Posted on 03/14/2003 9:55:11 AM PST by Calpernia
Edited on 04/13/2004 2:16:35 AM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]
The intense diplomatic battle that has been raging at the U.N. is coming to a close. A vote may be imminent on a proposed British resolution declaring that Saddam Hussein has missed his final chance to comply with U.N. demands to disarm Iraq of weapons of mass destruction unless he meets several final "benchmarks." They include announcing in Arabic on television that Iraq possesses such weapons and allowing dozens of scientists to be interviewed outside of Iraq.
(Excerpt) Read more at businessweek.com ...
Thank you. Exactly!
Yes and no. Motives matter, as does direct vs. indirect support. As despicable as it is that a country would sell arms to thugs like So-damn Insane for economic reasons, it is not the same thing. So-damn is not officially considered a terrorist himself, just a supporter and supplier of terrorists (and a breaker of U.N agreements, a mass-murderer, a torturer of his own people, an invader of neighbors, etc...). He deserves to be ousted on his own merit -- and if he succeeds at developing his WMD arsenal, he will be a growing threat to all of us.
The fact that he is aiding al Qaeda just makes it more urgent. What Russia is doing, though frustrating and wrong, cannot be compared to real supporters of terrorists.
They may go so far as to have one of their diplomats snub one of our diplomats at an upcoming state function.
Other than that there's nothing they can do - they are toothless.
Translation: Russian Ambassador: Russia is Relevant, Russia is Relevant, Russia is Relevant!!! (Say it over and over and maybe it will come true)
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.