is to change the dictatorial regime of Saddam Hussein (news - web sites)," he said, according to the Spanish text of the interview.

Blix said US President George W. Bush (news - web sites) had told him in October 2002 that he backed the UN's work to verify US and British claims that Baghdad was developing biological, chemical and nuclear weapons.

But he said he knew at the time "there were people within the Bush administration who were sceptical and who were working on engineering regime change". By the start of March the hawks in both Washington and London were getting impatient, he added.

Blix said that he thought the US might initially have believed Iraq possessed weapons of mass destruction -- although its "fabrication" of evidence raised doubts about even that -- but that Washington was now less convinced by its own claims.

"I think the Americans started the war thinking there were some. I think they now believe less in that possibility. But I don't know -- you ask yourself a lot of questions when you see the things they did to try and demonstrate that the Iraqis had nuclear weapons, like the fake contract with Niger," he explained.

That was a reference to US allegations -- later denied -- that Iraq had sought to purchase uranium from the west African state of Niger.

"I'm very curious to see if they do find any (weapons)," he said.

Blix said the war, which on Wednesday entered its 21st day, was "a very high price to pay in terms of human lives and the destruction of a country" when the threat of weapons proliferation could have been contained by UN inspections.

By attacking Iraq, Washington had sent the wrong message -- that if a country did not possess biological, chemical or nuclear weapons, it risked being attacked.

"The United States maintains that the war on Iraq is designed to send a signal to other countries to keep away from weapons of mass destruction. But people are getting a different message. Take the announcement North Korea (news - web sites) has just made. It's tantamount to saying 'if you let in the inspectors, like Iraq did, you get attacked'.

North Korea accused the United States on Sunday of using a UN Security Council discussion of its nuclear programme as a "prelude to war" and warned that it would fully mobilise and strengthen its forces.

"It's an important problem," Blix continued. "If a country perceives that its security is guaranteed, it won't need to consider weapons of mass destruction. This security guarantee is the first line of defence against the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction."

The 74-year-old Swede announced in March that he would step down from his post when his contract runs out in June.

Blix's reputation for independence and resisting political pressure was sorely tested as the Iraq crisis unfolded and US officials became exasperated with his measured reports on Iraqi cooperation with his inspection teams.

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?
tmpl=story&u=/afp/20030409/wl_mideast_afp/iraq_war_un_blix_030409135638
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:02 am
I don't necessarily believe US troops act with any more or any less honour in war than any others. But I do believe that those attacks on the Al Jazeera offices and the Palestine Hotel were deliberate and were therefore sanctioned at a very high level. Its got nothing to do with the honour/bravery/competence etc etc of the individual soldier.

Oh and just in case people suspect I am secretly pining for the passing of Saddam. Not true. I worked for a company that supplied (in the 1980's when it was ok) equipment to the Iraqi military. The casual barbarity inflicted on poor conscripts left one in no doubt about the vile nature of Saddam's regime. But of course in those days he was our customer, and as all good marketing guys know, the customer is king. The final straw for me was when a reporter for the Observer (Bazoft) was taken into custody accused of spying. (Don't forget Margaret Thatcher and Saddam Hussein are doing good business). But despite much pleading and protests at the highest level that it was a case of mistaken identity, Saddam had him hung.
0 Replies
 
perception
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:03 am
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:18 am
Rumsfeld now tells us Saddam might be in Syria, and (rather like a woman's trousseau) his weapons of mass destruction have gone on ahead. Laughing

This must be a likudnik's paradise. So many excuses, so many opportunites. Remnants of Saddam's Ba'athist regime in Ba'athist Syria. Weapons of mass destruction (crates of them, with WMD in English and Arabic stencilled on the side) in, well where do we want to find them? Mr bin Laden, or is it just Ali Qaida and his 40 looters in oooh lets think Tehran, no Yemen could be Libya. Enough to make one howl like a wolfowitz, but not with joy.
0 Replies
 
trespassers will
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:25 am
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Rumsfeld now tells us Saddam might be in Syria, and (rather like a woman's trousseau) his weapons of mass destruction have gone on ahead. Laughing

This must be a likudnik's paradise. So many excuses, so many opportunites. Remnants of Saddam's Ba'athist regime in Ba'athist Syria. Weapons of mass destruction (crates of them, with WMD in English and Arabic stencilled on the side) in, well where do we want to find them? Mr bin Laden, or is it just Ali Qaida and his 40 looters in oooh lets think Tehran, no Yemen could be Libya. Enough to make one howl like a wolfowitz, but not with joy.

Steve, I may not agree with your point of view, but I appreciate the style with which you express it. You had me chuckling even while I was shaking my head in disagreement. Very Happy
0 Replies
 
Steve 41oo
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:27 am
Quote:
He (Dr. Ahmad Chalabi) has been returned to Iraq with 700 followers and is being tested by the Bush administration at this time.


