Iraq Must Submit To UN Weapons Inspectors!

[Ronn_Bman]

Bush said this yesterday, and today Iraq said, "NO WAY".

I would point out that Iraq has been in direct volation of the UN directives, and their surrender agreement at the end of the Gulf War, for the past 3 years.

It is thought that they continue to create chemical/biological testing. Why would anyone think otherwise? I saw a news show that stated after the end of the Gulf War, UN weapons inspectors found enough militarized botulism, aka "The Black Plague", to kill every person on Earth 3 times (what is it about weapons of mass destruction that makes people think they need enough to kill someone more than once [img]graemlins/arcadefreak.gif[/img] ). Some of the stockpile was found loaded on SCUD warheads.

Something should have been done 3 years ago, when Iraq started refusing to submit, but no one had the stomach for it. I hope they'll find the stomach now.

Syria has said it would be a deadly mistake for the US to take the war on terrorism to Iraq. Weird, I thought the UN still had sanctions in place that allow military action against Iraq if it violates the UN directives. By not allowing the inspections, Iraq forfeits the UN promise to stop hostilities against Iraq, and defacto allows coalition nations to take military action to force the submission.

Three years of negotiation and diplomacy have done nothing. Years of sanctions have only served to allow Saddam to say America is starving Iraqi children. I'd say this part isn't working too good, so maybe another 100 hour military excursion might be effective?

[Silver Cheetah]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:
Bush said this yesterday, and today Iraq said, "NO WAY".

I would point out that Iraq has been in direct volation of the UN directives, and their surrender agreement at the end of the Gulf War, for the past 3 years.

It is thought that they continue to create chemical/biological testing. Why would anyone think otherwise? I saw a news show that stated after the end of the Gulf War, UN weapons inspectors found enough militarized botulism, aka "The Black Plague", to kill every person on Earth 3 times (what is it about weapons of mass destruction that makes people think they need enough to kill someone more than once [img]graemlins/arcadefreak.gif[/img] ). Some of the stockpile was found loaded on SCUD warheads.

Something should have been done 3 years ago, when Iraq started refusing to submit, but no one had the stomach for it. I hope they'll find the stomach now.

Syria has said it would be a deadly mistake for the US to take the war on terrorism to Iraq. Weird, I thought the UN still had sanctions in place that allow military action against Iraq if it violates the UN directives. By not allowing the inspections, Iraq forfeits the UN promise to stop hostilities against Iraq, and defacto allows coalition nations to take military action to force the submission.

Three years of negotiation and diplomacy have done nothing. Years of sanctions have only served to allow Saddam to say America is starving Iraqi children. I'd say this part isn't working too good, so maybe another 100 hour military excursion might be effective?

---

Erm, America has been bombing Iraq with unfailing regularity for the past three years! Did you not realise?? Bombing and sanctions, rather than negotiation and diplomacy. Millions of Iraqi kids die each year. Conditions within Iraq are appalling.

I don't know what the answer is on this one, but I doubt very much whether it's more bombing.

Saddam doesn't give a shit. He's safe in his bunker, and the more the Americans bomb, the more Iraqi citizens hate America, who they perceive as responsible for many of their ills. (Saddam is quite good at 'in-house' propaganda, I believe.)

Saddam needs to die, as do his coterie of torturers and murderers. Bombing isn't going to accomplish that. In a way, lifting sanctions (except of weapons of course) might be the best way to start accomplishing that. A starving people who hate America could change into a well fed people with the strength for rebellion. Ideally, Saddam's regime would be overthrown from within. Of course, it might be by something/someone just as bad.

God, do we need this world body with bite! Ron, just spotted your thread. Great idea! Just posted one or two thoughts.... Let's keep this one going!!

[Ronn_Bman]

There has been much more diplomacy than action in the past three years. If we really wanted to get our inspector in, we could do it. The bombing really hasn't been done with "regularity". Regularity would be the bombing in Afghanistan. Also another miss perception is that it's just the US, but there are also British planes involved in policing Iraqi airspace. This is being done completely within UN decisions.

Taking out AA sites, and other UN ruled illegal military fixtures in Iraq has been done time and time again, because these sites are against the UN declaration and against the terms of the Iraq surrender in the Gulf War. Just another way Iraq thumbs it's nose at the UN. Knowing 99% of the time nothing will be done. Time to change that ratio.

The sanctions against Iraq aren't against food or humanitarian aid, but instead military items and other things deemed illegal for them by the UN. The sanctions allow the UN to supervise Iraq funds from the sale of oil and to ensure they aren't being used for illegal items like biological weapons development. Of course, they've figured out how to work around this. Did you see the story about the delapidated tanker overloaded with illegal Iraqi oil that sank. They send these ships to sea where they transfer their illegal cargo to a ship with a legal cargo. This mixes makes the oil untraceable. They sell oil illegally because the UN can't track the money, and they can spend it on what they want. My guess is they don't spend it on food. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Saddam does need to be removed, and he should have been removed 10 years ago, but no one had the teeth or stomach for it.

[Barb]

Saddam is loved by Iraquis. They both hate America which is good for him because he does the same thing Hitler did. Hitler complained about the treaty of Versails and people loved him and Hussain is doing the same. Thje more the US go on about it and bomb Iraq, the more Iraquis will hate America, making Saddam stronger.

