Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community  

Go Back   Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community > The Academy > Tilted Politics


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 09-15-2004, 06:13 PM   #1 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Annan: US war in Iraq is Illeigal

http://english.aljazeera.net/NR/exer...B6370C75CC.htm
Quote:

Annan: US invasion of Iraq is 'illegal'

Thursday 16 September 2004, 4:16 Makka Time, 1:16 GMT


United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan has described the US-led invasion of Iraq as "illegal" and a violation of the UN charter.

In an interview with BBC on Wednesday, Annan also expressed fears that holding credible elections in Iraq may not be possible as planned in January 2005 in view of the escalating violence.

"I am one of those who believe that there should have been a second resolution from the UN Security Council to green-light the US-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein's regime," Annan said.

"I have indicated that it was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, and from the charter point of view it was illegal," he said.

US transgression

Annan stressed it was for the Security Council to act on UN resolutions to compel Saddam to abandon the pursuit of weapons of mass destruction.

“I have indicated that it was not in conformity with the UN charter from our point of view, and from the charter point of view it was illegal”

Kofi Annan,
UN Secretary-General


"It was up to the Security Council to approve or determine what those consequences should be," he said.

He added that the US decision to go ahead and invade Iraq, with British forces at its side, "was not in conformity with the Security Council, with the UN charter".

Asked if he meant that the decision to invade was illegal, Annan replied: "Yes, if you wish".

The secretary-general also had a grim forecast for Iraq, saying the current level of violence and unrest made credible elections early next year look highly unlikely.

"I think there have been lessons for the US and lessons for the UN and other member states," he said.

"I think that, in the end, everybody's concluded that it is best to work together with our allies and through the UN to deal with some of these issues," Annan said.

"I hope we do not see another Iraq-type operation for a long time".

The interview is likely to reignite debate over US President George Bush's decision to invade Iraq, a bitterly contested election campaign issue.
Agencies
So the secretary general says the US violated the UN charter in attacking Iraq. This isn't going to help the world opinion of the US at all. We really should have tried much harder to get the UN's (and world's) support before attacking Iraq.
Rekna is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 06:47 PM   #2 (permalink)
Kiss of Death
 
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
When will you realize that it doesn't matter what the reality was, we would've never gotten the required votes. Saddam could be straping babies to scuds while sodomizing a penguin with an AK and the likes of the French, Russian, and Chinese would've still been against it.

Fuck the Kofi Annan, I think he's mostly upset because of all the documents showing up involving the oil-for-food scandal, probably trying to divert attention from that. The UN and Kofi Annan are a joke, spineless and corrupt.
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.
Mojo_PeiPei is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 06:58 PM   #3 (permalink)
Huggles, sir?
 
seretogis's Avatar
 
Location: Seattle
http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=red%20herring

Pay no attention to the UN Security Council members behind the curtain with Saddam!
__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames
seretogis is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 06:59 PM   #4 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
another report, this from teh guardian, on the same story...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story...305709,00.html

huh...maybe points of view like mojo's are one reason the right attacked the un as soon as the bushcase for quick and unnecessary war failed to persuade anyone.

if you cant face the reality, it is always possible to create a diversion.

the problem then, as teh right reprocessed it in advance, is not that bush had no case for going to war--which is obvious by now to anyone who looks--but the un itself---because members of the unsc were not persuaded by the noncase the adminstration presented.

seems to work, that strategy, insofar as it prevents undue cognitive dissonance for conservatives who otherwise would have to face the fact that their boy bush sent the country to war on false pretenses.

but by now, batting away unpleasant facts about iraq in order to avoid cognitive dissonance must be nearly a fulltime job for those who support the war. i dont know how they find the time to do it.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 07:06 PM   #5 (permalink)
Huggles, sir?
 
