 |
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001 time: 23:22
|
|
Touche for MarkG!
Already the Russians said that they welcomed the Iraqi move, and the French continue to insist on two resolutions, not one, the first that would ask for Iraq toi let them back in, and then a later one, if the offer was denied, to spell out the world reaction. NOw that Iraq gave in the letter, I fail to see why the French would give in to the US. Also, the Arab league probably had a hand in writting the letter, so I fail to see that it will have anything immidiate that will bring suspicion form those undecided states (US,UK response immaterial, since they want war anyway)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
GePap
|
 |
of the Big Apple
Nov 2001 time: 23:22
|
|
quote: Originally posted by DinoDoc
GePap: I would be all for an unconditional resumption of inspections if that was what is actually being offered. |
I don't doubt the Iraqis will fudge: they always do. To a certain point they have the right to. In 1994, 3 years into the inspections, the inspectors told the UN 90% of their work was done. 4 years later they were still there. 3 years, 90%, 4 years, they could not do the other 10%? Unconditional access is somewaht absurd and dishonest, since to a certain extent, all the inspectors have to do to keep the regime going on indefenitelly, is ask to see anything in Iraq, and then claim Iraq is hinding something if they say no, and they don't really have to show evidence to do so: "hey, that nursery might hide SCUDS under the swings, we need to look!' The type of restrictions the iraqis may want to impose might very well be dishonest, but so is asking for fully unconditional access everywhere, no limits.
The admin wants war, they have from the start. bush went to the UN and called himslef a champion for UN honor as a way of gaining massive support for when Saddam acted like an idiot and said no. Well, Iraq didn't act ike an idiot, and said yes.
quote: Did someone say France changed it's postion?
Not according to the French foriegn minister: |
The thing is Chris, that having two resolutions, as the French want, works just as well, if your aim is to get Saddam to follow his word, with no time table attached. You make one resolution demanding Saddam follow all previous ones. If Saddam doesn't, then you writte a second allowing force. The same outcome, forcing Saddam to keep his word, just as the french said. The difference is that Bush and the admin have crated a war schedule in which we have to be at war by the end of the year. The French way could postpone any war by several month (the french don't care about this) and thus the admin. opposes it vehemently.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:22. Apolyton Time is 00:22. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|