The W
Views: 101493431
Main | FAQ | Search: Y! / G | Color chart | Log in for more!
21.12.07 0102
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - NO Iraqi WMD's in a Decade? Register and log in to post!
Pages: 1 2 3 Next(1065 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
User
Post (60 total)
rockdotcom_2.0
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 471/763
EXP: 1449313
For next: 36624

Since: 9.1.02
From: Virginia Beach Va

Since last post: 640 days
Last activity: 255 days
AIM:  
#1 Posted on 2.3.04 2244.36
Reposted on: 2.3.11 2246.32
UN says no WMDs in Iraq since 1994 (story.news.yahoo.com)


I have no idea how the the our conservative brethren can spin this other than to blame Bill CLinton somehow. So please guys go right ahead. But for the first time in my life Im actually looking forward to November.


This has convinced me to contact my local Democratic party officials and volunteer and do whatever I can.


Promote this thread!
Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Level: 47

Posts: 56/512
EXP: 732816
For next: 33393

Since: 6.1.04
From: New York

Since last post: 283 days
Last activity: 1 day
#2 Posted on 2.3.04 2331.57
Reposted on: 2.3.11 2333.25
Is this the UN that has Syria serve as the President of its Security Council?
Is it the UN that allows Cuba & Libya on its Human Rights Commission?
Are they the UN that had Iraq on its Nuclear Disarmament Committee?

Thanks, but I'll choose to ignore the entity that takes up valuable real estate in my city so it can try & place the rogue nations of the world on equal standing with us & other free, civilized nations...

Why the need to spin something that comes pre-spun? :)
eviljonhunt81
Pepperoni
Level: 66

Posts: 829/1084
EXP: 2454887
For next: 6977

Since: 6.1.02
From: not Japan

Since last post: 3046 days
Last activity: 3043 days
#3 Posted on 2.3.04 2344.43
Reposted on: 2.3.11 2345.05
    Originally posted by rockdotcom_2.0
    I have no idea how the the our conservative brethren can spin this other than to blame Bill CLinton somehow.


Looks like it was "discredit the UN" instead. Too bad. As a consellation prize, you get the knowledge that WMDs have somehow not become the reason for the Iraq war and a version of the home game.
rockdotcom_2.0
Frankfurter
Level: 57

Posts: 473/763
EXP: 1449313
For next: 36624

Since: 9.1.02
From: Virginia Beach Va

Since last post: 640 days
Last activity: 255 days
AIM:  
#4 Posted on 3.3.04 0026.33
Reposted on: 3.3.11 0026.37
    Originally posted by eviljonhunt81
      Originally posted by rockdotcom_2.0
      I have no idea how the the our conservative brethren can spin this other than to blame Bill CLinton somehow.


    Looks like it was "discredit the UN" instead. Too bad. As a consellation prize, you get the knowledge that WMDs have somehow not become the reason for the Iraq war and a version of the home game.



But "discredit the UN" was my next guess! Honestly!
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 2881/4700
EXP: 21724419
For next: 112243

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1328 days
Last activity: 1125 days
#5 Posted on 3.3.04 0617.51
Reposted on: 3.3.11 0617.58
When was the last time the UN was anything but discredited?
ThreepMe
Morcilla
Level: 53

Posts: 489/641
EXP: 1111571
For next: 45555

Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3760 days
Last activity: 3419 days
#6 Posted on 3.3.04 0619.01
Reposted on: 3.3.11 0619.05
    Originally posted by Von Maestro
    Is this the UN that has Syria serve as the President of its Security Council?
    Is it the UN that allows Cuba & Libya on its Human Rights Commission?
    Are they the UN that had Iraq on its Nuclear Disarmament Committee?

    Thanks, but I'll choose to ignore the entity that takes up valuable real estate in my city so it can try & place the rogue nations of the world on equal standing with us & other free, civilized nations...

    Why the need to spin something that comes pre-spun? :)


Or you can listen to the government that flat out lied to you about WMD's.

Take your pick.
PalpatineW
Lap cheong
Level: 77

Posts: 1032/1528
EXP: 4110173
For next: 80975

Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2888 days
Last activity: 2731 days
AIM:  
#7 Posted on 3.3.04 0748.07
Reposted on: 3.3.11 0748.10
    Originally posted by ThreepMe
      Originally posted by Von Maestro
      Is this the UN that has Syria serve as the President of its Security Council?
      Is it the UN that allows Cuba & Libya on its Human Rights Commission?
      Are they the UN that had Iraq on its Nuclear Disarmament Committee?

      Thanks, but I'll choose to ignore the entity that takes up valuable real estate in my city so it can try & place the rogue nations of the world on equal standing with us & other free, civilized nations...