seretogis's Avatar
 
Location: Seattle
I really have to bushquestion the bushreasoning behind prepending "bush" to every bushword. Is it funny? Does it help you make your case? To me it seems as immature and, frankly, moronic, as the kiddies that spell Microsoft with a $.
__________________
seretogis - sieg heil
perfect little dream the kind that hurts the most, forgot how it feels well almost
no one to blame always the same, open my eyes wake up in flames
seretogis is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 07:10 PM   #6 (permalink)
Junkie
 
powerclown's Avatar
 
Location: Detroit, MI
The United Nations is a disgrace. One day soon, it'll all come home to roost on thier doorstep, and they'll be looking around wondering what they did wrong.
Quote:
"I am one of those who believe that there should have been a second resolution from the UN Security Council to green-light the US-led invasion that toppled Saddam Hussein's regime," Annan said.
A second resolution....

A second resolution.

This man has the integrity of a cbs news anchor. A sellout. A hypocrite. An impotent, feeble little bureaucratic eunuch who stands to lose billions for himself, his crooked cronies, and his organization because he didn't have the spine to take a stand. Absolutely reprehensible. What gall to say such nonsense after Hussein broke 18 different UN Security Council Resolutions. 18!! One can only shake their head and laugh.
powerclown is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 07:14 PM   #7 (permalink)
can't help but laugh
 
irateplatypus's Avatar
 
Location: dar al-harb
i think there are many people who have a more legitimate right to make this case than kofi annon does. i'd like to hear a whole lot less from mr. annon until full disclosure on the food-for-oil program is achieved.
__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill
irateplatypus is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 07:17 PM   #8 (permalink)
Junkie
 
filtherton's Avatar
 
Location: In the land of ice and snow.
Funny that red herring was mentioned in the context of iraq. That's something i would have never expected, at least not in reference to the the u.n..

I bet if annan was pro-invasion we'd be bending over backwards to justify everything he does or says on the matter. How many resolutions has israel broken again?
filtherton is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 07:46 PM   #9 (permalink)
Kiss of Death
 
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
How many of them are security council resolutions?
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.
Mojo_PeiPei is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 07:50 PM   #10 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
Hahahaha thats funny.

What does he miss his oil for 'food' bribes?
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.
Ustwo is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 08:03 PM   #11 (permalink)
Junkie
 
Seaver's Avatar
 
Location: Fort Worth, TX
One more reason I believe we should simply pull out of the UN.

1400 UN soldiers couldnt do what 59 mercenaries did in the Ivory Coast... put an end to the massacres over there.

No country has listened to the UN in a dozen years. So why are we still pumping money into something so corrupt?
Seaver is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 08:31 PM   #12 (permalink)
Insane
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
When will you realize that it doesn't matter what the reality was, we would've never gotten the required votes. Saddam could be straping babies to scuds while sodomizing a penguin with an AK and the likes of the French, Russian, and Chinese would've still been against it.

Fuck the Kofi Annan, I think he's mostly upset because of all the documents showing up involving the oil-for-food scandal, probably trying to divert attention from that. The UN and Kofi Annan are a joke, spineless and corrupt.
man, you really nailed it there guy. not with us, you´re with the terrorists. Kofi Annan with 40 years of service dedicated to your well being, nobel peace prize winner and spokesman for the worlds community is irrelevent. Ditto United Nations.
Idiots questioned king George. heretics, fools, "spineless, corrupt jokes"
Damn right, pull out of the UN now. Who needs em? Kick all their asses the fuck back to wherever they came from. then rob everything they got. because we, of course, are more deserving. god bless america, west virginia and your mother/sister/aunt wife. you folk truly make me ashamed of my passport.
pedro padilla is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 08:33 PM   #13 (permalink)
Junkie
 
powerclown's Avatar
 
Location: Detroit, MI
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
How many of them are security council resolutions?
None of them are, the last was 37 years ago.
If the UN had its way with Israel, there'd be no Israel by now.
powerclown is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 08:39 PM   #14 (permalink)
Lennonite Priest
 
pan6467's Avatar
 
Location: Mansfield, Ohio USA
Sounds to me like the UN just wants more money from us. You know impose the fine and then as we always have done pay it.

