This Just In: Iraq Concedes to Inspections... - Page 3

GePap · September 16, 2002, 21:23

Quote:

Originally posted by jimmytrick
Bush rejects Iraqs offer.

"This is not a matter of inspections. It is about disarmament of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and the Iraqi regime's compliance with all other Security Council resolutions.

This is a tactical step by Iraq in hopes of avoiding strong U.N. Security Council action. As such, it is a tactic that will fail.

It is time for the Security Council to act"

Way to lose mr. president! Now, i have no idea what kind of pressure the US is puttin on other members of the Security council to move in a way to declare war, but for the president to reject this out of hand is one quick way of destroying the "all the US wants is to help the UN' persona he created on thursday. Bush is right, that this is just a tactic, but its the best one Iraq could use, and Powell will have a lot more work to get Bush's little vendetta going. I expect the Saudis and other wolrd leaders to hail this UN victory and start planning for a new inspection regime. Also watch for Blair to get pounded the next few days if the takes the same line.

Lincoln · September 16, 2002, 21:33

Bush is calling the shots, not Sadam. the inspections will be on UN terms not Sadam's. The offer was not Sadam's to make although he will have to put up or shut up when the final resolution is passed in a day or two. There will be no war unless Iraq refuses to comply with the upcoming UN resolution. This one will be a firm ultimatum, not another game for Sadam to play with.

Andrew1999 · September 16, 2002, 21:53

Hussein could fulfill every single one of Bush's demands and there will still be a war. Remember, whenever you see anything about this war, that it's not about inspectors, or human rights, or (lol) UN resolutions. It's about a vendetta, pure and simple.

Jon Miller · September 16, 2002, 21:57

it is about Iraq being against the US

pure and simple

Jon Miller

leftover_crack · September 16, 2002, 21:59

ya but the vendetta happened cause of all of those above. Iraq is like teathered goat at this point. The US is T-rex...

No matter. We will still strike Iraq on October 6th.

Kontiki · September 16, 2002, 22:38

Yep, get on with attack. Otherwise, Saddam will just use WMD against Israel and the US just like he did during the first Gulf War.....

Gatekeeper · September 17, 2002, 03:02

I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if, that in the unlikely case the United States did nothing against Iraq, Israel decides to blow the hell out of it. Particularly if Iraq's alleged nuclear ambitions verge on becoming reality.

Gatekeeper

notyoueither · September 17, 2002, 03:28

There is always the Israeli solution...

Leak them the intel of what and where. Let them blow the hell out of it and then shelter them from international sanction, but...

That ain't the point, is it?

The point is an international renegade who has started more than 1 war and lobbed weapons at non involved nations.

The point is that the US has had enough of the bull sh!t of puszy footing around with lunatics from the ME who think that murdering civilians while in plain clothes or being safe behind a foreign capitol is a good idea.

The point is that there has been enough bull sh!t, and that to allow that particularly vile lunatic to gain bigger WMD would be to put the peace of the entire world at stake. What do you think would be the response from Moscow, Beijing, Paris, or Washington were a nuke to go off? Do you think a few million would die? Duh!

Nubclear · September 17, 2002, 03:30

Quote:

Originally posted by Lincoln
Bush is calling the shots, not Sadam. the inspections will be on UN terms not Sadam's. The offer was not Sadam's to make although he will have to put up or shut up when the final resolution is passed in a day or two. There will be no war unless Iraq refuses to comply with the upcoming UN resolution. This one will be a firm ultimatum, not another game for Sadam to play with.

Unless its vetoed.

MarkG · September 17, 2002, 07:39

MarkG · September 17, 2002, 07:53

ZoboZeWarrior · September 17, 2002, 08:04

Nop, Saddam isn't working on his nuke actually.

Saddam was a really bad studient and was lurking at his femal classmate during atomistic lessons ...

Thucydides · September 17, 2002, 08:13

The scary thing is that Doonesbury (as they often are) is pretty close to the truth here. Most people pay only scant attention to the events that lie outside of the there one narrow life, and purposefully ignorant of most things that even a junior high school student should know (Jay Leno q&A is a good example of this, also I've seen plenty of survey's showing how ignorant Americans are concerning basic things like geography, science and history). It's sort of amazing that democracy works at all with such an ignorant populance.

Arrian · September 17, 2002, 09:11

Leno Q&A is set up. They choose the idiotic responses because they are supposedly funny.

