View Full Version : USA fails to persuade World to Invade Iraq


Khanjar
06-02-03, 10:08 AM
Powell says ‘day of reckoning’ is closer


NEW YORK — US Secretary of State Colin Powell yesterday gave dramatic new evidence of what he called Iraqi efforts to hide its weapons of mass destruction as he pressed the US case for tough action against Saddam Hussein.

Putting satellite photos and tape recordings before a landmark meeting of the UN Security Council, Powell said by rejecting “its one last opportunity to come clean and disarm, Iraq has put itself in deeper material breach and closer to the day when it will face serious consequences”.

Powell did not explicitly mention military action, but said: “We must not shrink from whatever is ahead of us. We must not fail in our duty and our responsibilities.”

“Saddam Hussein and his regime will stop at nothing until something stops him.”

Russia and China said UN weapons inspections must be finished in Iraq, but France, another leading opponent of force, said war would be an option if the inspections fail.

Iraq rejected the allegations that it had lied to the UN arms inspectors and had links to international terrorism. “Iraq will provide detailed and technical responses to the allegations,” its ambassador to the United Nations, Mohammed Al Douri, said when given the right of reply at the end of a three-and-a-half-hour council meeting.

But, in an immediate reaction, Al Douri said Powell’s 83-minute audio-visual presentation to the council comprised “mere sound recordings that cannot be ascertained as genuine” and “incorrect allegations” made by “unknown sources.”

Quoting Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, Al Douri specifically denied the charge that his government had ties to Osama bin Laden’s Al Qaeda network.

“If we had a relationship with Al Qaeda and we believed in that relationship, we would not be ashamed to admit it,” he said.

“We have no relationship with Al Qaeda.”

“The clear goal behind holding this meeting ... is to sell the idea of war and aggression against my country, Iraq, without any legal, moral or political justification,” he said.

At the crucial meeting, the US secretary of state showed satellite images of suspected arms plants in Iraq and played recordings of officials, using information from “people who have risked their lives to let the world know what Saddam Hussein is really up to.”

“Saddam Hussein’s inhumanity knows no limits,” Powell told foreign ministers and ambassadors from the 15 Security Council member nations and Iraq’s UN ambassador. Powell outlined US details on Iraq’s chemical and biological weapons arsenal and how it has been hidden from UN weapons inspectors, who have been there since November.

Powell said there was a “decade of proof” that Iraq was trying to develop nuclear weapons, saying “Saddam Hussein is determined to get his hands on a nuclear bomb.”

“Iraq’s behaviour demonstrates that Saddam Hussein and his regime have made no effort — no effort — to disarm as required by the international community,” Powell told the council. “Indeed, the facts and Iraq’s behaviour show that Saddam Hussein and his regime are concealing their efforts to produce more weapons of mass destruction.”

Powell said Iraqi officials hid correspondence on military industrialisation, ordered the removal of banned weapons from key sites and hid prohibited items in their homes.

He charged that “Iraq’s record on chemical weapons is replete with lies.”

“Our conservative estimate is that Iraq today has a stockpile of between 100 and 500 tonnes of chemical weapons agent. That is enough agent to fill 16,000 battlefield rockets,” said Powell, who was flanked by George Tenet, the head of the Central Intelligence Agency.

“Saddam Hussein has investigated dozens of biological agents causing diseases such as gas gangrene, plague, typhus, tetanus, cholera, camelpox and hemorrhagic fever, and he also has the wherewithal to develop smallpox.”

Iraq had declared 8,500 litres of anthrax, but Powell said UN experts estimated that Iraq could have produced 25,000 litres.

He played two audiotapes of intercepted conversations between Iraqi officials that he said proved Baghdad’s intent to deceive the inspectors.

The tapes, he said, were “part and parcel of a policy of evasion and deception decided at the highest levels of the regime.”

He said Saddam had a “higher committee for monitoring the inspections teams”.

Powell also reaffirmed US accusations of Iraqi involvement in terrorism. He said there was a “sinister nexus” between Iraq and the Al Qaeda group, adding that Al Qaeda had used Iraq’s embassy in Pakistan as a “liaison office.”

Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov said Powell’s information had to be handed over to UN agencies and “the activities of the international inspectors in Iraq must be continued.”

China’s foreign minister, Tang Jiaxuan, also called for the US intelligence to be used by the inspectors to make their work more effective.

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin said inspections must continue, but added: “If this path fails and leads us into an impasse, we rule out no option, including, as a last resort, the use of force, as we have said all along.” — AFP

Desert_Sloath
06-02-03, 02:33 PM
American argument of Iraq's WMD is reaching a point of redicule. The presentations so far, brought in public by Secretary Powel is as good as a mental case taking off his pants in public as a result of challenge to prove circumsision.

Powel brought a pile of so called evidence and begun to brief the so called security council as if he was briefing his platoon commanders in a NATO battle camp. Wanachekesha sana.

Who doesn't know the fabrication of Usama tapes last time the CNN came up with one ? The same could happen for Iraq. 1st, it is a matter of making a modle of terrain representing Iraq and then take a photograph. 2nd, it is a case of having two tape recorder and make up a play to attempt a conversation between Iraqi officer talking exactly the unprobable truth.

Why then the CIA has failed to produce such evidence to the Weapon Inspectors in the early stages of inspection and pinpoint the location of the " three large munition bunkers " ?

Wouldn't it had been easier for the CIA to have worked closer with the weapons inspectors ?

Iraqis are known to have welcomed CIA and any other similar organisation to collaborate with the weapons inspectors. What we know of is no such institutions have come forward. Why ?

Powell quotes his information from " other countries intelligence ". Does " other country " mean Israel ? Certainly with highest probability that would be the source but with vested interests if not the culprit behind all the fuss.

The attempt is not impressive, at all.

When exhausted with unconvincing 'evidence' Powell throws in an amount of red herring that Iraq, is developing missles of the range that could 'precisely' bring Berlin, Moscow, Peking and Johanesburg under it's range ? This is wicked.

In conclusion : NO CASE AGAINST IRAQ - DISMISS

Source : http://daily.webshots.com/content/ap/current/h36454295.html


____________________________________

Do not ask what your country has done for you
But ask what have you done for your country

Dark Project
06-02-03, 03:37 PM
American argument of Iraq's WMD is reaching a point of redicule. The presentations so far, brought in public by Secretary Powel is as good as a mental case taking off his pants in public as a result of challenge to prove circumsision.

LOL LOL LOL Hang on a min !!! let us dramatise it more ... Shall we call it SPEED Part 3 ( the movie)

Wanderer
06-02-03, 07:01 PM
OK, so you figured out our master plan #0011999-2003AIRAQ

Like someone on the Sabla has the phone number to, ah, ... um, who would you call to stop us ?


"All your oil fields are belong to us."

MoonChild
06-02-03, 08:47 PM
At this point, it's like religion - people are going to believe what they want to believe.

DeSerTDesTroYeR
07-02-03, 12:23 AM
Khanjar: would you provide a link to your article source??

Dark Project
09-02-03, 05:23 PM
Originally posted by Wanderer


"All your oil fields are belong to us."

Take it from Iraq why all of our oil fields? I thought you are interested in Iraqi oil Not GCC countries ...
Is that a slip of a toungue :kewl:

Wanderer
10-02-03, 07:19 PM
DP, just to get realistic-

Arab states cannot even defeat Israel, in fact, they start losing rather rapidly.

The US wields considerably more military power than Israel and could "annex" all ME oilfields in short order, partly because all of this has been played out in simulations decades ago during the Cold War - when the threat was how to counter a oil grab by the Soviet Union. The US may not have the ground forces it once had during the Cold War, but it does now have the logistical advantages of forward bases in the ME and an unchallenged Navy, which it didn't really enjoy before.

But the US isn't just taking the oil as it pleases. It's looking to remove a very dangereous leader after his failure to live up to the "generous" UN cease-fire agreement conditions. As a side benefit, the Iraqi may end up with a representative government.

So why don't the Germans and French "get with the program" ?

I don't really know; I wish we had one here to ask. The French aren't adverse to unilateral military action - the had no qualms bolstering their forces in the Ivory Coast to facilitate extracting their citizens. I suspect that their current stance has to do with national pride and power - they want to be in a decision-making position, not an add-on.

As for the Germans, I think:

a) they've had the war kicked right out of them.
b) the current leader is just hanging on in the polls and dares not offend the peacenicks.

Perhaps another on this Sabla can provide more insight.

How to proceed ? Dump Germany and France and recruit the Indians.

Wanderer
10-02-03, 09:51 PM
Oh, and this ...

"The volume of French exports to Baghdad reached $2 billion dollars through the oil-for-food program, making France the largest European exporter to Iraq."

source: http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/000403/2000040347.html

This from an article almost 3 years old. But is it still the case ?

Is France's reluctance to back calls to remove Saddam largely economic self-interest ?

It should be noted that France's active participation is not necessary in military action against Iraq.

Dark Project
13-02-03, 09:28 PM
**** Cheny as well signed with Iraq when he was the president of HaliBurton ( If I spelt it right) Oil company 32 million US$ .
Where does he fit in this ??
Thank you for the site :)

Wanderer
13-02-03, 11:14 PM
Originally posted by Dark Project
**** Cheny as well signed with Iraq when he was the president of HaliBurton ( If I spelt it right) Oil company 32 million US$ .
Where does he fit in this ??
Thank you for the site :)

You'll need to provide clear facts and an opinion here.

He signed a deal, or the company he led signed a deal, or subsidiaries signed deals ? He got the money, the company got the money, the subsidiaries got the money ? He tried to hide it, or didn't try to hide it? It was legal or it was illegal?