One Vote Away From 2nd Resolution

CNN | Wednesday, March 12, 2003 Posted: 9:42 AM EST (1442 GMT)

[maquiladora]

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The Bush administration believes that it is one vote shy of having nine of 15 votes needed on a U.N. Security Council resolution that sets a Monday deadline for Iraqi compliance, a senior U.S. State Department official said, and officials are focusing diplomatic energies on Mexico and Chile.

President Bush has spent much of the last week on the telephone, lobbying council members to support the resolution.

"Bush and [British Prime Minister Tony] Blair are attempting to do whatever it takes to get the Latins to commit," the official told CNN's Andrea Koppel.

Blair told members of the House of Commons on Wednesday that the council was considering a series of benchmarks that Iraq would have to meet to prove it was disarming -- a step that Chile and Mexico previously suggested.

The State Department official also said the United States is confident it has the support of the three African members of the Security Council -- Cameroon, Guinea and Angola -- despite a visit this week by French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin to secure their opposition to the resolution.

In addition, U.S. and Pakistani officials said Pakistani President Pervez Musharraf can be counted on for his support when a vote happens this week.

That leaves Mexico and Chile as holdouts, the State Department official said. To secure these votes, the United States, Great Britain and Spain have teamed up to work all the angles. On Tuesday, U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell held a three-way conference call with his allied counterparts as they coordinated strategies.

Nevertheless, Russia and France have threatened to veto the resolution. Nine council votes are needed to pass the resolution, but a veto by any of the five permanent members would defeat it. Britain, France, Russia, China and the United States are permanent members.

[Dog]

Vote MAY come sometime this week....now the vote looks like it is slipping also..

[babaloo]

Why is CNN the only one reporting this?

[steveegg]

And if not, and they want to re-fight the War of 1848, I think they can be oblidged.

[Orangedog]

Mexico is holding out? For what?

ANY politician who doesn't co-sponsor legislation to stop any and all foreign aid to the "no" voting countries loses my vote in a hurry. I'm sick of my tax dollars rewarding this kind of "loyalty".

[maquiladora]

Vote MAY come sometime this week

Foxnews reports that Foreign Office Minister Mike O'Brien said that it will happen tomorrow.

[Tai_Chung]

One Vote Away From 2nd Resolution

The title is misleading. It's not a possible 2nd resolution against Iraq, it's a possible 18th resoultion.

[Bulldogs22]

"I wish they would all vote no. Destroy the UN first."




our real enemy

[maquiladora]

That's true, but it's more commonly been called a second resolution now.

[Enduring Freedom]

Fox's back surgery is understandable.

American physicians are having a spine installed.

[captnorb]

I just hope we don't give away any more of store.

[prairiebreeze]

**All of these, all, before Monday.**

I thought these benchmarks (thank you for listing them BTW) had a later date attached. Have you heard anything about that? I"m TV deprived this morning.

thanks Prairie

[showme_the_Glory]

Looks like I'll be gettin rid of my Tequilla......

either way..........*grinnin*

[thinktwice]

Waiting for the UN now is BS.

The UN is proven irrelevant, and America needs to get it on with the enemy.

[A Vast RightWing Conspirator]

Looks like they are not telling the truth.

[TheBattman]

How about this for a benchmark:

Saddam must present physical evidence of destruction/disposition of all documented arms, including both chemical and biologicals. The documented arms for this discussino would include all of those thousands of lbs of agents that were documented in the previous inspections.

Also included in the benchmarks would be the direct whitnessing of the destruction of all All Sau?? missiles and ALL components thereof. Another form of evidence would be allowing several thousand US troops and inspectors to simultaniously inspect every suspected weapons depot, every presidential compound/palace, and every laboritory in the country.

Meeting these benchmarks whould win Iraq at least 24 more hours to complete the job at hand.

If a single threat, delaying tactice, bullet, or other action is taken on Iraq's part, then war would be automatic - with the use of our new MOAB as well as possible use of our "other" arsenal....

[Thane_Banquo]

Dear Mexico:

It would be so unfortunate if we had to deport all the criminal illegal immigrants in our country back to their respective homelands.

But then again, if we got your vote tomorrow, we might be able to work something out.

[js1138]

I forget. Did we support or oppose his election? Was he buds with Clinton or did Carvile oppose his election?

So many scandals, so few brain cells left.

[vishnu2]

Hear, hear!

[kaylar]

I am beginning to see what I think is the French aim:

They want to destroy the UN as it is today, and most especially the existence of a SC and veto capacity. Whatever prestige France supposedly gains from its SC seat and veto is more than offset in its eyes by the USA having the same power....This stands in the way of the many wonderful multilateral "reforms" that the EU/Third World alliance could otherwise inflict upon the world, such as global taxation, forced adherence to all UN treaties and protocols such as the ICC , Kyoto, etc.

In September of 2000 WJC along with most world heads of state signed the Millenniuum Summit charter for global democracy. It was explained away as a mere UN 'wish list', when some protested in the media that it was far more invasive of national sovereignty than is the original UN charter. And nothing has been done to enforce the MS document since its signing.

But suppose France's antics do destroy the current UN, and most especially the SC/veto curb. And suppose as a result the UN re-forms using the MS document as the new charter. What then? The US would have to decide between staying in a UN in which it would be continually outvoted, or leaving the UN entirely, and being declared a 'global outlaw'. The real danger at that point would be if the desire on the part of the EU/Third World alliance at seeing US power curbed is so great that the alliance is willing to destroy the global economy, creating a true global depression:

They might decide to force the US to rejoin the UN and adhere to Kyoto and the ICC, the various antiHate Speech internet measures the EU passed,etc, by an economic embargo against the US , and by demanding we remove our bases on which the US depends for 'global reach'.

Tinfoil? I hope so.

[maquiladora]

I thought that too, but the source that told this to CNN said the deadline was still Monday. I heard from CBS yesterday that President Bush was willing to push it back to the 21st, but no further. The Brits were talking about another week to ten days.
It seems that it will be voted on tomorrow, we'll get 9 votes, and France will probably veto. NBC reports that Bush will address the nation tomorrow night after the vote, the speech is already being written, and he'll spell out the deadline to Saddam.