Aright..I'm reading the responses now and this is the French response:

"Given the choice between military intervention and an inspections
regime that is inadequate because of a failure to cooperate on Iraq's
part, we must choose the decisive reinforcement of the means of
inspections"

Now that's BS. I don't know the exact wording of the resolution that was
recently passed, but the gist of it seems to be that if Iraq is found in
'material breach' (still trying to wrap my mind around what that phrase
ACTUALLY means) then military action is required.

If the French concede however reluctantly that Iraq hasn't been exactly
straightforward....then how can beefing up the inspections help?
Why was Iraq allowed to forbid U2 spyplane flyovers in the first place? 

So we can see that the French just want to stall regardless.

The Iraqis are of course going to deny everything. 

I mean..one needs to have this sort of evidence independently verified
by an International agency. 

Think of it as a court of law you know? You need to provide evidence
that can be verified. 
I am unsure of who is verifying or has verified this evidence

But! If we go on the basis that the evidence is valid..then it is very
troubling indeed. 
I also wonder that China, Russia, the French..Britain...have not put
forward any evidence to the contrary. 
Or provided evidence of their own. 

Is it only the United States that has intelligence on Iraq???
Is the US the only one interested in keeping tabs on what Saddam is
doing?

The speech raises a lot of questions...and it sways me toward the side
that Military action may be necessary..but it doesn't convince me of
this.

Now if this was against North Korea? Pfftt..wouldn't need that much
evidence at all to convince me that they needed to bum rush the place
before things got going. 

But with Iraq already being under sanctions for so many years...and the
'iffy' nature of things...the lure of Oil and the control of this oil
output to undercut OPEC control of prices etc. ?

War in the Middle East..attacking a middle eastern country just isn't
something you just wade in and do because it's the 'right thing' to do.
The region is not the most stable in the world by any means. 

One just cannot be as certain about the motives of the entities involved
in pushing for War. 
One asks a lot more questions and seeks far more reassurance in this
case.

-Gel



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~|
Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5
Subscription: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5
This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for 
dependable ColdFusion Hosting.

                                Unsubscribe: 
http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
                                

Reply via email to