A small prize for the 10 most appropriate test questions.

for example

Question 1. Business Ethics. Name the current vice president of the United States.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:29 am
FOX News is currently running a phonecall with the reporter who wrote the article I cited above. During this phonecall, the reporter stated that the Army Team brought in to perform more extensive tests than the Marines could perform, has indicatedt there are strong indications of "Weapons Grade Plutonium". Further tests will follow as rapidly as can be arranged.

Oh, a gloat here. I just can't resist. ... forgive me ...

Remember folks, you heard it here first Twisted Evil


Again Twisted Evil Twisted Evil Twisted Evil
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:36 am
timber, I don't recognize the "gloat," but it won't be the first nor the last. Wink c.i.
0 Replies
 
Gelisgesti
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:37 am
CounterPunch Special Report
Secret Bechtel Documents Reveal:
Yes, It Is About Oil

By DAVID LINDORFF

Is the war against Iraq all about oil? Not to hear Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld tell it. Back on Nov. 15, he called the notion that oil was the real reason behind the Bush administration's drive against Saddam Hussein "nonsense," saying, "It has nothing to do with oil, literally nothing to do with oil."

But a new study released by the Institute for Policy Studies, based upon secret diplomatic cables just declassified by the National Archives, and internal communications of the Bechtel Corporation, suggests just the opposite?that oil is the underlying cause of this war.



I'm telling you guys this is popping up all over the place .... I found the same story, told in a different manner, in an unrelated source just this morning and posted it a few pages back. Just please take the time to check this out. Ity's not that long a read.

http://www.counterpunch.org/
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:52 am
cicerone imposter wrote:
timber, I don't recognize the "gloat," but it won't be the first nor the last. Wink c.i.


Ya just gotta keep up better, c.i. Laughing Laughing Laughing ... the gloat has to do with this:

http://www.able2know.com/forums/viewtopic.php?p=171883#171883 ,

from several hours ago, related to the "Just Now Breaking News" of Supicious Iraqi Nuclear Material. I get the biggest kick outta finding obscure stuff that turns into "Big News". I usually admit that nothing came of something I picked up, but I rarely gloat over my substantive finds. Its an ego flaw, I guess ... its great to be "Right" more often than not, particularly when it comes to War. Twisted Evil Rolling Eyes Twisted Evil
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:55 am
Quote:
perception: Is Dr. Ahmad Chalabi too controversial to be the new leader of Iraq?


The following is one of many possible answers (just additional to the couple others given before):

Quote:

Ahmad Chalabi
Why shouldn't a politician be president of Iraq?


(BTW: the mentioned FT-article is the translation from 'Die Zeit', I quoted before.)
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 11:56 am
timber, With so many false alarms concerning this war, I'm apt to discredit hot off the press news. I prefer to wait for that "confirmation," then respond. Wink c.i.
0 Replies
 
frolic
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 12:02 pm
Steve (as 41oo) wrote:
Rumsfeld now tells us Saddam might be in Syria, and (rather like a woman's trousseau) his weapons of mass destruction have gone on ahead. Laughing

This must be a likudnik's paradise. So many excuses, so many opportunites. Remnants of Saddam's Ba'athist regime in Ba'athist Syria. Weapons of mass destruction (crates of them, with WMD in English and Arabic stencilled on the side) in, well where do we want to find them? Mr bin Laden, or is it just Ali Qaida and his 40 looters in oooh lets think Tehran, no Yemen could be Libya. Enough to make one howl like a wolfowitz, but not with joy.


He must have been driving to Damascus because the US controls the skies. That means several hours driving with quite a caravan of vehicles. And how long is that trip? Some hundred miles? So the US forces let this man flee to Syria without stopping him? This can mean two things.

1)There are some very uncapable serviceman in the US army
2) Saddam had a pre-war agreement with the US. That would also explain the swift conquest of Bagdad.

Or Rumsfeld could be lying as usual.

Other options
Saddam retreated to Tikrit
Saddam was killed in a decapitation airstrike
one stand-in fled to Damascus, one was killed in the first airstrike, one fled to Tikrit and the real Saddam is now on the Bahamas drinking his Margaritas.
0 Replies
 
cicerone imposter
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 12:04 pm
It seems Saddam's disappearance resembles the disappearance of Osama. Quite funny, I think. Wink c.i.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 12:17 pm
Lola wrote:
My other impression from the coverage I've been able to watch is that we see no images or interviews with angry or unhappy Iraqis. There was one short statement by an Iraqi saying he didn't want America to govern Iraq, and his tone was stern. But he also said that any honest Iraqi would tell you they are glad to see Saddam out. Logically, it seems to me, if the news weren't being so tightly controlled, we would see at least a mix of feelings. I don't care to have my news strained through a sieve as if I were a child, unable to make up my own mind. I resent being fed pablum when what I want is honest information.


