Diplomatic language often is meant to be unclear when there is no basic agreement... Language is selected precisely to allow both sides to claim that there position was supported... Resolution 1441 is such a Resolution... Failure to understand this, or a willingness to ignore this, allows you to claim that Resolution 1441 said something it did not say... It did not speak to the question as to the REQUIREMENT for a NEW Chapter VII Resolution... It only spoke to the requirement of TALKING about a new Resolution... Diplomatic language is extremely nuanced...
On Dec 24, 3:43 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > Like when I quote the authors (1441) and theIR given ORAL/WRITTEN > explanations to the body they present it to that says it is not to be > construed as a pelude or permission to invasion and you point out five > words that can be misconstrued and skewered to mean "well, Maybe" and > continue with the thought that absolute permission was in fact > intended ???? > > As far as Germany in 1933... do not go there, Karl Lehmann is my > cousin on my fathers side and all those people named Rosenberg > (mothers side) at Dachau on the wall exhibit were family of my father. > I know the level of proof required in an arguement that has "live or > die" at its center... you have spent far too much time in the US to > even grasp "realities" of the world. > > On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 12:45 PM, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Mark, in 1933 my father had the horror to understand the "True > > Believer" mentality in both Russia and Germany... In a discussion if > > I make a point and you dispute it, I should bring up a fact to "prove > > the point"... I did... However if civil debate is to continue, you > > must be willing the accept "facts" or at least document why they are > > not facts... You failed to do this... > > > You seem to think the reasons listed were only WMD.... But Saddam's > > human rights abuses, failure to follow the cease fire accord, support > > for terrorism (not only AQ), prior use of WMD, failure to provide full > > and unfettered access to inspectors, verified lying to UN inspectors, > > and being the corrupting influence in the Oil for Food Programs, ALL > > HAVE BEEN PROVEN TRUE AND ARE NOT MERE CLAIMS OF FAULTY INTEL... > > Unless you wish to dispute all these reasons, you logic and reasoning > > here is at the level of Hitler's Brown shirts and Stalin's True > > Believers --- it is true because my leader told me so, even if it > > contradicts what he told me last month... > > > On Dec 24, 1:28 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > >> I truly feel sorry for you and those like you that must wallow in > >> those dark corners of revisionist ignorance while reaching into the > >> recesses Pseudo reality to uphold their carefully culled self serving > >> "truths". > > >> On Wed, Dec 24, 2008 at 12:13 PM, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> > See my reply to Lef... It is clear you do not include facts into > >> > your discussions here... Like Hitler's and Stalin's True Believers > >> > of old, Propaganda not Facts aere the standard of truth... > > >> > On Dec 24, 12:44 pm, Mark <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> Agreed Lefty, It is just amazing that the Bush "reports" and "reasons" > >> >> were all based on carefully culled and known erroneous "intel" that > >> >> was catered to fit his wants. > > >> >> It will come out at the trials. Whether they are held in the US or as > >> >> in one case already, Germany. > > >> >> Presidential pardons are only effective within the US. > > >> >> On 12/24/08, lef <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> >> > I don't know why you bring up this old speech. We now know that it was > >> >> > just lies. > > >> >> > On 24 Dec, 17:05, jgg1000a <[email protected]> wrote: > >> >> > > Bush's 2002 UN Speech... Let's see the reasons > > >> >> > > 1) 12 years failure in compliance with UNSC Chapter VII Resolutions > > >> >> > > 2) Failure to comply with the 1991 cease fire accord > > >> >> > > 3) Human Rights abuses of the Iraqi people, > > >> >> > > 4) Support for terrorism > > >> >> > > 5) Corrupting the Oil for Food program > > >> >> > > 6) an unwillingness to have an open and unfettered inspection > >> >> > > process > >> >> > > concerning WMD > > >> >> > > Clearly Bush lists many reason for removing Saddam... > > >> >> > >http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/releases/2002/09/20020912-1.html > > >> >> > > >>> Above all, our principles and our security are challenged today > >> >> > > >>> by outlaw groups and regimes that accept no law of morality and > >> >> > > >>> have no limit to their violent ambitions. In the attacks on > >> >> > > >>> America a year ago, we saw the destructive intentions of our > >> >> > > >>> enemies. This threat hides within many nations, including my > >> >> > > >>> own. In cells and camps, terrorists are plotting further > >> >> > > >>> destruction, and building new bases for their war against > >> >> > > >>> civilization. And our greatest fear is that terrorists will > >> >> > > >>> find a shortcut to their mad ambitions when an outlaw regime > >> >> > > >>> supplies them with the technologies to kill on a massive scale. > > >> >> > > In one place -- in one regime -- we find all these dangers, in their > >> >> > > most lethal and aggressive forms, exactly the kind of aggressive > >> >> > > threat the United Nations was born to confront. > > >> >> > > Twelve years ago, Iraq invaded Kuwait without provocation. And the > >> >> > > regime's forces were poised to continue their march to seize other > >> >> > > countries and their resources. Had Saddam Hussein been appeased > >> >> > > instead of stopped, he would have endangered the peace and stability > >> >> > > of the world. Yet this aggression was stopped -- by the might of > >> >> > > coalition forces and the will of the United Nations. > > >> >> > > To suspend hostilities, to spare himself, Iraq's dictator accepted a > >> >> > > series of commitments. The terms were clear, to him and to all. And > >> >> > > he > >> >> > > agreed to prove he is complying with every one of those obligations. > > >> >> > > He has proven instead only his contempt for the United Nations, and > >> >> > > for all his pledges. By breaking every pledge -- by his deceptions, > >> >> > > and by his cruelties -- Saddam Hussein has made the case against > >> >> > > himself. > > >> >> > > In 1991, Security Council Resolution 688 demanded that the Iraqi > >> >> > > regime cease at once the repression of its own people, including the > >> >> > > systematic repression of minorities -- which the Council said, > >> >> > > threatened international peace and security in the region. This > >> >> > > demand > >> >> > > goes ignored. > > >> >> > > Last year, the U.N. Commission on Human Rights found that Iraq > >> >> > > continues to commit extremely grave violations of human rights, and > >> >> > > that the regime's repression is all pervasive. Tens of thousands of > >> >> > > political opponents and ordinary citizens have been subjected to > >> >> > > arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, summary execution, and torture by > >> >> > > beating and burning, electric shock, starvation, mutilation, and > >> >> > > rape. > >> >> > > Wives are tortured in front of their husbands, children in the > >> >> > > presence of their parents -- and all of these horrors concealed from > >> >> > > the world by the apparatus of a totalitarian state. > > >> >> > > In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolutions 686 and 687, > >> >> > > demanded that Iraq return all prisoners from Kuwait and other lands. > >> >> > > Iraq's regime agreed. It broke its promise. Last year the Secretary > >> >> > > General's high-level coordinator for this issue reported that > >> >> > > Kuwait, > >> >> > > Saudi, Indian, Syrian, Lebanese, Iranian, Egyptian, Bahraini, and > >> >> > > Omani nationals remain unaccounted for -- more than 600 people. One > >> >> > > American pilot is among them. > > >> >> > > In 1991, the U.N. Security Council, through Resolution 687, demanded > >> >> > > that Iraq renounce all involvement with terrorism, and permit no > >> >> > > terrorist organizations to operate in Iraq. Iraq's regime agreed. It > >> >> > > broke this promise. In violation of Security Council Resolution > >> >> > > 1373, > >> >> > > Iraq continues to shelter and support terrorist organizations that > >> >> > > direct violence against Iran, Israel, and Western governments. Iraqi > >> >> > > dissidents abroad are targeted for murder. In 1993, Iraq attempted > >> >> > > to > >> >> > > assassinate the Emir of Kuwait and a former American President. > >> >> > > Iraq's > >> >> > > government openly praised the attacks of September the 11th. And al > >> >> > > Qaeda terrorists escaped from Afghanistan and are known to be in > >> >> > > Iraq. > > >> >> > > In 1991, the Iraqi regime agreed to destroy and stop developing all > >> >> > > weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles, and to prove to > >> >> > > the world it has done so by complying with rigorous inspections. > >> >> > > Iraq > >> >> > > has broken every aspect of this fundamental pledge. > > >> >> > > From 1991 to 1995, the Iraqi regime said it had no biological > >> >> > > weapons. > >> >> > > After a senior official in its weapons program defected and exposed > >> >> > > this lie, the regime admitted to producing tens of thousands of > >> >> > > liters > >> >> > > of anthrax and other deadly biological agents for use with Scud > >> >> > > warheads, aerial bombs, and aircraft spray tanks. U.N. inspectors > >> >> > > believe Iraq has produced two to four times the amount of biological > >> >> > > agents it declared, and has failed to account for more than three > >> >> > > metric tons of material that could be used to produce biological > >> >> > > weapons. Right now, Iraq is expanding and improving facilities that > >> >> > > were used for the production of biological weapons. > > >> >> > > United Nations' inspections also revealed that Iraq likely maintains > >> >> > > stockpiles of VX, mustard and other chemical agents, and that the > >> >> > > regime is rebuilding and expanding facilities capable of producing > >> >> > > chemical weapons. > > >> >> > > And in 1995, after four years of deception, Iraq finally admitted it > >> >> > > had a crash nuclear weapons program prior to the Gulf War. We know > >> >> > > now, were it not for that war, the regime in Iraq would likely have > >> >> > > possessed a nuclear weapon no later than 1993. > > >> >> > > Today, Iraq continues to withhold important information about its > >> >> > > nuclear program -- weapons design, procurement logs, experiment > >> >> > > data, > >> >> > > an accounting of nuclear materials and documentation of foreign > >> >> > > assistance. Iraq employs capable nuclear scientists and technicians. > >> >> > > It retains physical infrastructure needed to build a nuclear weapon. > > ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
