No need for a war !

[Moiraine]

Last U.N. news.

Hans Blix said in his last report that "Iraq's promised destruction of its Al Samoud 2 missiles is a very significant piece of real disarmament".

Seems the inspections are fruitful and the disarming can be obtained diplomatically, after all.

[skywalker]

Originally posted by Moiraine: Last U.N. news. Hans Blix said in his last report that "Iraq's promised destruction of its Al Samoud 2 missiles is a very significant piece of real disarmament". Seems the inspections are fruitful and the disarming can be obtained diplomatically, after all.

If only it could be so Moiraine! [img]smile.gif[/img]

Get ready for the responses, though!

Mark

[Animal]

Let's hope the US sees it this way also, although I feel if the US were going to do something, they probably would've done so by now.

Im sure you are not forgetting SH's track record of the last 12 years.....lie lie lie, admit...promise to not do it again....lie lie lie admit, promise not to do it again.......ad nausium

We have a saying in the US, not sure it is anywhere else.....

Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

[Animal]

Originally posted by MagiK: Im sure you are not forgetting SH's track record of the last 12 years.....lie lie lie, admit...promise to not do it again....lie lie lie admit, promise not to do it again.......ad nausium We have a saying in the US, not sure it is anywhere else..... Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

Sounds like your standard, run of the mill politician to me.

I think the point here is that if a war can be avoided, then it should be.

[Ronn_Bman]

Sounds good, doesn't?

Weird though that this one, single, solitary remark seems to compensate for the months of Mr. Blix's consistent stating of the fact that Iraq is failing to cooperate substantively. One single, solitary, substantive action seems to go a looooooooooooong way for some even if it takes TWELVE YEARS.

Following this formula, Iraq cannot completely disarm under Saddam because he won't live long enough. I'm not saying he can't completely disarm because he'll be killed and will therefore be unable to do the job. I'm saying he won't live 500-1000 more years, so he couldn't possibly disarm Iraq at the current pace even if he lives to a ripe old age.

Of course, the inspectors still can't tell the UN how many Al-Samoud missiles Iraq has produced IN DIRECT VIOLATION OF UN MANDATES and in DIRECT VIOLATION OF ORDERS FROM WEAPONS INSPECTORS IN THE 90s NOT TO CHANGE THE DESIGNS OF THE AL-SAMOUD MISSILES. Less than 4 years after the Gulf War(in truth less than 1 year), Iraq didn't care what the UN said, had said, or would say unless it was acting militarily, so why would anyone think Iraq cares now without the threat of military force?

Iraq destroying the El-Samoud missiles is great? Now if agreeing to dispose of these ILLEGALLY PRODUCED MISSILES can be coupled with the agreement to destroy the hundreds of tons of VX, the tens of thousands of chemical/biological delivery devices, ETC., and if the Iraqis answer all the other questions posed by the inspectors, then this really would be GREAT! Complete, total, and immediate disarmament, right? Of course the immediate part can never happen, so which other parts of the demand should be thrown away?

Could someone remind me what exactly the Iraqis have offered that hasn't been DISCOVERED by the inspectors? Discovered by the inspectors whose job isn't to discover ANYTHING but is, instead, to supervise the disposal of their WoMD. The SC resolutions AND Mr. Blix have consistently said that it is the Iraqis job to disarm themselves, so what exactly have the Iraqis offered to disarm themselves of? If memory serves.....

Nothing! Not a single solitary item has been offered, despite their agreement to offer every, single, solitary thing. They still deny any problem exists, they never admit violations even when those violations are proven, and they protest everything that isn't found to be in their favor, so exactly what "thing" have they offered?

NO THING!

A quarter of a million troops threatening Iraq have gotten them to cooperate somewhat, but how many troops will be required for them to completely, totally, and immediately to disarm?

A million?

A billion?

Who's going to send them?

[ 03-01-2003, 11:38 PM: Message edited by: Ronn_Bman ]

[Davros]

Originally posted by MagiK: We have a saying in the US, not sure it is anywhere else..... Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

I took a look at Google to see if it is used anywhere else

Lifted from one article I found discussing NASA funding :

"There is an old saying, attributed variously to the Scottish, the Native Americans, and the Chinese, which goes, "Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me."

From a G Dubbya speech I got :

"There's an old saying in Tennessee - I know it's in Texas, probably in Tennessee that says, fool me once, shame on ...."

Maybe it was the Tennesssee Native Americans - or the Texas Native Americans - or maybe he heard it in the James Bond movie "Goldfinger"?


[ 03-02-2003, 08:04 AM: Message edited by: Davros ]

[Moiraine]

Originally posted by MagiK: Im sure you are not forgetting SH's track record of the last 12 years.....lie lie lie, admit...promise to not do it again....lie lie lie admit, promise not to do it again.......ad nausium We have a saying in the US, not sure it is anywhere else..... Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me.

So, if I hear you correctly, on one hand you state that only people that have the training and experience and are on top of things can be trusted to have a valid opinion, and on the other hand, you discount M. Blix's report conclusion, though according to your own standards, he is the single one man whose opinion is the most valid one ?

EDIT : I surmise you haven't fully read the first article "UN begins supervising destruction of Iraqi missiles". It clearly states that disarmement IS going on. [img]smile.gif[/img]

[ 03-02-2003, 09:03 AM: Message edited by: Moiraine ]

[Indemaijinj]

Still, this probably wouldn't have happened if not for the giant army of american bombers and whatnot being at the very doorsteps of Iraq.

Yet, it could be so much more economical for everyone if the US army was able to THREATEN Saddam's regime into disbanding instead of actually having to actually invade anything.

So even if an invasion will not become a reality the US war effort has not been in vain.

Sadly a lot of people seem to want their boys returning with severed heads on sticks (figuratively speaking).

[Ronn_Bman]

Originally posted by Indemaijinj: Still, this probably wouldn't have happened if not for the giant army of american bombers and whatnot being at the very doorsteps of Iraq. I'll go further and point out that nothing was happening before the American army showed up. Yet, it could be so much more economical for everyone if the US army was able to THREATEN Saddam's regime into disbanding instead of actually having to actually invade anything. Especially economical for those who feel that military pressure is key, but don't feel they have to bother participating. Not so economical for the US which is fielding 250,000 troops. So even if an invasion will not become a reality the US war effort has not been in vain. This is true, unlikely, but true. Sadly a lot of people seem to want their boys returning with severed heads on sticks (figuratively speaking). This thought is absolutely sad. I'm not sure who you've been talking to, but even those who are pro-action aren't figuratively or in any other way looking for those type war trophies, and it's in pretty bad taste to suggest it.