Sponsor Message:
Non Aviation Forum
My Starred Topics | Profile | New Topic | Forum Index | Help | Search 
"Monday Will Be A Moment Of Truth For The World"  
User currently offlineTodaReisinger From Switzerland, joined Mar 2001, 2804 posts, RR: 1
Posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 8 hours ago) and read 2433 times:

That's how Pres. Bush opened his speech at the Azores summit.....



http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/03/16/sprj.irq.main/index.html


I bitterly miss the livery that should never have been changed (repetition...)
73 replies: All unread, showing first 25:
 
User currently offline777236ER From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 1, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2424 times:

Nice to see that democracy is only acceptable when it favours US wishes.

User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5977 posts, RR: 3
Reply 2, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2413 times:

Is it just me, or was it the same old phrases that was used again? Iraq has WMD, Iraq is not disarming, a war will liberate the Iraqi people.

User currently offlineAviatsiya From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 3, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 7 hours ago) and read 2401 times:

Here is a transcript of Bush's speech below....



User currently offlineStratofish From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 1051 posts, RR: 5
Reply 4, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 6 hours ago) and read 2335 times:

The "emergency Azores summit". The emergency: 3 guys whining "f*** the world won´t give us our war, we want our war, emergency, ...our war!!!" (and a good job in the oil industry-in the case of Mr. Aznar)

The truth is this is a decleration of war against the UN. And it´s not acceptable! But all great empires have fallen, Mr. Julius C. Bush.

Stratofish



The Metro might be the Sub(optimal)way
User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 202 posts, RR: 1
Reply 5, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2315 times:

The truth is this is a decleration of war against the UN.

Hardly. It's a request for the U.N. to show that their resolutions have meaning, and consequences if not followed. It's that simple.


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 6, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2302 times:

Agree with TWAL1011. If you really believe it's a declaration of war on the UN, then you have to conclude that the UN is taking the side of Iraq, which it hardly has, despite it constantly moving the line in the sand when it comes to that woebegone nation.

The U.S. is simply sticking to it's postion, as is France, Russia, China, and others. Are those nations declaring war on the U.S. by opposing it's position in the UN? Hardly, and conversely, the same is true for the US.


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 7, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2284 times:

Now it's a done deal...I am filled with a sense of dread.

User currently offlineCPH-R From Denmark, joined May 2001, 5977 posts, RR: 3
Reply 8, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2278 times:

Then at the same time, the UN could reinforce the demand that Israel allows the Palestinian refugees to return or that they be given a compensation as per resolution 194 and a whole lot more.

But then again, why would the US want that to be reinforced?


User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 9, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2275 times:

There is no real question of legality of this war. Any of the past 16 resolutions call for serious consequences for failure to comply. There is nothing illegal about it.

The real important issue is that we are about to enter the era of preemptive war. That is the unnerving part to me.



User currently offlineSonic From Lithuania, joined Jan 2000, 1670 posts, RR: 1
Reply 10, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2271 times:

Well, even if UN would now approve war against it's wishes (which is actually very hardly possible, since I doubt France or Russia would drop their opinions "to save UN"), it would still be meaningless. The decition not to sue American soldiers in international war crime court already showed that.

In my opinion now it is best for Lithuania to leave UN and all the resolutions it accepted. Because nobody actually wants to be in organization, which isn't working and furthermore, which resolutions only applies to certain countries and situations. Certain countries can't expect any support because support because "the leader" dislikes the support. This is especially true about smaller countries.


User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 11, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2268 times:

Cheney saying it's "a possibiity" that Iraq will launch it's own pre-emptive strikes may just be wishful thinking, although I personally would welcome Iraq being that stupid. If Iraq were to launch an attack, the world would, reluctantly, I believe, support a US-led invasion of Iraq at that point, seeing thta there's no other choice. But I think the chances of that happening are slim and none, and slim just left town.

Despite the weather that will start tomake an invasion difficult, Bush should put France on the spot and immediately agree to their 30-day timetable for Iraq to fully comply with inspections. Although I believe France is doing this in the hopes that by mid-April, an invasion will not be very feesable with hotter weather arriving, I would accept it immediately if I were Bush. It's definitely a way to form more of a consensus on the issue. Then, in 30 days if France again moves the line in the sand, then you go without the UN.


User currently offlineSchoenorama From Spain, joined Apr 2001, 2440 posts, RR: 26
Reply 12, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2260 times:

Resolution 1441 DOES NOT automatically authorize the use of war. A new resolution is needed for that. If a war is launched on Iraq by Spain, UK and the US without a specific resolution which authorizes the use of force, Spain, the UK and the US will be in breach of the UNSC and international law and, IMO, could be considered as "rogue states".

