Posted on 02/15/2003 3:50:09 AM PST by summer
Disarming Iraq
As much as the feuding members of the United Nations Security Council might like Hans Blix and Mohamed ElBaradei to settle the question of war or peace with Iraq, these two mild-mannered civil servants can't make that fateful judgment. All they can do, which they did again yesterday, is to tell the Council how their inspection efforts are faring. So-so was the answer.
It's up to the Council members — especially the veto-wielding quintet of the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China — to decide whether Iraq is disarming. In our judgment, Iraq is not.
The only way short of war to get Saddam Hussein to reverse course at this late hour is to make clear that the Security Council is united in its determination to disarm him and is now ready to call in the cavalry to get the job done. America and Britain are prepared to take that step. The time has come for the others to quit pretending that inspections alone are the solution.
The Security Council, as we said the other day, needs to pass a new resolution that sets a deadline for unconditional Iraqi compliance and authorizes military action if Baghdad falls short. Without that, the French proposal that Mr. Blix and Dr. ElBaradei report again in mid-March is the diplomatic equivalent of treading water. It practically invites President Bush to take the undesirable step of going to war without the support of the Security Council.
Just as they did last month, the inspectors offered a mixed picture that allowed all sides to draw sustenance for their arguments. What should not be missed is that the positive aspects of the reports dealt largely with secondary matters like process and access. On the essential issue of active Iraqi cooperation in the disclosure and destruction of prohibited unconventional weapons, the inspectors could find little encouraging to say.
That leaves the fundamental picture about where it was last weekend, except that another week has passed without Iraq doing what it urgently needs to do. It's easy to see where France's wishful thinking leads. Baghdad could continue dribbling out meaningless concessions such as yesterday's laughable decree that the development of weapons of mass destruction is now prohibited in Iraq.
Mr. Blix and Dr. ElBaradei cannot be left to play games of hide-and-seek. This is not like Washington's unproved assertions about an alliance between Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden. There is ample evidence that Iraq has produced highly toxic VX nerve gas and anthrax and has the capacity to produce a lot more. It has concealed these materials, lied about them, and more recently failed to account for them to the current inspectors. The Security Council doesn't need to sit through more months of inconclusive reports. It needs full and immediate Iraqi disarmament. It needs to say so, backed by the threat of military force.
Maybe they want to live to print another day.
I think even some of the lefties are beginning to realize that Saddam is not just some nut "over there" torturing his own people, but that he has big-time aspirations. I wish other lefties would have this same revelation.
They had to decide between rescuing an enemy of the US or rescuing the UN. They chose the UN. I'm sure it wasn't an easy choice for them.
There is a difference here?
I'm numb from shock. Thunderstruck by what I saw at the U.N. Friday.It was a staggering day of astounding surprises -- geopolitical bombshells were dropping and detonating at every turn. I felt overwhelmed.
Bill of particulars?
Sheesh, where, O where to begin?
First -- and boy, is this a shocker! -- after one, no, two, no, three...wait, 5, oops, 10? Okay, I forget: How many U.N. resolutions on Iraq are there? Oh, yeah, that's right -- 17. Well, after 17 U.N. resolutions, 12 years of defiance, imagine my shock -- SHOCK! -- to learn Iraq was still (gasp!) in defiance, thumbing its nose at the League of Nations, oops, I meant the United Nations
Okay, I'll admit that was low -- comparing the U.N. to the League of Nations is demeaning . . . to the League of Nations. Those clowns in New York make the Boulder, Colorado police look competent.
More stunners:
--Hans Blix told the U.N. Security Council that, after 3 months, no weapons of mass destruction have turned up -- nor has any convincing evidence that U.N. inspectors are likelier to find the stuff than, say, O.J. at finding the "real killers." You're better off calling Miss Cleo's psyhic hotline. On the upside, Saddam's denials, on a credibility scale, rank right there with Michael Jackson claiming he's had only 2 operations performed on his nose. Mini-Me actor Verne Troyer will quit the boozing before Saddam quits the weapons of mass destruction habit.
--The French, often the butt of jokes as sniveling cowards, were surprisingly tough, standing up to a "brutal dictator." No brutal dictator is going to push the French around -- no siree. Problem is: In the eyes of those sniveling cowards -- the French -- Bush was the brutal dictator.
