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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: NickSE who wrote (71677)	2/5/2003 11:54:38 PM
From: greenspirit	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Thanks for the articles recently Ghostrider. I haven't commented on them but I've read every one. Thought you would enjoy reading the remarks by Great Britain today.. Great Britain's Remarks to the U.N. nytimes.com Why is Iraq refusing to allow UNMOVIC to use a U-2 plane to conduct aerial imagery and surveillance operations? When will Iraq account for the 6,500 bombs which could carry up to 1,000 tons of chemical agent? How will Iraq justify having a prohibited chemical precursor for mustard gas. But how will Iraq explain the concealment of nuclear documents and the development of a missile program in clear contravention of United Nations resolutions? And there is, Mr. President, only one possible conclusion from all of this, which is that Iraq is in further material breach as set out in United Nations Security Council Resolution 1441. And I believe that all colleagues here, all members will share our deep sense of frustration that Iraq is choosing to spurn this final opportunity to achieve a peaceful outcome. Mr. President, given what has to follow and the difficult choice now facing us, it would be easy to turn a blind eye to the wording of Resolution 1441 and hope for a change of heart by Iraq. Easy but wrong, because if we did so, we would be repeating the mistakes of the past 12 years and empowering a dictator who believes that his diseases and poison gases are essential weapons to suppress his own people and to threaten his neighbors and that by defiance of the United Nations he can indefinitely hoodwink the world. Mr. President, under the French presidency two weeks ago, we had a special session on the dangers of international terrorism, which I greatly welcomed, that session, of the grave danger to the world of terrorists acquiring weapons of mass destruction through the connivance of rogue states. Secretary Powell has today set out deeply worrying reports about the presence in Iraq of one of Osama bin Laden's lieutenants, al-Zaqawi (ph), and other members of Al Qaida and their efforts to develop poisons. STRAW: It defies imagination that all of this could be going on without the knowledge of Saddam Hussein. And the recent discovery of the poison ricin in London has underlined again that this is a threat which all of us face. Mr. President, Saddam must be left in no doubt as to the serious consequences and the serious situation which he now faces. The United Kingdom does not want war. What we want is for the United Nations system to be upheld. But the logic of Resolution 1441 is inescapable. Time is now very short. This council will have further reports from the inspectors on Friday week, the 14th of February. If noncooperation continues, this council must meet its responsibilities. Mr. President, our world faces many threats, from poverty and disease to civil war and terrorism. Working through this great institution, we have the capacity to tackle these challenges together. But if we are to do so, then the decisions we have to take must have a force beyond mere words. This is a moment of choice for Saddam and for the Iraqi regime, but it is also a moment of choice for this institution, the United Nations. The United Nations' pre-war predecessor, the League of Nations, had the same fine ideals as the United Nations, but the league failed because it could not create actions from its words. It could not back diplomacy with a credible threat and where necessary, the use of force. So small evils went unchecked. Tyrants became emboldened. Then greater evils were unleashed. At each stage good men said, "Wait, the evil is not big enough to challenge." Then before their eyes, the evil became too big to challenge. We slipped slowly down a slope, never noticing how far we had gone until it was too late. Mr. President, we owe it to our history, as well as to our future, not to make the same mistake again. Thank you.

To: NickSE who wrote (71677)	2/6/2003 6:03:17 PM
From: KLP	Respond to of 281500

I add my thanks for posting this and the former article!

To: NickSE who wrote (71677)	2/6/2003 7:53:35 PM
From: NickSE	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

German reversal? Schröder's back is against the wall faz.com [....] Experts commissioned by the German parliament say the constitution prohibits the country from allowing the United States to use its bases or German airspace for an attack against Iraq. But Schröder has already granted the United States overflight rights and the transportation of troops. “We have checked the legal situation and made our decision. And it's going to stay that way,“ said German Defense Minister Peter Struck. Even if Schröder's coalition should survive such a test, the embattled chancellor might not. Economics Minister Wolfgang Clement is tipped to take charge if Schröder must go. But the opposition Christian Democrats are apparently already making preparations for German reconciliation with the United States, perhaps under a new government. Seeking to assure the United States of her party's loyalty, Christian Democrat party whip Angela Merkel plans to fly to Washington to pledge the CDU's unwavering support of that country's Iraq plans.