To: JohnHuang2; The Wizard; Dr. Eckleburg; George W. Bush
Administration officials sought to explain the president's shift as a courtesy to Blair, who faces intense political pressure not to send British troops into battle without U.N. support. Bush and Blair appeared to have concluded that going to war without a follow-up to last fall's U.N. demand that Iraq disarm would be better than doing so after losing a vote in the Security Council on a new resolution.
They have left for the weekend any number of times over the last month with the impression that the next week will be the week when everything hits the fan. Then on Monday they morph that into new diplomatic "necessities."
I'm not convinced any more until I hear the call for UN inspectors and journalists to get out.
18 posted on
03/14/2003 5:44:37 AM PST by
xzins
(Babylon, you have been weighed in the balance and been found wanting!)
To: xzins
How public a call do you think will be made for the UN inspectors to leave?
Can we start without asking them to leave?
Doesn't that eliminate the element of surprise?
What about the new reports of Iraq's first strike against our troops in Kuwait?
Wouldn't our calling on inspectors to leave signal Iraq to start?
Man, I'm loaded with freepin' questions this morning!
To: xzins
[Bush and Blair appeared to have concluded that going to war without a follow-up to last fall's U.N. demand that Iraq disarm would be better than doing so after losing a vote in the Security Council on a new resolution.]
Well, Duh.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson