[kelly]

"The Pentagon said the hostile action by Baghdad was a breach of U.N. resolution 1441, Section 8, which says "Iraq shall not take or threaten hostile acts directed against any representative or personnel of the United Nations or ... any member state taking action to uphold any Council resolution."

http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/...ike/index.html

One way or another, I think this is going to effect just about all of us.

 

[elipsis]

imminent

 

[andrzejpw]

It's really obvious Bush is just itching to get into Iraq. I really hate bush's foreign policy. He's basically saying, "screw you all. We're America." When will we learn? I really hate the current egotistical "climate."

 

[kelly]

elipsis
Dammit, there was a homonym. I can't win.

andrze
I know better than to discuss politics with you people.

 

[Matthew-Spaltro]

Saddam has to be rooted out. Just wish there was some other way to get to him. Tomorrow begat tomorrow as they say.

 

[andrzejpw]

Do I even have to what your party affiliation is?

 

[Matthew-Spaltro]

I am a conservative Democrat. Just so every one knows.

 

[00940]

don't think this one could lead to war, unless the USA want to act alone (wich is possible).

The act must be declared against the resolution by the security council and both France and Russia don't like these air patrols and air strikes of the "coalition" (hum to be true a colatition of UK and USA, no comment). Except USA and UK government, nobody wants this war. Bush won't receive any real support if he tries to use this "common" affair.

Btw, CNN is known in a same time to be close of Republicans and to live from war. Puzzling.

 

[andrzejpw]

Quote:

Originally posted by Matthew-Spaltro I am a conservative Democrat. Just so every one knows.

lol, I was referring to kelly.

 

[kelly]

andrze
I've not stated a party affiliation and not intended to.

00940
It seems to me that if the US and UK did not intend to act alone that they would not be calling these events a breach of the resolution. Do you disagree?

 

[Born2bwire]

As I recall, they've been firing on us for a while. Interesting that they would make a point of it now by calling it a breach of UN resolution.

 

[andrzejpw]

Quote:

Originally posted by Born2bwire As I recall, they've been firing on us for a while. Interesting that they would make a point of it now by calling it a breach of UN resolution.

Born2bwire: That's a reason I'm a bit skeptical. Iraq has constantly been firing on us. I remember reading in time, iirc, that the incidents have been in the hundreds, if not thousands, over the last few years. Although true, ANY sort of attack is not to be taken lightely, its sort of odd that bush just happens to start paying attention now. . .

 

[kelly]

There was not previously a resolution to breach. The UN resolution could be considered a form of peace treaty. It was "We'll send inspectors in and you can tell us about your weapons and violations truthfully and not attack us or blockade our efforts or we'll consider you in breach of this treaty and decide how to respond to you." I'm suggesting that the according to CNN, the Bush administration and the Pentagon are now considering this a breach and that their stating so publicly may be a trigger for military action.

I suppose alternatively, the US could be seen as "baiting Iraq" into further action that may warrant a greater reaction from the US, but I see this as unlikely given the "chatter" about terrorism that CNN has also been reporting.

 

[00940]

USA and UK have surely the means to act alone. but i don't think it is for this time. (i could be wrong)

One : ok, they have a kind of blessing of the UN. But if they act right now, the EU will shout so loud that the diplomatic gain won't be interesting.

Two : Saddam has conceded huge oil exploitation authorizations to french and russian companies since a few months. The so harsh negotiations in the un security council had a lot to do with it.... If USA act now, France and Russia won't join and won't be able to justify the piece of oil cake they have secured. Going to war now, would be a mistake, you just have to wait Saddam to do a stupid thing. It will happen, sure. Just give him some time.

Three : I saw this more as a way for this US administration to keep France and Russia under preassure.

To finish this post, i think i would follow a foreign politic pretty similar if i were G. W. Bush. But this guy don't let the time acts, to eager to rush and he's making stupid things because of this.

 

[elipsis]

This thread can only end in tragedy. Or extreme comedy.