Iraq? A Mistake????

Discussion in 'Middle East - General' started by Annie, Sep 28, 2004.

  1. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    http://www.nytimes.com/2004/09/22/p...=4dc66408752abf1f&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

     
  2. -Cp
    Offline

    -Cp Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 23, 2004
    Messages:
    2,911
    Thanks Received:
    360
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Earth
    Ratings:
    +363
    Who actually reads - and trusts - anything the NY Times has to say?
     
  3. Annie
    Offline

    Annie Diamond Member

    Joined:
    Nov 22, 2003
    Messages:
    50,847
    Thanks Received:
    4,644
    Trophy Points:
    1,790
    Ratings:
    +4,770
    What are they saying, other than the CIA used the best available data?
     
  4. Zhukov
    Offline

    Zhukov VIP Member

    Joined:
    Dec 21, 2003
    Messages:
    3,492
    Thanks Received:
    301
    Trophy Points:
    83
    Location:
    Everywhere, simultaneously.
    Ratings:
    +301
    Still, the failures in intelligence are disconcerting to say the least. We haven't been hit domestically since 9/11, but one can only wonder if the failures associated with such flawed findings in Iraq might also be associated with the elements of our intelligence agencies tasked with finding and tracking international terrorists planning attacks against civilians in the U.S.
     
  5. NATO AIR
    Offline

    NATO AIR Senior Member

    Joined:
    Jun 25, 2004
    Messages:
    4,275
    Thanks Received:
    282
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    USS Abraham Lincoln
    Ratings:
    +282
    agreed
    as well, its not just the system but a good number of individuals in the system who are so incompetent.
     
  6. poebassman
    Offline

    poebassman Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    23
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0
    This is strange how the best available data from February 2001 that Powell and Bush discussed was...

    "the President and I, had a good discussion about the nature of the sanctions -- the fact that the sanctions exist -- not for the purpose of hurting the Iraqi people, but for the purpose of keeping in check Saddam Hussein's ambitions toward developing weapons of mass destruction. We should constantly be reviewing our policies, constantly be looking at those sanctions to make sure that they are directed toward that purpose. That purpose is every bit as important now as it was ten years ago when we began it. And frankly they have worked. He has not developed any significant capability with respect to weapons of mass destruction. He is unable to project conventional power against his neighbors. So in effect, our policies have strengthened the security of the neighbors of Iraq, and these are policies that we are going to keep in place"

    http://www.state.gov/secretary/rm/2001/933.htm

    Then 18 months later all of this turned around to Iraq had WMDs and is likely to use it against the U.S.. I just find it strange how Iraq could so quickly under the same sanctions that have worked according to Colin Powell be in the position to wreak such havoc.

    Isn't it also strange that David Kay who investigated post war Iraq came to the conclusion that the weapons programs were in check since 1998.

    http://politics.guardian.co.uk/iraq/story/0,12956,1160665,00.html


    Kay sat down in front of the Senate microphone on January 28, and with a few blunt words, swept all that carefully calibrated verbiage away. "Let me begin by saying, we were almost all wrong, and I certainly include myself here," he told the open-mouthed senators. It was a mea culpa - he had been convinced since his days as a UN inspector that Saddam Hussein was concealing a potentially devastating arsenal - but it was much more than that.

    In simply stating that there were no stockpiles, Kay declared that the would-be emperors on both sides of the Atlantic had no clothes. His call for a full inquiry ultimately tipped the balance in Washington and led to the creation of a bipartisan commission to investigate the intelligence fiasco. That, in turn, stampeded Blair into the Butler inquiry.

    But nothing stays clear for long when it comes to the justification for the Iraq war. Even since Kay's seminal testimony there have been attempts to reinterpret what he actually said. The media has been accused of focusing on a single soundbite, ignoring the ISG's findings that the Iraqis had indeed been trying to develop long-range missiles they were not entitled to, and had the means to reconstitute their weapons programmes once the international pressure was off.


