Worth it's own thread.. by Zid

Post-9/11 Era Forum

EDIT: SORRY ZID, I GAVE PHOTEK THE CREDIT FOR THIS BUT AM TRYING TO CORRECT IT. I LIKE THE WAY YOU THINK![ COLOR=red]ZID[/COLOR]

ZID posted this in another thread and I think it is a shame that it is buried. Those that that are opposed to US involvement simply rehash the same ol' things over and over again but they have still yet to validate their arguments.

Good summarization ZID , hope you don't mind me doing this.

So, I would like to ask, how would any of you proposed to bring this leader, Saddam, to compliance with the UN?

Before answering that...lets go over a couple things.

1. Can't say further Inspections: Why, because with the amount of Inspectors that Iraq would allow to enter at one time will never be enough to do a thorough inspection.

2. Can't say further Sanctions/Embargos: Why, because the three main countries who opposed this conflict are the three main violators of the Sanctions/Embargos...France, Germany, and Russia. Proof you ask? Well, technically speaking, there is no proof, but what is evident is that Iraq has very modern Russian Weaponry (their Tank Killer man pad launchers)...Russia says they haven't sold them directly to Iraq and has further stated that no country they have sold their weapons to, have sold (or provided those weapons) to Iraq, but the fact is evident...Iraq has them. Along with the GPS Jammers from Russia. France has sold repair and spare parts to Iraq for their aircraft. Germany (and Russia) has sent scientist to assist them with their developments...it's been plastered all over the media. Lastly...the sanctions and embargos have only truly hurt who? The Iraqi citizens...Saddam and his friends (and military) have had no impact placed upon them...they bleed their populace to continue to enjoy their lavish lifestyles.

3. Waiting longer, allowing a longer period for inspectors to comb Iraq: This was a very good tactic of the French, Germans, and Russians (unfortunately it backfired on them, they never expected the Coalition to move ahead w/o UN approval)...proposing to give things another several months. Why you ask? Well...1) The heat will become a factor. An extended campaign during the hot summer months, 110+ weather, the three nations opposing the immediate armed intervention (France, Germany, Russia) all knew that the Coalition would be hard pressed to "begin" a campaign in the middle of this type of climate. They knew that if things could be stalled a tad bit longer, it would be at least another 4-6 months minimum before any type of true campaign could begin. They also new that if things were to be drawn out another 6-8 months, the Coalitions own economies could not support leaving that many troops right next door to Iraq, simply could not be afforded.

4. Eventual Armed Intervention to force Saddam to comply: The French, Germans, and Russians never intended to utilize armed intervention....yes they never did, even though they signed up for it, the intent was never there. Why you ask? Their business holdings and interests would never have allowed it, you see, they cannot afford for the Iraqi Regime to change. All of their business ventures would very well be in jeopardy if/when a new government took rule. They needed Saddam and his Regime to stay in power. They felt that they could control him and side track the UN and others long enough to where things would have been forgotten.....in time. Don't believe me? Why then is it, that even now as the UNSG Mr. Kofi Annan does not want the "UN" to have a "major" role (he feels a limited role to meet the immediate needs of the Humanitarian Issues) in the rebuilding of Iraq...France, Germany, and Russia want to be a "major" part in the rebuilding? They have vested interests, they are jockeying for positioin to keep what they have already worked out with an outgoing regime. ***Incidentally, this will be another severe blow to the continued existance of the UN (in my opinion). The UNSG feels the UN shouldn't have a major part in the rebuilding, the French, Germans, and Russians feel the UN should....the US feels the UN shouldn't have a major part...alas, another rift forming. A vote and resolution will be attempted by the French/Germans/Russians, the US will gather who they can and threaten with a veto (very similiar to what the French threatened the coalition with). Someone mentioned WWIII is in the making, now that one ponders on the matters at hand....maybe that is not a far fetched idea.***

So...once we exclude those four ways....tell me, what can we do to make this man comply with the UN?

