BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Nov 02 - 03:54 PM

Whereas I think the ball is in everyone's court. I hope nobody drops it.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 11 Nov 02 - 03:11 PM

I believe at this point in time and since the gulf war the ball has been in their court.
You need to talk with them and not the us.

In exchange for an end to war they agreed to disarm
they have not and have done more armament and have helped terrorists.

time is about up....

not our problem

So you need to talk to them about theirs.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Little Hawk
Date: 11 Nov 02 - 01:04 PM

The vital thing about any written resolution is not so much whether it is vaguely worded...but this:

WHAT are the actual intentions of those signing the resolution?

We shall see.

Hitler signed a non-agression pact with Russia once, for example...but what were his actual intentions? Japan once signed a naval treaty to limit the size and number of their various warships, but what was their actual intention?

If the actual intention of the Bush administration is to have a war with Iraq, then the means will be found. If their actual intention is merely to inspect Iraq and cause disarmament of certain weapons...then the means will be found.

Regardless of how the resolution is worded.

Count on it.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: NicoleC
Date: 11 Nov 02 - 12:34 PM

Conrad, we have been here. We have been trying to get the US to engage Iraq in a non-violent way for decades. Back when Iraq was our ally, we gave the the poison gas used on the Kurds. Instead of censure, the US supported him. But that was because the Iraqis were at war with the "evil" Iran.

Then, we complained about the crippling US sanctions against Iraq which did nothing to weaken Saddam's power, but caused Iraqi citizens to die by the thousands each month. After 10 years of it, Saddam is still in power and the people who would have liked to see him ousted see him as a hero for standing up to the US.

The US foreign policy supporting and arming one petty dictator until he becomes politically inconvenient, and then supporting and arming their enemies instead has brought us round and round at war in Latin American and the Middle East. Who's next? The Turks? We've supported their internal ethnic cleansing. What about the Sauds? If Pakistan and India go to war, who are we goingto support -- the Pakistani military dictator that was out enemy but has so recently become our ally, or the Indian government that we've had peaceful relations with for years, but really hasn't done anything for us lately?

I'm afraid I don't see any noble intentions. We've never stopped bombing Iraq in the first place; we have not been offering peace.

I take to for granted the US will never take responsibility for helping to create some of the world's most brutal and repressive governments. We so conveniently forget yesterday's recipients of military arms and training. But what we must do, is to STOP DOING IT. Stop supporting internal rebels who seek to overthrow legitimate governments. Stop being the world's largest arms dealer, willing to sell anything to anyone, becuase any of those customers could be fronts for terrorist groups or future terrorists.

I am not suggesting we disengage from these governments, but by using the threat of war as our first response, we de-legitimize anything we have to say about peace.

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: GUEST
Date: 11 Nov 02 - 10:49 AM

Troll, if what you are saying was true, we never would have seen half a million people at an anti-war march last weekend. 9/11 hasn't had the effect of turning people away from the international peace and anti-globalization movement. Quite the contrary, in fact.

Conrad, most people aren't so stupid as to believe that if one opposes war, one is siding with Sadaam. But there are always exceptions to the rule, which you proved quite handily.

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: *#1 PEASANT*
Date: 11 Nov 02 - 10:37 AM

I am surprised that there is anyone who still contiues to support Iraq given the track record of that country.

Perehaps it is the tendency of folkies to be anti war just to be anti war and cool.

If you are truly anti war you should have been protesting the actions of iraq over the last 20 years. Where then have you been?

Saadam has had ample time to get his act together on his own, without help but he continues to pursue weapons when there is no need to do so.
Remember!
The USA could and might well have crushed him in the gulf war.
Our patience has put forth on record the nobility of our intentions.
We made the peace with him but he has failed to make the peace with the world despite great patience on our part.

We are at war with those who tolerate terror and one by one they shall be shut down. Opposing the USA does nothing but lend support to terrorists. You can be a folkie and recognize the need for war from time to time.

Conrad

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Troll
Date: 11 Nov 02 - 10:28 AM

And most of that will evaporate with the next Al Queda (sp?) attack.

And don't kid yourself that it won't come. Ask Austraila about their dead in Bali.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: GUEST
Date: 10 Nov 02 - 11:16 AM

Charley, it appears that half a million Europeans aren't quite so sure about that, and hundreds of thousands of Americans as well--all of whom in the past two weeks have marched in opposition to the US/British military buildup in the Middle East.

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Charley Noble
Date: 09 Nov 02 - 07:49 PM

Now that the General Election is over I seriously doubt that Bush is interested in pushing the war on Iraq. He's already succeeded in his primary objective, winning Republican majorities in the House and Senate. He can relax now and be the foreign affairs Statesman.

