Author Topic: Convince me (part2) (Read 1237 times)

Toad · « **Reply #45 on:** February 17, 2003, 08:33:28 AM »

Yes, they broke the rules on contact with Iraq.

As for the rest of your questions, I personally have no "proof".

OTOH, there is a significant amount of circumstancial evidence in the public view.

Each must draw his own conclusion.

straffo · « **Reply #46 on:** February 17, 2003, 08:49:28 AM »

Toad I've not found a résolution broke by this trip (*) yet

(*) in fact I got a very hard time to find this trip or it was not in september 2000?

Toad · « **Reply #47 on:** February 17, 2003, 10:26:12 AM »

September 23, 2000.

Here's a fig leaf for you to hide behind. Make the most of it, while telling us how France has been doing it's very best to support the UN in disarming Iraq.

Quote

Whether UN Security Council resolutions ban air travel is subject to interpretation. But, because of a ban on commercial and financial transactions with Iraq, the practice has been that a flight must be approved by the UN sanctions committee.

... The French government, which has become increasingly critical of the sanctions policy, considers that a non-commercial flight does not necessarily breach UN resolutions and may require only "notification" to the sanctions committee and inspection by French customs.

Should be more than enough for you to hide behind. After all, it was "subject to interpretation."

My apologies. It was only a common Security Council "practice". Which of course France did not feel it had to support.

RRAM · « **Reply #48 on:** February 17, 2003, 02:22:16 PM »

Haven't found anything about France's stand regarding SH's deposal in 1990, toad. However, I've found things like this:

http://www.sonic.net/~doretk/Issues/98-12%20WIN/the%20u.s.vssaddam.html

"Because U.N. "support" for Resolution 678 in the Gulf War against Iraq was a fraud, obtained by "bribery, black mail, and coercion," we might well wonder about the legitimacy of current U.N. "support." Ethiopia, Zaire, Colombia, and the Soviet Union received generous aid in return for supporting the Resolution. China was awarded $114 million dollars in deferred aid just for abstaining from voting. Syria was allowed to expand occupation of Lebanon. Jordan and Egypt were threatened with economic reprisals if they didn't vote for the Resolution. Egypt was manipulated to get the Arab League to condemn the Iraqi invasion."

Is this true?.

please guide me to any place where French and soviet stances regarding SH deposals are discussed...I've found none using google

Staga · « **Reply #49 on:** February 17, 2003, 02:39:14 PM »

hehe pretty clever sig-text from wwiiol board:
"The last time France wanted more evidence, it rolled right through France with a German flag."

straffo · « **Reply #50 on:** February 17, 2003, 03:51:52 PM »

No need for apolgies Toad I have a strong respect for you .

Actually I was not able to find a trace of this trip in any french information source (sorry I'm a bit lazy tonight I won't read English sources ).

I wanted to know the name of the peoples in this plane .
Imagine J.Carter making a trip to Iraq will it automaticly mean that GWB support Sadam ?
I guess no ... same for actual oposition in France
I know that Le Pen (who was a candidate for the presidence) is involved in a Franco/Iraq association but he is an anti-americanism "primaire" a strong eulogist of American bashing ... so his agenda is clear he would make all possible to piss off the USA.

Toad · « **Reply #51 on:** February 17, 2003, 11:07:47 PM »

Try to find newspaper archives from October/November of 1990 while the Security Council was working up to Resolution 678.

Russian, France and China were all either reluctant to support or outright opposed to 678.

Yet they voted for it in the end.

James Baker, the US Secretary of State at the time and a prime move in lining up the votes for 678 said in his autobiography: "I met personally with all my Security Council counterparts in an intricate process of cajoling, extracting, threatening, and occasionally buying votes. Such are the politics of diplomacy."

That's how it was done. That's how the UN works and always has worked.

BTW, take a look at this sight; I think you'll find a lot interesting information there.

Iraq Watch

Toad · « **Reply #52 on:** February 17, 2003, 11:16:08 PM »

Straffo, I only apologize for saying it was a "rule". It was not; it was a "practice" which France chose to ignore.

Further, apparently the French government, as mentioned in that quote, saw nothing wrong with these flights.

I must say I find it somewhat ironic that France continually chides the US for acting unilaterally and without consulting and respecting allies.

However, nearly everywhere I turn I see France doing exactly that. Like in this instance of the flights.

As for this whole debacle, I think no matter what happens now the UN has changed and the relationship between France and the US is even more damaged.

We discussed economics before. I'm sure you saw on the news that "boycott France" talk is starting here and is bound to have some worsening effect on an already poor situation.

The American "Liberty Tree" was watered with French blood and I won't forget that as I've mentioned before on this BBS.

However, while that respect will always be there, that doesn't mean I can overlook what is happening now, either. And I personally believe that France has not been supporting UN sanctions and embargoes against Iraq.

Had these efforts succeeded, perhaps we wouldn't be facing this war at all. If that possibility is accepted then it can be seen that all the countries that ignored the sanctions and embargoes have helped lead us down this trail to war.

The whole situation sux, from start to finish.

lord dolf vader · « **Reply #53 on:** February 18, 2003, 12:21:00 AM »

Just feel sad to be an american with so many "patriots" around.

Toad · « **Reply #54 on:** February 18, 2003, 12:23:17 AM »

Don't worry Towd. I think we're headed for a second civl war ourselves.

Everyone will get to be a patriot! Just on different sides. Oh, joy!

straffo · « **Reply #55 on:** February 18, 2003, 01:23:11 AM »

Quote

Originally posted by Toad

The whole situation sux, from start to finish.

that's a perfect resume of my though

straffo · « **Reply #56 on:** February 18, 2003, 01:48:26 AM »

Can you please clear a point for me :

If your governement say you cannot go to Iraq (without any law forbidding you to do so) can your governement forbid you to go in Iraq ?

For France we know the answer : governement can just say "I won't do if I were you"

But for USA ?

Habu · « **Reply #57 on:** February 18, 2003, 05:59:56 PM »

USA can ban it's citizens from going to a country. They did that for Libya in the 90's.

straffo · « **Reply #58 on:** February 19, 2003, 01:33:31 AM »

without any law ?