It is 'funny' that the text of the Azores summit says "Saddam's defiance of United Nations Security Council resolutions demanding the disarmament of his nuclear, chemical, biological, and long-range missile capacity has led to sanctions on Iraq and has undermined the authority of the UN, when these 3 countries are also defying the UNSC and undermining seriously the authority of the UN.

Another interesting passage of the summit text is:"We will fight terrorism in all its forms. Iraq must never again be a haven for terrorists of any kind." I thought Iraq's supposed links with terrorism was cleared ages ago?

I'm affraid tomorrow the world will change, even more than it did on 9/11!









Utinam logica falsa tuam philosophiam totam suffodiant!
User currently offlineN79969 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 13, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2255 times:

I agree with you Alpha 1. I think that we need more diplomatic cover than we have. I wish that Bush had accepted the Chilean proposal.

User currently offlineKeesje From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 14, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2241 times:

If there is no second resolution Belgium will not support any action.

they will close their airspace for US military.




User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 202 posts, RR: 1
Reply 15, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 5 hours ago) and read 2238 times:

Anyone here think that Saddam posses any nuclear devices? I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that I believe he does indeed. It's nothing more than a hunch, and does not influence my opinion towards need for force in Iraq. I'm just putting it on the record.

User currently offlineCyril B From France, joined Jun 2001, 396 posts, RR: 2
Reply 16, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2235 times:

Chirac's proposal (a 30 to 60 days deadline, if agreed by the UN inspectors) marks France's efforts to find a solution.
Chirac went it alone (Schroeder and Putin refused to back his proposal), but Powell undermined it saying it was "no real effort". It just shows that the US rejects diplomacy, they want war immediately.


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 17, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2234 times:

Resolution 1441 DOES NOT automatically authorize the use of war. A new resolution is needed for that.

But Resolution 687 does. It made the 1991 cease-fire conditional on Iraq's unconditional and complete disarmement, to be confirmed by inspections. 12 years later, Inspectors still cannot say that Iraq has disarmed, so the Gulf War never truely ended, in a legal sense.

Charles


User currently offlineCfalk From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 18, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2221 times:

Chirac's proposal (a 30 to 60 days deadline, if agreed by the UN inspectors) marks France's efforts to find a solution.

But they know that military action is virtually impossible in 30 or 60 days. They are simply hoping to delay the US until weather conditions will no longer allow action to be taken, even if Saddam withdraws all cooperation.

France wants the US to be faced with the situation of keeping a large force in the Kuwaiti desert for 8 months, unable to exercise effectively, and hampering Kuwait's own economic activities. Faced with this situation, the US will probably have to withdraw the forces back to the U.S..

If the forces go home, Americans will be unlikely to permit a second try next year, especially in an election year.

In such a situation, Saddam stays in power, which is what France is clearly working for.

Charles


User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 202 posts, RR: 1
Reply 19, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2211 times:

Chirac's proposal (a 30 to 60 days deadline, if agreed by the UN inspectors) marks France's efforts to find a solution.

Chirac's proposal would delay the use of force to a time where it's difficulty would rise on the order of a magnatude. You know it, I know, everyone knows it. A delay of 30 to 60 days means a delay of a year.


User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 202 posts, RR: 1
Reply 20, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2207 times:

Cfalk must have been posting at the same time I was typing, LOL.

User currently offlineStratofish From Germany, joined Sep 2001, 1051 posts, RR: 5
Reply 21, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2205 times:

Seems like the UN resolutions leave room to interpret what is compliance.

AFAIK Hans Blix has issued a proposed timeplan for a as fast as possible disarment of Iraq. At least this amount of time should be given before starting military action.
At the moment diplomacy itself, which has helped to save millions of lives in the past centuries, has been hijacked by Bush, Blair and Aznar.
The case is clear: a later start of the war would mean fighting in higher temperatures and they at least wanna try a quick invasion as they have promised to the American public.
Btw, the destruction of illegal weapons in Iraq continues as we speak, but "we see no compliance on the Iraqi side" (Powell).



The Metro might be the Sub(optimal)way
User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 202 posts, RR: 1
Reply 22, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2199 times:

Btw, the destruction of illegal weapons in Iraq continues as we speak

Saddam said today that he has no illegal weapons. Go figure.


