Archive through September 21, 2002
MoveCloseDeleteAdmin

TV ClubHouse: Archive: Iraq will allow full weapons inspection!!!!! (ARCHIVE): Archive through September 21, 2002

Nimtu

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 11:09 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Margie,
Read the Times, reuters etc. there are conditions regarding restrictions to inspecting the Palace and palace areas (I was utilizing examples to illustrate a point). The times online also has a very interesting article about a defected scientist who describes the ease of hiding the evidence of nuclear weapon research and development. I have not seen in this thread nor in any statement from the white house that the goal here is to "kill leaders on a hunch" Perhaps you could direct me to that source.
I think what I am seeing and hearing is that Saddam's word is being doubted and plans are underway to utitilize military force IF necessary. Meaning IF the inspections are halted or impeeded in any way. Don't ya think it's good to have a Plan B when dealing with a proven liar?
In terms of that the U.S. has weaponary...I wasn't saying "oh gosh, we would never have any kind of weapons here" I was again attemting (maybe rather poorly :) ) to illustrate a point. To the best of my knowledge we haven't gone out there and invaded other countries to expand our rule, attempted to commit genocide, etc.
Oh yeah, and Ditto Twig!

Hillbilly

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 11:42 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Well...all I can say to all those who think Saddam doesn't have weapons of mass destruction or that if he does he won't use them. For all our sakes...I hope you're right. But I'm not willing to bet the lives of those I hold dear on it. Are you?

While I didn't lose anyone close to me in the WTC, I might not be so lucky next time. I'm just not willing to take that chance.

Hillbilly

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 11:55 am EditMoveDeleteIP
September 20, 2002

Saddam defends palaces against arms inspectors
From James Bone in New York



IRAQ and America were locked in confrontation last night as Saddam Hussein rejected US attempts to give weapons inspectors access to his presidential palaces.
The Iraqi President told the UN he would accept inspectors on condition that they did not violate Iraq’s “rights, sovereignty, security”. The demand was immediately rejected by the US, which accused him of trying to “lure the world down the same dead-end road” it has travelled before.

The UN plans an early test of Saddam’s compliance. Hans Blix, the chief UN weapons inspector, told the Security Council that an advance party could arrive in Iraq on October 15 and conduct some inspections soon afterwards.

Earlier, it had emerged that Washington wants the inspectors to be given new powers to search Saddam’s eight presidential palaces. Under current rules of engagement, they have restricted access to the sprawling complexes.

President Bush stepped up the pressure for UN action by sending Congress a sweeping draft resolution demanding the power to remove Saddam using “all means ... including force”. He said: “If the Security Council won’t deal with the problem, the United States and some of our friends will.

Margie

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 12:06 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Nimtu, I've been reading and paying attention to news on the Iraq invasion. I have heard NOTHING mentioned of conditions placed on the inspections. After I read HillBilly's and your posts, I thought I had missed something and looked around some more. I came up with nothing. Just now I went to back to reuters, Chgo Tribune, Chgo Suntimes and the London Guardian and STILL found nothing about conditions. Either I'm really terrible at searching or there is NOTHING to find. It seems to me that it would be big news that the unconditional inspections were actually conditional. The Bush Administration would be trumpeting it to prove their point. THERE ARE NO CONDITIONS.

Without PROOF of his building nuclear weapons with the intent of causing harm to the U.S. or allies, we are invading on an assumption.

Saddam's word is being doubted, yes, and rightfully so. Bush is not planning on invading if the inspections are halted or impeded. He is NOT ALLOWING ANY INSPECTIONS. He is attempting to stop the U.N. from allowing any weapons inspectors in the Iraq. It's in the newspaper *today*.

He's been saying he doesn't want inspections. Iraq offered unconditional inspections and he refused them. The U.N. is trying to start the inspections and he's trying to BLOCK them. He does not want inspections. There is no "plan B".

Faery, I completely agree with what you're saying. There is no way Hussein could possibly prove he doesn't have something - if he doesn't have it. You can't prove a negative.

Margie

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 12:11 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Hillbilly, where did you get that article from?

Margie

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 12:33 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Hillbilly, nevermind, I found it at 3-421327%2C00.html,http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-421327,00.html

Strange, though, that's the only mention I've seen of any conditions being placed on the inspections. I checked CNN, Reuters, Chicago Trib, Chicago SunTimes, BBC, Guardian, Google, Yahoo and the A.P., and the only place it's found is on the UK Times?