      Why the need to spin something that comes pre-spun? :)


    Or you can listen to the government that flat out lied to you about WMD's.

    Take your pick.


That, of course, is your interpretation of events. I prefer to look at it this way.

1.) Bush got some intel that said Iraq was dangerous and had WMDs.
2.) Saddam refused to cooperate entirely.
3.) Bush didn't want to chance it, and went to war.

Though you, in your vast wisdom, Threep, seem to think that the goal all along was war. Clearly it's some kind of conspiracy theory; Bush is willing to throw American lives away for a few bucks in potential oil dollars after he leaves office. Or maybe he's just bent on world domination. I suppose it all makes sense in your paranoid worldview, Threep.
ThreepMe
Morcilla
Level: 53

Posts: 490/641
EXP: 1111571
For next: 45555

Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3760 days
Last activity: 3419 days
#8 Posted on 3.3.04 0754.06
Reposted on: 3.3.11 0756.50
    Originally posted by PalpatineW
      Originally posted by ThreepMe
        Originally posted by Von Maestro
        Is this the UN that has Syria serve as the President of its Security Council?
        Is it the UN that allows Cuba & Libya on its Human Rights Commission?
        Are they the UN that had Iraq on its Nuclear Disarmament Committee?

        Thanks, but I'll choose to ignore the entity that takes up valuable real estate in my city so it can try & place the rogue nations of the world on equal standing with us & other free, civilized nations...

        Why the need to spin something that comes pre-spun? :)


      Or you can listen to the government that flat out lied to you about WMD's.

      Take your pick.


    That, of course, is your interpretation of events. I prefer to look at it this way.

    1.) Bush got some intel that said Iraq was dangerous and had WMDs.
    2.) Saddam refused to cooperate entirely.
    3.) Bush didn't want to chance it, and went to war.

    Though you, in your vast wisdom, Threep, seem to think that the goal all along was war. Clearly it's some kind of conspiracy theory; Bush is willing to throw American lives away for a few bucks in potential oil dollars after he leaves office. Or maybe he's just bent on world domination. I suppose it all makes sense in your paranoid worldview, Threep.


Wow, you draw a lot from a simple statement.

Or...

We made hasty decisions based on Intel that wasn't followed up on. Either way, what was said was not the truth. And the truth could have been discovered if Bush wasn't so ready to jump the gun (pun intended).

But I guess, in your vast wisdom, one can draw dramatic conclusions from a simple statement.

If I'm paraniod, then you are a sheep. See, I can be asinine too!
PalpatineW
Lap cheong
Level: 77

Posts: 1034/1528
EXP: 4110173
For next: 80975

Since: 2.1.02
From: Getting Rowdy

Since last post: 2888 days
Last activity: 2731 days
AIM:  
#9 Posted on 3.3.04 0756.03
Reposted on: 3.3.11 0757.49
My problem is that you're being incredibly simple. "Or, you can trust the government that lied to you!" And now, in your next post, you're more or less admitting that it was simply a case of mismanaging intelligence, and not an instance of intentionally lying.

So now you're being simple and inconsistent.
StaggerLee
Scrapple
Level: 141

Posts: 1023/6371
EXP: 33966133
For next: 153965

Since: 3.10.02
From: Right side of the tracks

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 5 hours
#10 Posted on 3.3.04 0757.21
Reposted on: 3.3.11 0757.51
Or, here is a better way to show WHY we went to war, and WHY it was the correct thing to do:

Simple history lesson.



1990 Iraq invades its tiny neighbor, Kuwait, after talks break down over oil production and debt repayment. Iraqi president Saddam Hussein later annexes Kuwait and declares it a 19th province of Iraq (Aug. 2). President Bush believes that Iraq intends to invade Saudi Arabia and take control of the region's oil supplies. He begins organizing a multinational coalition to seek Kuwait's freedom and restoration of its legitimate government. The UN Security Council authorizes economic sanctions against Iraq. Bush orders U.S. troops to protect Saudi Arabia at the Saudis' request and “Operation Desert Shield” begins (Aug. 6). 230,000 American troops arrive in Saudi Arabia to take defensive action, but when Iraq continues a huge military buildup in Kuwait, the President orders an additional 200,000 troops deployed to prepare for a possible offensive action by the U.S.-led coalition forces. He subsequently obtains a UN Security Council resolution setting a Jan. 15, 1991 deadline for Iraq to withdraw unconditionally from Kuwait (Nov. 8).1991 Bush wins congressional approval for his position with the most devastating air assault in history against military targets in Iraq and Kuwait (Jan. 16). He rejects a Soviet-Iraq peace plan for a gradual withdrawal that does not comply with all the UN resolutions and gives Iraq an ultimatum to withdraw from Kuwait by noon Feb. 23 (Feb. 22). The president orders the ground war to begin (Feb. 24). In a brilliant and lightning-fast campaign, U.S. and coalition forces smash through Iraq's defenses and defeat Saddam Hussein's troops in only four days of combat. Allies enter Kuwait City (Feb. 26). Iraqi army sets fire to over 500 of Kuwait's oil wells as final act of destruction to Kuwait's infrastructure. Bush orders a unilateral cease-fire 100 hours after the ground offensive started (Feb. 27). Allied and Iraqi military leaders meet on battlefield to discuss terms for a formal cease-fire to end the Gulf War. Iraq agrees to abide by all of the UN resolutions (Mar. 3). The first Allied prisoners of war are released (Mar. 4). Official cease-fire accepted and signed (April 6). 532,000 U.S. forces served in Operation Desert Storm. There were a total of 147 U.S. battle deaths during the Gulf War, 145 nonbattle deaths, and 467 wounded in action.U.N. Resolutions on Iraq
Resolution 687:
Calling for a formal cease-fire to end the Gulf War, the Security Council demands that Iraq allow for the destruction of all its chemical and biological weapons. It also forced Iraq to unconditionally agree not to develop weapons of mass destruction. To oversee compliance of the resolution, the council establishes a special commission (UNSCOM) to conduct inspections of biological and chemical weapon sites and authorizes the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) to investigate Iraq's nuclear weapons capabilities. The resolution also re-imposes sanctions, linking their removal to Iraq's compliance with disarmament.

Resolution 706:
"Concerned by the serious nutritional and health situation" of the Iraqi people, the Security Council allows countries to buy oil (not to exceed $1.6 billion) from Iraq. Iraq is ordered to use the money to pay for humanitarian supplies, inspections and reparations to Kuwait.

Resolution 1441:
The latest resolution, jointly sponsored by Britain and the United States, gives United Nations inspectors the "immediate, unimpeded and unconditional" right to search the country for chemical, biological or nuclear weapons. This includes President Saddam Hussein's palaces. The resolution threatens Iraq with "serious consequences" should it fail to cooperate, alluding to the use of forceby the United States.


(excerpts from UN Resolution 687)


Reaffirming the need to be assured of Iraq's peaceful intentions in the light of its unlawful invasion and occupation of Kuwait,


Conscious also of the statements by Iraq threatening to use weapons in violation of its obligations under the Geneva Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, signed at Geneva on 17 June 1925, and of its prior use of chemical weapons and affirming that grave consequences would follow any further use by Iraq of such weapons


Recalling also that Iraq has signed the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction, of 10 April 1972,


Noting the importance of Iraq ratifying this Convention,

Aware of the use by Iraq of ballistic missiles in unprovoked attacks and therefore of the need to take specific measures in regard to such missiles located in Iraq,

Concerned by the reports in the hands of Member States that Iraq has attempted to acquire materials for a nuclear-weapons programme contrary to its obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1 July 1968,


Noting that despite the progress being made in fulfilling the obligations of resolution 686 (1991), many Kuwaiti and third country nationals are still not accounted for and property remains unreturned,


Recalling the International Convention against the Taking of Hostages, opened for signature at New York on 18 December 1979, which categorizes all acts of taking hostages as manifestations of international terrorism,


Deploring threats made by Iraq during the recent conflict to make use of terrorism against targets outside Iraq and the taking of hostages by Iraq,


THIS IS THE IMPORTANT PART! PAY ATTENTION TO THE LAST SECTION ESPECIALLY!!!!!!

1. Affirms all thirteen resolutions noted above, except as expressly changed below to achieve the goals of this resolution, including a formal cease-fire;


A

2. Demands that Iraq and Kuwait respect the inviolability of the international boundary and the allocation of islands set out in the "Agreed Minutes Between the State of Kuwait and the Republic of Iraq Regarding the Restoration of Friendly Relations, Recognition and Related Matters", signed by them in the exercise of their sovereignty at Baghdad on 4 October 1963 and registered with the United Nations and published by the United Nations in document 7063, United Nations, Treaty Series, 1964;


3. Calls upon the Secretary-General to lend his assistance to make arrangements with Iraq and Kuwait to demarcate the boundary between Iraq and Kuwait, drawing on appropriate material, including the map transmitted by Security Council document S/22412 and to report back to the Security Council within one month;


4. Decides to guarantee the inviolability of the above-mentioned international boundary and to take as appropriate all necessary measures to that end in accordance with the Charter of the United Nations;


B

5. Requests the Secretary-General, after consulting with Iraq and Kuwait, to submit within three days to the Security Council for its approval a plan for the immediate deployment of a United Nations observer unit to monitor the Khor Abdullah and a demilitarized zone, which is hereby established, extending ten kilometres into Iraq and five kilometres into Kuwait from the boundary referred to in the "Agreed Minutes Between the State of Kuwait and the Republic of Iraq Regarding the Restoration of Friendly Relations, Recognition and Related Matters" of 4 October 1963; to deter violations of the boundary through its presence in and surveillance of the demilitarized zone; to observe any hostile or potentially hostile action mounted from the territory of one State to the other; and for the Secretary-General to report regularly to the Security Council on the operations of the unit, and immediately if there are serious violations of the zone or potential threats to peace;


6. Notes that as soon as the Secretary-General notifies the Security Council of the completion of the deployment of the United Nations observer unit, the conditions will be established for the Member States cooperating with Kuwait in accordance with resolution 678 (1990) to bring their military presence in Iraq to an end consistent with resolution 686 (1991);


C

7. Invites Iraq to reaffirm unconditionally its obligations under the Geneva Protocol for the Prohibition of the Use in War of Asphyxiating, Poisonous or Other Gases, and of Bacteriological Methods of Warfare, signed at Geneva on 17 June 1925, and to ratify the Convention on the Prohibition of the Development, Production and Stockpiling of Bacteriological (Biological) and Toxin Weapons and on Their Destruction, of 10 April 1972;


8. Decides that Iraq shall unconditionally accept the destruction, removal, or rendering harmless, under international supervision, of:


(a) All chemical and biological weapons and all stocks of agents and all related subsystems and components and all research, development, support and manufacturing facilities;


(b) All ballistic missiles with a range greater than 150 kilometres and related major parts, and repair and production facilities;


9. Decides, for the implementation of paragraph 8 above, the following:


(a) Iraq shall submit to the Secretary-General, within fifteen days of the adoption of the present resolution, a declaration of the locations, amounts and types of all items specified in paragraph 8 and agree to urgent, on-site inspection as specified below;


(b) The Secretary-General, in consultation with the appropriate Governments and, where appropriate, with the Director-General of the World Health Organization, within forty-five days of the passage of the present resolution, shall develop, and submit to the Council for approval, a plan calling for the completion of the following acts within forty-five days of such approval:


(i) The forming of a Special Commission, which shall carry out immediate on-site inspection of Iraq's biological, chemical and missile capabilities, based on Iraq's declarations and the designation of any additional locations by the Special Commission itself;


(ii) The yielding by Iraq of possession to the Special Commission for destruction, removal or rendering harmless, taking into account the requirements of public safety, of all items specified under paragraph 8 (a) above, including items at the additional locations designated by the Special Commission under paragraph 9 (b) (i) above and the destruction by Iraq, under the supervision of the Special Commission, of all its missile capabilities, including launchers, as specified under paragraph 8 (b) above;


(iii) The provision by the Special Commission of the assistance and cooperation to the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency required in paragraphs 12 and 13 below;


10. Decides that Iraq shall unconditionally undertake not to use, develop, construct or acquire any of the items specified in paragraphs 8 and 9 above and requests the Secretary-General, in consultation with the Special Commission, to develop a plan for the future ongoing monitoring and verification of Iraq's compliance with this paragraph, to be submitted to the Security Council for approval within one hundred and twenty days of the passage of this resolution;


11. Invites Iraq to reaffirm unconditionally its obligations under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1 July 1968;


12. Decides that Iraq shall unconditionally agree not to acquire or develop nuclear weapons or nuclear-weapons-usable material or any subsystems or components or any research, development, support or manufacturing facilities related to the above; to submit to the Secretary-General and the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency within fifteen days of the adoption of the present resolution a declaration of the locations, amounts, and types of all items specified above; to place all of its nuclear-weapons-usable materials under the exclusive control, for custody and removal, of the International Atomic Energy Agency, with the assistance and cooperation of the Special Commission as provided for in the plan of the Secretary-General discussed in paragraph 9 (b) above; to accept, in accordance with the arrangements provided for in paragraph 13 below, urgent on-site inspection and the destruction, removal or rendering harmless as appropriate of all items specified above; and to accept the plan discussed in paragraph 13 below for the future ongoing monitoring and verification of its compliance with these undertakings;


