You Can Take Your War and Shove It

Let’s wait for the report and facts will be know once and for all..

Iraq: no nuclear evidence

**Blow to US hawks as inspectors draw blank **

Julian Borger in Washington, Brian Whitaker and Richard Norton-Taylor
Saturday January 25, 2003
The Guardian

**The United Nations’ nuclear inspectors will deliver a serious blow on Monday to Washington’s case for going to war with Iraq, telling the world they have found nothing and giving Saddam Hussein good grades for cooperation.
Just as damaging to the US position will be the insistence to the UN security council by the chief nuclear inspector, Mohamed El Baradei, that his team needs several more months to complete its work and that some important testing equipment has only just arrived in the country.

“Their report card will be a ‘B’,” said Mark Gwozdecky, a spokesman for the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which is carrying out the nuclear inspections. “We’ve been getting where and when we want to get, and we’ve been generally successful in getting what we need.” **

Another IAEA official, Melissa Fleming, said that 16 soil samples analysed for radiation had so far proved negative, but added that there were more samples to be taken and that equipment to test for airborne gamma radiation had only just arrived in Iraq.

The IAEA’s assessment in effect knocks away half of the platform upon which the US is hoping to build its case against Saddam Hussein when the security council meets on Monday. The other half was also looking shaky yesterday.

Hans Blix, who is in charge of biological, chemical and missile inspections and who will also present a report, has also called for more time. According to one well-placed UN official, Mr Blix’s inspectors are demanding “several more months” to pursue their operations in Iraq.

“Nobody can imagine the inspectors could do a proper job in eight weeks,” the official said.

However, Mr Blix has been ambivalent about Iraqi cooperation, pointing out Baghdad’s objection to his inspectors using American-piloted U2 spy planes to search Iraq for banned weapons. Mr Blix is also unhappy with the refusal of Iraqi scientists to undergo interviews without a government minder present.

The Pentagon has alleged that the scientists and their families are being threatened with execution if they cooperate with the inspectors. Yesterday, the White House spokesman said it was “unacceptable” that the scientists had not been made available for private interview.

In the battle for public perceptions, the Bush administration has been conducting an intense media campaign in an attempt to ensure the headlines from Monday’s crucial reports by the weapons inspectors will portray Iraq as having failed to disarm.

If the coverage emphasises Baghdad’s cooperation and the absence of a “smoking gun” the administration will have an even harder task convincing the rest of the world and the US public that the inspections should be cut short to pave the way for war.

Nearly 70% of Americans questioned recently said the inspectors should have months to finish their work.

“Is the glass half full or half empty. That will be the question on Monday,” said a diplomat from one of the security council member nations.

An administration official said yesterday that if the inspectors produce new evidence of clandestine Iraqi attempts to produce weapons of mass destruction, the administration would consider giving them more time. The implication was that if the inspectors have little to declare on Monday, the US will reject their work as pointless.

In that case, the Bush administration will be forced to rely on presenting its own intelligence to justify going to war. John Bolton, US undersecretary of state - and a leading hawk - said Washington had “very convincing” evidence of an extensive Iraqi programme for the production of banned weapons which it will reveal “at an appropriate time”.

The evidence includes long-range missiles which Iraq has been banned from keeping since the 1991 Gulf war, he said.

The previous day, the deputy defence minister, Paul Wolfowitz, said that Iraq had admitted trying to produce rocket fuel of a type suitable for ballistic missiles. But analysts said the US case would have to be more convincing to change minds in Europe and much of the US.

“If the Americans wanted this to be the linchpin for building the coalition, it would have to be very conclusive evidence, such as photographs,” said Toby Dodge, an Iraq specialist at Warwick University. “Either this is a well-timed grand finale, or they don’t have anything. My first instinct is that if the US had conclusive evidence we’d see it now.”

An Iraqi diplomat also highlighted Washington’s coyness about disclosure. “What do they mean by an ‘appropriate time’? What is a more appropriate time than while the inspectors are preparing their report,” he asked.

Mr Bolton’s remarks came as an Iraqi opposition group produced documents suggesting that Iraq might be preparing to use chemical weapons in a war with the US. The papers, appear to show that elite Iraqi forces have been equipped with chemical warfare suits and a drug that can protect against nerve gas.

Exactly. American LIES are being exposed before the world for all to see…now I am sure the US will start talking down the UN and start going on about going it alone.

Iraq to Get Good Grade by Nuke Inspectors](Yahoo News: Latest and Breaking News, Headlines, Live Updates, and More)

The inspectors where not ordered to find evidence by res.1440,the res. calls for Iraq to comply and disarm,the inspectors job is to supervise that disarmement.
It is quite clever for the lefties in europe to try this ploy of no smoking gun but i think it is going to end up back-firing on them.
Iraq was ordered to disarm,with verification by inspectors,not to play cat and mouse with the UN.
There is no way that one could expect a couple of hundred inspectors,to find anything that Iraq didnt want them to and that is not what the res. demands of them in the first place.
There is actually no reason for another res. The Iraqi
s are in breach of the first one already and now they are going to suffer severe consequences as outlined by 1441.

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Braveheart: *
*
...now they are going to suffer severe consequences as outlined by 1441.
[/QUOTE]
**
BraveHeart, what's the severest consequence as outlined by 1441?

...false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq’s obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraphs 11 and 12... Don't have a URL at the moment but the Resolution is accessible via the UN website; you have to go through the SCR section, i think. This is from paragraph four.

IF Iraq is found to be in alleged breach of its obligations, 1441 doesn't give ANY country the right to attack Iraq. The severest consequence is merely that the breach will be reported to the Security Council, and from there further negotiations will be held. 1441 doesn't give any country the right to invade Iraq, breach or no breach.

Whatever you say N,I aint argueing the words or the understanding of those words with u,we would be here all night.

However i notice you dont argue with the general point of my post,which is the duties of the inspectors and their duties as laid out in the res.

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by Braveheart:

It is quite clever for the lefties in europe to try this ploy of no smoking gun but i think it is going to end up back-firing on them.

[/QUOTE]

So all those Catholic and Protestant church leaders publicly opposing this war mongering are all lefties are they? :)

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Braveheart: *
Whatever you say N,I aint argueing the words or the understanding of those words with u,we would be here all night. However i notice you dont argue with the general point of my post,which is the duties of the inspectors and their duties as laid out in the res.
[/QUOTE]

Let's have no hard feelings, BraveHeart. Whatever you say, i hope one day, for the sake of Iraq's kids, you are right and i was always dead wrong. i doubt it, but i hope so.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Malik73: *

So all those Catholic and Protestant church leaders publicly opposing this war mongering are all lefties are they? :)
[/QUOTE]

If thats what you want yes,they are all lefties and worse that that the organised religions are the biggest cause of war on this planet,which is why i stay well away from them.They speak of peace all the time until it breaks out,then it will be out there blessing all their holy soldiers,cause god forbid their religion will lose.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Braveheart: *

If thats what you want yes,they are all lefties and worse that that the organised religions are the biggest cause of war on this planet,which is why i stay well away from them.
[/QUOTE]

The protesting Catholic and Protestant clergy say making war is against their faith, and their faith teaches them peace. You are obviously disagreeing with that?

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Malik73: *

The protesting Catholic and Protestant clergy say making war is against their faith, and their faith teaches them peace. You are obviously disagreeing with that?
[/QUOTE]

Oh yes,most vehemently! They are hypocrites in the regard of war and peace.