Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Kuwait Says It won't Serve as Launch Pad for U.S. Attack on Iraq
Tehran Times ^ | July 12 2002

Posted on 07/12/2002 1:32:56 PM PDT by knighthawk

KUWAIT CITY -- Kuwait will not accept to serve as a launching pad for a U.S. attack on former occupier Iraq, a Kuwaiti minister said in remarks published Friday.

"The mission of U.S. troops deployed in Kuwait is well known...

It is to defend our land and national sovereignty... Kuwait does not agree to an attack on Iraq being launched from its territory," Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammad al-Sabah told the daily ***Al-Rai al-Aam***.

"There is no truth to press reports that Washington has concluded intensive negotiations with Kuwait about using its territory and airspace to carry out an attack on Iraq and topple President Saddam Hussein," he said.

"Nothing of the sort happened," the Kuwaiti minister said, referring to a news report that the United States has been in contact with four regional states, including Kuwait, to use their territories and airspace for an attack on Iraq.

"The United States has not said it would use Kuwaiti territory to launch an attack on Iraq. We (heard) nothing from (Washington) in this regard," Sheikh Mohammad added.

Jordan on Thursday also dismissed a stream of foreign press reports suggesting it could be used as a base for a U.S. strike on Iraq, while Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal reiterated that Arab states opposed such a strike, AFP reported.

Iraq occupied Kuwait for seven months before being expelled by a U.S.-led coalition in February 1991. Some 10,000 U.S. troops are currently stationed in Kuwait.

U.S. President George W. Bush this week renewed a pledge to use "all tools" at his disposal to oust Saddam Hussein, whom Washington accuses of developing weapons of mass destruction.

In the meantime, former Iraqi Army officers and opponents of Saddam Hussein gathered Friday in London to mull how best to topple the Iraqi leader, amid persistent reports that his regime is Washington's next target.

During three days of talks, which British and U.S. officials are also likely to attend as observers, they hope to put on a united front.

But there is dispute over how representative the exiled opposition factions are, and, arguably more importantly from Washington's point of view, how much support they could muster inside Iraq.

Friday's meeting was taking place in Kensington Town Hall, in the heart of one of London's most exclusive areas.

It was being organized by the Iraqi National Coalition and exiled officers "from all over the world" were attending, organizers said.

The coalition's Albert Yelda said all Iraqi opposition movements, large or small, had been invited to debate how to overthrow the existing regime as well as Iraq's future and the role of the army post-Saddam.

U.S. President George W. Bush pledged earlier this week to use "all tools" at his disposal to remove Saddam.

Ahmed Chalabi, who is leader of the Iraqi National Congress (INC) umbrella opposition group, said Saddam was rejected overwhelmingly by ordinary Iraqis.

"He is the world's most experienced and oldest terrorist" with a stockpile of weapons of mass destruction, he told Britain's Channel 4 TV. He said any imminent conflict would not be a war between the United States and Iraq, but a "war of national liberation for the Iraqi people which the U.S. has decided finally to support." "We are in consultation with the U.S. government," he went on. "We expect to coordinate with them."

But Scott Ritter, a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, said there was no evidence that Baghdad held weapons of mass destruction.

"You cannot go to war over speculation, there has to be more than rhetoric. There is no case that Iraq represents a threat to the United States or anyone else," he told the same program.

He dismissed the opposition groups behind the meeting as having "no viable constituency" inside Iraq. "This is not a real opposition, this is not a Northern Alliance (the Afghan opposition group who helped overthrow the Taleban), this is not something the U.S. can build around."

He said the opposition groups were being exploited as "a political foil" by pro-war hard-liners in Washington. "If Saddam Hussein is removed, anybody who meets in Kensington will have a zero future... They will have zero life expectancy after American troops are withdrawn."


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: arabconsumption; iraq; kuwait; ustroops
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-45 next last

1 posted on 07/12/2002 1:32:56 PM PDT by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: MizSterious; rebdov; Nix 2; green lantern; BeOSUser; Brad's Gramma; dreadme; keri; Turk2; ...
Ping
2 posted on 07/12/2002 1:33:23 PM PDT by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Jordan also said it would not be a staging ground. At this point it looks like it will be impossible to topple Saddam in a conventional war.
3 posted on 07/12/2002 1:34:49 PM PDT by ChicagoRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Then perhaps they should be made a door mat.
4 posted on 07/12/2002 1:37:48 PM PDT by N. Theknow
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Geez. You're welcome.
5 posted on 07/12/2002 1:38:47 PM PDT by william clark
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoRepublican
I'm thinking the only conventional war option is down south from Turkey and in the Northern Areas of Iraq. None of the Arab countries can be trusted.
6 posted on 07/12/2002 1:40:20 PM PDT by ChicagoRepublican
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Looks like a for arab consumption article from the Teheran times. Who knows what the Kuwaiti government has told administration officials in private.Many of these middle eastern countries say one thing in local press and make other agreements behind the scenes.Quatar said we could use them as a base.Turkey is available.Heck within a week of the offensive Bhagdad may be available.
7 posted on 07/12/2002 1:41:14 PM PDT by lexington minuteman 1775
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Read between the lines folks. This is all garbage.
8 posted on 07/12/2002 1:42:12 PM PDT by zarf
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: All
Kuwait won't help US in attacking Iraq
AFP via Hindustan Times

Kuwait will not accept to serve as a launching pad for a US attack on former occupier Iraq, a Kuwaiti minister said in remarks published on Friday.