[Ronn_Bman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barb:
Saddam is loved by Iraquis. They both hate America which is good for him because he does the same thing Hitler did. Hitler complained about the treaty of Versails and people loved him and Hussain is doing the same. Thje more the US go on about it and bomb Iraq, the more Iraquis will hate America, making Saddam stronger.

---

Until we remove him, and through aid show ours is the better way. Whether they love him or hate him, and regardless of what they think, the man had enough militarized botulism to kill the world three times over! That was just one of the many biological weapons that was stockpiled or being researched. That was 10 years ago. Now he's been without UN inspectors for three years. I don't care who they hate because he is a clear and present danger to the world.

[Barry the Sprout]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barb:
Saddam is loved by Iraquis. They both hate America which is good for him because he does the same thing Hitler did. Hitler complained about the treaty of Versails and people loved him and Hussain is doing the same. Thje more the US go on about it and bomb Iraq, the more Iraquis will hate America, making Saddam stronger.

---

Very good post Barb - my point exactly (and before I even made it - how did you know?).

Ronn, the point is that bombing again, or going in with troops again, might just strengthen his position in the country. We might be able to weaken his position if we lift the sanctions and start giving the aid now. I know it doesn't look palatable but it doesn't involve killing people and it would probably work. IMO anyway.

[Silver Cheetah]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Ronn_Bman:
There has been much more diplomacy than action in the past three years. If we really wanted to get our inspector in, we could do it. The bombing really hasn't been done with "regularity". Regularity would be the bombing in Afghanistan. Also another miss perception is that it's just the US, but there are also British planes involved in policing Iraqi airspace. This is being done completely within UN decisions.

Taking out AA sites, and other UN ruled illegal military fixtures in Iraq has been done time and time again, because these sites are against the UN declaration and against the terms of the Iraq surrender in the Gulf War. Just another way Iraq thumbs it's nose at the UN. Knowing 99% of the time nothing will be done. Time to change that ratio.

The sanctions against Iraq aren't against food or humanitarian aid, but instead military items and other things deemed illegal for them by the UN. The sanctions allow the UN to supervise Iraq funds from the sale of oil and to ensure they aren't being used for illegal items like biological weapons development. Of course, they've figured out how to work around this. Did you see the story about the delapidated tanker overloaded with illegal Iraqi oil that sank. They send these ships to sea where they transfer their illegal cargo to a ship with a legal cargo. This mixes makes the oil untraceable. They sell oil illegally because the UN can't track the money, and they can spend it on what they want. My guess is they don't spend it on food. [img]smile.gif[/img]

Saddam does need to be removed, and he should have been removed 10 years ago, but no one had the teeth or stomach for it.

---

I obviously am misinformed on sanctions! I'll do some research. Out of interest, why was he not removed?

[Ronn_Bman]

The world (US included), the middle east in particular, did not want the war to go that far. Just get them out of Kuwait. End the immediate threat. Force him to submit.

He did submit, but as soon as the troops went home he started agian. If we wouldn't come after him when we had kicked his A$% and while we had a half a million troops in the country, why would we do it for a few violations of agreements.

Part of the reason Iraqis love Saddam is because they believe he beat America in the Gulf War(in some ways he beat us all). He was never force to personally sign any documents or publicly admit defeat. The entire time the Iraqi delegation and military leaders were accepting the terms of surrender, Saddam was on TV proclaiming victory.

[Ronn_Bman]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Barry the Sprout:


Very good post Barb - my point exactly (and before I even made it - how did you know?).

Ronn, the point is that bombing again, or going in with troops again, might just strengthen his position in the country. We might be able to weaken his position if we lift the sanctions and start giving the aid now. I know it doesn't look palatable but it doesn't involve killing people and it would probably work. IMO anyway.

---

It won't strengthen his position if we go in to take him out. That was never an agreed upon objective in the Gulf War. Just to get him out of Kuwait and disable his ability to attack(not destroying his army completely, they wanted to leave Iraq the ability to defend itself against it's neighbors), and remove his biological capibilities. The only objective achieved was his ouster from Kuwait.

Feeding the Iraqi citizians will do nothing to eliminate the biological threat. Lifting the sactions and allowing Iraq to spend their money on anything they please will probably work? How? Do you think Saddam will spend his money on food? It wasn't his primary objective before, why would it be now. If the sanctions are lifted, his victory is complete. What would be his deterant to doing something again?

If they were complying with the UN, there would be no sanctions. Why should he not have to comply? Because he's willing to kill and we aren't?

[Zbyszek]

The reasons why Saddam was not overthrown were strictly political
- Iraq could brake into three or more parts

- in nothern part - Kurds - they fight against Iraq with support of Iran, against Turkey with help of Iraq - independent Kurdistan would be a threat for Turkey - our ally
No one think of Kurds, human rights organization and similar s**t, where are you? - all USA, UN care about themselves only
-in southern part of Iraq live people who are supported by Iran (the same religion, sunnits and shijits (however you write it), they hate each other more than christians), that part would be incorporated by Iran! - Iran - enemy no1 of USA in Middle East.
In result - rest of Iraq would be insignificant, Iran would be more powerful and would not have enemy - Iraq - at all, Kurds would threaten Turkey and provoke them to try to enter Kurdistan - new war.
But lets keep old Saddam, lets keep status-quo.
I love politics.