    "reconstitute their weapons programmes once the international pressure was off" Said Kay... but the pressure wasn't off. So with the pressure on... as Powell said it was... how could they reconstitute the programmes? :dunno:
     
  7. dilloduck
    Offline

    dilloduck Diamond Member

    Joined:
    May 8, 2004
    Messages:
    53,240
    Thanks Received:
    5,552
    Trophy Points:
    1,850
    Location:
    Austin, TX
    Ratings:
    +6,403
    We are now discovering that the pressure wasn't on !
     
  8. poebassman
    Offline

    poebassman Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    23
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0
    According to Powell, the U.N. sanctions were working well to keep the pressure on.

    I'd kind of like to take his word on that but it is tough to know who to believe in our government anymore.
     
  9. rtwngAvngr
    Offline

    rtwngAvngr Guest

    Joined:
    Jan 5, 2004
    Messages:
    15,755
    Thanks Received:
    511
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Ratings:
    +511
    What about the 17 violated un resolutions? Those are not debatable. He kicked out inspectors. That alone should have been reason enough for any thinking person.
     
    • Thank You! Thank You! x 1
  10. poebassman
    Offline

    poebassman Rookie

    Joined:
    Sep 27, 2004
    Messages:
    23
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0
    Obviously if you had read the U.N. resolution 1441, you'd notice that it recalled all previous resolutions with its violations. The U.N. gave Iraq a new deadline and qualifications for compliance. Kofi Anan agreed he met those qualifications.

    http://www.middleeastinfo.org/article1606.html

    UNITED NATIONS, Nov. 13 — Iraq said very reluctantly today that it would "deal with" a Security Council resolution obliging it to disarm and allow United Nations weapons inspectors to begin work, but it also denied that it possessed any prohibited weapons.

    Most Security Council nations welcomed Baghdad's statement, which came two days before a deadline set in the resolution that the council unanimously approved last week. Iraq's response came in a nine-page letter that its United Nations ambassador, Muhammad al-Douri, delivered today to the office of Secretary General Kofi Annan.

    The White House dismissed as fabrication Saddam Hussein's contention that Iraq possesses no weapons of mass destruction.

    Earlier, shortly before the Iraqi envoy announced that Baghdad had accepted terms of the resolution, Mr. Bush told reporters at a cabinet meeting that he was firm in what he expected.

    "Zero tolerance — about as plain as I can make it," he said. "We will not tolerate any deception, denial or deceit, period."

    A White House spokesman, Scott McClellan, said the administration was taking a cautious approach to Iraq's promise to comply. "We have heard this before, and now it's time to see it by their actions," he said.

    In pages of hostile language, the Iraqi letter calls the United States and Britain, allies who wrote the resolution, "the gang of evil" and accuses them of manipulating the Security Council with "the biggest and most wicked slander" against Iraq.

    In the text, Baghdad provides the bare minimum expression of agreement to allow the inspections to go forward under the tough terms of Resolution 1441.

    But it was enough for the United Nations secretary general, Kofi Anan, who said after meeting with President Bush in Washington that Iraq had met the first deadline set out in the resolution.

    "Iraq has accepted," Mr. Annan said outside the White House. "I think the word, the acceptance and inviting the inspectors to come in, is there, so we take it that they have accepted it."

    Mr. Annan said that the first inspectors would head for Iraq on Monday and that he and President Bush had agreed that their reception would be the first true test of Iraq's compliance.

    "The issue is not the acceptance but performance on the ground,"` he said. "I urge the Iraqis to cooperate with them and to perform. I think that is the real test we are all waiting for.

    "The president is determined that the disarmament will take place and that we should press ahead with our plans."

    As Mr. ad-Douri arrived at the United Nations this morning to deliver to deliver the letter, he told reporters: "The letter is saying that Iraq will deal with the Security Council Resolution 1441 despite its bad contents. We are prepared to receive the inspectors within the assigned timetable. We are eager to see them perform their duties in accordance with international law as soon as possible. This is the essence of the letter.