Nimtu

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 12:34 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Margie,
Second paragraph (and yes, U.S. doesn't just want inspections, we want him to disarm per 1991 agreement) :

UNITED NATIONS, Sept 19 (Reuters) - Declaring Iraq had no weapons of mass destruction, President Saddam Hussein on Thursday sent a message to the United Nations accusing Washington of fabrications in order to attack his country and take control of Middle East oil.

Reading a message from Saddam to the U.N. General Assembly, Iraq's foreign minister also said that U.N. weapons inspectors returning to his country had to respect arrangements on Baghdad's sovereignty and security, a suggestion that some areas, like presidential palace grounds, would again be off limits to the arms experts.

But Foreign Minister Naji Sabri's speech was aimed mainly at the United States as well as Israel, which he said had "become now as one" with Washington's policy.

"In targeting Iraq, the United States administration is acting on behalf of Zionism which has been killing the heroic people of Palestine, destroying their property, murdering their children," the message said.

The United States, which has called for a "regime change," has lobbied the international community to fall in line behind tough steps against Iraq, including possible military actions.

"The U.S. administration wants to destroy Iraq in order to control the Middle East oil, and consequently control the politics as well as the oil and economic policies of the whole world," Saddam's message said.

Iraq on Monday decided to admit U.N. arms inspectors who left the country in December 1998 and have not been allowed to return.

"I hereby declare before you that Iraq is clear of all nuclear, chemical and biological weapons," Saddam's message said, denouncing "the fabrications" delivered by American officials.

He accused U.S. President George W. Bush of wielding an "American propaganda machine" that spewed out "lies, distortion and falsehood" aimed at inciting the American public against Iraq.

The speech came as the United States and Britain pressed U.N. Security Council members to toughen the mandate of arms inspectors bound for Iraq and began shaping a new resolution that could include authorization to use force.

The inspectors must verify that Iraq has scrapped its banned weapons programs before the U.N. sanctions, imposed for Baghdad's 1990 invasion of Kuwait, can be suspended.



09/19/02 13:21 ET

Nimtu

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 12:36 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
By the way that's Reuters

Margie

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 12:46 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Nimtu, that "suggestion" is an inference drawn from the author. Like I said before, send in the inspectors - if they are blocked or impeded in any way, then we can bomb. Right now, without proof or provocation, we need to back off.

I'm up to my ears in Iraq news right now from looking for conditions on the inspections. I have found (Washington Post) that the U.N.'s chief weapons inspector said that he would follow the 1995 agreement where they had to fly in foreign diplomats before they could inspect the palaces, but that the U.N. said that would not stand and that the inspectors would be allowed to go anywhere, anytime with no limitations.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A41742-2002Sep19.html

Hillbilly

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 01:17 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,678610,00.html


Defector reveals extent of Iraqi weapons programme

An Iraqi defector has claimed Saddam Hussein is developing a missile system which could deliver chemical, biological and eventually nuclear warheads to Middle Eastern capitals, writes Chris Alden

Thursday April 4, 2002

Iraq is developing a long-range ballistic missile system that could carry weapons of mass destruction up to 700 miles, according to an Iraqi defector interviewed in this month's Vanity Fair.
The defector, who fled Iraq last year, says he had access to some of the most secret operations of the Mukhabarat, Iraq's security and intelligence service.

At a meeting with Vanity Fair journalist David Rose - arranged by the Iraq National Congress, an opposition organisation funded by the US government - the defector describes how he worked on plans to acquire components for project Tammooz, "a new-generation long-range ballistic-missile system, equipped to deliver chemical, biological, and eventually nuclear warheads".

The missile, the defector says, has been designed with an initial range of 600 to 700 miles: "far enough to hit Riyadh, Saudi Arabia; Ankara, in Turkey; Cairo and Alexandria, in Egypt; Nicosia, in Cyprus; and Tehran, capital of Iraq's historic enemy, Iran."

It was at a meeting held in Dubai to arrange how to buy components for the Tammooz project that the defector fled the Iraqi regime.

In the interview, the defector identifies sites where chemical and biological weapons are designed, manufactured and tested, as well as one where nuclear weapons are again being tested.