I dislike the war, think we are seeing a very long disasterous affair ahead of us, but I hate the UN almost as much. I truly believe we need to stop all funds going into it.
__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"
pan6467 is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 08:42 PM   #15 (permalink)
Kiss of Death
 
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
Quote:
Originally Posted by pedro padilla
man, you really nailed it there guy. not with us, you´re with the terrorists. Kofi Annan with 40 years of service dedicated to your well being, nobel peace prize winner and spokesman for the worlds community is irrelevent. Ditto United Nations.
Idiots questioned king George. heretics, fools, "spineless, corrupt jokes"
Damn right, pull out of the UN now. Who needs em? Kick all their asses the fuck back to wherever they came from. then rob everything they got. because we, of course, are more deserving. god bless america, west virginia and your mother/sister/aunt wife. you folk truly make me ashamed of my passport.

Arafat won a peace prize, seems like anyone is eligable these days.

So hows that situation in Sudan going? Be a shame if another Rwanda happened....

Good think the UN regularly takes pro-active steps in the face of injustice. Why don't you ask the Iraqi's how well those sanctions helped their plight.

How'd that Somalia incident ever end up?

Yugoslavia? I seem to remember something about some genocide there, I'm sure the admirable Kofi stepped up to bat there.

Outside of Somalia, Rwanda, and Sudan, I seem to remember hearing something about some "conflict diamonds", I'm sure the UN stepped in though.
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.
Mojo_PeiPei is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 08:47 PM   #16 (permalink)
Insane
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
How many of them are security council resolutions?

How many Security Council resolutions have been unanimous only to have the US veto them?



SLM3
SLM3 is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 08:50 PM   #17 (permalink)
Insane
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
Arafat won a peace prize, seems like anyone is eligable these days.

So hows that situation in Sudan going? Be a shame if another Rwanda happened....

Good think the UN regularly takes pro-active steps in the face of injustice. Why don't you ask the Iraqi's how well those sanctions helped their plight.

How'd that Somalia incident ever end up?

Yugoslavia? I seem to remember something about some genocide there, I'm sure the admirable Kofi stepped up to bat there.

Outside of Somalia, Rwanda, and Sudan, I seem to remember hearing something about some "conflict diamonds", I'm sure the UN stepped in though.

The UN is what we make it; It's merely a tool. Where was the the US led resolution to call the situation in Sudan genocide months ago so that the UN would be required to do something (by mandate)? Where was it when Rwanda dealt with it?

SLM3
SLM3 is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 08:54 PM   #18 (permalink)
Kiss of Death
 
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
Quote:
The US Secretary of State Colin Powell has said the killings in Sudan's Darfur region constitute genocide.
Speaking before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Mr Powell said the conclusion was based on interviews with refugees who had fled Darfur.

He spoke as the UN Security Council prepared to debate a second resolution threatening Sudan with sanctions.

Up to 50,000 people in Darfur may have died and a million have been made homeless during the conflict.

Mr Powell blamed the government of Sudan and pro-government Arab Janjaweed militias for the killings.
"We concluded that genocide has been committed in Darfur and that the government of Sudan and the Janjaweed bear responsibility and genocide may still be occurring," Mr Powell said.

Mr Powell's conclusion is based on evidence collected by state department investigators, who interviewed more than 1,800 refugees.

Their testimonies, Mr Powell said, showed a pattern of violence which was co-ordinated, not random.

Three quarters of them said the Sudanese military had been involved in the violence, working with the Janjaweed.

The Sudanese foreign affairs minister, Najib Abdul Wahab, rejected the accusation of genocide.

He said that neither the European Union nor the African Union had used such strong language to describe events in Darfur.