User currently offlineTWAL1011 From United States of America, joined Nov 2003, 202 posts, RR: 1
Reply 23, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2190 times:

The thing that really bugs me about this whole Iraq thing is that I know that there are people out there who are hoping that things go poorly for the coalition forces in the event of a war. Sadly, these desires are driven by nothing more than a simple hatred of Bush. Sort of a "As long as it makes Bush look bad, it's okay by me" attitude.

User currently offlineAlpha 1 From , joined Dec 1969, posts, RR:
Reply 24, posted (11 years 4 months 2 weeks 4 hours ago) and read 2176 times:

It just shows that the US rejects diplomacy, they want war immediately.

Cyril, had the U.S. wanted war "immediately", it would have launched an attack already. The fact is that we-meaning the world community-has been dancing this dance about Iraq for 12 YEARS AND 17 RESOLUTIONS! How the hell can you say ANYONE has rejected diplomacy, when the diplomacy has been going on for 12 years? That's just crazy!

Again, I would accept France's proposal IMMEDIATELY. Then in 30 days, if France waffles yet again, then there's no doubt what their intention is-to forstall an invasion at all cost, to keep THEIR economic interests paramount, even if it means leaving the Nut of Baghdad in power.


25 ADG : 17 resolutions huh? that means he has only 49 more to go before he has breached as many as some other country we know.... If Bush wanted diplomacy he'
26 Airplanetire : A hundred bucks says that we (the US) are at war by Wednesday, March 19. Let me say why I think this is true. On Monday, unless something changes, the
27 Stratofish : "As long as it makes Bush look bad, it's okay by me" I do hope things go steep downhill for Bush. But I do not hope for any bloodshed on either side.
28 Dc10guy : Guys, I got a sick feeling in my stomach that the wars going to start Monday. I guess its like that guy said once," If your going to get raped and you
29 TWAL1011 : I do hope things go steep downhill for Bush. What kind of things? Economic downturn? More terrorist attacks? What?
30 CX747 : Accepting France's 30 day proposal would lead to a year long postponment of the war due to weather. Therefore it is not acceptable. The U.N. has passe
31 TWAL1011 : Guys, I got a sick feeling in my stomach that the wars going to start Monday. Guys, I've got a sick feeling it's going to start soon, too. Despite wha
32 N312RC : Bush has been ringing the damn war bell for weeks now. I think he's trying to scare Saddam into exile or something. If a war actually starts I dont th
33 Klaus : TWAL1011: Despite what you think, no one (yes, even "cowboy" Bush) wants this to turn to war. There is only one person who has any real ability to sto
34 Hamfist : 777236ER, Nice to see that democracy is only acceptable when it favours US wishes. UMM...wasn't that YOUR Prime Minister about two podiums to Bush's l
35 Thumper : Schoenorama:Resolution 1441 DOES NOT automatically authorize the use of war. A new resolution is needed for that. If a war is launched on Iraq by Spai
36 Silverfox : Having watched the 2003 version of the Three Stooges, correct me if i am wrong but is the message 'We want you to vote yes on a war so we can go in,BU
37 TWAL1011 : Klaus, that analogy doesn't even make sense.
38 CX747 : Democracy is having a voice and being allowed to voice it. France, Germany and Russia have all had their chance to voice their opinions. There opinion
39 Post contains links Schoenorama : To Cfalk: "But Resolution 687 does. It made the 1991 cease-fire conditional on Iraq's unconditional and complete disarmement, to be confirmed by inspe
40 Yyz717 : I am filled with a sense of dread. Only just now? Haven't you felt a sense of dread for the last 12 years during which time Saddam has been gassing Ku
41 David B. : Oh, you mean Israel ADG? The only democracy in the Middle East? I'll support democratic Israel anytime over Iraq. So that means they can do whatever t
42 N79969 : Yyz717, There are 200,000 Americans (not Canadians) about to engage in combat. Some will not come home. Hence my sense of dread.
43 David B. : How many canadian troops are in the ME right now? How many are going to fight in Iraq?
44 Yyz717 : There are 200,000 Americans (not Canadians) about to engage in combat. I know. I'm ashamed of my country's noncommital stance, as are many Canadians.
45 Post contains images David B. : It's a noble & correct cause disarming a tyrant for the betterment of humankind, despite a vocal minority of tyrant/terror apologists in the West (who
46 Arsenal@LHR : I know. I'm ashamed of my country's noncommital stance, as are many Canadians What's there to be ashamed of? Where's the shame in opposing something y
47 Yyz717 : What's there to be ashamed of? Canada should be standing shoulder-to-shoulder with its neighbour & best friend in their hour of need, as we did in WW1
