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

Skip to comments.

Iraq Scraps Missiles, Turkey Rejects U.S. Troops
Reuters ^ | March 1, 2003 | Nadim Ladki

Posted on 03/01/2003 12:47:38 PM PST by AntiGuv

BAGHDAD (Reuters) - Iraq started destroying its banned al-Samoud missiles on Saturday under the gaze of U.N. inspectors, complicating a U.S. push to win international support to go to war against Baghdad for failing to disarm.

U.S. preparations for war suffered a further blow when Turkey's parliament rejected a long-awaited motion that would have allowed the United States to deploy 62,000 troops in Turkey for a possible invasion of Iraq.

Four Iraqi missiles with a range exceeding the 93-mile limit set in U.N. resolutions were crushed under the supervision of U.N. inspectors on Saturday. "I can confirm now that four al-Samoud missiles have been destroyed," a U.N. spokesman told Reuters.

Iraq is thought to have produced around 100 al-Samoud 2 missiles, deploying about 50 in military bases around Baghdad.

Iraqi compliance had been seen as crucial before chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix addresses the Security Council late next week -- after which the United States and Britain want to bring to a vote a draft resolution that lays the ground for war.

The scrapping of the first of Iraq's most advanced surface-to-surface missiles was hailed as a "significant piece of real disarmament" by Blix, but was dismissed by Washington as part of a "game of deception."

In Ankara, Turkish leader Tayyip Erdogan said parliament's decision not to let U.S. troops use Turkish bases and ports was a "completely democratic result," suggesting he would accept it. The ruling party will meet on Sunday, but Erdogan gave no clue to his intentions.

There is widespread opposition in Turkey to a war on Iraq, but acceptance of U.S. troops, enabling Washington to open a northern front into Iraq and probably shorten any war, would have brought hefty U.S. financial aid and the chance to send Turkish troops into northern Iraq to protect Ankara's interests.

The parliamentary motion, the climax of lengthy negotiations with Washington, was approved by a simple majority but not the overall majority of MPs present.

A State Department spokesman said only that the United States was seeking clarification of the vote.

UAE WANTS SADDAM TO GO

Pressure on Iraqi President Saddam Hussein came from an unexpected source in the form of the United Arab Emirates, which became the first Arab state to call officially on him and his aides to go into exile.

Washington has said such a solution, proposed by the UAE at an Arab summit in Egypt on Saturday, could spare the region another war. But Saddam said this week he would rather die than go into exile.

The Arab League summit issued a communique opposing an attack on Iraq as a threat to Arab national security, and said member countries would not participate in any war.

The mood on the street was also strongly opposed to war.

In one of the biggest protests in the Middle East, more than 300,000 Yemenis took to the streets denouncing the United States, its main ally Britain and Israel as an "axis of evil" and urging Arab leaders to deny Washington help in a war.

In Turkey around 20,000 protesters took to the streets of Ankara urging parliament to reject Washington's request to use the country as a launchpad for an attack.

The Vatican, which does not believe an attack on Iraq would be a "just war," said Pope John Paul would send a senior cardinal to Washington on a personal peace mission.

In Iraq the Republican Guards, the country's best-equipped special forces, met Saddam and told him they were ready "to sacrifice to the level of martyrdom to defend their leader, their country and their sanctities," the official Iraq News Agency said.

MISSILE DESTRUCTION

Hiro Ueki, the spokesman for the U.N. inspectors, said the destruction of the proscribed al-Samoud 2 missiles, components and related systems was taking place at the Taji military base, some 25 miles north of Baghdad.

Uday al-Taei, a senior official of the Iraqi Information Ministry, said a "a timetable and action plan" had been agreed for the coming days.

Iraq's promise to destroy one of its major weapons systems did little to heal divisions in the U.N. Security Council, with the United States and Britain saying it meant little and Russia welcoming the decision.

The United States says the missiles are the tip of the iceberg and that Baghdad is trying to mask the fact that it has huge stores of the weapons the U.N. requires it to scrap. Iraq denies it has banned weapons.

"(U.N.) Resolution 1441 called for a complete, total and immediate disarmament. It did not call for pieces of disarmament. The president has always predicted that Iraq would destroy its al-Samoud missiles as part of their game of deception," said White House spokeswoman Mercy Viana.

British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw echoed the U.S. view, saying, "What Saddam Hussein does...is he plays the international community, trying to divide and trying to trickle out concessions."

Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Alexander Yakovenko applauded the Iraqi move. "We see this as highly important evidence of Iraq's cooperation with the United Nations," he told Interfax news agency.

In a pre-recorded weekly radio address, President Bush again threatened military action while promising a brighter future for the Iraqi people once Saddam is gone.

"The United States has no intention of determining the precise form of Iraq's new government. That choice belongs to the Iraqi people. Yet we will ensure that one brutal dictator is not replaced by another," Bush said.

Bush has said a new resolution, while desirable, is not necessary for Washington to justify a U.S.-led attack, and he has assembled a large force in the Gulf region to carry one out.


TOPICS: Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: iraq; turkey; unitednations; warlist
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 last
To: Scott from the Left Coast
Bush went against his better judgment and tried to go along with the doves in his administration, and got himself bushwacked by the U.N. Too much time and diplomatic capital has now been wasted. Cheney and Wolfowiz (spelling?) warned him not to involve the U.N., as they very well knew what would happen (hell, EVERYONE knew what would happen, especially the U.N.: The U.N. planned on sabotaging the war effort from Day One!). The time to have attacked, at the latest, was this very weekend (ideally, we should have attacked NLT the beginning of February). Now, if we don't move within the next week it's all over, as we will have lost the initiative, and likely any support we may have had up to this point. Personally, I am surprised Bush let himself get ambushed like this. I thought he was made of sterner stuff.
21 posted on 03/01/2003 1:31:42 PM PST by ought-six
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: ought-six
ought-six boy you guys from DU never cease to amaze us
22 posted on 03/01/2003 1:38:15 PM PST by Leclair10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: Scott from the Left Coast
then why should he even run again, why suffer the same fate as his father theres just so many republians who could win the presidency(lol)
23 posted on 03/01/2003 1:39:32 PM PST by Leclair10
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: tomahawk; Scott from the Left Coast
Good posts, both of you.

One thing that leaves me quite puzzled, however, is why we decided at such a late date that we needed Turkey anyway. If we were supposedly ready to go last fall - without Turkey - why did we suddenly decide a couple of months ago that we needed Turkey so desperately?

BTW, whatever the ramifications of this for us, I think Turkey is going to live to regret it. They have a very active hard-line Marxist movement and a very active fundamentalist Islamic movement, both of which they have worked hard to supppress. But to a certain extent, by their action today, they have rejected the Westernized, moderate direction they seemed to be taking. So now it seems to me that the existing government might be much more vulnerable to a grab by one or the other - or both - of these factions.
24 posted on 03/01/2003 1:39:35 PM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Leclair10
ought-six boy you guys from DU never cease to amaze us

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/site/user-posts?id=100295

Doesn't look like a DUer to me.

25 posted on 03/01/2003 1:44:43 PM PST by gilor
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag
They didn't even wait for the second paragraph to slip in the lie.

If the U.N. inspectors weren't watching, who was? Is the U.N. just ignoring the destruction and doing something else while it goes on? I should think they would have insisted on being present.

26 posted on 03/01/2003 2:02:07 PM PST by templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: kjam22
Re: #5

I hate to say it, but I'm beginning to have the same thoughts. Saddam's taking a different course of action this time and is playing the international public opinion game. Since he is gaining support domestically and internationally, and Bush is losing it, I'd say he's playing a better game. Bush better do something soon, or he'll be in an awfully akward position if and when he attacks Iraq. And when (if) he does, he's gotta win very quickly (which I believe he can if he doesn't hold anything back).
27 posted on 03/01/2003 2:06:52 PM PST by templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Leclair10; ought-six
...you guys from DU never cease to amaze us

Out of curiosity, what seems to qualify ought-six as DU material? Seems to me like he's really hawkish against Iraq, opposed to UN, etc. Kinda opposite of what I expect from DU people. Just curious about your analysis of his post, maybe you're more astute than I.

28 posted on 03/01/2003 2:16:17 PM PST by templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: templar
who was?

According to reports only Saddam. The UN had to verify the claims.

29 posted on 03/01/2003 3:59:20 PM PST by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
Someone please tell me we are eliminating the 15 billion $$$ aid package we planned to send Turkey...ungrateful ****s should not expect any help from us now.
30 posted on 03/01/2003 5:02:00 PM PST by Capitalism2003
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: AntiGuv
I would tell the turks to get real.They can take the money and help or they can shove it.You can kick a lots of a$$ for 26Bil.Come in from the south and sweep Iraq like the floor.
31 posted on 03/01/2003 6:08:57 PM PST by solo gringo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

bump
32 posted on 03/01/2003 8:35:53 PM PST by meema
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: templar
You mentioned that you thought I was hawkish. Let's just say that I am an Air Force veteran (Vietnam) and my religion is America and my bible is the U.S. Constitution. I support just and righteous wars to protect America and its allies. I have no use for the majority of the "peace protesters" because most of them are clueless (only going along for the ride because they think its "cool") and the whole movement is basically set up by a bunch of leftist extremists. I respect TRUE peace activists who oppose war in all its facets (the Amish, the Quakers, and the like), although I do not agree with them. The protesters we see today (and their ilk that were a cancer back in the 60s and 70s) are worthless socialists and Marxists and anti-Americans, who only oppose wars fought by America and the capitalist West, but do not oppose wars of the totalitarian states. Oh, one other thing, and maybe I'm a dolt, but what the hell is DU?
33 posted on 03/02/2003 2:34:41 PM PST by ought-six
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: ought-six
Oh, one other thing, and maybe I'm a dolt, but what the hell is DU?

Democratic underground.A leftist site that tries to pretend it's the liberal version of FreeRepublic. Visit it and get an idea what liberals actually think, but keep you time down to only a few minutes to avoid extreme nausea, high blood pressure, and other adverse side effects. You didn't seem the DU sort to me, which is why I questioned your being called that in another post.

34 posted on 03/02/2003 3:29:46 PM PST by templar
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: templar
LOL! So that's what DU is! Rest assured, I have more honor and integrity than to associate myself with such bottom feeders. The Dems have been completely co-opted by the leftist extremists at NOW, NEA, VPC, and a host of other alphabet tyrannies. The Dems religion is socialism and its sacrament is abortion. One only need look at the Dems slavish adoration of Political Correctness to see they are first and foremost for speech control, thought control, and the various other oppressions they so eagerly embrace. The Founders of this country would be ready for another revolution if they saw the modern Democratic Party and its anti-American agenda.
35 posted on 03/03/2003 6:18:34 AM PST by ought-six
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-35 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