13. Requests the Director-General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, through the Secretary-General, with the assistance and cooperation of the Special Commission as provided for in the plan of the Secretary-General in paragraph 9 (b) above, to carry out immediate on-site inspection of Iraq's nuclear capabilities based on Iraq's declarations and the designation of any additional locations by the Special Commission; to develop a plan for submission to the Security Council within forty-five days calling for the destruction, removal, or rendering harmless as appropriate of all items listed in paragraph 12 above; to carry out the plan within forty-five days following approval by the Security Council; and to develop a plan, taking into account the rights and obligations of Iraq under the Treaty on the Non-Proliferation of Nuclear Weapons of 1 July 1968, for the future ongoing monitoring and verification of Iraq's compliance with paragraph 12 above, including an inventory of all nuclear material in Iraq subject to the Agency's verification and inspections to confirm that Agency safeguards cover all relevant nuclear activities in Iraq, to be submitted to the Security Council for approval within one hundred and twenty days of the passage of the present resolution;


14. Takes note that the actions to be taken by Iraq in paragraphs 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 of the present resolution represent steps towards the goal of establishing in the Middle East a zone free from weapons of mass destruction and all missiles for their delivery and the objective of a global ban on chemical weapons;


D

15. Requests the Secretary-General to report to the Security Council on the steps taken to facilitate the return of all Kuwaiti property seized by Iraq, including a list of any property that Kuwait claims has not been returned or which has not been returned intact;


E

16. Reaffirms that Iraq, without prejudice to the debts and obligations of Iraq arising prior to 2 August 1990, which will be addressed through the normal mechanisms, is liable under international law for any direct loss, damage, including environmental damage and the depletion of natural resources, or injury to foreign Governments, nationals and corporations, as a result of Iraq's unlawful invasion and occupation of Kuwait;


17. Decides that all Iraqi statements made since 2 August 1990 repudiating its foreign debt are null and void, and demands that Iraq adhere scrupulously to all of its obligations concerning servicing and repayment of its foreign debt;


18. Decides also to create a fund to pay compensation for claims that fall within paragraph 16 above and to establish a Commission that will administer the fund;


19. Directs the Secretary-General to develop and present to the Security Council for decision, no later than thirty days following the adoption of the present resolution, recommendations for the fund to meet the requirement for the payment of claims established in accordance with paragraph 18 above and for a programme to implement the decisions in paragraphs 16, 17 and 18 above, including: administration of the fund; mechanisms for determining the appropriate level of Iraq's contribution to the fund based on a percentage of the value of the exports of petroleum and petroleum products from Iraq not to exceed a figure to be suggested to the Council by the Secretary-General, taking into account the requirements of the people of Iraq, Iraq's payment capacity as assessed in conjunction with the international financial institutions taking into consideration external debt service, and the needs of the Iraqi economy; arrangements for ensuring that payments are made to the fund; the process by which funds will be allocated and claims paid; appropriate procedures for evaluating losses, listing claims and verifying their validity and resolving disputed claims in respect of Iraq's liability as specified in paragraph 16 above; and the composition of the Commission designated above;


F

20. Decides, effective immediately, that the prohibitions against the sale or supply to Iraq of commodities or products, other than medicine and health supplies, and prohibitions against financial transactions related thereto contained in resolution 661 (1990) shall not apply to foodstuffs notified to the Security Council Committee established by resolution 661 (1990) concerning the situation between Iraq and Kuwait or, with the approval of that Committee, under the simplified and accelerated "no-objection" procedure, to materials and supplies for essential civilian needs as identified in the report of the Secretary-General dated 20 March 1991, and in any further findings of humanitarian need by the Committee;


21. Decides that the Security Council shall review the provisions of paragraph 20 above every sixty days in the light of the policies and practices of the Government of Iraq, including the implementation of all relevant resolutions of the Security Council, for the purpose of determining whether to reduce or lift the prohibitions referred to therein;


22. Decides that upon the approval by the Security Council of the programme called for in paragraph 19 above and upon Council agreement that Iraq has completed all actions contemplated in paragraphs 8, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 13 above, the prohibitions against the import of commodities and products originating in Iraq and the prohibitions against financial transactions related thereto contained in resolution 661 (1990) shall have no further force or effect;


23. Decides that, pending action by the Security Council under paragraph 22 above, the Security Council Committee established by resolution 661 (1990) shall be empowered to approve, when required to assure adequate financial resources on the part of Iraq to carry out the activities under paragraph 20 above, exceptions to the prohibition against the import of commodities and products originating in Iraq;


24. Decides that, in accordance with resolution 661 (1990) and subsequent related resolutions and until a further decision is taken by the Security Council, all States shall continue to prevent the sale or supply, or the promotion or facilitation of such sale or supply, to Iraq by their nationals, or from their territories or using their flag vessels or aircraft, of:


(a) Arms and related materiel of all types, specifically including the sale or transfer through other means of all forms of conventional military equipment, including for paramilitary forces, and spare parts and components and their means of production, for such equipment;


(b) Items specified and defined in paragraphs 8 and 12 above not otherwise covered above;