French Foreign minister, Dominique de Villepin demanded that inspections -- which are not inspections because Saddam won't give inspectors anything to inspect -- more time . . . oh, and more airplanes, more offices, more maps, more pencils, more paper, more puters, more CDs, more drones, more giger counters. Then, if all that fails, more talks! And if more talks fail, an 18th U.N. resolution calling for. . . a new round of talks!
--Russia praised Saddam for allowing interview of scientists without minders standing by -- okay with fewer minders standing by (3 minders instead of 5) -- yes! Wonderful progress! A huge leap forward! But progress didn't stop there. In his zeal to cooperate, Saddam's even planting fewer bugs at hotel rooms of U.N. inspectors. Let's see, fewer bugs, fewer minders can mean only one thing: Saddam's going wobbly. Give inspections another 12 years, and he'll cave. (For peaceniks, how's that for a slogan? "Twelve more years! Twelve more years!")
And Democrat reaction? Bush needs to build a coalition. The U.S. can't go it alone with the U.K., Spain, Portugal, Denmark, Italy, Australia, Turkey, Bahrain, Qatar, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Albania, Hungary, Estonia, Latvia, Poland, Macedonia, Slovenia, Croatia, Lithuania, Slovakia, Bulgaria, Romania, Czech Republic! The 25 or so countries with us aren't, well, countries enough.
But fret not, for here's the bottom line: Iraq will soon have some Real Weapons Inspectors. How soon? Oh, just as soon as their Commander-in-Chief says, 'Go!'
--------------------------------- "A key piece of the information leading to the recent terror alerts was fabricated," reported completely objective and neutral ABCNEWS Friday morning, fueling a big 'Ah-Ha!-We-Knew-Bush-Ginned-The-Whole-Thing-Up-To-Whip-Up-Support-For-His-War!' media splash."The officials said that a claim made by a captured al-Qaeda member that Washington, New York, or Florida would be hit by a 'dirty bomb' sometime this week had proven to be a product of his imagination," claimed the completely objective and neutral report, False Alarm?, by completely objective and neutral reporters, Brian Ross, Len Tepper and Jill Rackmill.
An al-Qaeda sleeper cell in Virginia or Detroit had, according to this informant, a "detailed plan" to dirty bomb "government buildings and Christian or clerical centers," having cooked up ingenious means to elude security checks.
"Former CIA counter-terrorism chief" and network consultant Vince Cannistraro (also completely objective and neutral) called the 'fabrication' "the reason for a lot of the alarm," insinuating the feds screwed up royally by raising the threat alert status based on a fabricated report before giving the "informant" a polygraph which he flunked.
So, given the feds screwed up royally by raising the threat alert status based on a fabricated report, the feds are set to reverse course -- put the thing back where it was before the goof, right?
Well, no, because, er, (as we learn only well into the article) the threat alert status was not raised based on a fabricated report but on "other (validated) intelligence that officials still believe points to a coming attack, timed to hostilities with Iraq."
In other words, completely objective and neutral ABCNEWS, in their noble zeal to cast the Bush administration in the worst possible light, based their report that the feds had screwed up royally by raising the threat alert status on a fabrication that wasn't the reason why they raised the threat alert status in the first place.
Incidentally, had the thrust of the story been correct -- it wasn't -- the worst the feds might be accused of is, well, screwing up. Nothing more venal than that.
There was, however, nothing unintentional in ABCNEWS' handling of this story. Their hyped "report" was intentionally misleading.
Anyway, that's..
My two cents..
"JohnHuang2"
The Iraqis were given 90 days to disarm following the 1991 Gulf War and a second chance 11 years later with UN Resolution 1441. Both have been ignored by Iraq, and it's time for a coalition of the willing to enforce the consequences of Iraq's behavior.
Every parent knows that you cannot shape the behavior of a child unless clear rules are set and the consequences of misbehavior are delivered. President Bush understands this simple truth but some on the Security Council and others around the world don't. It's high time that the world gets a lesson in parenting from the tip of the spear - The 101st Airborne.
Maybe The Old Gray drag queen will give you a shot now?
5.56mm
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.