Archive through September 17, 2002
TV ClubHouse: Archive: Iraq will allow full weapons inspection!!!!! (ARCHIVE):
Archive through September 17, 2002
Vanillarose | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 06:33 pm     Omigosh, I am, personally, so happy to hear that Iraq agreed to the UN demands for weapons inspections!!! It isn't that I trust Iraq, or Sadaam Hussein, but I just think that our risk of going to war with them, at least for now, just went down considerably, and that definitely strikes me as a good thing! After all, it seems to me, that if we strike Iraq, we run a much greater risk of weapons of mass destruction being used and more terrorism being unleashed against us. Not to mention, we would alienate even more of the Middle East, and indeed, many other nations in the world, than we already have. Thank you, Kofi Annan!!! (Sorry, I will slink back off of my peacenik platform, now. You can now go back to your regularly scheduled programming. I am just so excited by this development !!!) |
Twiggyish | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 06:40 pm     I'm waiting to see what happens. It's up to Bush now. |
Vanillarose | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 06:44 pm     Twiggy that cowboy had better hang up his 10-gallon hat and his six-shooters! |
Sbw | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 06:58 pm     Taken from the CNN article - Annan credited the Arab League with playing a "key role" in the negotiations, saying Moussa's "strenuous efforts" helped "convince Iraq to allow the return of the inspectors." Annan said President Bush's speech last Thursday helped spur the international community in getting Iraq to comply with U.N. resolutions. "A lot has happened in this building since Thursday," Annan said in announcing the news. "I believe the president's speech galvanized the international community, as most of you heard almost every speaker in the General Assembly urge Iraq to accept the return of the inspectors." --Maybe that cowboy did some good! Hang in there Tex -- |
Kapow | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 07:31 pm     IMHO, Seems like George held the feet to the fire until we got what we wanted/needed. Hail to the chief.... All joking aside - All Bush said he originally wanted was the access for inspections. Now that we have it, we will have to wait and see if they REALLY give access. That will be the next big question. |
Margie | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 08:26 pm     Bad news: ************************** White House Dismisses Iraqi Offer Mon Sep 16, 8:44 PM ET By GEORGE GEDDA, Associated Press Writer UNITED NATIONS (AP) - The White House dismissed an Iraqi offer Monday to let weapons inspectors return there unconditionally, calling it a tactical move that did not change the Bush administration's desire to remove Saddam Hussein. ********************** Bush doesn't want inspections, he wants war. |
Max | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 08:49 pm     I wonder how big a temper tantrum he threw in the oval office. |
Faerygdds | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 08:57 pm     You know.. I was going to post earlier that the bigger question was will this satisfy Bush, but I didn't want to jinx it... guess that theory (jinxing it) was a bust! |
Margie | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 09:02 pm     I agree, Max. I'm sure he was throwing a fit. And it would be funny if it weren't so darn sad. Some of our young men are going to lose their lives over there because Bush will settle for nothing less than an all out invasion on Iraq. Bush never wanted inspections -- The administration said months ago that regardless of whether Iraq allowed the inspectors back we were still invading. This refusal doesn't surprise me, but it does sicken me. |
Gentoo | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 09:51 pm     Some of OUR young men? We'll maybe lose half a dozen. THink of the thousands of Iraqi innocent civillians that will be killed by Mr. Bush. |
Margie | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 10:00 pm     I absolutely agree, Gentoo, it just doesn't seem that anyone wants to hear about innocent Iraqi anything right now. They don't seem to care how many innocent civilians die as long as Bush get's Hussein's head. With the offer of unconditional inspections, Hussein is waving a white flag. That doesn't matter to Bush. We're going in anyway and if public opinion is against it somehow, he'll just find a way to tie Iraq to September 11th. (I know they tried that before and fell flat on their face and had to admit there was no Iraq tie to 9/11, but mark my words, they're going to find a way to make it seem plausible, and we're going in.) |
Maris | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 10:12 pm     cast your minds back folks to the last time Hussein waved the white flag and agreed to inspections. We all know how successful that was. I will believe it when I see it. |