I agree totally....You cannot make him comply that is why he gets removed........people bring up innocent deaths.....people bring up genocidal sanctions.......But those people need to answer how they would remove Innocent "hostages" being held my a demented murderer without casualties. They cannot answer that without resorting to finger pointing and some sort of slanting of the facts.......We (the US) were wrong in the past as all countries have been. This specific war is not for the US to take anything over but to hand it back to its rightful owners.


I too would like to see if someone can answer photeks post

i don't mind you doing that, but i didn't write that. although i do remember reading that, kudos to the person who wrote it.

Hmmmmm.... I wonder why none of the anti-US posters haven't been able to respond yet?

@HereinBigD

I already answered in other posts as others did.

The difference ?

biased question

1. you don't know what would have been the authorised amount of inspectors ....
biased question

2. on the sanctions and embargo. agree
For the rest: you said it: there is no proof . Weapons from Russia ? do you know that even here in Belgium you can by Russian made guns and weapons ... why ? due to the end of war in Bosnia, Yougoslavia, ....... "their Tank Killer man pad launchers" how much ? if you are ready to sell weapons and others, you will sell 1 or 2 pieces ?.... it comes from somewhere else ....
"Germany (and Russia) has sent scientists" ... as far as I know the scientists you are talking about did by themselves, remember Gerald Bull with the cannon of 1000 mm from Canada .... Is it Canada which sent him in Iraq ? no he went there for money as well as those you are talking about.

Let say they did, watch that report: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2591351.stm

Just a note about the sanctions imposed on Iraq after the 1991 war. It seems many complain about the destructiveness of these sanctions in regards to the death of many Iraqis from starvation and Illness. It seems to me that because of the intransigence of the Iraqi leadership the quickest way to remove those sanctions was to remove the leadership. I suspect one year from now there will be far fewer Iraqi children dieing from malnutrition and illness.

Also a question: Why were children malnurished and without medical care when the one legal hole in the sanctions was for food and medicine???

Another question: How with all the sanctions in place did the government of Iraq manage to build all those statues and palaces for Sadaam?

Paul

Well the answer is simple, they stole a large proportion of the legitimate Iraqi funds for thier own purposes, and all of the illegitimate Iraqi funds coming from oil smuggling, which they had organised and running all the time at every border, and the main port. Also, emergency aid in the form of food and medical supplies weren't even shipped from Iraqi warehouses by the government when they were given them freely.

The Iraqi economy would've been more than capable to manage under the restrictions placed on them by the sanctions, if Saddam and other government officials had not been pocketing whatever they felt they could get away with. I guarantee you that if the sanctions were lifted the Iraqi people would not have been better off, Saddam would've just got riicher and richer.

I started to type a "rebuttal" to nowar...but bouncing btwn webpages pulling in info, thoughts, and ideas.....gah!....the page timed out! (gotta love ya nowar! you make this fun for me....you dig abit and put something up....making me dig and put something up....would be fun to sit down and chat/debate with ya over nice glass of wine)

But I don't think I need to say anything further...

The coalition has done Step 1 of what it said it was going to do....I just hope that everything that has been promised in Step 2 happens.

hope too
I will pm you

Let's all hope the second part of what the coalition has promised to do is accomplished. Bottom line in all this, whether you were for the war or against whether you are Iraqi, American, European, or others is that the Iraqi people be allowed to live their future better than they have lived their recent past.

iraq had its chance 12 yrs than again in 1441 so saddam had its chance, didnt heed and now pays for his mistakes just like the rest of us when we screw up. Only differnce is saddam killed thousands and thousands verse maybe 2000 injuries and casualities caused by this invasion in the end. And now the irqis finally get what all you and me enjoy, FREEDOM whats wrong with everyone enjoying freedom not just you and me far as the un ther all trolls trying to do what everyone wants not what they should be doing. As far as the sanctions, iraq has no one to blame but saddam, over half if not 3/4 of the iraqiis money for himself and his armys., and his palaces, and all of his other luxerys he enjoys. Thats where iraqs money went and iraq was getting help from france,russia and should i keep going ,look at all facts not just what you want than make your decisions based on fact not fiction