(c) Technology under licensing or other transfer arrangements used in the production, utilization or stockpiling of items specified in subparagraphs (a) and (b) above;


(d) Personnel or materials for training or technical support services relating to the design, development, manufacture, use, maintenance or support of items specified in subparagraphs (a) and (b) above;


25. Calls upon all States and international organizations to act strictly in accordance with paragraph 24 above, notwithstanding the existence of any contracts, agreements, licences or any other arrangements;


26. Requests the Secretary-General, in consultation with appropriate Governments, to develop within sixty days, for the approval of the Security Council, guidelines to facilitate full international implementation of paragraphs 24 and 25 above and paragraph 27 below, and to make them available to all States and to establish a procedure for updating these guidelines periodically;


27. Calls upon all States to maintain such national controls and procedures and to take such other actions consistent with the guidelines to be established by the Security Council under paragraph 26 above as may be necessary to ensure compliance with the terms of paragraph 24 above, and calls upon international organizations to take all appropriate steps to assist in ensuring such full compliance;


28. Agrees to review its decisions in paragraphs 22, 23, 24 and 25 above, except for the items specified and defined in paragraphs 8 and 12 above, on a regular basis and in any case one hundred and twenty days following passage of the present resolution, taking into account Iraq's compliance with the resolution and general progress towards the control of armaments in the region;


29. Decides that all States, including Iraq, shall take the necessary measures to ensure that no claim shall lie at the instance of the Government of Iraq, or of any person or body in Iraq, or of any person claiming through or for the benefit of any such person or body, in connection with any contract or other transaction where its performance was affected by reason of the measures taken by the Security Council in resolution 661 (1990) and related resolutions;


G

30. Decides that, in furtherance of its commitment to facilitate the repatriation of all Kuwaiti and third country nationals, Iraq shall extend all necessary cooperation to the International Committee of the Red Cross, providing lists of such persons, facilitating the access of the International Committee of the Red Cross to all such persons wherever located or detained and facilitating the search by the International Committee of the Red Cross for those Kuwaiti and third country nationals still unaccounted for;


31. Invites the International Committee of the Red Cross to keep the Secretary-General apprised as appropriate of all activities undertaken in connection with facilitating the repatriation or return of all Kuwaiti and third country nationals or their remains present in Iraq on or after 2 August 1990;


H

32. Requires Iraq to inform the Security Council that it will not commit or support any act of international terrorism or allow any organization directed towards commission of such acts to operate within its territory and to condemn unequivocally and renounce all acts, methods and practices of terrorism;


I

33. Declares that, upon official notification by Iraq to the Secretary-General and to the Security Council of its acceptance of the provisions above, a formal cease-fire is effective between Iraq and Kuwait and the Member States cooperating with Kuwait in accordance with resolution 678 (1990);


34. Decides to remain seized of the matter and to take such further steps as may be required for the implementation of the present resolution and to secure peace and security in the area.

ThreepMe
Morcilla
Level: 53

Posts: 491/641
EXP: 1111571
For next: 45555

Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3760 days
Last activity: 3419 days
#11 Posted on 3.3.04 0802.28
Reposted on: 3.3.11 0803.22
    Originally posted by PalpatineW
    My problem is that you're being incredibly simple. "Or, you can trust the government that lied to you!" And now, in your next post, you're more or less admitting that it was simply a case of mismanaging intelligence, and not an instance of intentionally lying.

    So now you're being simple and inconsistent.


Did you read the "or" part of it...

For lack of making a huge post, please realize that it was just showing how it can be many things, not the massive jump to conclusions that you made.

My original statement can mean many things. That's why I left it as a generalization.

My idea wasn't to quantify why it happened (because none of us actually KNOW, but we all like to pretend), just to retort to what we did vs. what the UN is doing now in response to Von Maestro.

For further reference, before you, like the Bush Admin, make another hasty attack, "OR" can be followed by a lot of things.

If you're going to infere something, infere that.

(edited by ThreepMe on 3.3.04 0603)
Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Level: 47

Posts: 58/512
EXP: 732816
For next: 33393

Since: 6.1.04
From: New York

Since last post: 283 days
Last activity: 1 day
#12 Posted on 3.3.04 1006.43
Reposted on: 3.3.11 1008.25
    Originally posted by ThreepMe
    Or you can listen to the government that flat out lied to you about WMD's.

    Take your pick.


So, my choice is between the UN & my freely elected government (that I can vote out if I don't like)?

