Spain's Palacio "2nd Resolution May be Withdrawn"(My Title: A Frog Veto makes 2nd Resolution Moot)

Bloomberg.com ^ | March 12, 2003 (10:18 AM EST) | Jeffrey T. Lewis

[w_over_w]

Madrid, March 12 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S., the U.K. and Spain may withdraw a proposed second United Nations resolution ordering Iraq to disarm because France plans to veto it, Agence France- Presse cited Spanish Foreign Minister Ana Palacio as saying.

[ewing]

Crikey, what the heck is going on with these supposed 'allies'

[1Old Pro]

Whatever, we can still give him another 7 days until the 14th and we don't have to go to the U.N. for that.

[goodnesswins]

Isn't this a GOOD move? Means UN reverts to the original resolution which they UNANIMOUSLY approved.

[w_over_w]

Crikey, what the heck is going on with these supposed 'allies'

When you find out let me know. There's more going on than what's being reported (Duh!) but whatever impatience we're feeling has to be times 10 with GW.

[wadecollins]

I thought we were going to stand up and be counted?? I never heard Spain had a second resolution. We did? What is happening is this thing is going "wobbly" real bad.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

Based on the various reports out this morning from Britain, Japan and now this (Spain), the whole U.N. matter has dissolved into total chaos -- maybe all due to Blair's wobbly act, but whatever...

No better reason than that to pull the plug on the U.N. process and take this "outside".

That's what Bush will do by tomorrow night at the latest -- I think.

[maquiladora]

Not breaking news, check first.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/862876/posts

[luv2ndamend]

This also could mean that the pres. is going to address the nation thursday, to start the war? If the resolution is withdrawn.

[Menkenspiel]

``Not submitting the resolution is a possibility given the French determination to use its veto, because such a veto would have consequences on the UN system,'' AFP cited Palacio as saying.

Right, rather have egg on our faces than theirs.

Treaty - n. - an alliance between two countries that have their hands so deeply embedded in each other's pockets that they are not able to separately plunder a third. (Devil's Dictionary, by Ambrose Bierce).

Needs to be updated for the times.

United Nations - n. - An organization of many countries whose regimes are so brutal, corrupt and self-serving, that only acting together are they able to coerce powerful nations with thriving democracies into harmful concessions they would never unilaterally accept.

[goodnesswins]

I think the opponents to the second resolution have very obviously "outed" themselves.....not taking the "vote" is just giving them some shelter, but WE KNOW WHO OUR FRIENDS ARE! (And the UN as a whole, as well as specific countries are NOT our FRIEND.)

[ewing]

I'm coming around to the idea leaked in the UK press of the United States just suspending itself from the UN while we get rid of Iraq because of the corrupt Blix.

Then we can rely on the UK to use our veto.

[Lucas1]

"Time to show your cards"

Yep...right..uh huh...yeah Bush ok WHATEVER...wake us up when you mean what you say.

[Wyatt's Torch]

"Not submitting the resolution is a possibility given the French determination to use its veto, because such a veto would have consequences on the UN system," AFP cited Palacio as saying.

This is the exact reason why the resolution has to be introduced. The UN is irrelvant. The veto of this resolution will ultimately seal the fate of the UN as a worthless body.

[Scott from the Left Coast]

That's been covered pretty extensively as well last night...Bush will, in the speech tomorrow, set out an ultimatum to Saddam, an ultimatum that runs out, as the stories go, anywhere from March 17 at the early side to seven to 10 days from tomorrow on the long side.

[mhking]

GlobalSecurity.org Countdown Clock:

T-minus 5 Days, 7 Hours, and counting...

[luv2ndamend]

Thanks for the info!