The BBC's state department correspondent Jill McGivering says the use of the word genocide does not legally oblige the US to act, but it does increase the moral and political pressure.

Ten years ago the UN was accused of failing to stop genocide in Rwanda.

The Sudanese government says it does not believe its allies within the UN will agree to any sanctions.

Oil threat

A previous UN resolution was passed in July, calling for the pro-government Arab Janjaweed militias to be disarmed. The new draft resolution - put forward by Washington - says Sudan has failed to fully comply.

If Khartoum has still not complied by the proposed new deadline, sanctions may be introduced "including with regard to the petroleum sector". Sudan currently produces about 320,000 barrels of oil per day.

The resolution also calls for:


the expansion of the number and mandate of the current 300 African Union troops in the country

international over flights in Darfur to monitor what is happening, and an end to Sudanese military flights there

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to assess whether acts of genocide have been carried out and identify the perpetrators.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3641820.stm
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.
Mojo_PeiPei is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 09:19 PM   #19 (permalink)
Insane
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
Speaking before the US Senate Foreign Relations Committee, Mr Powell said the conclusion was based on interviews with refugees who had fled Darfur.

He spoke as the UN Security Council prepared to debate a second resolution threatening Sudan with sanctions.

Up to 50,000 people in Darfur may have died and a million have been made homeless during the conflict.

Mr Powell blamed the government of Sudan and pro-government Arab Janjaweed militias for the killings.
"We concluded that genocide has been committed in Darfur and that the government of Sudan and the Janjaweed bear responsibility and genocide may still be occurring," Mr Powell said.

Mr Powell's conclusion is based on evidence collected by state department investigators, who interviewed more than 1,800 refugees.

Their testimonies, Mr Powell said, showed a pattern of violence which was co-ordinated, not random.

Three quarters of them said the Sudanese military had been involved in the violence, working with the Janjaweed.

The Sudanese foreign affairs minister, Najib Abdul Wahab, rejected the accusation of genocide.

He said that neither the European Union nor the African Union had used such strong language to describe events in Darfur.

The BBC's state department correspondent Jill McGivering says the use of the word genocide does not legally oblige the US to act, but it does increase the moral and political pressure.

Ten years ago the UN was accused of failing to stop genocide in Rwanda.

The Sudanese government says it does not believe its allies within the UN will agree to any sanctions.

Oil threat

A previous UN resolution was passed in July, calling for the pro-government Arab Janjaweed militias to be disarmed. The new draft resolution - put forward by Washington - says Sudan has failed to fully comply.

If Khartoum has still not complied by the proposed new deadline, sanctions may be introduced "including with regard to the petroleum sector". Sudan currently produces about 320,000 barrels of oil per day.

The resolution also calls for:


the expansion of the number and mandate of the current 300 African Union troops in the country

international over flights in Darfur to monitor what is happening, and an end to Sudanese military flights there

UN Secretary General Kofi Annan to assess whether acts of genocide have been carried out and identify the perpetrators.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/africa/3641820.stm
So, uh, where's the resolution calling it genocide?


SLM3
SLM3 is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 09:23 PM   #20 (permalink)
Psycho
 
Location: I think my horns are coming out
Like anyone cares what the UN thinks.
The Phenomenon is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 09:55 PM   #21 (permalink)
Junkie
 
powerclown's Avatar
 
Location: Detroit, MI
Quote:
Originally Posted by SLM3
How many Security Council resolutions have been unanimous only to have the US veto them?
SLM3
See my post above.
That's why they're called "Allies".
powerclown is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 10:00 PM   #22 (permalink)
Loser
 
Remember when one of the never-ending shifting excuses for the Iraq war was that Saddam had ignored the U.N. resolutions?



We had to invade Iraq because they ignored the U.N. resolutions!
Don't listen to the U.N., they're a bunch of spineless/idiots/fools!