He also reveals how Iraq used a network of front companies to evade Western sanctions.

He says the Mukhabarat's firms sold items imported as part of the UN's "food for oil" program, in return for money for arms procurement; and smuggled military equipment and raw materials via Dubai for Iraq's Military Industrial Commission.

His next mission, he says, would have been to procure items for Iraq's nuclear project - codenamed al-Bashir, and based at Fahama, a populous residential area of Baghdad.

The defector describes a meeting held in Tanzania in 1994, in which he and other Iraqis met five eastern Europeans. At the meeting, he says, cash was exchanged for the contents of a heavy trunk.

"They had a sports bag and took out gloves, face masks which were like gas masks, and a small electronic gadget," he tells Vanity Fair.

"They opened the trunk, and the scientist bent over it. Inside were what looked like pieces of black rock, glittery".

Nuclear experts are sceptical of some details of this meeting, Rose says.

But they also say the black material sounds like "a description of spent reactor fuel rods cut into sections, which could be used to build a 'dirty' radiological bomb".

While not as devastating as an atomic explosion, a "dirty" bomb - a conventional explosive surrounded by a layer of radioactive material - could bring chaos and mass destruction to a city.

In the interview, the defector takes credit for the idea of converting Renault trucks - bought legally - into mobile factories of mass destruction.

"They look like meat cars, yoghurt cars," he says. "And inside is a laboratory with incubators for bacteria, microscopes, air conditioning."

But the Mukhabarat was eventually to turn on him. In 1998, he says he was tortured and interrogated over a supposed plot to topple Saddam Hussein.

During a six-month incarceration, crocodile-clip electrodes were attached to his eyelids and genitals, and he was sexually abused.

After his release, he decided to gather as much information as possible, and flee when he could.

The Vanity Fair interview lends fresh ammunition to those who support a US attack on Iraq.

Early in his career, it says, the defector worked for a department which provided support and training for terrorists abroad, including the Palestinian terrorist group, Hamas.

A "stream of Hamas fighters" learned skills such as sabotage, assassination, hijacking, and suicide bombing, the interview says.

"The defector's testimony reveals the true depth of the Iraq-Hamas connection," says Rose. "It places Iraq squarely on the front line of President Bush's war on international terrorism: even without the added factor of weapons of mass destruction, this might be held to justify a US attack."


****and just so you don't think its just US propaganda...I'm using other country news sources*****

Hillbilly

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 01:27 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/events/crisis_in_the_gulf/latest_news/217093.stm

An Iraqi defector has alleged that the Iraqi regime is continuing to hide weapons and move them between locations to keep them from UN weapons inspectors.

Abbas al-Janabi defected in February this year after working for 15 years as an aide to Saddam Hussein's feared son Uday.

Mr Janabi said in an exclusive television interview for the BBC programme Hardtalk that biological and chemical weapons and rocket launchers were constantly being moved between sites.

"Whenever there is a crisis between Iraq and the United Nations that means there is a shift operation," he said. "They are moving always."

He said there was an army brigade dedicated to moving weapons from site to site but there was no point in mentioning where these sites were located as the Iraqi leadership would just change them.

And Mr Janabi warned the Iraqi leader had said he would be prepared to use weapons of mass destruction if cornered.

"When you put him in a cage he will be very dangerous. He may use chemical or biological [weapons] or what he has."

BBC Diplomatic Correspondent James Robbins said it was impossible to verify the testimony, but it is supported by news of more recent massacres of the Iraqi president's opponents in Iraq.

Sanctions busting

Mr Janabi also said the army was being equipped through the Russian black market.

He said he had seen helicopter spare parts being smuggled in.

"It is from Russia but not official. By mediators, you know those who work in the black market. The army black market.

'The richest man in Iraq'

Mr Janabi said he had been tortured on the orders of Uday Hussein before defecting.


He said he had personally seen his former boss kill four people.

He alleged there was a thriving sanctions-busting smuggling operation through Turkey and Iran with Uday playing a key role.

The Iraqi president's son Uday
"Uday for example pays the Iranian side 100 dollars for each ton of beef went across the Iranian border.

"They take the barges from Basra to a port in Iran and there they change the flag from the Iraqi flag to the Iranian."

He said Uday was the richest man in Iraq and keeps his money in Swiss banks.

"You can ask the Swiss banks. And also in Iraq - he has cash money. He has rooms of money - believe me."


