Do we care about world opinion?

[beet1e]

ygsmilo - I think the US and UK (and supporters like Spain) are doing absolutely the right thing, right now. Of course, this latest phase of the war should have been done in 1991, but was halted.

I don't think there is anti-American feeling from the UK anti-war crowd. And I would like to bet that MOST of the anti-war people have never visited the US at all, or even gone beyond their own shores. I believe that any anti-American feeling is borne not of ill-will, but of ignorance.

Psst... Guys, it's "supersede" - derived from supersession.

[Dowding]

And I would like to bet that MOST of the anti-war people have never visited the US at all, or even gone beyond their own shores.

It's a real shame there are brits on this board to call time on your assertions. People might actually believe you're telling the truth.

British people go abroad now with flights for as little as 80 quid return - friends of mine went to Barcelona for 30 quid return last week - are you seriously suggesting that the people on that march have never been abroad?

roadkill.

[beet1e]

Dowding - yes, I believe that only a minority of people in Britain have ever been to the US. As to flying to other foreign parts, you might find that only a relative minority of people have done that too. Back in the 80s when I did my PPL exams, the training syllabus included a section on how to brief passengers for a flight, and cautioned that MOST people in Britain have never flown!  I was surprised myself. The CAA's words, not mine.

Anyway Dowding, I see that Iraq is firing Scuds - the ones they were supposed to have destroyed. Got your evidence yet? Next time, matey, I'd leave it to the CIA to know what weapons Iraq has and does not have. It's their JOB to know.

Perish the thought that my security is ever placed in the hands of an armchair politician.

[RRAM]

Originally posted by beet1e
Anyway Dowding, I see that Iraq is firing Scuds - the ones they were supposed to have destroyed. Got your evidence yet?

the destroyed missiles could very well be Al-Samuds, which were properly declared to the UN inspectors, and were being destroyed under UN supervision.

There's no proof  those missiles were Scuds, at all. I'm not saying they weren't ,simply that they could not be. So far there's no such evidence as you seem to believe .

[beet1e]

Originally posted by RRAM
So far there's no such evidence as you seem to believe .

Bollocks, RRAM. What you mean is, there is no evidence that you personally know about. That does not mean that no evidence exists. Do you really think that the CIA is going to publish details of the whereabouts of WMD, thereby affording Saddam the opportunity of relocating them - again? Do you really believe that 280,000 service personnel would be deployed to the Gulf, with political futures being placed on the line, as part of a military exercise? No need to say any more. It won't be long now before the truth will out. And then you and Dowding, Bounder, Blitz et al are going to have egg on your faces!  I see from another post that you're approximately the same age as Dowding, and probably doing your own term of service in the office of armchair politics. It will pass...

[Dowding]

I'm sorry, but you said abroad, not just the US. This isn't the 80's. The advent of ultra-cheap package holidays in the early nineties and the recent phenomenon of ultra-cheap flights to anywhere in continental Europe, means your assertion that most of the marchers had never left the country, is quite frankly, bollocks.

And if it was the Al Samud type - which isn't neccessarily the case - we know they had those missiles. Why? Because the UN inspectors were in the process of cutting them up. The UN inspectors have now gone, leaving their work unfinished. The implication is that there are missiles left behind. So it's hardly a 'revelation' that they have some left, is it?

It's hardly a vindication of your faith in the current party line.

[Holden McGroin]

Should be intresting to see the world reaction should the US/UK/AU forces be required to use their chem/bio suits in other than just a precautionary manner.  

Hope it doesn't happen, and if (when) it does the counter-measures work as well as advertized.

Wait...  none of that will be required, because Iraq destroyed all that stuff long ago.  The inspectors proved that...

[beet1e]

I said that MOST people in Britain have not been to the US, and quoted the CAA which advised (in the 80s) that MOST people in Britain have never flown.

The UN inspectors have now gone, leaving their work unfinished.

You're right about that one. Silly me. Silly Tony Blair. Silly Dubya. The answer was staring us in the face. We should have just given the UN weapon inspectors another 12 years.

[Dowding]

Is that really what you said?

And I would like to bet that MOST of the anti-war people have never visited the US at all, or even gone beyond their own shores.

Hmmm...