-- More of that impressive conservative hypocrisy
OpieCunningham is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 10:11 PM   #23 (permalink)
Insane
 
yeah, arafat got the peace prize and sharon is a "man of peace" and bush is a defender of the american people and OJ didn´t do it.
you´re right. basically the UN is totally crippled by US and israeli non compliance when and where it suits them. theys good boys when they´re behind us but obsolete when they don´t fall in line.
ever thought that maybe many of your cited failures and lack of action on UNs part may stink of direct US complicity? The US are unquestionably the strongest of the so called superpowers. More than able to organize and facilitate any UN humanitarian mission or resolution.
we do what we want when we want in our self appointed world cop role. when the fuck are these cops gonna have to face a judge?
pedro padilla is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 10:20 PM   #24 (permalink)
Kiss of Death
 
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
Opie, yeah that is funny.

The UN put resolutions in place and Saddam blatantly ignored them for over a decade Man because of his actions millions of people suffered needlessly, more then half a million children died, you'd think a jewish writer wrote that!

What was the count 17 or 18? What's hilarious is how Saddam didn't even really try and hide his non-compliance.

Bush said it best, the rest of the world shares our assesment, but not our resolve.
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.
Mojo_PeiPei is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 10:39 PM   #25 (permalink)
Loser
 
Mojo - Sarcasm. Neat. Lacking context and facts, but hey, I don't expect miracles.

But it assuredly is quite funny that you don't see the irony in complaining about/ignoring the U.N. out of one side of your mouth and championing your war out of the other side of your mought due to someone else complaining about/ignoring the U.N.
OpieCunningham is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 10:49 PM   #26 (permalink)
Insane
 
damn, you funny too!
non compliance? the WMD inspectors were completely ignored by the bush crew. when nothing came up we got the historic powell moving vans of death presentation and absolute media fantasy blitz. face it, there were not, are not, and hopefully will never be any WMDs in iraq. they posed less of a threat to the US than canada. they had no ties to 9 11 and basically, if left alone for a coupla more years, would have probably imploded without our foot in their ass.
yeah we brought down that evil villians regime. saved the iraquis from the dangers of safe drinking water and electricity. and it only sets us back a few million a day.
meanwhile the other bad guys take advantage of the unsupervised recess to work on some new toys.
bush shoulda said: the rest of the world doesn´t swallow our trumped up, obviously falsified assesment but we resolve to do it anyway.
clinton shoulda admitted the blowjob as well.

mentiras. eres una mentiroso. - freddy fender
pedro padilla is offline  
Old 09-15-2004, 11:24 PM   #27 (permalink)
Banned
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by seretogis
I really have to bushquestion the bushreasoning behind prepending "bush" to every bushword. Is it funny? Does it help you make your case? To me it seems as immature and, frankly, moronic, as the kiddies that spell Microsoft with a $.
he did it to one word. i double-checked. lighten the fuck up.

how about challenging a viewpoint you disagree with, rather than make snide commentary about it? I guess it's just easier and requires less maturity to take a pot-shot and move along.

Last edited by analog; 09-15-2004 at 11:27 PM..
analog is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 01:19 AM   #28 (permalink)
Insane
 
Old news. This was known long before the war had even started. The Iraq war was a war of aggression, which is against all international law.

Is War Against Iraq Legal Or Not? a Debate Between Roger Normand and Ruth Wedgewood

Army Chiefs Feared Iraq War Illegal Just Days Before Start

'Illegal War' Could Mean Soldiers Face Prosecution

US War Without UN Approval Would Be Seen as Illegal (they never got it)

Armey: 'Unprovoked' Iraq War Would Be Illegal

Even Richard Perle, one of the neo-con architects of the war has admitted it!

