Posted on 02/21/2003 7:56:12 PM PST by areafiftyone
LONDON: In a significant trans-Atlantic pincer movement to make the case for war, US secretary of state Colin Powell has given British television viewers advance notice of next weeks second United Nations resolution, while Americas chief ally, Tony Blair, canvasses support on the European mainland.
In a rare interview to the BBC, billed by the organisation as "exclusive", Powell revealed that the second UN resolution would contain no deadline and would not authorise or specify military action.
Meanwhile, in an apparent quickening of the pace to war, President Bush and Blair are reported by at least one British paper to have decided on a 21-day deadline.
The paper said the two men, who had a 30-minute telephone conversation on Thursday, had agreed to give Saddam Hussein until March 14 to disarm or face war.
The two men were reported to have put in place the "endgame" in the long stand-off with Baghdad.
In an orchestrated initiative, late on Friday, British foreign secretary Jack Straw made a hard-edged "moral case for war", ahead of Blairs Saturday meeting with Pope John Paul II in the Vatican.
The Pope has spoken out against war and a reluctant Vatican is understood to have granted Blair an audience, only to appear even-handed.
Iraqi Deputy Prime Minister Tariq Aziz was given an unprecedented half-hour meeting with the Holy Father last week.
The rising rhetoric of a "moral war" comes as the heads of both the Catholic Church and of 70 million Anglican Christians around the world, have firmly rejected the morality of bombing Baghdad into submission.
On Thursday night, Powell, who spoke with quiet intensity, insisted a second UN resolution did not need to authorise the use of force. That hurdle had already been crossed, Powell indicated.
The new resolution, he said, would "summarise the situation... as it exists - show that Iraq is not in compliance will point out that lack of co-operation".
Military force had already been authorised by the six-page UN Security Council resolution 1441 unanimously passed last November, Powell said.
He said the resolution would probably not contain a specific deadline for Iraqi compliance, but added the mantra: "Clearly time is running out "
In the British governments most outspoken attack on last weekends unprecedented anti-war protests in Britain and around the world, Jack Straw criticised the demonstrators "relativist nonsense" about human rights abuse.
Saddams was a brutal regime, he said and it was not enough to say Iraq should not be invaded because human rights abuse occurred in other countries as well.
I used to have a similar view, but the more I read of the past and watch current events unfold, the more convinced I am that there is little difference between the two parties, at least at the top (there are many good Republicans at the state and local levels).
The rhetoric makes it sound like they are different, but in actions, they are not.
I believe that they are moving us towards a global government, which will be brought about by regional governments, brought about by regional trade agreements (like the European Union). The policies of "free trade", open borders, increased foreign aid, and expansionist government have been the major accomplishments of the last three administrations. All of these things move us closer to a "New World Order".
I realize people will disagree and that's fine, since I was nieve to the big picture for a long time. After a lot of reading, I eventually woke up to what I believe the truth to be.
Sadly, you're probably correct.
That's the one valid reason I'll buy into. It's still appeasing the UN, but if it'll help the most stand-up ally we've seen in a long time, so be it.
MM
I don't like his refusal to curb the spending of Congress, In fact I was hoping he would Veto the Omnibus Bill. I was outraged over the Education Bill. I will wait for the end result of the CFR bill after it has been trimmed by the SCOTUS before commenting on it. But I find your assessment of this President a little off base and more in line with the typical Libertarian screed coming from the unappeasables in that group.
I think a lot of GWB and think he is doing a great job on international issues. I don't see any real possibility of seeing real changes on Domestic issues anytime soon. The liberals in Congress and the Media have the general public in their hip pocket and it will take time to see any real changes there.
I know there is a few outstanding conservatives who I agree with totally, BUT they're UN-ELECTABLE at this point. I believe we have to take back this country from the left, the same way we lost it.... SLOWLY. I do think GWB is a visionary and a realist who understands that he can'rt change this country during his term or terms, But I believe he laying the groundwork for real change in the future. I will continue to look at the glass as hal full and support George W. Bush 100%, I believe he has done unbelievably well in just his first 2 years in office and I'm not ready to see conservatives divided once again just because this President doesn't please all of us all of the time.
What if one of these extensions turns out to be false?
We give him this 21 days - and strike in 10. Why should he know when we're coming?
Could be part of the game.
It's put up or shut up time for France.
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.