That being said, yeah, the average American doesn't know much about the issues w/regard to Iraq. I had a quick debate at work the other day... and ran head-on into "Saddam is evil." Why? He has WoMD! So do we, and we've used 'em too. But he's evil! At which point I gave up.

-Arrian

DinoDoc · September 17, 2002, 10:45

I was hoping for coercive inspections at the very least. What are the chances of that still happening?

C0ckney · September 17, 2002, 11:16

i think saddam has pulled a bit of a flanker here, it's a good delaying tactic and will make UN approval for an attack much more difficult to get..

Chris 62 · September 17, 2002, 11:40

Same old, same old from most here...

This is a MAJOR victory for Bush, he made the UN actually back up a resolution, something NOBODY has been able to do in years.

Now, if Iraq tries ANY kind of obstruction, he can move quickly, because Iraq will have renegged AGAIN.

This could not have worked out better for Bush.

MarkG · September 17, 2002, 11:52

Quote:

Now, if Iraq tries ANY kind of obstruction, he can move quickly

chris, you seem to ignore the fact that bush is ignoring the iraqi statement and wants to move ahead anyway....

SpencerH · September 17, 2002, 12:03

There's no statement by the administration saying they're going ahead with any attack. They've just said that Iraqs ploy is merely delaying tactic (and thats not good enough).

Pekka · September 17, 2002, 12:05

A brilliant move by Saddam. As I earlier predicted he will let them in (though I predicted lots of other solutions as well

), stalling the attack and making it very difficult for the US to build up coalition.

But. There's another side, it can blow up his face. If he lets inspectors now, with full access to what they want and find something, it's war with new allies. There is no way he can avoid the war if they find something. Or if they restrict their inspections. Maybe he's using stall tactics and trusting his luck that nothing is to be found.
Big risks, brilliant play!

Bush would be brilliant if he just smiled and played the game. It's all about the game and how you play it (Triple-H rules). He should call the bluff (if there is any that is). He could make a statement that OK, we'll give you a chance, but this is your last one and if something goes wrong, you are facing attack in the same day. If there are WoMD to be found, it justifies the removal of Saddam completely. If not.. it gets more tricky. But if Bush calls the bluff, he gets coalition. If not, well, it's going to cost a lot since there are only few sharing the costs.

Pekka · September 17, 2002, 12:08

Iraq has also invited lots of young politicians there, at least from Finland. That could mean he's gonna let the inspectors in too, and if kaka hits the fan, he has lots of nice hostages.
I hope no one goes until the sky is clear. If someone goes now, they have a death wish.

MarkG · September 17, 2002, 12:09

ok, so given the latest Bush statement, when the rest of the security council will say "they might mean it, lets send the inspectors", what will be the bush position? "ok, you send the inspectors, meanwhile i'll start bombing"?

Andrew1999 · September 17, 2002, 12:27

Should be interesting in the State Department legal office today. They have to write a resolution that is impossible for Iraq to comply with but not so bald-faced that it's rejected by the UN.

flashback to Austria/Serbia, 1914

walruskkkch · September 17, 2002, 12:30

It appears that Iraq has set the condition that the inspections only apply to military bases. So much for the offer.

Ming · September 17, 2002, 12:33

Quote:

Originally posted by walruskkkch
It appears that Iraq has set the condition that the inspections only apply to military bases. So much for the offer.

Typical... Doesn't that just kind of scream out that there are places he doesn't want inspectors to see.

For a minute there, I actually thought he was pulling a good move. What a moron...

DinoDoc · September 17, 2002, 12:36

Quote:

Originally posted by Pekka
It's all about the game and how you play it

Wrong! It's all about control and who can take it.

walruskkkch · September 17, 2002, 12:37

He designated some 40% of his military bases as "Presidential Palaces" so limiting it so makes the inspectors useless. ALso they will never be able to see the labs in all those "Civilian" buildings.

ZoboZeWarrior · September 17, 2002, 12:39

Maybe Saddam is preparing a devil trick : Inspectors could become Saddam hostage ...

Chris 62 · September 17, 2002, 12:40

Looks like I was correct Mark.

I knew Saddam would attempt to put conditions on it, same old, same old, and since ol Koffi fell over himself thanking Bush, he's going to look awful stupid if he backs out now!

walruskkkch · September 17, 2002, 12:42

Why did anyone expect any less from Saddam?