War Critics Astonished as US Hawk Admits Invasion was Illegal
hammer4all is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 01:23 AM   #29 (permalink)
undead
 
Pacifier's Avatar
 
Location: Duisburg, Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
When will you realize that it doesn't matter what the reality was, we would've never gotten the required votes.
Neocon whining

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
Saddam could be straping babies to scuds while sodomizing a penguin with an AK and the likes of the French, Russian, and Chinese would've still been against it.
BS, see Gulf War I
You got the vote for that even though all the "baby stories" back then were a blatant lie.
__________________
"It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death
— Albert Einstein
Pacifier is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 01:37 AM   #30 (permalink)
Insane
 
A note to some people here regarding the so-called oil-for-food "scandal." The U.S. shares just as much, if not more, blame for their role in not stopping it in the first place!

Quote:
But Phyllis Bennis of the Institute for Policy Studies, who monitors day-to-day political developments in the world body, told IPS that U.N. 'credibility' is certainly not at risk.

'It's the members of the Security Council, most significantly the United States and its allies, who were responsible for approving all contracts in the oil-for-food program,' she pointed out.

'This is one more in a long series of efforts by Washington to divert responsibility for its own failures to blame the United Nations instead,' Bennis said.
http://www.commondreams.org/headlines04/0412-09.htm

http://www.ambafrance-us.org/news/st...imes040704.asp

For some reason the conservative columnists who keep peddling this story tend to leave out that fact...
hammer4all is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 02:08 AM   #31 (permalink)
Insane
 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
Opie, yeah that is funny.

The UN put resolutions in place and Saddam blatantly ignored them for over a decade Man because of his actions millions of people suffered needlessly, more then half a million children died, you'd think a jewish writer wrote that!

What was the count 17 or 18? What's hilarious is how Saddam didn't even really try and hide his non-compliance.

Bush said it best, the rest of the world shares our assesment, but not our resolve.
A funny thing about Saddam's non-compliance--as the following article illustrates, the U.S. had no intention of holding up their end of the bargain either. Never mind the supposed weapons; they weren't going to lift sanctions as long as Saddam was in power no matter what he did. Moreover, as Saddam had pointed out, the UNSCOM weapons inspectors were being used for U.S. espionage at the same time they were supposed to be just inspecting--hardly a tactic that encourages compliance.

Follow the Policy: Why So Long for Iraq to Comply?
hammer4all is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 05:52 AM   #32 (permalink)
can't help but laugh
 
irateplatypus's Avatar
 
Location: dar al-harb
if you believe that [insert wildly estimated figure here] iraqis suffered under the sanctions (which i'm not sure that i do)... how many palaces were you going to let saddam build for himself before the blame shifted to him?
__________________
If you will not fight when your victory will be sure and not too costly, you may come to the moment when you will have to fight with all the odds against you and only a precarious chance for survival. There may even be a worse case. You may have to fight when there is no hope of victory, because it is better to perish than to live as slaves.

~ Winston Churchill
irateplatypus is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 06:32 AM   #33 (permalink)
Kiss of Death
 
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pacifier
BS, see Gulf War I
You got the vote for that even though all the "baby stories" back then were a blatant lie.
Actually, if you look back I'm fairly certain one of our "major" "allies" was not there. Stormin' Norman made some reference about hunting and an accordian...
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.
Mojo_PeiPei is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 06:32 AM   #34 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
wow, what an explosion of bile....

let's summarize the situation one more time:
the administration claimed hussein had wmds.
the un inspection team did not concur.
the un inspectors appear to have been right.
the unsc believed the teams on the ground over the administration.

the administration claimed that iraq was a security threat to the us. partly on the basis of the wmds (not true), partly on the basis of some vague link to "international terror" (also not true).

the administration failed to persuade the unsc that its case was compelling,
it turns out that it was not compelling because it was false.

clearly, the problem is the united nations.

the human rights argument that was floated later is a joke. the entire history of american foreign policy since world war 2 (and before, but less consistently) demonstrates that it is a joke.the problem is not that saddam hussein was not a bad guy, but that the american have no problem with bad guys who murder their population to stay in power so long as that bad guy is politically convenient. thats the way "we" work.