[RRAM]

Originally posted by beet1e
Bollocks, RRAM. What you mean is, there is no evidence that you personally know about. That does not mean that no evidence exists. Do you really think that the CIA is going to publish details of the whereabouts of WMD, thereby affording Saddam the opportunity of relocating them - again? Do you really believe that 280,000 service personnel would be deployed to the Gulf, with political futures being placed on the line, as part of a military exercise? No need to say any more. It won't be long now before the truth will out. And then you and Dowding, Bounder, Blitz et al are going to have egg on your faces!  I see from another post that you're approximately the same age as Dowding, and probably doing your own term of service in the office of armchair politics. It will pass...

I don't know personally about any WMD in Irak, that is true. Nor do you, for that matter, and you are basing your arguments on mere speculation.

If the US intelligence reports had evidence of the existance of WMD in Irak, then why didn't you show it in the UN SC?...so far all you have showed is ,either false proof, or very questionable reports. So far there is NO EVIDENCE of WMD in Irak. Period. If CIA has it, then they should have presented it in the UN SC for a proper way to solve this thing.


BTW, I honestly hope to have egg on my face, as you say. I'll sleep much better knowing that I was wrong, that you were right, and this war was really unavoidable as you claim it was. So far I think it could've been avoided, and so I don't feel well about it.

[Vermillion]

RAM, have you actually read UN Resolution 1441? Or are you just parrotting back what you have been told that it says?

Here is the full text of the resolution, and from a non-US website, so I don't get accusations of "american bias".

Let me point out Clause #13

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations

Specifically,  "will face serious consequences" is politico speak for "war".

But regardless of what 1441 itself says, Iraqi is in violation of the original cease fire agreements (note it was a "cease fire" not a peace treaty) and the resolutions following it, so even by YOUR definitions RAM, it is a legal and just war.

[beet1e]

Originally posted by Dowding
Is that really what you said?

I quoted the CAA in saying that MOST Britons have never flown. And I don't see tens of millions of Britons going to France/Spain etc. by boat. Maybe a few thousands each year?  Check with P&O or Brittany Ferries.

RRAM

If CIA has it, then they should have presented it in the UN SC for a proper way to solve this thing.

This has always been a tough one for armchair politicians to understand. The point is that if the CIA supplies information of that kind, Saddam is going to know about it, and will take action to thwart their position. Not only that, but the source of the information (how the CIA got it) could be exposed. You and I simply do not know what agents the CIA has on the ground in Iraq, but they are there. If the CIA were to blow its cover, as you seem to deem fit and proper, those sources of information might be cut off. Is that what you want?

[RRAM]

Originally posted by Vermillion
RAM, have you actually read UN Resolution 1441? Or are you just parrotting back what you have been told that it says?.

I've read it, and I still keep what I said. According to 1441, war is illegal.

On the argument about the previous resolutions being broken, I must admit that the war can be legal, and that SW's posts are bassically right. I was mistaken on that particular matter.


However, WMD existance in Irak has not been proved, at all. And I think that war could've been avoided had a different path of action been selected. I still think the US decision to go to war at this moment is bassically wrong, even while is legal according to the letter of the UN resolutions.





Beet1e, if CIA had evidence of WMD in Irak, UN inspectors could've been secretly informed to go to a certain place to conduct an investigation by surprise putting no sources in danger. If they had found something, of if they had met any kind of resistance or lack of cooperation to their inspection then I'd thikn you're right.

but that hasn't been done, nor anything similar to that...there's nothing that leads me to think that the UN inspectors were wrong in their reports to the UN SC. And all you have is speculation to toy with.

And supporting a war only having speculation to back up your opinion, is something questionable, at least from my point of view.

[Vermillion]

The UN is a sieve (ie its full of holes) when it comes to information, especially "secret" information.  So I can see a reluctance of any intelligence agency to turn over sensitive information that would compromise the source.

But at this point, such an arguement is moot.  Either he does have weapons and material that is illegal under UN mandates, and they will be revealed in the coming weeks.  Or he doesn't and the US will have some explaining too do.

We'll just have to see who history proves was right.

[RRAM]

Originally posted by Vermillion


We'll just have to see who history proves was right.

as I said before, I honestly hope you are right on the WMD and weapons matter. I will feel much better if this war has been not only legal, but also needed.