Charley Noble

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Nov 02 - 01:28 PM

Right Peg. And actually, they aren't just engaged in the preparation for war, the US has been doing low level bombings of Iraq ever since Bush I.

Last time the US bombed Iraq was last Wednesday--day after the "Bush mandate" election.

Go here for more information on the last time the US bombed Iraq:

http://www.ccmep.org/us_bombing_watch.html

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Peg
Date: 09 Nov 02 - 11:33 AM

Bush and his cronies are not even waitng for Iraq's compliance with any of it...all the news updates have been saying the military is still preparing for war in Iraq. What's the point of cutting them some slack only to be posturing and threatening in the background where they can see you? Our leadership is playing childless manipulative games with innocent lives and meanwhile our economoy and morale as a nation have fallen into the toilet.

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Nov 02 - 10:33 AM

Debka.com

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Troll
Date: 09 Nov 02 - 08:57 AM

Well maybe the next time the UN Security Council will listen to you instead of Bush and all the others.
You win some and you lose some and the sun comes up the next morning either way.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: GUEST
Date: 09 Nov 02 - 08:00 AM

Actually katlaughing, as I understand the UN resolution (and I haven't read, only heard some news reports), it wasn't what Bush wanted, but the media is spinning it as if "he won" in the UN. Our American journalists apparently are having some difficulty shifting from the subject of the American election to the UN vote. Someone should tell them they aren't the same thing. ;-)

Anyway, the unilateral approach is no longer considered very likely. What is not clear is just which "other countries" Bush was referring to yesterday when he made his statement on it, that "America" (wouldn't it be helpful if our president learned to use the proper name of our nation?) will work with to disarm Iraq.

While the matter of regime change still seems to be fuzzy, the resolution does not give the power to the US to decide whether Iraq is in compliance, but reserves that power for the UN weapons inspectors. That was a big sticking point for the international community.

BTW, if Powell hadn't known for certain that the Security Council vote was unanimous, he wouldn't have had them vote. That is just the way it works. Usually. Occassionally there is a veto of the US' interests in the Security Council, but it is very rare.

Thing is, I suspect the UN vote won't stop the Bush administration from invading Iraq. The administration has been lying about it's true motives and intentions regarding Iraq all along. It isn't about weapons, it is about the coup. I believe they may do it by assassination rather than invasion, but I do believe they are going to be done with Hussein one way or the other. I think the reason for that is Hussein must have a lot of goods on the Republican presidents who put him in power--Reagan and Bush the first. Information that could be extremely damaging to the US, not to mention to the Bush administration because of their ties to the former Republican presidents.

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 10:13 PM

Thank you, Barry....

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Barry Finn
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 10:10 PM

A bunch of drunks & druggies (this includes DWI Cheney) that rightfully shouldn't have drivers licenses & they're at the war wheel. We deserve what's coming. God help us all. Barry

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Bobert
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 02:09 PM

Ohhhh, that Bush and his timing! Just this morning the Washington Post has a big write up about Junior's current was not going too well ("Afgan War Faltering, Military Leader Says, Meyers Cites Al Qaeda's Ability to Adapt", Page A-1) which Kat might be able to turn into a blue clicky thing.

Yeah, Junior tends to get distracted with the deatils of finishing jobs. Maybe tahts because he's never really had one for too long, I don't know. But now, with that big stick that every presdident has had for the last 50 some years, he's shown a willingness to hit folks with it, and so now he has his "resolution". Big deal. It was a foregone conclusion that he was either going to have it or just crank up another war. Heck, he said that from the very beginning. The only reason he's getting the resolution is to pacify a few folks. Well, I don't feel pacified by it. It means absolutely *nothing**!

You know if wars were women, he's be called a womanizer. Think someone needs to get some A.D.D. meds into the boy before he makes too much of a mess...

Bobert

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: katlaughing
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 01:45 PM

I guess I should have made it clear I was being cynical. Yes, of course I want the UN in if Bush insists on going to war. What I don't believe is that it makes one damn bit of difference to Bush and the oil companies. I think it is naive to believe that he will stop short of going in no matter what the UN says.

Who is going to be the judge as to whether Saddam complies or not? What is an Iraqi looks cross-eyed at an inspector or an inspector looks cross-eyed at an Iraqi? Simplified, I know, but with the cultural difference and all, there is a fine line to be walked in order to not start a catasrophe. Why does this have to be escalated now? Bush admitted himself that it's been eleven years since we first tried to get inspections going; what makes it different now? Don't tell me Sept. 11th. Bush has become the little boy who cried wolf; everyday we get a new warning that some vague terrorist threat has been discovered and somewhere, sometime there will be an attack in the US. I know there is a possibility, but the constant fear-mongering serves his purposes in keeping us all focussed on that instead of critical social matters. He, or better yet, Cheney, will have war...doesn't matter what the UN says. I guess I was really hoping the UN would be a last bastion of holding him off and I know I am contradicting myself on my take of all of this. Sorry, thinking out loud that happens sometimes.

