Yank (ie. Bush) go home!

[yoxer]

Corydoras:

 

I personally think that if the UN said that the only solution other than military action was a deal with Iraq ....that if the UN are allowed total, unfetered access to anywhere in Iraq, with no predetermined time limit, with as many inspectors as the UN think they need to commit ( be it 20 or 200,000) then all sanctions will be lifted when all teams report complete compliance. Also there would be an "Amnesty" whereby if the inspectors do find any WMD no further action will be taken. They will be decommissioned anyway so there will be no threat. I think the international community would find this proposal very hard to refuse.

 

 

 

 

So, do you choose:

 

a) Lift sanctions and let Iraq get on doing whatever

 

Keep sanctions imposed to quell any threat at the expense of 000's of lives

 

c) Remove Saddam in the belief you can save the lives of 000's of people

 

d) The above solution .

 

e) Name any other solution you can think of

[corydoras]

Nice politcal answer. Not an answer at all. What would YOU have them do?

[yoxer]

Its not a political answer at all.I have given you my solution clearly . What do you not understand , or what are you not clear on ?

[corydoras]

So that's it? Just sit on your hands, do nothing and let Saddam get on with it.

[Guest sslatter]

yoxer:

Corydoras:

 

I personally think that if the UN said that the only solution other than military action was a deal with Iraq ....that if the UN are allowed total, unfetered access to anywhere in Iraq, with no predetermined time limit, with as many inspectors as the UN think they need to commit ( be it 20 or 200,000) then all sanctions will be lifted when all teams report complete compliance. Also there would be an "Amnesty" whereby if the inspectors do find any WMD no further action will be taken. They will be decommissioned anyway so there will be no threat. I think the international community would find this proposal very hard to refuse.

Sounds okay, with one major failing: "no predetermined time limit". Hypothetically speaking, he could stall forever, couldn't he?

 

And one more point: you say that even if he does have the materials, Saddam doesn't have the long-range capabilities to use them. Yet he does-all it takes is a 'dirty bomb' which could be smuggled and let off in any country in the world. He doesn't need long-range rocket capabilities to strike anywhere. Just a few fanatics to travel to any country he orders. And believe you me, the radical fundamentalists are prepared to commit suicide if so 'ordered' by a superior whom they revere.

 

But I'm not pro-war. Not at all. Control of business interests is always at the core of any conflict- the rich get richer, and the poor get hacked-off, to the point where they don't care anymore. World peace? Improve the conditions for the 3rd world, and the poor and oppressed might not feel so despairing. And then they might not let themselves be brainwashed by religious propaganda. Is it a coincidence that the majority of muslim anti-west feeling comes from the poorest communities in the world?

[yoxer]

Dirty bombs and terrorism is a very real threat no doubt however every attempt by the Bush Administration to link Iraq to international terrorism has failed. A 2002 study by the State Department ("Patterns of Global Terrorism") found no association between Iraq and terrorist groups. A 2002 CIA report demonstrates that Baghdad has been consciously avoiding actions that could antagonize the US ("The Case Against War," www.thenation.com ).

 

An alliance between the secularist Ba’ath Party and al-Qaeda is highly improbable. Saddam Hussein has used extreme repression against Islamicists; Osama bin Laden considers Saddam Hussein an infidel.

 

Raising the specter of Iraqi cooperation with "terrorists" seems like a cynical scare tactic. After all, Bush’s plans to invade Iraq pre-date the attacks of September 2001 ("Bush Planned Iraq Regime Change Before Becoming President," www.sundayherald.com/27735 ).

 

The strongest "link" between Iraq and al-Qaeda is that attacking Iraq may increase support for al-Qaeda by fueling resentment against the US and exacerbating conditions, such as political instability, mass displacement, poverty and social breakdown, that give rise to political extremism, including acts of terrorism.

[yoxer]

with regard to ongoing sanctions.... US allies, the United Nations and even the CIA contend that UN inspections have fundamentally succeeded in facilitating the disarmament of Iraq ("Analysts Discount Attack by Iraq," www.washingtonpost.com) .

 

Iraq refused to continue with inspections when it was discovered that the US was using inspectors as spies. Iraq also refused to cooperate when inspectors demanded unrestricted access to any site in Iraq. The US similarly refuses to admit UN weapons inspectors to all US laboratories.

 

Today’s mass media often repeat the US claim that inspectors were thrown out of Iraq by Saddam Hussein in 1998. Actually, they were withdrawn by request of President Clinton on the eve of his Desert Fox bombing campaign (www.madre.org/art_iraq_factsheet98.html#iraq ).

 

The US has undercut Iraq’s incentive to cooperate with inspectors by declaring that sanctions (originally imposed to compel disarmament) will remain in place even after Iraq complies with inspections.

[nursejudy]

just how do we know all these weapons of mass destruction are missing ...because we and the us especially donald rumpsfelt(apologies for mis spelling)sold them to Iraq when we were fighting against Iran...we needed Sadam then alledgedly.Also what about the super gun we british were helping Sadam to build,it just seems double standards to me,

From what I have read Sadam's son is just as bad ,he tortured the world cup football team that lost....and has killed his own sister.

 

nursejudy

[Peter M]

On the news tonight they were interviewing exiled iraqi nationals. Well I thought this will give us the definate answer as who better to inform us as to the way forward. Guess what they had two people on who were from Iraq and they disagreed about whether to go to war or not. The only thing they agreed on was they hated Saddam. Well if they can't agree ...............?

[chesters1]

quote:

---

From what I have read Sadam's son is just as bad ,he tortured the world cup football team that lost....and has killed his own sister.

---

maybe we should start as for his sister and all iraqi women i would kill them , their all hideous ugly monsters hence by moslem law they MUST wear burka`s or yashmacs any male seing one "in the flesh" would immediatly strap a bomb to himself and head for a school bus , i am always amazed that they can actually breed maybe thats why the males flock over here so they can actually look at their female victims