SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : The Donkey's Inn -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (4507)9/11/2002 12:26:36 PM
From: Mephisto  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 15516
 
I was terrified when I read that article because the consequences are not what we had in mind if
Bush declares war on Iraq: suicide bombings in the US. I thought about it too this morning.

Bush said it would be a new kind of war but I don't believe Americans are prepared for the idea
that they may be shot down in their own streets or streets in a foreign nation. I don't believe
we considered that angle.

Iraq has warned that Americans will be a target if the US attacks.



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (4507)9/11/2002 12:29:40 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Iraq Threatens to Widen Conflict if U.S. Attacks
Vice President Issues Call to Arab World To Retaliate Against
American Interests


By Rajiv Chandrasekaran
Washington Post Foreign Service
Wednesday, September 11, 2002;
Page A10

BAGHDAD, Iraq, Sept. 10
-- An Iraqi vice president
threatened today to engulf
the United States in a
wider conflict if his country
is attacked, urging Arabs
outside Iraq to respond by
striking at U.S. interests all
over the world.

"We categorically believe
that the aggression on Iraq
is an aggression on all the
Arab nations," Vice
President Taha Yassin
Ramadan said at a news
conference in the
Jordanian capital, Amman.
He called on "all Arab and
good people to confront the
interests of the aggressors,
their materials and
humans, wherever they
are."

Arabs should use "all
means" to respond, he
said.

Ramadan's exhortation was
among the most
confrontational made by
senior Iraqi officials in
response to growing fears here of a U.S. attack. Although
Iraq has long sought to elicit support and sympathy from
Arabs beyond its borders, it has not previously made such
a public call to arms.

Despite the escalation of rhetoric, there was no sign of
crisis on major Baghdad streets that foreign reporters
traveled en route to a tour of a bombed-out Iraqi nuclear
facility. Traffic flowed normally; ordinary people patronized
shops and restaurants. Conversations with government
officials who were made available to reporters did not
suggest a sense of panic.

Ramadan spoke on the same day that British Prime
Minister Tony Blair, the United States' closest ally in the
standoff, warned that "action will follow" if the country did
not heed U.N. Security Council resolutions and readmit
U.N. weapons inspectors.

Israeli President Moshe Katsav, meanwhile, said that Iraq
would probably attack Israel in response to a U.S.
campaign, in which case Israel would "for certain" retaliate.
"I know for certain that the state of Israel is prepared . . . to
confront that challenge, and this time it does not intend to
sit idly by with its arms folded," Katsav told Israeli Army
Radio.

During the Persian Gulf War in 1991, Israel abided by U.S.
requests not to respond to Iraqi Scud missile attacks. U.S.
officials argued that an Israeli counterattack would
undermine the Arab coalition against Iraq.

Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, Prince Saud Faisal, said
today he worried that a U.S. attack might tear Iraq apart.
Speaking to reporters after a meeting with French
President Jacques Chirac, he insisted that the United
States seek U.N. approval for any action against Baghdad.
European countries have made similar calls.

Ramadan's comments appeared to be aimed in part at the
leaders of neighboring Arab states. Although their
governments have all voiced opposition to U.S. military
action, several countries have privately urged Iraq in recent
days to accede to Security Council resolutions and let in
U.N. inspectors, who are tasked with determining whether
Iraq has nuclear, biological or chemical weapons.

The United Nations withdrew inspectors in 1998,
complaining that Iraq was obstructing their work. Four
days of air raids by U.S. and British warplanes on alleged
weapons sites followed. Iraq has refused to readmit the
inspectors, and denies it has the kinds of weapons they
are looking for.

Diplomats in other Arab nations said Iraq may be hoping
that threats of unrest across the Arab world -- where
anti-American sentiment is widespread due to U.S. support
for Israel in its conflict with the Palestinians -- will
dissuade Arab leaders from breaking ranks with Baghdad.

"They want countries like Jordan and Egypt and Saudi
Arabia to know that if they support the United States,
they're going to have to deal with a new terrorism
problem," an Arab diplomat in Cairo said. "And the threat
is not just going to be against the United States but the
overall stability of other nations in the Arab world."

In Amman, government officials and academics have voiced
concern about a spillover of violence if war begins in
neighboring Iraq. "The repercussions will be felt across the
region," said Mustafa Hamarneh, director of the Center for
Strategic Studies at the University of Jordan. "The
Americans need to listen to what their allies in the region
are telling them."

Already fearful of anti-Israel street demonstrations getting
out of control, countries such as Egypt and Jordan have
tightened security. The U.S. government also has
increased security at its diplomatic posts in the region.
Washington fears attacks by al Qaeda operatives around
the anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks, but also action by
local opponents of U.S. policy toward Iraq, officials said.

Tonight, a senior official in the Iraqi Information Ministry
sought to tone down Ramadan's comments. "We are not
against individual Americans," the official said. "We even
protect Americans who are visiting here."