clearly the problem is the united nations.

the war in iraq was about opposing a neocon vision of american national interests to that of the un, how national interest is defined in the charter.
the neocons thought the war would be short and simple--totally wrong, but hey, when it comes to members of the right, no error, no matter how huge, should carry any political consequences.

clearly the problem is the united nations.

the idea was to insert the american state, in its military capacity, as above international law, the idea of which the neocons hate because their entire politics assumes the nation-state as primary. the un does too, in fact, but that seems secondary to them.

for the gambit to have worked, the war would have had to be as they fantasized it would be--a short heroic war of liberation.

well it did not turn out that way.
they had no plan for that.

over a thousand american troops, and uncounted iraqis, combattants and civilians alike, have died because the neocons fucked up. there is no sense of liberation. there is nothing but chaos with no obvious way out. there is a consistent undermining of the american position internationally, both in terms of "moral" arguments and in terms of military power.

that the americans deployed their military in iraq and then found themselves caught where they are is about the worst thing that could have happened from a long-term security viewpoint for the u.s.

clearly the problem has to be the united nations.

why iraq in the first place? because of the neocon understanding of the first gulf war. they saw the un working against their john wayne understanding of american national interests, which for them would have required that the americans roll into baghdad in 1991.

the war is theater.

obviously, the problem is the united nations.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 06:44 AM   #35 (permalink)
Kiss of Death
 
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
Desert Fox anyone?
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.
Mojo_PeiPei is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 06:55 AM   #36 (permalink)
Pissing in the cornflakes
 
Ustwo's Avatar
 
This is what you are looking for Mojo.

Quote:
These words were spoken by Jed Babbin, a former deputy undersecretary of defense in the first Bush administration, during a 30 January 2003 appearance on the political talk show Hardball. The full comment (offered during the course of a discussion about differences between U.S. and European policy towards Iraq) was: " . . . you know frankly, going to war without France is like going deer hunting without an accordion. You just leave a lot of useless noisy baggage behind."

Since Jed Babbin doesn't currently hold a position in the U.S. government (he served as deputy undersecretary of defense under President George H.W. Bush, the father of the current President, back in late 1980s) and is hardly a household name, this quote has been attributed to several other more prominent political and military figures, including current Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, Persian Gulf War commander General Norman Schwarzkopf, and former presidential candidate Ross Perot.
Other great France quotes.

"France has neither winter nor summer nor morals. Apart from these drawbacks it is a fine country. France has usually been governed by prostitutes." ---Mark Twain

"I would rather have a German division in front of me than a French one behind me."
---General George S. Patton

"We can stand here like the French, or we can do something about it."
---- Marge Simpson

"As far as I'm concerned, war always means failure"
---Jacques Chirac, President of France

"As far as France is concerned, you're right."
---Rush Limbaugh

You know the more I think about it the more I am confused. WHY is France thought of as a Major ally? The last time they did anything of value was blocking the British retreat at York Town, and that French government was later executed by the French.

I see France as a neutral power.
__________________
Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host

Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

Last edited by Ustwo; 09-16-2004 at 07:05 AM..
Ustwo is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 07:03 AM   #37 (permalink)
Kiss of Death
 
Location: Perpetual wind and sorrow
"You know why the French don't want to bomb Saddam Hussein? Because he hates America, he loves mistresses and wears a beret. He is French, people." --Conan O'Brien
__________________
To win a war you must serve no master but your ambition.
Mojo_PeiPei is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 07:08 AM   #38 (permalink)
undead
 
Pacifier's Avatar
 
Location: Duisburg, Germany
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mojo_PeiPei
Actually, if you look back I'm fairly certain one of our "major" "allies" was not there. Stormin' Norman made some reference about hunting and an accordian...
You were bitching about that "French, Russian, and Chinese would've still been against it." which was BS.
If they sended troops or not is an other topic.