"The mission of US troops deployed in Kuwait is well known... It is to defend our land and national sovereignty... Kuwait does not agree to an attack on Iraq being launched from its territory," Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Sheikh Mohammad al-Sabah told the daily Al-Rai Al-Aam.

"There is no truth to press reports that Washington has concluded intensive negotiations with Kuwait about using its territory and airspace to carry out an attack on Iraq and topple (President) Saddam Hussein," he said.

"Nothing of the sort happened," the Kuwaiti minister said, referring to a news report that the United States has been in contact with four regional states, including Kuwait, to use their territories and airspace for an attack on Iraq.

"The United States has not said it would use Kuwaiti territory to launch an attack on Iraq. We (heard) nothing from (Washington) in this regard," Sheikh Mohammad added.

Jordan on Thursday also dismissed a stream of foreign press reports suggesting it could be used as a base for a US strike on Iraq, while Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal reiterated that Arab states opposed such a strike.

Iraq occupied Kuwait for seven months before being expelled by a US-led coalition in February 1991. Some 10,000 US troops are currently stationed in Kuwait.

US President George W. Bush this week renewed a pledge to use "all tools" at his disposal to oust Saddam Hussein, whom Washington accuses of developing weapons of mass destruction.

9 posted on 07/12/2002 1:46:44 PM PDT by knighthawk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: ChicagoRepublican
Turkey has its own problems right now .

Beleaguered Turkish Prime Minister Bulent Ecevit has vowed to remain in control despite major crack in his government and a major challenge from a new political party...

...More than 40 lawmakers, including a total of seven ministers, abandoned the government and resigned from the Democratic Left party this week...

10 posted on 07/12/2002 1:47:41 PM PDT by relee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
I think we should just take all of our troops out of KUWAIT all together and let them try to fight off saddam all on their little own...they couldn't do it ladt time, I'm sure they can't do it in the future.
11 posted on 07/12/2002 1:53:13 PM PDT by Jewels1091
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: zarf
Yeah Garbage. Kuwaitis are going to tell the Iranians what they want to hear. I'm sure we will have no trouble persuading them when the time comes.
12 posted on 07/12/2002 1:54:46 PM PDT by demlosers
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: zarf
Read between the lines folks. This is all garbage.

Why's that? In the Middle Eastern polls I've seen, the Kuwatis lead the Arab world in their hatred of the United States. The Saudi's are #2. We are far more liked by the Iranian people than the by Kuwatis.

The general rule of thumb is: the more we support a Middle Eastern government, the more we are despised by the people. Hence, the recent pro-American demonstrations in Iran.

13 posted on 07/12/2002 1:57:42 PM PDT by AdamSelene235
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
That little war we fought to liberate you from Hussein's forces in the nineties?

You're welcome.

Pigs.

Dan

14 posted on 07/12/2002 1:59:46 PM PDT by BibChr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
Why is anyone willing to agree that the ungrateful bastards leading Kuwait have any choice in the matter??

After we conquer Iraq we should turn Kuwait into a U.S. territory and take their oil in exchange for the unappreciated good turn we did them in Desert Storm........

15 posted on 07/12/2002 2:00:24 PM PDT by tracer
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: william clark
Oops; we shared a thought (see 13).

Dan

16 posted on 07/12/2002 2:00:33 PM PDT by BibChr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: william clark
...er, I mean, 14.
17 posted on 07/12/2002 2:00:56 PM PDT by BibChr
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
To bad we can't encourage Iraq to invade Kuwait again!They could finish off Kuwait,then we could finish them off.INSTANT OIL!
18 posted on 07/12/2002 2:10:17 PM PDT by INSENSITIVE GUY
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: INSENSITIVE GUY
That sounds like an excellent idea.....
19 posted on 07/12/2002 2:29:51 PM PDT by JD86
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: knighthawk
But Scott Ritter, a former UN weapons inspector in Iraq, said there was no evidence that Baghdad held weapons of mass destruction.

Somebody has flipped this guy.

20 posted on 07/12/2002 3:05:41 PM PDT by facedown
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-45 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson