Your War Policy Please...Draw You Plans

but one comment first: lets remember that iraq LOST the war and agreed to all these terms as part of his surrender and ending gulf war 1. now he is negotiating as if HE won the war. a big problem is the disconnect after the war, we lost interest in following up on his compliance. i blame the admin. under clinton and congress (not a shot at clinton) for not showing more fervor in following through, and clinton made a big mistake by withdrawing inspectors and launching a few cruise missles as if theat would work. it was that decision, that ABSOLUTE shift in foreign policy that helped put us in this jam; we should have been applying more pressureinstead of pussy-footing with iraq all through the 90's. so no wonder there is cynicism from those asking why now? but how can we blame anyone, who wants to get their hands dirty when the good times were rolling through the 90's?? i say better late than never.


we, as any other UN member, always have the right under UN article 51 to "inherent right of self defense....until security council has taken measures necesary to maintain peace and security" and nothing in the UN charter "shall impair this right"
we could claim self defense and that the security council hasnt acted to maintain peace and security, blah blah blah, of course i grey area but we always have the right under this blanket article.

specifically we CAN occupy iraq under security council resolution 678 of November 1990 and 687 of april 1991.

678:

http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/575/28/IMG/NR057528.pdf?OpenElement

687:

http://daccess-ods.un.org/doc/RESOLUTION/GEN/NR0/596/23/IMG/NR059623.pdf?OpenElement

adobe format so i couldnt cut and paste excerpts.
 
Originally posted by Ron In-a-sauna
thanks for the star :D , LOL
and let me know what you think, and we are still waiting for you rpolicy.
More...

Yes, yes. The soup is simmering and the meal is well under preparation. The info (links you sent) will give me a good base of support for my decision should an attack and occupation be deemed necessary. Thanks again! :D
 
Just when I was thinking I had started to bring together a response, up jumps North Korea to complicate matters even more. I had hoped to be able to address them later down the line (in my thinking). But with everyone watching the double standard angle, I have to start to lay down the plans for the next phase a little more concretely. What a stew. But I still believe, manageable! :)
 
Originally posted by canyonman00
Just when I was thinking I had started to bring together a response, up jumps North Korea to complicate matters even more. I had hoped to be able to address them later down the line (in my thinking). But with everyone watching the double standard angle, I have to start to lay down the plans for the next phase a little more concretely. What a stew. But I still believe, manageable! :)
More...

agree, the korea issue throws a monkey wrench in everything. if nothing else this proves you cannot negotiate with these thugs and pariah nations, because they will just lie cheat and steal like n.k.
initially i think this justifies action even more.
 
Originally posted by Ron In-a-sauna


agree, the korea issue throws a monkey wrench in everything. if nothing else this proves you cannot negotiate with these thugs and pariah nations, because they will just lie cheat and steal like n.k.
initially i think this justifies action even more.
More...

The two pieces that trouble me here are; 1) the appearance of no concern from the same folks who jump up and down and scream that we should not be concerned about countries/thugs like this as they can't directly hurt us; and 2) no complaints from the same countries who oppose our actions with Sadam in saying we should not be worried about this type of stuff. Here we have the next escalated level of violations and so many folks still say take the violator to the table for more talks.

Many people are saying give them some other things to keep them in check (More U.S. taxpayer money and technologies as a reward for violations?). The message sent to other thugs/clowns is just keep America posturing. Americans seem to have no real stomach for blood shed or understanding of spankings.

We sometimes don't have the resolve or guts do anything more than negotiate into the thirteenth hour of an eight hour negotiation. By the time we reach a tentative agreement, the base conditions have changed. Then we come off looking like obstructionists. We (Americans) are the victim of too many movie fantasy solutions where at the last second, the bad guy blinks. Are they right in thinking that of us? I don't think so, but sometimes I wonder! :)
 
Originally posted by canyonman00
Americans seem to have no real stomach for blood shed or understanding of spankings.
More...

canyon, why, apparently you haven't been a very diligent student of what exactly the us has been engaging in in it's past history, josh b very nicely researched that for us:

Tables and Lists of USA Actions Since 1945

USA Backed Coups
http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa01.html

USA Invasions,
Bombings, Military Aid
Political Interventions and Sanctions
http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa02.html

Use of the Veto on United Nations Resolutions by the USA
http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa03.html

Involvement of USA Companies
http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa04.html

USA: Nuclear, Biological and Chemical
http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa05.html

Civilian Victims of USA Foreign Policy
http://www.krysstal.com/democracy_whyusa06.html

Some of our Korea activities:

...The USA drops 70,000 gallons (265m3) of napalm per day on Korea. This is a substance made from benzene, polystyrene and gasoline that catches fire and sticks to flesh. The victim is either burned to death or suffocated by lack of oxygen...