Main thing is I do not want a war but I feel our prez-select does and will get it regardless. Fuck!

kat

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Kim C
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 01:41 PM

Troll, you mean to say, that there are people who don't write things clearly on purpose?!??! No way. ;-)

I do believe there are other countries with concerns about Iraq. And I don't think it would be any skin off the UN's nose to tell Bush to blow it out his ass. But they didn't.

Where have all the No Nukes people gone?

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: DougR
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 01:18 PM

Oh.

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Troll
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 01:08 PM

No Doug, Amos was NOT agreeing with me. I am saying that the vagueness of some sections of the resolution are deliberate so as to allow the UN some "wiggle room" on interpretation of those sections.
Amos claims that they are there because the prople who wrote them don't know HOW to write things clearly.

troll

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: DougR
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 01:03 PM

And Saddam could get a piece! (Sorry Kim could't resist)

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Kim C
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 01:00 PM

I read in the German magazine Neue Revue (sp?) that Ciccolina, the famous Italian porn star (and didn't she get elected to the Italian Parliament or some such?) openly offered that if Saddam complied with all UN demands, she would have sex with him. Her exact words were, I would do it for peace.

Apparently the USA isn't the only country with concerns about Iraq...

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: DougR
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 12:56 PM

Amos: are you saying you agree with Troll?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Amos
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 12:51 PM

From personal experience I can tell you without reservation that the highest levels of the Department of Defense seem to be inherently incapable of stating what they want clearly -- they can't even specify software systems with enough clarity to engineer them with any confidence. Throughout the DoD, millions of dollars are spent just compensating for the inability of Admirals and Generals to clarify their own thoughts before they send them down the chain of command. And that's in engineering, where the switches are guaranteed to stay where you set them 99% of the time!!

So it is hardly surprising that vagueness and ambiguity should be the order of the day in the much more volatile and unbounded arena of human interactions, especially under adversarial circumstances.

But, just as in the engineering department, this kind of loosy-goosy thinking and talking gets VERY expensive as it rolls out. In software it is just very expensive in terms of dollars and manhours. In politics it has similarly high costs paid in sudden death or life-long disfigurement, maiming and crippling of humans. Pretty high price to pay for a little stupidity at the top.

A

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Troll
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 12:40 PM

The vague sections are there on purpose. If the provisions are too specific, it's easy to get around them. So they are deliberately worded in such a manner as to allow for interpretation. If you want to see a marvel of vagueness, scope out a union contract sometime.
I realize that this makes some people nervous because it gives the US and Britain some latitude in deciding whether or not Saddam is in compliance with the resolution, but that's the way these things are done.
If Syria can go along with it...?

troll

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: chip a
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 12:25 PM

Good post Troll.

:-), Chip

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: DougR
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 12:24 PM

Troll is right. The ball is in Saddam's court now. Whether or not there is war will be determined by Saddam, not the U. N., and not the U.S. All he has to do is comply with the Resolution and there will be no war.

I am a bit confused about the title of your thread kat. "UN caves." Are you implying that in your opinion Iraq should not be held to the agreements he made with the U. N. at the close of the Gulf war? If so, why have U. N. Resolutions in the first place?

DougR

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: Troll
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 12:16 PM

The " ultimate plunge into war " is rather up to Iraq, isn't it? If Saddam complies and disarms, the sanctions are lifted and the authority of the UN is strengthened.
If not, then military action may be utilized but it will be in pursuit of the enforcment of a UN resolution.
I was under the impression that a UN resolution was what everyone wanted. Am I wrong? Is what everyone really wants peace (or absence of war) at any price?

troll

Subject: RE: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: NicoleC
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 12:13 PM

The only part of the resolution that bothers me (other than the fact I didn't think we needed a new one as much as we needed to revive the old one) is the very deliberately vague parts that could be construed as permission for anyone to attack Iraq if they aren't happy with the course of the inspections.

One inspector gets stopped speeding by an Iraqi cop who doesn't know he's an inspector and we can call it "interfering."

That kinda of vagueness worries me, especially in regard to an administration that came up with the idea of pre-emptive self-defense. (No, sir, officer, I shot those people in McDonald's because I had good reason to believe they might rob me one day!)

Subject: BS: UN caves - gives Bush his resolution
From: katlaughing
Date: 08 Nov 02 - 11:16 AM

Just heard the vote was unanimous. I sincerely hope this keeps Bush from taking the ultimate plunge into war, but I am not going to hold my breath. I had hoped France and Russia would keep the pressure on for awhile longer.