Vanillarose | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 10:13 pm     *Sigh*. I should have known that the six-shooters weren't going back into the holsters so easily. |
Maris | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 10:44 pm     not a six shooter, just a realist. History has a way of repeating itself. |
Faerygdds | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 11:06 pm     History only repeats itself if you don't learn from it... Bush should do more reading... |
Maris | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 11:35 pm     perhaps Hussein should have learned from it since he is the one who will do the same old song and dance about the inspectors. Does anyone here really believe he is going to go along with the inspectors????????????????? |
Maris | Monday, September 16, 2002 - 11:47 pm     From CNN - Bush is not alone in thinking Hussein is a liar. Britain's reaction: UNITED NATIONS -- World leaders have reacted cautiously to the decision by Iraq to re-admit weapons inspectors with hope tempered by varying degrees of mistrust over Baghdad's motives. Britain, one of U.S. President George W. Bush's most vocal supporters on Iraq, echoed Washington's dismissal of Iraq's pledge with Prime Minister Tony Blair's office saying that President Saddam Hussein "had a long history of playing games." "His regime has flouted a whole raft of (United Nations) resolutions. Let's see what they are offering," the spokeswoman said. Australia's reaction: Australia and New Zealand have welcomed the move, saying it is a promising development. Australian Prime Minister John Howard said the move was a "cautious first step" in averting war. Howard said the world should treat Iraq's latest move with "a great deal of caution, a great deal of reserve and even a touch of scepticism." "We are cautiously optimistic but the world would be deluded to imagine that this is the end of the difficulty and the mere expression of willingness on the part of Iraq to re-admit weapons inspectors means that the world can take its eye off this issue," he said. Bangladesh: Bangladesh's Foreign Minister Morshed Khan told CNN the move was a good start but suggested the proof of the pudding was in the eating. |
Goddessatlaw | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 01:14 am     Nevermind Maris . . . you're wasting your breath. Can we have this thread retitled "Bush Bashers and Gore Sour Grapes Unite" please? |
Hillbilly | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 05:22 am     I should probably know better...but I would just like to remind everyone that the return of the inspectors was only ONE of the conditions. Saddam also must make war reparations to Kuwait-remember he used a scorched earth policy on this country, leaving it in tatters. He must also repatriate ALL prisoners taken during his invasion and the gulf war or account for them...including one of our pilots, Scott Reicher. There are also some other conditions that he originally agreed to when the war ended that he has yet to fulfill. Inspections and disarmament are just one part of a long equation. |
Babyruth | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 05:53 am     Much as you'd like to reduce the intelligent voice of dissent in this thread to "Bush Bashers and Gore Sour Grapes", it's not about the 2000 election, Goddess. It's about agreeing or disagreeing with Bush's desire for war, and about Iraq's recent response. Why dredge up the election and bring it into this thread just to the stir the pot? Why label those opposing Bush's war plan as simplistic and vengeful? Your comment rather devalues your opinions as far as I'm concerned. |
Faerygdds | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 06:02 am     Goddess... maybe we should retitle the thread "Bush Rhetoric vs Free thinking" It isn't about wanting Gore... it's about NOT approving of going in a waving your willy around with all the machisimo of the world... And that's what Bush is doing! And Maris... Blair is "in bed" so to speak with Bush... so does his reaction REALLY surprise you? Not to mention... I said last week that even if Iraq agreed, Bush would still find a way to war. I got bashed then, but my LOGIC still seems to be holding up. Frankly I don't know if Gore could have handled such stressful times... don't care to know... but I do know this... I don't like the way Bush is handling it. Although I'm beginning to think that maybe Bush IS right after all... maybe we DO have too many freedoms. I've said for a year now that freedoms carry a burden of responsibility. Too many people take them for granted. Too many people think it's a right... well... you have the right to have kids too... as many as you want... but having kids carries a burden of responsibility... same thing with our freedoms... But that's ok... I'm sure when Bush gets his way and his version of the SS has come to pass and all of our freedoms and civil liberties have gone out of the window... you'll enjoy living in Amerika. Little history lesson... anyone know what the word Republican means in German??? |
Adven | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 07:47 am     Speaking of history lessons, Hitler was adept at appeasing other Western powers prior to W.W. II and playing on their reluctance to go to war. The result was subjugation of the Jews, Germany's annexation of other European territories and a militarily powerful Nazi Germany by the time we finally responded with the invasion of Poland. Hitler could likely have been stopped quite easily had we taken a firmer stand in the years leading up to W.W. II, but we didn't. Although I am no great supporter of George Bush, Saddam has ignored the U.N. for ten years (to say nothing of the basic tenets of humanity) and the U.N., irresponsibly, has done nothing. If Saddam is actively pursuing weapons of mass destruction to use against others, and the evidence certainly points in that direction, what options does Bush have? Iraqi nuclear scientists who have defected to the West, suggest Saddam will have the ability to deliver a nuclear bomb somewhere between 2004 and 2007. They don't doubt that he intends to use them. Saddam, like Hitler before him, is skilled at telling the West what they want to hear when it suits him, while continuing with his own personal agenda in the meantime. To me, this new "openness"is more of the same from him. The bottom line is that, in the nuclear age, it is foolishly dangerous to try and appease tyrants like Saddam when it puts our own safety in such potential jeopardy. We might not like it, but I think we are going to have to pay the fiddler on this one and use force to get the "regime change" Bush refers to. We can do it now or delay, hoping some other solution will present itself, and risk something truly catastrophic happening in the meantime. I'm not sure we have the luxury of observing all the political niceties on this one. |
Twiggyish | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 07:50 am     I'm cautiously optimistic. As far as Sadaam is concerned, a tiger doesn't change his stripes. I'm taking a wait and see approach. |
Margie | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 08:00 am     Adven, "If Saddam is actively pursuing weapons of mass destruction to use against others, and the evidence certainly points in that direction, what options does Bush have?" What evidence? I've been waiting for some kind of evidence and as far as I've seen they've come up with nothing...? Iraq may have the ability to bomb locally by then. According to the pentagon press briefing yesterday, North Korea will have the ability to drop one on New York in the next few years. If we're worried about nuclear capability, I would think that North Korea would be the more imminent threat. Saddam is offering unconditional inspections. If we take him up on it and he screws around we still have the option of invading Iraq. No one is taking Bush's toys away from him. No one has said that Hussein is going to have nuclear capability next month - we send in inspectors today -- if he doesn't have the weapons then we averted an unjust invasion and many unneeded deaths. If he has the weapons we destroy them -- again averting needless deaths and the invasion. If he prevents our inspectors from doing their job, we have the option of invading him and "removing" him from office. It is just illogical to jump to the invading and killing option while there are other viable options on the table. This president who ran his campaign on morality sure isn't acting very moral right now. |
Faerygdds | Tuesday, September 17, 2002 - 08:31 am     You want to talk about Hitler... ok.. let's talk about Hitler... Hitler was the part of the Republican Nationalist party... shorten that to Nazi. Hitler spent years coming into power. he started by creating an aura of fear in his countrymen... then he started taxing certian items. Most ppl accepted it because it didn't effect them. Later he began censoring his people and burning books, thus trying to dumben his nation. Why? Because it is easier to control a weak minded nation than a nation of free thinkers. Then, he got the great idea of starting an organization made up by the people under the guise of national pride. They were primarily made up of teenagers and young adults. History calls it "Hitler's youth". They in turn, so awe struck by their pride began to turn in friends, neighbors, even parents... anyone who didn't agree with Hitler's rhetoric. While all this was going on he formed the SS through recruitment and fear tactics. And do you know why ALL this happened??? Not because Hitler was a madman... because he was BRILLIANT! He managed to start sneaking these little laws right under his people's noses until they "woke up" one day and realized what kind of government they were living under. By then it was too late!!!! Be careful who you compare to Hitler... you may find closer association to home rather than abroad! {now going upstairs to hide all my history books lest they be revised or worse... BURNED!} |
|