But, the official warned, "Americans should be acquainted
with the hatred for them from Pakistan to Senegal."


"People are willing to sacrifice their lives to save the holy
[Islamic] shrines in Iraq," he said.

Iraq has characterized the Bush administration's call for
"regime change" in Baghdad as a joint U.S.-Israeli ploy to
dominate the region and monopolize the oil market.

In an interview with Egypt's largest and most influential
daily newspaper, al-Ahram, Iraq's foreign minister, Naji
Sabri, said a U.S. attack would "not be a threat to Iraq" but
"a threat to security and stability in the world."

At a rally in support of Iraq in the Gaza Strip today, Sheik
Ahmed Yassin, the founder of the militant Islamic
Resistance Movement, known as Hamas, accused the
United States of "launching a war against Arabs and
Muslims in the name of fighting terrorism," according to
the Reuters news agency. Demonstrators waved photos of
the Iraqi president, Saddam Hussein, and vowed to help
defend Iraq if it was attacked.

The leaders of the Gaza branch of Iraq's ruling Baath Party
handed out $10,000 checks to the families of 36
Palestinians killed by Israeli soldiers in the past three
months. The Iraqi government has frequently tried to rally
Arab support by giving financial assistance to the families
of Palestinians killed in the uprising.

© 2002 The Washington Post Company



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (4507)9/11/2002 7:36:25 PM
From: Mephisto  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 15516
 
I think Ray is right about the Democrats:

"What we need is for the Congressional Democrats to get a spine. Leahy is hinting, Dennis Kucinich is
terrific but not in the leadership. We need Dashle, Reid, Gephardt and Pelosi to join forces and come out swinging. They're entirely too intimidated by the neocon bully boys. And apparently for some reason unknown to me, Dianne Feinstein is opposing an independent blue ribbon investigation, according to a representative of "Families of September 11" on CNN's Crossfire today."

SI Reference: Message 17972225



To: Patricia Trinchero who wrote (4507)9/11/2002 7:47:39 PM
From: Mephisto  Respond to of 15516
 
Echo of the Bullhorn
The New York Times

September 11, 2002

By MAUREEN DOWD

The following is an excerpt:

" The first President Bush has told people lately how impressed he is that
his son goes to bed every night without a worry in his head.

Should the nation really take comfort in this fact?


On 9/14/01, Mr. Bush picked up a bullhorn at ground zero and assured
rescue workers: "The people who knocked down these buildings are
going to hear from all of us."

A prodigal son who had spent much of his life unfocused suddenly had
sharp focus. A self-indulgent generation suddenly found itself in the
middle of its own Pearl Harbor. How would a president and a country
used to easy respond to hard?

At first, Mr. Bush was ferocious, spitting cowboy threats about getting
Osama bin Laden and Mullah Omar "dead or alive."

He promised to reinvent the failed alphabet apparatus - F.B.I., C.I.A., N.S.A., I.N.S. - and
secure our borders and airports.

We liberated Afghanistan, which was good for Afghanistan. But what else
had been accomplished?

Osama et cetera remain unaccounted for. Al Qaeda has regrouped and is
said to be plotting smaller attacks against American targets.

It is still startling that not a single head has rolled at the C.I.A. or the F.B.I.
George Tenet has escaped the fate of his counterparts at Enron
and Arthur Andersen.


The Homeland Security Department is bogged down in Congress. Airport
security remains risible.

After a few months the president shifted his attention from a hard war to an
easy war, from an unconventional war with no end or bad guys in
sight to a conventional war with a clearly discernible end and bad guy.

Administration hawks attempted to justify the easy war by portraying
it as a part of the hard war, doing their implausible best to make
Saddam and Osama seem like co-conspirators in a single threat.

Even as the F.B.I. was persecuting Dr. Stephen Hatfill for the anthrax letters,
the vice president was implying on "Meet the Press" Sunday
that Saddam might be the culprit.


The more Bush officials insisted upon these dubious connections,
the less persuaded Americans seemed to be. And the more they showed
their hand with insistence that Saddam had to go, the more
they made people worry what a psycho dictator with plenty of poison and nothing
to lose might do to Israel or the U.S.

Even the cautious Bob Graham, the Senate intelligence chairman,
told The Times's Carl Hulse that if we wanted to catch terrorists, Iraq was
the wrong spot. "Avoid the allure of distractions," he warned, calling Syria and
Iran more immediate dangers.

If the old Desert Storm warriors want a new desert storm, they should stop
condescending to their fellow countrymen, who understand both
that Iraq is a threat and that Iraq had nothing to do with the
destruction of the World Trade Center.

The administration is now in the business of simplification.
Those rescue workers at ground zero on 9/14/01 were not
cheering for "regime change." They wanted the head
of Osama bin Laden. And they still do."


nytimes.com
Copyright 2002 The New York Times Company