First the applause was coming from nations all over the world, not just Europe.
The point was, the statement they were appauding; I didn't count the number of applauders. Everyone is worried about the US having too much power. But, I would suggest, they wouldn't be happier if the US had too little power. They want the US to protect their wonderful little world, but please don't ask for any favors in return, because they are too busy, primping in the mirror, to help anybody, like they were helped. The middle east is a quagmire, of dictatorships and monarchies. The french created Iraq in 1948 I believe, but because of WWII, didn't have the resources to do it right. Now they want us to straighten out the mess they created.
Does it ever dawn on you that Bush is the one who might be out of control and acting inappropriately rather than Europe?
That could be possible, but it isn't. I know because they said so.Read this.
EU Warns Iraq It Faces 'Last Chance'
advertisement
SPECIAL REPORT
• The Bin Laden Tape: Audio | Text
• Poll: Post-ABC Poll Results
• Text: Russian, French and German Declaration on Iraq
• Powell at the U.N.: Text | Images
Q & A: The U.S. Standoff With Iraq
Primer: Confronting Iraq The issues and events that brought the U.S. and Iraq to the brink of war.
Timeline: Saddam Hussein's Reign
Opinion: The Iraq Debate with pieces by Jimmy Carter, George Shultz, Wesley Clark and others.
Document: U.N. Resolution 1441
___ Article Search ___
Use keywords to search through Washington Post stories about the confrontation with Iraq since November 2002:
• Advanced Search
_____News From Iraq_____
• NATO Agrees to Begin Aid To Turkey (The Washington Post, Feb 17, 2003)
• Rice Calls Security Council's Actions 'Appeasement' (The Washington Post, Feb 17, 2003)
• Kurds Look South And See Weakness (The Washington Post, Feb 17, 2003)
• Top Army General Backs U.S. Capability (The Washington Post, Feb 17, 2003)
• Arab Envoys Fail to Agree On Holding Iraq Summit (The Washington Post, Feb 17, 2003)
• Complete Post Coverage of Iraq
E-Mail This Article
Printer-Friendly Version
Subscribe to The Post
By BARRY RENFREW
The Associated Press
Monday, February 17, 2003; 7:31 PM
European leaders, trying to end their bitter dispute over Iraq, warned Saddam Hussein on Monday he faces a "last chance" to disarm, but gave no deadline and said U.N. weapons inspectors must have more time to finish their work.
Insisting it had healed the rift over U.S. calls for military action against Iraq, the EU emergency summit nevertheless left significant divisions, with some states saying the United Nations could still disarm Iraq peacefully.
"War is not inevitable. Force should be used only as a last resort. It is for the Iraqi regime to end this crisis by complying fully with the demands of the Security Council," the 15 nations said in a statement.
That was seen as a setback for Germany, which has opposed war under any circumstances.
"Baghdad should have no illusions. It must disarm and cooperate immediately and fully. The Iraqi regime alone will be responsible for the consequences if it continues to flout the will of the international community and does not take this last chance," the leaders said in the joint declaration.
While that position will cheer the United States and Britain, which are urging military action, there was still strong support for continued, possibly increased U.N. weapons inspections. The statement gave no indication of how much longer inspections should continue, but said they could not go on forever without Iraqi cooperation.
"They must be given the time and resources that the U.N. Security Council believes they need," the declaration said. "However, inspections cannot continue indefinitely in the absence of full Iraqi cooperation."
France, which has blocked any swift move to military action, insisted its position had been vindicated that only the U.N. Security Council can handle the issue - an implicit rejection of U.S. statements that it has the right to disarm Iraq alone if necessary.
"We all agree the elimination of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction is absolutely imperative (but) only the Security Council can handle the means," French President Jacque Chirac said.
"There is no reason today to change the strategy," he added.
That suggests significant wrangling lies ahead if the United States and Britain hope to get a second resolution from the U.N. Security Council authorizing war. British Prime Minister Tony Blair wants the resolution because of strong domestic opposition to war.
Chirac said France would oppose any effort to draft a new U.N. resolution authorizing war at this time.
In an extraordinary outburst, Chirac publicly lambasted eastern European nations seeking to join the EU for their support for Washington over the Iraq crisis.
"It is not really responsible behavior, it is not well brought-up behavior. They missed a good opportunity to keep quiet," he told reporters.
EU diplomats had hoped to mend the damaging rift after NATO managed to overcome a disagreement on Sunday on planning on aiding Turkey in the event of war with Iraq. France, Germany and Belgium had blocked the move for a month, but a solution was worked out by moving the issue to a committee where the French are not represented.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair appeared frustrated by the French stance, saying he did not understand how EU states could agree Iraq was not cooperating fully, but Baghdad had not been declared in material breach, or violation, of U.N. resolutions - grounds for military action.
"If Iraq is not cooperating fully and everyone accepts they are not cooperating, why is Iraq not then in material breach? I still don't know the answer to that question," he told reporters.
Blair also appeared to be backing away from a push for a second U.N. resolution to endorse military action against Iraq. He said the earlier resolution demanding Iraq disarm made a convincing case for tough action.
Seeking not only to mend rifts in the European Union, but also with the United States, the leaders also gave the American military buildup in the Persian Gulf credit for forcing Saddam to work with U.N. weapons inspectors.
"We are committed to working with all our partners, especially the United States, for the disarmament of Iraq, for peace and stability in the region," the leaders said.
European parliamentary leaders, who met with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan before he entered the summit, said Annan stressed, however, that he did not want the weapons inspections to go on too long, suggesting the threat of action had to be real to preserve the body's credibility.
The split had threatened the EU's ability to forge a foreign and security policy. France and others want the EU to be a major power that can counter the United States, but most European nations are reluctant to give up control of their foreign policy, especially direct ties with Washington.
© 2003 The Associated Press
Did you especially notice this part.
Seeking not only to mend rifts in the European Union, but also with the United States, the leaders also gave the American military buildup in the Persian Gulf credit for forcing Saddam to work with U.N. weapons inspectors.
"We are committed to working with all our partners, especially the United States, for the disarmament of Iraq, for peace and stability in the region," the leaders said.
European parliamentary leaders, who met with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan before he entered the summit, said Annan stressed, however, that he did not want the weapons inspections to go on too long, suggesting the threat of action had to be real to preserve the body's credibility.
After tearing up the UN, NATO and possibly the EU, now they agree unanimously that it was a good thing GW was doing to force Iraq to comply, and that they wouldn't give inspections much more time. And you say GW was the problem. The problem is countries like the French trying to pretend they are more important than they really are. Now, when they found out the demonstrations are getting out of control, and that every body is resorting to fighting and bickering, now they say, nevermind. My bet is that they will set a limit for inspections, of less than 45 days.
Is it even remotely possible that we can continue to maintain the status quo and keep Saddam contained without going to war?
No it would be impossible, because you can't keep the army in the desert for 5, 10 20 yrs, waiting for Saddam to comply. What is the use. And, all 15 in the EU agreed with that position today.
.......then, yes, I don't have a response because the person is speaking nonsense.
Still trying to throw insults, instead of logic I see. Growth is not nonsense. You know it isn't, because every day you pick stocks based upon growth. So don't give me, that's not important stuff. I know better. |