    "We explained in the letter the whole Iraqi equation dealt with here within the United Nations activities," Mr. al-Douri went on. "So we tried to explain our position, saying that Iraq have and have not and will not have any mass destruction weapons." He added that Iraq therefore had no concerns about the inspectors' return to the country.

    In answer to a reporter's question, he said, "Iraq is clean, yes."

    Asked why Iraq had accepted the resolution after so adamantly opposing the idea, Mr. al-Douri said it was "the right time to give the answer right now."

    "We choose always the peaceful ways and means," he continued. "And this is part of our policy, vis-à-vis to protect our country, to protect our nation, to protect the region also from the threat of war, which is real. And everybody knows about it."


    U.N. resolution 1441


    Recalling all its previous relevant resolutions, in particular its resolutions 661 (1990) of 6 August 1990, 678 (1990) of 29 November 1990, 686 (1991) of 2 March 1991, 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, 688 (1991) of 5 April 1991, 707 (1991) of 15 August 1991, 715 (1991) of 11 October 1991, 986 (1995) of 14 April 1995, and 1284 (1999) of 17 December 1999, and all the relevant statements of its President,

    Recalling also its resolution 1382 (2001) of 29 November 2001 and its intention to implement it fully,

    Recognizing the threat Iraq's noncompliance with Council resolutions and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to international peace and security,

    Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August 1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to Resolution 660 (1990) and to restore international peace and security in the area,

    Further recalling that its resolution 687 (1991) imposed obligations on Iraq as a necessary step for achievement of its stated objective of restoring international peace and security in the area,

    Deploring the fact that Iraq has not provided an accurate, full, final, and complete disclosure, as required by resolution 687 (1991), of all aspects of its programmes to develop weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles with a range greater than one hundred and fifty kilometres, and of all holdings of such weapons, their components and production facilities and locations, as well as all other nuclear programmes, including any which it claims are for purposes not related to nuclear-weapons-usable material,

    Deploring further that Iraq repeatedly obstructed immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to sites designated by the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), failed to cooperate fully and unconditionally with UNSCOM and IAEA weapons inspectors, as required by resolution 687 (1991), and ultimately ceased all cooperation with UNSCOM and the IAEA in 1998,

    Deploring the absence, since December 1998, in Iraq of international monitoring, inspection, and verification, as required by relevant resolutions, of weapons of mass destruction and ballistic missiles, in spite of the Council's repeated demands that Iraq provide immediate, unconditional, and unrestricted access to the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC), established in resolution 1284 (1999) as the successor organization to UNSCOM, and the IAEA, and regretting the consequent prolonging of the crisis in the region and the suffering of the Iraqi people,

    Deploring also that the Government of Iraq has failed to comply with its commitments pursuant to resolution 687 (1991) with regard to terrorism, pursuant to resolution 688 (1991) to end repression of its civilian population and to provide access by international humanitarian organizations to all those in need of assistance in Iraq, and pursuant to resolutions 686 (1991), 687 (1991), and 1284 (1999) to return or cooperate in accounting for Kuwaiti and third country nationals wrongfully detained by Iraq, or to return Kuwaiti property wrongfully seized by Iraq,

    Recalling that in its resolution 687 (1991) the Council declared that a ceasefire would be based on acceptance by Iraq of the provisions of that resolution, including the obligations on Iraq contained therein,

    Determined to ensure full and immediate compliance by Iraq without conditions or restrictions with its obligations under resolution 687 (1991) and other relevant resolutions and recalling that the resolutions of the Council constitute the governing standard of Iraqi compliance,

    Recalling that the effective operation of UNMOVIC, as the successor organization to the Special Commission, and the IAEA is essential for the implementation of resolution 687 (1991) and other relevant resolutions,


    http://www.cnn.com/2002/US/11/08/resolution.text/
     

Share This Page