 | | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) Seriously, are you really that obtuse? Do you really think the US *wants* war??? We want 1) prove that Iraq has been disarmed of WOMD, and 2) Saddam deposed. That's *all*. Unfortunately, it will probably take war to accomplish that. (...) (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) The credibility of the UN is being destroyed by the rhetoric from Bush/Blair. (...) I agree. I'd have given more credence to Powell's little performance if Jr had not been itching bomb Iraq for most of his “presidency”. Did Powell show the (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) As your own country's history shows, anti-Semitism, ethnic cleansing, genocide and racial/ethnic/religious intolerance is not a uniquely European experience. Zionism was an established philosophy well before WW2 and some form of Jewish (...) (22 years ago, 3-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) I think whatever point you may have had in mind was lost in your wording. If you wish to speak of people in the US dieing because of a 200+ year old internal document, you have left the arena of international law and diplomacy. Be that as it (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Bruce Schlickbernd writes: <snip> (...) My point, parenthetical to be sure, is that "Oh we'll uphold a document written a long time ago--every jot and tittle--but a UN sanction (the US being one of the founding members of (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) I think Bush will be quite happy to see Saddam ousted from within. He also may be amenable to seeing him accept voluntary exile. But Bush has decided for whatever reason that he wants Saddam gone, and has no problem with the war route (ah, for (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes: <snip> (...) Well, I'm not sure of the exact section (think 10) of 1441 paraphrased -- any country with info of WoMD must turn over that info to the inspectors for confirmation... I'd say that's (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) No, sorry, don't buy it. We do not have an obligation to turn over intelligence to the UN if that intelligence is going to be immediately leaked to the Iraqis and if, further, doing so is going to compromise the sources (remember what that (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Re: Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) My point was, as some folks pointed out in rebuttal to Powell's presentation, is that the US should turn over info to the inspectors. Yes the Iraqis should do more to accomodate the inspection process, but just by showing us that the US had (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
| |
| | Leaks (was Re: Here's one of the many things I don't understand...
|
|
(...) Like I said, it's leaked. The US decided to present it anyway. From commentary on today's presentation by Powell: (URL) ... it's true that there was no single moment like that (Adlai Stevenson smoking gun): rather, there were several of them. (...) (22 years ago, 6-Feb-03, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