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Hillbilly

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 01:45 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
I would also like to add that the 'presidential palaces' are not like those in England. The Iraqi palaces refer to HUGE complexes of many buildings and cover alot of ground. Plenty of room to hide weapons, chemical and biological. Probably even enough room to hide missle silos. We had a few silos in Arkansas before they were dismantled. They required a much smaller space than most would think.

Suitsmefine

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 08:26 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Hillbilly is correct, it does not take much space for missile silos, and we all know he likes to add 'special ingredients' to his....I just saw on the news that Arafats compound is under seige by Israel, I think we should be totally backing this , Israel has put up with so much terrorism and if any country should be backed in going after Bush's "axis of evil" it is Israel. Hillbilly, do you remember the missile silo accident in the '80's .....we were close enough to have to be evacuated in the middle of the night....any whooooo, as usual, I had to give my 2cents worth....

Gentoo

Friday, September 20, 2002 - 08:45 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Does anybody here truly think that Bush wants to attack Iraq because of this weapons inspection thing? And if so, why now, why not before. Why didn't his dad finish the job the first time?

Personally I think he's riding his war-fever for all its worth. The "evil" (but lets not go back there) 9/11 attack brought out rage in people, which Bush focussed on Afghanistan. Breaking every convention of international law, Bush went in and attacked Aghanistan, blowing stuff up. It looked good and people felt some retribution. Bombs would come one day, care packages the next. The peasantry must have been awfully confused, those who were willing to gamble could run out in the open, but they really couldn't know if they'd find food or explosions.

Anyway, Afghanistan was levelled, and then pretty much ignored. A new regime was put in, but kept pretty much out of the headlines, as Bush turned his war-fever on the next target, Iraq.

Now Bush needed to attack Iraq. It would be good for is presidency. If he stopped warring, folks would remember just who he is - a president that wasn't really voted in but appointed by the courts. Once peace came, I bet he feared he'd lose out to somebody more suited for running the actual country he lives in, just as his father did.

Bush must have had a hissy fit when he heard that Iraq would comply with weapons inspections. Bush didn't want to hear tht. He needs this war, but with so many allies against him, and an attack on a country willing (or claiming to be willing) to comply with his demands, he may actually lose popularity.

I really look forward to seeing what happens here. If Bush attacks, I want to know what the rest of the world will say and do. And moreover I want to see who Bush's next target will be. Will he stay at war indefinitely, and will his former allies turn against him and actually use embargos or even force to stop him from rampaging?

Finally, if I may make just one last observation. Bush seems awfully hypocritical about not wanting others to have "weapons of mass destruction", when his country has the world's largest supply of such, and is the only country ever to have used it.

Oh, and for all those who find me "inane" or a jerk or whatever, you are entitled to that opinion. But instead of posting nasty things on here, just ignore me and carry on with the conversation. I agree that the mass disection of my first post on this thread was pretty silly, when a more important topic should have been discussed.

There I added my opinion to a long line of already present opinions. Mine just wasn't well received. If my opinion in this post is also not well received, lets not go off on some similar hate-tangent.

Hillbilly

Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 04:06 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Suits...I don't recall the accident in the 80's...I was away at college at the time and was out of state. What happened?

Maris

Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 06:05 am EditMoveDeleteIP
from CNN - BAGHDAD, Iraq -- Iraq says it will not cooperate with any new U.N. resolution on arms inspections, as the U.S. pushes for tough ultimatums against Baghdad.

The Iraqi announcement is a direct challenge to U.S. President George W. Bush's push for a new resolution that puts teeth into current ones, creating concise and strong consequences should Iraq renege on its agreement.

"Iraq announces that it will not cooperate with a new resolution which is different to what was agreed upon with the secretary-general (Kofi Annan)," said a statement issued following a meeting of top Iraqi leaders chaired by President Saddam Hussein.

"The American officials are trying, according to the media, to issue new, bad resolutions from the Security Council," the statement, carried by Baghdad radio, said.


The United States and Britain are trying to overcome resistance from Russia, China and France to issuing a new U.N. resolution threatening Iraq with war if it does not destroy alleged stockpiles of weapons of mass destruction.

CNN correspondent Rula Amin said: "This is the first time we have heard Iraq issue calls for any kind of restrictions on new arms inspections."

