Archived material Access restricted Article
Rantburg

Today's Front Page   View All of Fri 03/07/2003 View Thu 03/06/2003 View Wed 03/05/2003 View Tue 03/04/2003 View Mon 03/03/2003 View Sun 03/02/2003 View Sat 03/01/2003
1
2003-03-07 Iraq
Full text: Draft UN resolution
Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.
Posted by Bulldog 2003-03-07 04:47 pm|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07]  Top

#1 ...unless, on or before 17 March 2003 the council concludes...

Of course the council will never conclude such a thing even if Blix affirmed that Iraq was in full compliance. The U.S. would veto such a conclusion and invade anyway. It's ridiculous to believe that Iraq could comply with this in 10 days. The U.S. would just say that it had info that Iraq is still hiding something. Sheer hypocrisy given the fact the U.S. forces are already operating in Iraq. What a farce
"God is a comedian playing to an audience too afraid to laugh." (Voltaire)

Hence: NON - NJET - NEIN
Posted by Danish Mermaid 2003-03-07 17:48:11||   2003-03-07 17:48:11|| Front Page Top

#2 Danish Mermaid: Exactly. Rather nice piece of drafting, wouldn't you say?
Posted by Idler 2003-03-07 18:22:56||   2003-03-07 18:22:56|| Front Page Top

#3 DM / Idler

Really? 10 days is 10 days too long. The Bastid has had 12 years to disarm, so keep your sanctimony to yourself. Sammy is in absolute control. At any day, at any moment, he could OPEN UP HIS COUNTRY to full disarmamament - and he refuses to do so. Hence...shut your cake holes if you can't come up with an argument that is based in reality. You post a hypothetical situation and immediately apply to what is currently happening. Go back to whatever bridge you are currenlty living under.
Posted by Rex Mundi 2003-03-07 18:37:31||   2003-03-07 18:37:31|| Front Page Top

#4 Rex Mundi: Time out! I'm on your side! My comment was directed at Danish Mermaid, not in support of her. I share your frustration at delay, but given the fact that we have decided to play the U.N. game, the proposed resolution (and perhaps I have misread it) seems to put the French, Germans, and Russians in a no-win position. If they veto it, we will go ahead anyway, and the U.N. will be history in the bargain. If they approve it, there is no way that the Security Council will be able to pass a resolution on March 17 that Saddam has "demonstrated full, unconditional, immediate, and active cooperation" with Resolution 1441: because, even if they tried to, we (and the U.K. as well) would veto any such resolution. Therefore, unless I am missing something (and I am quite willing to be corrected), I think that the French and their friends are up the creek without the proverbial paddle. I, like you, would prefer not to have further delays, but, as President Bush said last night, let's have the French and their friends "show their cards."
Posted by Idler 2003-03-07 19:14:44||   2003-03-07 19:14:44|| Front Page Top

#5 If the United Nations Security Council has any guts it will vote this resolution down.
Your president already said it: The U.S. doesn't need "permission" from anyone.
Then stop asking for it. Stop bullying the small nations or buying them. Spare us this farce. Do what you need to do. But not in our name. I'd rather see the United Nations die in honour than in infamy.
Posted by Danish Mermaid 2003-03-07 19:32:52||   2003-03-07 19:32:52|| Front Page Top

#6 So be it.
Posted by RW 2003-03-07 19:44:06||   2003-03-07 19:44:06|| Front Page Top

#7 When the "Security" Council votes down the resolution, and they will, the US will be able to say that the UN has refused to extend the time limit to remedy the already existing material breach and begin the liberation of Iraq before the 17th. That'll show 'em.

The Iraqi people will remember who opposed the end to their brutalization.
Posted by GKarp 2003-03-07 19:48:00||   2003-03-07 19:48:00|| Front Page Top

#8 Danish Mermaid

Hey, that's a nice statue of you in the harbor. But I think you've got the UN picture all wrong. The resolution has nothing to do with before-the-war. It's all about after-the-war.

Bush is making people take sides, publicly. He knows what the Americans and British are going to find when they go into Iraq. He's going to make sure it gets world-wide coverage. What has been happening in Iraq, that the French and the Germans and the Russians wanted to cover up, will get lots of coverage after the war. And that (along with an unprecedented demonstration of American capability) will affect the balance of power in the post-war world.

The word is shame. The French and Germans are going to be hearing that word a lot when this is all over. And they'll have to be quiet for a while...
Posted by Patrick  2003-03-07 21:54:21||   2003-03-07 21:54:21|| Front Page Top

#9 Yes yes, sides. Either with you or...
I wish the world was that simple.
I wonder what Chile or Mexico have to hide in Iraq though.
Posted by Danish Mermaid 2003-03-07 22:07:19||   2003-03-07 22:07:19|| Front Page Top

#10 Sorry, Danish Mermaid, but the world IS that simple. Live or die. Free or slave. Win or lose.

See, what you don't get is that what's coming next is the Battle of Iraq, not the War in Iraq. This is Phase 2 of the War on Terrorism, a war that, if we win, will save your ass. And if we lose, as the peaceniks and leftists and Islamists hope, you and your culture are doomed.

Only by winning in Iraq is there a chance to change the Middle East from a fetid dump that breeds terrorists to a place where people can live free, aspire to a better life, and pursue happiness as THEY, not some mullah or strongman, sees fit.

That's what this war is about. If you're with us, you have a chance to be on the side of the angels. If you're against us, you are consigning the people of the Middle East to an even worse fate and all of us to darkness and fear.




Posted by R. McLeod 2003-03-08 02:28:39||   2003-03-08 02:28:39|| Front Page Top

#11 DM,
Let's see if I understand:It is the U.S.'s fault the U.N.doesn't have the cajones to enfoce 1441.

Jeez what a Ditz.
Posted by raptor  2003-03-08 07:19:13||   2003-03-08 07:19:13|| Front Page Top

10:43 glas iz sjene
08:22 raptor
07:19 raptor
06:44 raptor
05:49 Ptah
02:28 R. McLeod
00:47 Dishman
00:14 Steve White
23:38 djohn
23:32 Fred
23:32 Subotai
23:07 Dar Steckelberg
23:03 Alaska Paul
22:53 djohn
22:41 Fred
22:39 Danish Mermaid
22:37 Old Grouch
22:34 Frank G
22:33 Old Grouch
22:31 Frank G
22:29 Frank G
22:07 Danish Mermaid
21:59 Subotai
21:55 djohn









Paypal:
Google
Search WWW Search rantburg.com