The UN Is Walking A Dangerous Rope

[Annie]

The gall of these people! No effective pressure, US and Britain through both threat of force and diplomacy bring Libya to the table and Elbarudi thinks he can just tell us to take a 'walk', time for US to seriously get the UN out of here:

http://news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/ap/20031231/ap_on_re_af/us_libya_1

 

[DKSuddeth]

a little unilateralism never hurt anyone, right? After all, Are they not following the example set out by Bush? Besides, I would think that whatever weapons inspectors we have should go to Iraq and find THOSE weapons, not to a country thats willingly working with us at the current time.

 

[Annie]

Duh, Libya contacted Britain to intervene with US, that's the way it went down. Now, US and Britain go to UN with this and the UN says to stay out? Get a life. If France had not actively worked against US/UK pressure and let the 'full might' of UNSC come down on Iraq, perhaps there wouldn't have been a war there. But they did. US led coalition response? Welcome international rebuilding, with all but US monies. Hardly unilateralist.

 

[r3volut!on]

I'm with DK on this one.

The only reason the US and Britain have any interest in being involved is to further push the notion that Libya's cooperation was a direct result of the war on Iraq--to further justify a war that is still in need of a whole lot of justification worldwide.

 

[DKSuddeth]

Kathianne, chill hon. Don't let a little sarcasm fly by you.

 

[jimnyc]

Tell Elbarudi to pound salt up his ass. I wouldn't trust the UN to host a poker game.

 

[Annie]

Kathianne, chill hon. Don't let a little sarcasm fly by you.

posted by DK

I reread, still 'flying by me', perhaps you might enlighten?

 

[DKSuddeth]

Bush said we'll do it alone (referring to iraq and weapons inspections) and the UN said we'll do it alone (libya and weapons inspections) so the unilateralism remark was sarcastic but my stand remains the same on where the US weapons inspectors should be.

 

[bamthin]

Wasn't it the IAEA that stated that Iraq had no nuclear weapons program and the US and Britian that were saying that Saddam was trying to buy African uranium?

Sounds to me like they had it right and the US/Britian were bumbling fools. How can the world trust the US/Britian inspectors when they use fraudulent documents to prop up pre-emptive war strikes?

Seems like a no-brainer to me....


-Bam

 

[Annie]

Bam, why did the UN want to continue the inspections then, if they had reached such a finding?

 

[bamthin]

In January of this year they reported that there was no evidence of nuclear weapons program. I think the IAEA wanted to continue with inspecting however. I guess they never got the chance and the intelligence of the US/Britian was considered better. What's your point? Bottom line: The IAEA was right.


-Bam

 

[Annie]

Provide some links on what you are saying please, I can't find anything that backs up your claims.

 

[bamthin]

Here

-Bam

 

[Annie]

Thanks for the link, it made me reread the thread. Must have been the champagne or stupidity, I now recognize you were speaking of the nuclear, not all WMD. On Saddam's nuclear program it appears there was less, (tg), than US/UK feared; but in hindsight, after the war and with what they are finding NOW, IAEA was unable to find documentation that was needed.

Bottom line, you're more correct on nuclear in Iraq, they weren't close to building a reactor.

 

[bamthin]

No problem and Happy New Year. I think we all can agree that the IAEA can do the job in Libya and that British/US inspectors/intelligence have recently proven their bumbling, if not criminal, practices. re: fraudulent "yellow cake" Saddam documents presented as fact.

-Bam

 

[nbdysfu]

Actually it appears that the US/UK caught the Libyans with its own inspections months ago. This confirmation was released after the UN council claimed sole responsibility:

centrifuge imports to Libya blocked by US/UK three months ago
[Y! AP]
_______________________ _______________________
WASHINGTON - Nearly three months after the successful operation, the Bush administration confirmed on Wednesday interception of an illegal shipment of thousands of parts of uranium-enrichment equipment bound for Libya.

The seizure in early October sealed Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's decision to dismantle his nuclear weapons program, a U.S. official said on condition of anonymity.

Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton plans to fly to London on New Year's Day to make plans with Britain for holding Gadhafi to his Dec. 19 pledge to dismantle.

There is an extensive black market that provided Libya with tens of millions of dollars in equipment, the U.S. official said, but there now is an aggressive program of interdicting delivery and the administration intends to pursue middlemen actively.

The intercepted parts were being delivered to Libya on a German-owned freighter that was diverted to an Italian port.
_______________________ _______________________


Today, it appears the UN is walking a tight rope afterall. I would say their appeasement and denial of US participation has provoked this tantrum from Libyan leaders:

Libya threatens not to honor Lockerbie if we don't reimburse their weapons research; Liberia anyone?
[Y! AP]
qoute:
_______________________ _______________________
"NEW YORK - Libya's prime minister said his country wants to be rewarded for opening up to nuclear inspections and stressed that the United States must lift sanctions by May 12 or his government won't have to pay $6 million to each family of the 1988 Lockerbie bombing (news - web sites) victims, according to an interview published Friday.

Prime Minister Shukri Ghanim told The New York Times that Libya wants to be paid for turning over nuclear materials. Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi pledged in mid-December to give up his unconventional weapons programs and to open weapons sites to inspectors.

Ghanim told the Times that the North African country wants to "accelerate to the maximum" the dismantling of its unconventional weapons programs so that Libya could be declared free of the weapons in the next few months.

At the same time, Ghanim reiterated that his country won't have to pay the remaining $6 million to each family of the victims of the airliner bombing unless Washington lifts the sanctions that it imposed in 1986 by May 12. "
_______________________ _______________________

 

[bamthin]

I find it very convenient that the Bush administration will come out three months AFTER they said they made these discoveries when it suited them to try and muscle the IAEA out of Libya.

"The seizure in early October sealed Libyan leader Moammar Gadhafi's decision to dismantle his nuclear weapons program, a U.S. official said on condition of anonymity."

"The interception of centrifuge parts bound for Libya was first reported in Wednesday's Wall Street Journal. The White House and State Department then confirmed the report with few details and no explanation why confirmation took nearly three months."

""The IAEA is in there because of what we uncovered," said one U.S. official on condition of anonymity. "The Libyans came to us and the British."

"The shipment originated in a Persian Gulf port, but the officials declined to identify the country Wednesday. Nor would they say which country or countries may have supplied the centrifuge parts, citing ongoing investigations. "

"In September, British and American intelligence authorities learned a German freighter was to depart the Gulf port bearing centrifuge equipment, a U.S. official said, speaking on condition of anonymity. The intelligence agencies alerted their German counterparts, who contacted the ship's owner.



I don't think the heresay evidence of an anonymous US official is gonna cut it. Nice try though. Kinda has "Karl Rove" written on it.


Do you actually just buy all this stuff without question? This article is laughable and none of it can be substantiated.


-Bam

 

[nbdysfu]

Karl Rove? I thought a more likely candidate would be John Ashcroft.
thanks for the respect, I've heard that 'anonymity' argument before. I've argued it before. It's an AP article, although Schweid is usually to the right of arguments from what I've read from him before.

 

[Annie]

I find it very convenient that the Bush administration will come out three months AFTER they said they made these discoveries when it suited them to try and muscle the IAEA out of Libya.

No one was trying to 'muscle' the IAEA out of Libya. The US and UK want their own inspectors there also. It was the UK that Libya first approached to begin the talks with the US.

For some reason the US/UK is not entirely comfortable with the reliability or honesty of the UN:

http://rogerlsimon.com/archives/00000578.htm

 

[nbdysfu]

Nor this guy, apparently:

"I think the UN is bizarro world," said Israeli deputy ambassador Arye Mekel after the session. for consideration in the UN General Assembly's 2004 agenda: The Israeli bombing of Iraq's Osirak nuclear reactor.


Nor the IDF apparently, mind the 'zionist source' : ].here The IDF homesite has some info on it too that I haven't seen anywhere in the media, like terrorists launching about twenty shoulder fired rockets at IDF.