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 : DON'T START THE WAR -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TigerPaw who wrote (19403)	3/11/2003 7:48:47 PM
From: 49thMIMOMander	Respond to of 25898

<What would possess him to say this?> Well, my opinion is that this is a matter for USA citizens, not much anyone else can do that much about. Slightly complicated by being a non-elected servant, although there are some well adopted ideas on how to replace administrations-governments in most nations, even inbetween elections. (without having to go to Monica, whitewater and -gates with impeachments) Ilmarinen I am waiting for what the UK brand new constitution, maybe some day, will come up with. They have at least made a firm decision to change a lot and finally write one, Blair might be a better case to work from than Thatcher.

To: TigerPaw who wrote (19403)	3/11/2003 8:03:01 PM
From: Just_Observing	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25898

What would possess him to say this? The madness of King George is infectious. Rummy's statement created shock and awe in Downing Street. US ready to fight 'without UK' US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has sparked diplomatic confusion by suggesting that America would be prepared to take military action against Iraq without Britain. Telephones between Number 10 and Washington were ringing "red hot" after Mr Rumsfeld told a press briefing that the US had alternative plans if the UK decided not to go to war with Iraq. The remarks caused shock and surprise in Downing Street, which insisted that if Saddam Hussein made the wrong moves, then Britain would be in at the front. news.bbc.co.uk

To: TigerPaw who wrote (19403)	3/11/2003 8:16:22 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 25898

US ready to fight 'without UK' (In just six months, Bush has managed to alienate just about every country on the planet. ) British troops are nearly ready for action US Defence Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has sparked diplomatic confusion by suggesting that America would be prepared to take military action against Iraq without Britain. Telephones between Number 10 and Washington were ringing "red hot" after Mr Rumsfeld told a press briefing that the US had alternative plans if the UK decided not to go to war with Iraq. The remarks caused shock and surprise in Downing Street, which insisted that if Saddam Hussein made the wrong moves, then Britain would be in at the front. There's no doubt that Tony Blair is in a very, very weak position indeed Andrew Marr BBC political editor Q&A: Blair under pressure Number 10 made it clear that rather than scaling down the UK's involvement in the conflict, the opposite was happening. The diplomatic flurry came as Tony Blair said he was willing to work "night and day" to secure enough common ground among UN security council members for a second resolution. Mr Rumsfeld told reporters: "What will ultimately be decided is unclear as to their [UK's] role and I think until we know what the resolution is, we won't know what their role will be." Asked if he meant the US would go to war without its "closest ally", he added: "That is an issue that the president will be addressing in the days ahead, one would assume." Military planning A Downing Street spokeswoman insisted: "This has not changed anything. We are still working to get a second resolution. We are not at this stage (war) yet. "But there has been complete cooperation throughout between the United Kingdom and United States on the military planning." Within the hour, Mr Rumsfeld tried to clarify his comments with a statement saying he had "no doubt" in the UK's "full support" for the international community's efforts to disarm Iraq. I don't think it is possible to exaggerate the degree of concern about the illegality of what is proposed Tam Dalyell He stressed: "I was simply pointing out that obtaining a second United Nation's Security Council Resolution is important to the United Kingdom and that we are working to achieve it. "In the event that a decision to use force is made, we have every reason to believe there will be a significant military contribution from the United Kingdom." In recent days military planners have been talking about Britain's "military contribution being greater than we thought". But Liberal Democrat foreign affairs spokesman Menzies Campbell told BBC's Newsnight that Mr Rumsfeld's comments appeared to "devalue Britain's military contribution and hence its political influence". Earlier, Mr Blair warned that Saddam Hussein will be "let off the hook" if France or Russia uses a veto over a further UN resolution. UK diplomats at the UN have proposed a series of tests they say Baghdad should fulfil within a set time to prove that it is ready to hand over its weapons. The proposals are part of an attempt to win wider support for a new UN resolution that gives the Iraqi leader a deadline to disarm before war. Mr Blair hopes the plan will break the UN deadlock and ease mounting political pressure at home following an attack on his strategy by Clare Short, the international development secretary. But on Tuesday, six undecided UN members - Cameroon, Angola, Chile, Guinea, Mexico and Pakistan - suggested a 45-day deadline for Iraq to disarm. This will be seen as a non-starter by America, which has rejected calls to extend the deadline beyond 17 March, insisting that a UN vote on war against Iraq will happen this week. Mr Blair knows the risks he is taking Nick Assinder BBC News Online political correspondent Could Blair really be toppled? On Monday, the prime minister telephoned Security Council members to discuss the benchmarks against which Iraqi compliance can be judged. That paved the way for Britain's new proposals, which were drawn up and circulated by Britain's ambassador to the UN, Jeremy Greenstock. On Tuesday, Mr Blair held talks in Downing Street with Portuguese Prime Minister Jose Manuel Durao Barroso who was supportive of his British counterpart's stance. According to the Guardian newspaper, security sources at the UN suggest the new deadline could be pushed back "a few days" beyond the March 17 deadline in the draft resolution. Downing Street seemed to indicate a degree of flexibility over the date. France and Russia have warned that they would veto any new UN resolution, while UN Secretary General Kofi Annan has said the legitimacy of any military action without a new UN mandate would be "seriously impaired". news.bbc.co.uk