Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

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 : PRESIDENT GEORGE W. BUSH -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Skywatcher who wrote (350499)	1/30/2003 5:26:51 PM
From: Lazarus_Long	Respond to of 769670

Gee, weren't you guys up until JUST NOW telling us how the Europeans so were strongly opposed to an Iraq war? Have you forgotten that? Or do you lack the intellectual honesty to admit it? But while we're here, let me pour a little more salt in the wound: Canada may back Iraq war By ROBERT RUSSO WASHINGTON (CP) - Canada would consider contributing forces to an attack on Iraq even if the United Nations does not sanction the military assault, Defence Minister John McCallum said Thursday. It marked the first time Canada has deviated from its insistence that joining any attack on Iraq would be predicated on UN authorization. "Many, many countries are in a position where they are offering contingency co-operation," McCallum said after meeting U.S. counterpart Donald Rumsfeld at the Pentagon. "Some may say, 'We're doing it only with a UN mandate.' We're saying we much prefer that, but we may do it otherwise." Aides to McCallum later insisted that the defence minister was not actively considering any Canadian military involvement in a mission undertaken without UN approval, but was suggesting that it could be considered at a later date. "Canada is reserving the right to say no or to say yes in terms of military participation," McCallum said. "In the case where there would be UN approval, our answer would be yes. If there is no such authorization by the UN, it is not yes or no, we'll decide later on." Asked whether that means Canada will remain on the sidelines if the United States attacks Iraq on its own, McCallum replied: "That's not decided yet." McCallum made the announcement minutes after UN weapons inspectors told the Security Council they had found no "smoking guns" in their search for Iraqi weapons of mass destruction. Chief UN weapons inspector Hans Blix told the Security Council that Iraq had acknowledged importing parts for its missile program - a violation of UN sanctions. The Iraqis had also failed to allow scientists who might have knowledge of Iraqi weapons programs to be interviewed in private. But their report was bereft of the kind of incendiary flouting of UN sanctions that might trigger a multilateral effort to topple Iraqi President Saddam Hussein. That conflict seemed less likely after Britain appeared to be pleading with the Bush administration for more time for inspectors to do their work. Ottawa continues to believe that war is not inevitable and hopes a military assault can be avoided, but McCallum revealed that Canadian military planners are currently at U.S. Central Command in Tampa, Fla., discussing what contribution Canada would make to any UN-mandated attack on Iraq. "It's necessary always to plan in advance of such a contingency," McCallum said. "This in no way guarantees that the government will take that decision in the future. But we must plan for the future to keep that contingency open." Canada's participation in the war planning represents something of a departure. Canadian generals were not invited to the sessions until they were ready to signal they would contribute to a UN effort to punish Baghdad. "There was a time when we had not indicated our position at all on Iraq and I think some planning went on in our absence," McCallum said. "But we have subsequently indicated that we are interested and the moment we so indicated we were involved in those discussions." Canada's contribution to a U.S.-led war in Iraq might include positioning additional ships in the Persian Gulf, providing elite commandos and relieving U.S. troops stationed in Afghanistan, defence officials have said. The United States has loudly complained about Canada's relatively puny spending on defence as a percentage of gross domestic product. McCallum said Rumsfeld was "very happy" with what Canada is offering as a battlefield contribution in any potential war against Iraq. The Canadian military has been facing a funding crisis due to a decade of cutbacks and many analysts say the country has very little to offer a potential coalition. A Senate committee even went so far last fall as to suggest that Canadian Forces should not be sent on a foreign deployment for at least two years in order to address a shortfall in equipment and training. McCallum told reporters he has requested more money in the budget for defence. He said he won't know what will happen until the budget is tabled in February. "The answers are not definite before the budget, but I've done the best that I could. I know there is public support for defence these days, so I'm relatively optimistic." cnews.canoe.ca