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 : Sioux Nation -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: zonkie who wrote (61151)	3/16/2006 4:41:46 PM
From: Karen Lawrence	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 361804

Or, how about when he says he's sorry, retort with. "You sure are sorry, the sorriest thing I ever saw." :) You have a point there, pressing that pudge on issues gets a reporter barred from future "press conferences"

To: zonkie who wrote (61151)	3/16/2006 5:13:24 PM
From: SiouxPal	Respond to of 361804

Today's Press Briefing... whitehouse.gov Q Does the President know that he's in violation of international law when he advocates preemptive war? The U.N. Charter, Geneva, Nuremberg. We violate international law when we advocate attacking a country that did not attack us. MR. McCLELLAN: Helen, I would just disagree with your assessment. First of all, preemption is a longstanding principle of American foreign -- Q It's not a long-standing principle with us. It's your principle. MR. McCLELLAN: Have you asked your question? Q It's a violation of international law. MR. McCLELLAN: First of all, let me back up, preemption is a longstanding principle of American foreign policy. It is also part -- Q It's never been. MR. McCLELLAN: It is also part of an inherent right to self-defense. But what we seek to do is to address issues diplomatically by working with our friends and allies, and working with regional partners. That's what we're doing when it comes to the threat posed by Iran pursuing nuclear weapons. That's what we're doing when it comes to resolving the nuclear issue with North Korea. So we seek diplomatic solutions to confront threats. And it's important what September 11th taught us -- Q The heavy emphasis of your paper today is war and preemptive war. MR. McCLELLAN: Can I finish responding to your question, because I think it's important to answer your question. It's a good question and it's a fair question. But first of all, are we supposed to wait until a threat fully materializes and then respond? September 11th -- Q Under international law you have to be attacked first. MR. McCLELLAN: Helen, you're not letting me respond to your question. You have the opportunity to ask your question, and I would like to be able to provide a response so that the American people can hear what our view is. This is not new in terms of our foreign policy. This has been a longstanding principle, the question that you bring up. But again, I'll put the question back to you. Are we supposed to wait until a threat fully materializes before we respond -- Q You had no threat from Iraq. MR. McCLELLAN: September 11th taught us -- Q That was not a threat from Iraq. MR. McCLELLAN: -- some important lessons. One important lesson it taught us was that we must confront threats before they fully materialize. That's why we are working to address the threats when it comes to nuclear issues involving Iran and North Korea. That's why we're pursuing diplomatic solutions to those efforts, by working with our friends and allies, by working with regional partners who understand the stakes involved and understand the consequences of failing to confront those threats early, before it's too late. Q What are the consequences? MR. McCLELLAN: The consequences of a nuclear armed Iran, they are very serious in terms of stability -- Q Are you warning Iran that it has consequences as you did Iraq? MR. McCLELLAN: Well, what has happened with Iran right now is that the matter has been reported to the United Nations Security Council because the regime in Iran has failed to come into compliance with its safeguard obligations, and they continue to engage in enrichment related activity. And we have supported the efforts of the Europeans to resolve this matter diplomatically, but the regime in Iran continues to pursue the wrong course. They need to change their behavior. They continue to defy the international community. That's why the matter has been reported to the Security Council. We have now entered a new phase of diplomacy. And there are a lot of discussions going on about how to prevent the regime from developing a nuclear weapon capability, or developing nuclear weapons. And that's why those discussions are ongoing. This is an important issue. It outlines in our national security strategy that this is one of the most serious challenges that we face. Q Are we threatening Iran with preemptive war? MR. McCLELLAN: We're trying to resolve this in a diplomatic manner by working with our friends and allies. Q May I ask you about the timing of the operation in Iraq today? The 101st released a press release calling it the biggest air assault since the invasion on the very same day that the White House released the National Security Strategy, and Hadley gives this major speech. Is there any coordination whatsoever? MR. McCLELLAN: I just told you this was a decision made by our commanders, so, no. Q There was no coordination. And is it an intense effort of this administration to show with the press release from the 101st, to call attention to what the U.S. is doing there? Do you think they need to broadcast more effectively what the U.S. is doing in Iraq? MR. McCLELLAN: Those are decisions made by the military. You ought to direct those questions to them. Q So all that is done without consultation with the administration? MR. McCLELLAN: That's correct.