I don't know what your answer would be Threep, but it really doesn't seem like that tough a question...
Grimis
Scrapple
Level: 124

Posts: 2884/4700
EXP: 21724419
For next: 112243

Since: 11.7.02
From: MD

Since last post: 1328 days
Last activity: 1125 days
#13 Posted on 3.3.04 1048.46
Reposted on: 3.3.11 1049.15
Dontcha love the fact that some people trust a large, monolithic group of non-Americans to deal with American security and foreign policy more than Americans do?
SKLOKAZOID
Bratwurst
Level: 76

Posts: 647/1469
EXP: 3842906
For next: 163173

Since: 20.3.02
From: California

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 9 hours
AIM:  
#14 Posted on 3.3.04 1103.18
Reposted on: 3.3.11 1103.48
Why trust either of the statements?

Our US intelligence, admittedly, wasn't accurate here and we still haven't found the evidence we're looking for.

The UN has so many factors influencing it that the report can be skewed a number of ways.

Still, aside from Hussein's evasiveness, we really have no hard evidence that they had WMDs since around that time.

ThreepMe
Morcilla
Level: 53

Posts: 492/641
EXP: 1111571
For next: 45555

Since: 15.2.02
From: Dallas

Since last post: 3760 days
Last activity: 3419 days
#15 Posted on 3.3.04 1105.22
Reposted on: 3.3.11 1105.28
    Originally posted by Von Maestro
      Originally posted by ThreepMe
      Or you can listen to the government that flat out lied to you about WMD's.

      Take your pick.


    So, my choice is between the UN & my freely elected government (that I can vote out if I don't like)?

    I don't know what your answer would be Threep, but it really doesn't seem like that tough a question...


Yeah, that was kinda the main idea...

Damned if you do...Damned if you don't. Both suck. So let's not start throwing stones at the UN just yet. We have our own messes to clean up.

And dontcha just love the fact that some people still think that Iraq was ever a threat to American security.

To Iraqi security, sure.

To Middle East security, mostly...But over there, everyone is a threat.

Hell, I think GW and his Administration is more of a threat to American Security than Iraq ever was.
Nuclear Winter
Boudin rouge
Level: 47

Posts: 24/524
EXP: 764297
For next: 1912

Since: 9.11.03
From: Bedford, Michigan

Since last post: 265 days
Last activity: 2 days
AIM:  
#16 Posted on 3.3.04 1121.18
Reposted on: 3.3.11 1121.50
President Bush receives intelligence that Iraq has very likely developed chemical, biological, and/or nuclear weapons, and that Saddam Hussein is planning on using these weapons against other Middle Eastern countries or the United States.

Bush is placed in a no-win situation.

1.) He attacks Iraq and removes Hussein from power, then finds no WMDs, he is attacked by liberals for creating an "unjust war."

OR

2.) He waits for more intelligence, gets correct intelligence, and calls off any plans for a strike.

OR

3.) He waits for more intelligence, and while he's waiting, Iraq anthraxes a country.

Maybe it's just me, but if there's any chance that an innocent country is going to be attacked, and I have any chance to stop it, I'm gonna take that chance.
RYDER FAKIN
Six Degrees of Me
Level: 63

Posts: 184/961
EXP: 2039142
For next: 58021

Since: 21.2.02
From: ORLANDO

Since last post: 21 days
Last activity: 21 days
AIM:  
#17 Posted on 3.3.04 1135.02
Reposted on: 3.3.11 1135.03
Since we now have an official candidate to challenge President Bush, we might as well get into what he said, when he said it and...well, make your own judgements. I think it's just as strange that Kerry has changed his tune, compared to the alleged FRAUD and LIAR tag that people are attaching to G.W.

Personally, if it came down to the issue of War and National Security, my vote for Bush is a no brainer. However, I'm not crazy about the direction the social issues are taking, specifically the recent escalation of the FCC dick-waving masquerading as "caring for the children"...especially what they have done to Clear Channel. Or I guess I should say what Clear Channel has done to themselves by caving to a bunch of lunatics.

Ironically, the same week that "Decency" hearings took place to clean up our airwaves, the study came out disclosing THOUSANDS (!!!!) of Catholic Priests participated in the abuse and cover-up of molestation of young boys over the last 50 years.

Anyway, the Road to The White House is underway and I think it's going to get really, really ugly. For me it will boil down to is it worth having the right-wing moralists running the country for another four years but eventually reap the benefits of the War in Iraq, or allow someone like John Kerry to totally pull the plug on what we are doing and *possibly* maintain a little Freedom of Choice without being branded as a pervert.