how creative, nation bashing .... what about some surrender jokes? it may have been a week since i heard the last
__________________
"It seems to me that the idea of a personal God is an anthropological concept which I cannot take seriously. I also cannot imagine some will or goal outside the human sphere. Science has been charged with undermining morality, but the charge is unjust. A man's ethical behavior should be based effectually on sympathy, education, and social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death
— Albert Einstein

Last edited by Pacifier; 09-16-2004 at 07:10 AM..
Pacifier is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 07:09 AM   #39 (permalink)
 
roachboy's Avatar
 
Super Moderator
Location: essex ma
looks to me like the right folk have nothing to say about the central problem raised by annan's statements and prefer to spin about in networks of displacements...

now the problem is france.

it was the united nations.

it is everyone and everything other than the bush administration.

this appears more the acting-out of a psychological structure than an attempt to grapple with a political problem.

it does indeed appear that swatting away cognitive dissonance is a full time job.
i wonder at what point the question of diminishing returns will arise.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear

it make you sick.

-kamau brathwaite
roachboy is offline  
Old 09-16-2004, 07:31 AM   #40 (permalink)
Junkie
 
powerclown's Avatar
 
Location: Detroit, MI
Its disgraceful how Annan is pulling the 'illegal war' card. Pure hypocrisy and bitterness. Of course he's going to be pissed off when he is shown for the impotent little weasels that he and his organization are. Of course he's going to whine like a baby when his puny little money-kingdom is overruled by countries who actually have the spine to stand up to insane dictatorships. "Illegal." This from the organization who puts China and Libya in charge of their Human Rights commission. Pure farce.

Russia knew Hussein had WMD. Germany knew Hussein had WMD. France knew Hussein had WMD. China knew Hussein had WMD. The US knew he had WMD. Saudi Arabia knew he had WMD. Israel knew he had WMD. Iran knew he had WMD. The giveaway here was when Hussein actually used them in the Iran-Iraq War. He also used them to kill rebellious Kurds in northern Iraq. It makes the claim that he did not have WMD nonsense, when he dispelled anyone's notion of the matter by USING THEM. He buried missles in the sand. He buried ammunition at the bottom of the Tigris river. Underground bunkers & tunnels. There was an infrastructure in place designed to keep Bad Things out of site of satellites.

The fact that the UN knew all this - but decided to do nothing - besides a policy of appeasing the beast with (broken) resolution after (broken) resolution, is a mark of shame on them. Never mind the fact that many of the above countries also stood to lose $billions$ if their business partner/dictator in Iraq was put out of business, which to me, is the main reason why they refused to support the US & Britain. Now, like spoiled children, they refuse to cooperate in the reconstruction of Iraq.

Theatre, yes. Theatre of the Absurd.

Last edited by powerclown; 09-16-2004 at 07:43 AM..
powerclown is offline  
 

Tags
annan, illeigal, iraq, war

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On



All times are GMT -8. The time now is 01:23 PM.

Tilted Forum Project

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194 195 196 197 198 199 200 201 202 203 204 205 206 207 208 209 210 211 212 213 214 215 216 217 218 219 220 221 222 223 224 225 226 227 228 229 230 231 232 233 234 235 236 237 238 239 240 241 242 243 244 245 246 247 248 249 250 251 252 253 254 255 256 257 258 259 260 261 262 263 264 265 266 267 268 269 270 271 272 273 274 275 276 277 278 279 280 281 282 283 284 285 286 287 288 289 290 291 292 293 294 295 296 297 298 299 300 301 302 303 304 305 306 307 308 309 310 311 312 313 314 315 316 317 318 319 320 321 322 323 324 325 326 327 328 329 330 331 332 333 334 335 336 337 338 339 340 341 342 343 344 345 346 347 348 349 350 351 352 353 354 355 356 357 358 359 360