On Dutch news at least even last night they had a mix of reactions - as I already quoted above, there were the cheering Iraqis kissing the soldiers and calling out "Thank you, thank you America", but there was also the angry man yelling at the cameraman, bloodied cloth in hand: "this was a child's! You did this, America, you did this!", and he showed the family of the child in question, weeping and crying.

I'm sure the first kind of reaction is the more common one, but if you do only get the first kind of images, it does indeed say more about your media than about Iraq.
0 Replies
 
Asherman
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 12:17 pm
Blatham,

I suppose I am a romantic of sorts, a holdover from earlier times. I love this country, its flag, and the values that once were taught in one room schoolhouses. The land and sky here may be no larger than in other parts of the world, but to me they are emblematic of the largeness of American hopes and dreams of liberty. I know, perhaps better than most, that Americans have done unjust things, have made grave errors, and sometimes imposed their views and values on others. Americans are often depicted as brash, arrogant, patronizing, and far too wealthy. We often discount the world outside our borders; our natural inclination is inward and isolationist. We've mostly come to celebrate our diversity, and the richness that immigrant cultures have brought us. Here you can think whatever you wish with no fear that the secret police will drag you away in the night to a torture chamber. Here you have to work at it to be poor, and even the poor often have two cars and a room filled with electronic gadgets. We are typically preoccupied with Truth and Justice, and avoid offending others almost as an article of faith.

I have the highest regard and faith in our armed forces. They are capable, almost certainly the most capable soldiers in the world today. They are professionals whose doctrines have been painstakingly developed. They are equipped and armed with the finest materials that our technology can devise. Their training is superb, and their dedication to duty, honor and country is on the highest order. Merit and rigorous evaluations insure that only the very best climb to high position, regardless of age, gender, race, ethnicity, etc. I really doubt that anyone will achieve field rank who is prejudiced, lazy, mentally slow or defective, or who are not competent to lead. This is a military that encourages initiative, and rewards success. This is a disciplined army where orders are obeyed, even though the soldier may have personal doubts. These are not a bunch of wild, trigger-happy yahoos who enjoy murder, mayhem, or who just get a kick out of being "powerful". These soldiers are among the best of us.

I'm a romantic? I suppose that is a reasonably fair assessment. Perhaps I'm wrong to believe that Americans tell the truth as they believe it to be, and that they are altruistic and compassionate. Maybe the times have changed, and America is, as some maintain, the moral equivalent of Nazi Germany, or Stalinist Russia. I just don't believe it -- not even for a moment.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 12:30 pm
c.i., the way I figure, I'd rather keep up with what's happening and adjust accordingly than to try to cope with what has already happened.
0 Replies
 
trespassers will
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 01:10 pm
nimh wrote:
Lola wrote:
My other impression from the coverage I've been able to watch is that we see no images or interviews with angry or unhappy Iraqis. There was one short statement by an Iraqi saying he didn't want America to govern Iraq, and his tone was stern. But he also said that any honest Iraqi would tell you they are glad to see Saddam out. Logically, it seems to me, if the news weren't being so tightly controlled, we would see at least a mix of feelings. I don't care to have my news strained through a sieve as if I were a child, unable to make up my own mind. I resent being fed pablum when what I want is honest information.


On Dutch news at least even last night they had a mix of reactions - as I already quoted above, there were the cheering Iraqis kissing the soldiers and calling out "Thank you, thank you America", but there was also the angry man yelling at the cameraman, bloodied cloth in hand: "this was a child's! You did this, America, you did this!", and he showed the family of the child in question, weeping and crying.

I'm sure the first kind of reaction is the more common one, but if you do only get the first kind of images, it does indeed say more about your media than about Iraq.

nimh - I can only tell you that if you go by what lola wrote above, you will ge a very one-sided and inaccurate picture of the reporting seen on American TV. Her "impression" may even be as biased, inaccurate and one-sided as she portrays the American media coverage to be.

I have seen many images of heroism and horror, faces elated and enraged, children laughing and who will never laugh again. I can only guess how anyone could come to the "impression" lola has shared with us, but I can tell you emphatically that her impression is not representative of reality.
0 Replies
 
timberlandko
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 01:16 pm
2nd Btn 23rd Marines report finding vehicle which may be mobile bioweapon. I just gotta say, with all the smoke, there's very likely a gun laying around somewhere.
0 Replies
 
dyslexia
 
  1  
Reply Thu 10 Apr, 2003 01:17 pm
if you go by what Lola wrote you will get a one-sided view, hers
if you go by what Tres wrote you will get a one-sided view, his
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
 
  1. Forums
  2. » The US, UN & Iraq II
  3. » Page 180
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 11/05/2024 at 05:21:59