FLEA

comprehensive listing of John Kerry's quotes re: WMD, Sadaam and the War in general

(edited by RYDER FAKIN on 3.3.04 1253)
DrDirt
Banger
Level: 97

Posts: 514/2708
EXP: 9014134
For next: 303224

Since: 8.10.03
From: flyover country

Since last post: 16 days
Last activity: 1 day
#18 Posted on 3.3.04 1207.53
Reposted on: 3.3.11 1210.53
Flea, While Kerry may not provide you with much security re Iraq, etc., but remember one thing. Once anyone and I mean anyone gets into the White House, political reality sets in what they have done previously goes largely out the window.
SKLOKAZOID
Bratwurst
Level: 76

Posts: 648/1469
EXP: 3842906
For next: 163173

Since: 20.3.02
From: California

Since last post: 2 days
Last activity: 9 hours
AIM:  
#19 Posted on 3.3.04 1212.48
Reposted on: 3.3.11 1215.44
    Originally posted by Nuclear Winter
    President Bush receives intelligence that Iraq has very likely developed chemical, biological, and/or nuclear weapons, and that Saddam Hussein is planning on using these weapons against other Middle Eastern countries or the United States.

    Bush is placed in a no-win situation.

    1.) He attacks Iraq and removes Hussein from power, then finds no WMDs, he is attacked by liberals for creating an "unjust war."

    OR

    2.) He waits for more intelligence, gets correct intelligence, and calls off any plans for a strike.

    OR

    3.) He waits for more intelligence, and while he's waiting, Iraq anthraxes a country.

    Maybe it's just me, but if there's any chance that an innocent country is going to be attacked, and I have any chance to stop it, I'm gonna take that chance.


I don't see how #2 qualifies this as a "no-win" situation.

Any chance? That's a pretty broad statement. There's a chance North Korea can attack Seattle, and - as we wait - an even greater chance it's with a nuke as time goes on. But, we know we can resolve the situation through other means with North Korea and that's the avenue we're taking.

The Iraqi intelligence that was recieved, to my knowledge, did not give any indication of an imminent threat. Only that Saddam was in violation with the UN terms agreed upon at the end of the Gulf War in 1991 by not allowing the full inspections the UN wanted. The intelligence indicated that he possibly had weapons, but that was not a certainty no matter how much this was pushed. No one was convinced and we had to go on the credibility of our intelligence community.

In my view, in order for there to have been a real incitement to attack, we needed three things:
1- Evidence that Iraq had WMD in the present (Unverified)
2- Evidence that Iraq had the means to use WMD, if he had any (Verified. Empty missile shells were found and Iraq was able to launch missiles armed with WMD)
3- Evidence that, with #1 and #2 both being verified, Iraq had plans to attack (Unverified, because it fails on the first criteria)

Even with #1 fulfilled, attack is not a foregone conclusion, but a stronger case for war could have been made. But, #1 still remains unproven. Therefore, the potential for Iraq to attack another country with WMD isn't there. Then, and only then, is it a "no-win" situation.
Von Maestro
Boudin rouge
Level: 47

Posts: 59/512
EXP: 732816
For next: 33393

Since: 6.1.04
From: New York

Since last post: 283 days
Last activity: 1 day
#20 Posted on 3.3.04 1249.29
Reposted on: 3.3.11 1252.23
    Originally posted by ThreepMe
    Damned if you do...Damned if you don't. Both suck. So let's not start throwing stones at the UN just yet.


It's not a damned if you do choice. I'll choose the freely elected government of my United States over a UN that provides equal voice to our enemies & some of the worst, most dangerous nations in the world every single time, no matter who was in office.
The US should never let itself be dictated to by the UN, ever.

    Originally posted by ThreepMe
    And dontcha just love the fact that some people still think that Iraq was ever a threat to American security.


The simple fact that Iraq was a threat to the Middle East's security MAKES it a threat to our security!
Like it or not, the region controls a LOT of the world's oil. If that would have been controlled by a Saddam-like dictator, the US & the world would be in a very bad situation.

The fact that Hussein was a supporter of various terrorist organizations as well (he would offer money to the families of homicide bombers for example) also speaks of the threat they posed to us. Any regime that supports or even tolerates terrorism is a threat to America IMO.

    Originally posted by ThreepMe
    Hell, I think GW and his Administration is more of a threat to American Security than Iraq ever was.


These are the kind of statements from the Left that drive me crazy. Why can't you make your argument without including such ridiculous assertions that any right-thinking individual would properly dismiss??

Come on, you seem above that...
Pages: 1 2 3 NextThread ahead: British woman suing for the right to live
Next thread: CIA not in the loop on Iraq?
Previous thread: California Legislators proposes 14-year old voting age
(1065 newer) Next thread | Previous thread
The 7 - Current Events & Politics - NO Iraqi WMD's in a Decade? Register and log in to post!

The W™ message board - 7 year recycle

ZimBoard
©2001-2014 Brothers Zim
This old hunk of junk rendered your page in 0.217 seconds.