...During the war in Korea, USA aircraft drop a number of diseased objects (feathers, bacteria, decaying animals, fish parts) in Korea and China. Many people die from plague, anthrax and encephalitis...

...Between 1967 and 1969 the USA sprays Agent Orange over 23,607 acres (95km2) in the border region between North Korea and South Korea. Agent Orange is a defoliant and contains dioxin, a chemical producing cancer and genetic defects in babies..
http://www.elitetrader.com/vb/showthread.php?s=&postid=141911#post141911

surely, that amount of state terrorism should satisfy even your desire for blood shed.



---------------------------------------
brent scowcroft, national security advisor to presidents gerald ford & george bush senior:
Don't Attack Saddam
It would undermine our antiterror efforts
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002133
 
I love all these arguments that contradict and make no sense what so ever..America is in a constant no win situation. We are THE ONLY superpower in the HISTORY of the world that wins brutal and costly wars....and then give the land back and dump BILLIONS into building the conquered back up !! Where ever the problem exists, we get called into the battle...WWI and WWII were EUROPE problems...But America came to the rescue!! and what did we get for our troubles? Billions of unpaid debt and no support. The only time France and Germany care is when it might directly affect them...Remember the Yugoslavian problem of the early 1990's?? Don't you think European nations could have handled that problem w/out America? Of course, but they all want free military might from us. Look at Saudi Arabia..As soon as Saddam put 1/2 million troops on their boarder they started singing "stars and stripes" and gave us their airstrips....now, they are against an iraqi invasion. ..until the next time Iraq heads for the boarder...As far as all theses weapons you quote, you are correct. America possesses more weapons of mass destruction than any other country...however, we honor the geneva convention and do not use them anymore...don't you think we could have just dropped a few nukes on Korea, Vietnam, Iraq, and sparred every american life?

As far as Brent Scokcroft goes, he's under the assumption that the Palestinian/Israel conflict is of the greatest concern to middle eastern countries....It isn't...They don't care, because every single country there would like to see Israel destroyed...There will never be true peace there because nobody wants to recognize israel, so let's get real...how many peace treaties have we seen inked? do they make a difference? No...The Arab nations could easily help the Palestinians build state and nation..that's not their intent...they don't want Israel there, end of story.
If saddam get's the nuke he covets he will launch one right into Jerusalem....the last time he sent 37 skuds for no reason into innocent neighborhoods...do you really think he will show the same nuclear restraint that America does????
 
Originally posted by TM_Direct
I love all these arguments that contradict and make no sense what so ever
More...

what i love (irony) is the fact that the usa is either involved in direct state terrorism, or in indirect state terrorism such as when we built up saddam and provided him with chemical and biological weapons that he used on his citizens with our knowledge, or when we let him start a war of aggression against iran where we again directly supported him, or the us government is involved in lying again to it's citizens to start yet another imbecilic war that will inevitably backfire on us, will not further the effort against terrorism, but that serves well as a detraction from national problems.

President Bush's case against Saddam Hussein, outlined in a televised address to the nation on Monday night, relied on a slanted and sometimes entirely false reading of the available US intelligence, government officials and analysts claimed yesterday. http://www.guardian.co.uk/usa/story/0,12271,807286,00.html

---------------------------------------------------
brent scowcroft, national security advisor to presidents gerald ford & george bush senior:
Don't Attack Saddam
It would undermine our antiterror efforts
http://www.opinionjournal.com/editorial/feature.html?id=110002133
 
Originally posted by canyonman00

The two pieces that trouble me here are; 1) the appearance of no concern from the same folks who jump up and down and scream that we should not be concerned about countries/thugs like this as they can't directly hurt us;
More...

excellent point.

not only an 'appearance of no concern,' but downright dismissive. that's one that should be given some thought.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top