Free Republic

<p>April 22, 2003 -- WHY do you think France, Russia and China sided with Saddam Hussein in the United Nations Security Council against the invasion of Iraq? Because their support was bought and paid for by the Iraqi dictator. Now, in the ruins of his empire, the question is whether the world will honor his promised bribes.</p>

<p>"We ought to let the United Nations decide the future of Iraq. The [Iraq] war is a good thing if done right."</p> <p>Unfortunately, the president who couldn't recall much during his impeachment depositions has also forgotten about the dramatic failure of the United Nations following his own military adventurism in Haiti. President Clinton sent troops into Haiti a decade ago in order to remove Raoul Cedras, the leader of a military coup, and restore power to Jean Bertrand Aristide, a leftist tyrant. Subsequently, Clinton called in the U.N. to take over with the peace keeping and the nation building.</p>

Eating humble pie is not something that comes easily to Jacques Chirac. Accustomed to the flunkies and gilt splendour of the Elysee Palace and his ego nicely inflated by last year's election victories, the word humility has not been in the French President's lexicon for some time. So, faced with France's biggest diplomatic setback in decades, Chirac is groping for discretion and dignity as he beats a retreat over his Iraqi policy. He hopes some soothing words, a few concessions and a swing of fortune's pendulum will ease his international isolation and ward off US reprisals against his country. Chirac...

<p>PARIS - THE WAR NOW is past tense, the dead gone, the wounded paying the price for all the cheers and relief.</p> <p>The controversy resumes in the present and future tenses, over Washington's planned (or, as it seems, largely unplanned) pacification and reconstruction of Iraq as an economic and political society and over what may follow in the eastern Mediterranean.</p>

As the war with Iraq draws to an early close, a chorus of diplomatic "experts" are getting their "multilateral" music sheets out, singing about the necessity of making the European Union a co-partner in rebuilding that nation. They are cheerfully chanting that a U.S.-European partnership on Iraq — brokered by the U.N. — will be an outstanding opportunity to heal the diplomatic wounds from the past year and repair our fractured trans-Atlantic alliance. At the heart of their vision is the belief that America's "unilateralism" has hurt Europe's feelings and that we have to atone for our boorish behavior...

<p>On the Brit Hume program at the bottom of the hour, Jane Skinner said the Saddams Secret Police files that Russia tried to take out of Iraq via convoy had been found.</p> <p>No mention if anything looked to be missing or looked through.</p>

WASHINGTON (AFP) WASHINGTON (AFP) - US Secretary of State Colin Powell (news - web sites) challenged Russian, French and German leaders' contention that only the United Nations (news - web sites) has the authority to rebuild post-war Iraq (news - web sites).   "We're not prepared to say, 'fine, this conflict has come to some conclusion and we're all leaving and going to turn it over to the United Nations'," he told NBC's Nightly News. Earlier Friday, Russian President Vladimir Putin (news - web sites), French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder met in St. Petersburg. At a...

<p>March 21, 2003 -- WASHINGTON - Chief U.N. weapons inspector Hans Blix yesterday said Iraq violated its agreement with the United Nations if the missiles it fired at American troops were Scuds.</p> <p>"I'm very interested to know whether they used Scuds," Blix said in an interview with the Fox News Channel. "If they're firing [Scuds], of course that shows that there's a violation," he said.</p>

Since the New York Times editorial page is the political left's "paper of record," and thus fairly representative of the liberal anti-war sentiment in America today, I thought I'd analyze its recent missive "Saying No to War." The crux of their position is "in the face of United Nations opposition ... long-running, stepped-up weapons inspections" is "a better option" than invading Iraq. "By adding hundreds of additional inspectors" and "using the threat of force" "the United States could obtain much of what it was originally hoping to achieve." Sorry, but "obtain[ing] much" won't get it – getting close doesn't work...

America might have created the U.N., said Dean Acheson, but "I personally am free of the slightest suspicion of paternity." IN AN ADMINISTRATION full of "unilateralists," many observers expected Secretary of State Colin Powell to be the most reliable friend of the United Nations--and perhaps he was, until French foreign minister Dominique de Villepin sandbagged him on Iraq at a meeting Powell thought had been called to discuss terrorism. Since then, Powell has almost daily told the U.N. and its admirers they should quickly get serious if they want the organization to avoid the fate of the League of Nations,...

I have a feeling the sophisticated governments of the Old World have been set up by a Texas cowboy. In a matter of days, the United States and its current allies will invade Iraq and capture Baghdad. It has been evident for some time that this will likely happen without the blessing of the United Nations Security Council. But in his press conference Thursday, President Bush pushed things a step further. "No matter what the whip count is, we're calling for the vote," he said of a new resolution that would green-light an invasion. "We want to see people stand...

Here’s a simple quiz. Who said the following: “What if (Saddam) fails to comply and we fail to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more opportunities to develop this programme of weapons of mass destruction? . . . Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction. And some day, some way, I guarantee you he’ll use the arsenal.” Full marks if you guessed Bill Clinton. It was 1998. But I...

It was hard not to feel a batsqueak of sympathy for Hans Blix on Friday as he delivered his third report. There was a time when a statement by the United Nations chief weapons inspector was the main event in the Iraqi crisis: the world - quite literally - hung on his every word. Remember in February when Dr Blix's laconic attack on Colin Powell drew gasps in the UN chamber? Contrast the reception of the inspector's report last week. Dr Blix sounded like a public school house master giving a very dull end-of-term speech to a hall full of...

Mar 9, 4:51 AM EST Britain Says U.N. May Back Iraq DeadlineBy BARRY RENFREWAssociated Press Writer LONDON (AP) -- Britain insisted Saturday that the U.N. Security Council could still back a final deadline for Iraq to prove it is disarming, as France mounted a last-minute foray to rally opposition to war.While U.S. and British diplomats worked behind the scenes to line up support at the United Nations, France's foreign minister scheduled a visit to Africa to win swing votes and French President Jacques Chirac called for an emergency summit to find a compromise.France, a leader in opposition to war, had...

President George Bush's prime time press conference Thursday night was not so much a final warning to Saddam Hussein, but possibly a last chance for the UN Security Council to prove it's not the League of Nations. It's now irrefutably clear, if it wasn't before, that Bush is going to force a regime change in Iraq. As much as Saddam is on the spot - get out while the getting is good - so is the UN Security Council. Its future is also at stake. Personally, I suspect Saddam is made of tougher stuff than the UN - so far...