She said current resolutions allow for the lifting of sanctions against Iraq if it co-operates with the United Nations Security Council.

But she added the U.S. is pushing for "a new resolution with an ultimatum and also U.N. authorisation for the possible use of force against Iraq."

Iraq, under mounting international pressure and to avoid a possible U.S. invasion, announced on Monday it would accept the unconditional return of international weapons inspectors nearly four years after they left.

The U.S., which is seeking U.N. backing for any course of action it decides to take, said the Iraqi decision to allow inspectors to return was designed to divide the Security Council.

U.S. President George W. Bush has dismissed it as a "ploy" and has not ruled out unilateral American military action.

British U.N. Ambassador Sir Jeremy Greenstock met the 10 non-permanent members of the 15-nation Security Council late on Friday to lobby for a new directive.

The proposed resolution demands unfettered access for the arms experts and spells out the consequences if Baghdad failed to cooperate with teams searching for weapons of mass destruction, as required by past council resolutions, Reuters news agency reports.

U.N. weapons inspectors were withdrawn from Iraq in December 1998, just before a U.S.-British bombing blitz designed to punish Baghdad for its alleged failure to cooperate with them.

Suitsmefine

Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 07:46 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Hillbilly, In Sept. of 1980, a maintenance worker at the Titan II missile silo in Damascus, dropped a wrench (apparently it was a HUGE WRENCH) and it punctured the fuel tank of the missile.Several hours later the escaping fuel vapors ignited into a fireball that blew the 740 ton top off of the silo and sent the 9 megaton warhead flying 200 yds. thru the air - killing one and injuring at least 20 other USAF personnel.....There was a huge cloud of orange that seemed to go on forever...They say there was no radioactive contamination since the warhead was recovered intact, yet there have been lots of lawsuits filed by people saying they suffer from health problems since that night. I was a Senior in HS then and I must say it was a very scary time....With all the military personnel that seemed to be at every corner , police and emergency personnel driving through every community using PA systems to evacuate everyone... it was quite surreal... anyhow that's the story.So glad to hear from you again...I lurked into the Jason act Southern thread the other night, was glad to see you posting again...

Hillbilly

Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 08:49 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I just love when they talk about southerners. It tickles me at some of the questions they ask and some of the misconceptions that are still out there.

Suitsmefine

Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 09:08 am EditMoveDeleteIP
Yeah sometimes I feel like they think we are all inbred, crosseyed, buck-toothed, moonshine runners .....although some of my relatives fit that description,ROTFLMBO!!!!, I try to keep a sense of humor about it but sometimes I let my southern pride take over my southern mouth and it gets me in trouble!!!LOL Anyhow, WHERE HAVE YOU BEEN?????

Hillbilly

Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 09:12 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I've been here on this side of the board. The BB side got too mean and nasty. Unfortunately, it seems like this side is getting nasty too.

Suitsmefine

Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 09:27 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I'm trying to stay away from the nasty.....but the show has been boring so I slipped to this side, and learned pretty quickly that I would be better off if I tried to keep my personal opinions to myself most of the time.So we have been taking the kids fishing alot after school, and tomorrow I get the distinct privilege of putting on a fish fry for the entire clan, We don't just do fish,fries,hush puppies and slaw oh no, we are tooo southern for that , it ends up being all that andplus a pot of beans, cornbread and my moms famous chicken and dumplings PLUS a big ole punch bowl cake and banana pudding!!!! Every time we get together it's a big feast and we all end up stuffed. I know that probably sounds yucky to alot of people , but thats just how we do things here.OMG....did I get off topic or what!!!LOL

Hillbilly

Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 09:30 am EditMoveDeleteIP
I LOVE CHICKEN AND DUMPLINGS! <except for that kind that comes out of the can>

Suitsmefine

Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 09:37 am EditMoveDeleteIP
BLASPHEMY!!!!!!!Those wads of goop are NOT chicken and dumplings!!!! My Mom does it just like her Mom and Grandmother did it ....I have yet to master their recipe , but I'm still trying!

Faerygdds

Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 03:04 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
Ok Hill... I have no idea how this thread went from Iraq to Chicken and dumplings, but suits is 100% correct... that crap in the can is NOT a dumpling!!! YUCK!

Hillbilly

Saturday, September 21, 2002 - 03:08 pm EditMoveDeleteIP
...I guess we's got hungry!