The Mudcat Café TM
Thread #57623   Message #912554
Posted By: Teribus
18-Mar-03 - 10:24 AM
Thread Name: BS: Is Tony Blair a lying sack of shit?
Subject: RE: BS: Is Tony Blair a lying sack of shit?
Gervase:

"PARIS, FRANCE - It was announced today that France would be deploying two elite units of French troops to Iraq in the event
of war. Five hundred crack troops from the 2nd Groupement d'Instruction en Abandonment are mobilizing to assist the Iraqi Army in the finer points of military surrender.

"The immediate capitulation of an armed force is a delicate and intricate tactic in which we French have much experience." said Defense Ministry spokesperson General de Armee Francois-Phillippe Hommes de Petit-Pommes. "There is a certain protocol in laying down your arms or fleeing the battlefield. To wave the white flag while remaining arrogant, pompous and insufferable requires experience and training. The French Army believes it is second to none in the fine art of surrendering quickly. The record of our armed forces in that area speaks for itself. The Iraqi performance in giving up
without a fight during the last Gulf War was commendable but slip-shod. We hope to improve their level of surrender execution for the next war."

General Hommes de Petit-Pommes further announced that 1000 advisors
from the Regiment de Collaborateurs Francais will also be dispatched to Iraq to assist the Iraqi people in collaborating effectively with any occupation force. "It is more important to protect their art treasures than to defend their honour," the General pointed out.

The General also expressed the hope that Baghdad has some tree-lined
boulevards. "It was our experience that the Germans liked to march in
the shade, and we feel the Americans and the British might like that
same measure of comfort in Iraq-especially as warm weather settles
in this spring."

As to the relevance of the UN - that particular organisation has done more to prove its own irrelevance - than could be proven externally, by anyone.

Bagpuss:

You could read through the UN Security Council Resolutions 687 and 1441. You could read the reports from UNSCOM and IAEA covering the period. You could then split hairs until the cows come home - None of which would alter the fact that as far as the entire United Nations Security Council was concerned their reading of the situation was that Iraq was in material breach of all existing UN Resolutions relating to Iraq up until the passing of 1441 - that was why they passed it.