48 Arsenal@LHR : Canada should be standing shoulder-to-shoulder with its neighbour & best friend in their hour of need, as we did in WW1, WW2, the Korean War, Gulf War
49 CX747 : Yyz717, I thank you for your kind post. I'm proud to have Canada has an allie and a friend even though we are disagreeing on this current conflict. In
50 Post contains images David B. : Tell that to the families of the 100 Canadian victims of 9-11. An Al-Qaeda attack on any Western country is an attack on all of them. Yea, tell that t
51 Yyz717 : the US was under DIRECT threat, this is not the case now. The US didn't think it was under direct attack either, on Sept 10, 2001. That changed 24 hou
52 CX747 : YYz717, I was trying to pay you a compliment! Race has nothing to do with it! I was meerly stating that the my love in life is a blond girl from Toron
53 Cyril B : I guess it is nothing new in the European continent. I believe your country found out first hand in the 1940s what happens when you appease dictators.
54 VonRichtofen : Emergency summit addressing only countries that agree with the US? What's the point? If he's trying to convince other countries that war is justified
55 Yyz717 : Oops, sorry CX747. It's just open-season on right-wing blue-eyed blond white heterosexual Protestant males (such as I) in our overly-PC world. Thought
56 CX747 : I don't think that the U.S. gives money or food to the Korea currently. As for regime change, President Bush has stated time and time again that that
57 Yyz717 : Actually, over the past 5 years the US has been a primary contributant of foodstuffs to North Korea. The US also continues to heavily subsidize the So
58 Sonic : True democracies in the middle east: 0 (In Israel Palestinians has few rights and same for Kurds in Turkey; Armenia qualifies for this listing if you
59 CX747 : Well, greetings then from another right wing, blond haired, blue eyed, heterosexual, Protestant male. I'm not quite sure how Canada produced such a fi
60 David B. : Sonic is right. There are 0 true democracies in the middle east. Israel is a theocracy, not a true democracy.
61 Yyz717 : Israel is a theocracy, not a true democracy. Not true. Israeli Arabs and Christians have full voting rights. Israel is a democracy in every sense.
62 Sonic : Yyz717, only voting rights doesn't qualifies democracy. Shortly after civil war blacks gained (officially) voting and all othe rights equal to ones of
63 Post contains images EA CO AS : Then at the same time, the UN could reinforce the demand that Israel allows the Palestinian refugees to return or that they be given a compensation as
64 ADG : Israel is a democracy in every sense. and thus in one statement validates what many of us are thinking about him. You do realise that even the America
65 Go Canada! : Then at the same time, the UN could reinforce the demand that Israel allows the Palestinian refugees to return or that they be given a compensation as
66 Post contains links Go Canada! : http://www.thisislondon.com/haveyoursay/polls/?vote=yes&itemId=3850481&qid=3850492&aid=3850498&display=true A poll for the london evening standard say
67 ADG : You'd be hard pressed finding any truth in any of this situation. However, the attack is now imminent as the US has warned the UN to get their people
68 Go Canada! : adg, your right, it looks like war is very likely.this situtation has been caused by the position of france and saddam hussien.no-one wanted this war
69 Post contains links Go Canada! : "Saddam Hussein has paid out thousands of dollars to families of Palestinians killed in fighting with Israel. Relatives of at least one suicide attack
70 Arsenal@LHR : Arsenal@LHR: Appeasement of dictators. I guess it is nothing new in the European continent. I believe your country found out first hand in the 1940s w
71 Yyz717 : So trying to find a solution through diplomatic channels without resorting to violence is "appeasement"? That's what the US has been doing to date. It
72 Arsenal@LHR : That's what the US has been doing to date. It hasn't worked, so now it's time for war. The Euro-terror-apologists only believe in endless appeasement.
73 Post contains links Krushny : Now that Israel has been brought into this thread, it is interesting to see that Blair and Aznar are asking the US to press Israel for an agreement w
Top Of Page
Forum Index

This topic is archived and can not be replied to any more.

Printer friendly format

Similar topics:More similar topics...
Will Germany Be Ready For The World Cup? posted Fri Jan 13 2006 18:58:38 by Derico
Germans To Learn English For The World Cup posted Tue May 23 2006 21:00:51 by TheSonntag
I Just Got Tickets For The World Cup... YES! posted Thu Apr 20 2006 11:47:04 by TheSonntag
Is The German Team Ready For The World Cup posted Thu Mar 2 2006 00:08:56 by BR076
Would-be Bride Throws Party For The Homeless posted Fri Jul 1 2005 00:56:26 by Rsmith6621a
"A Donation Will Be Made On You Behalf" posted Tue Dec 21 2004 17:32:29 by YooYoo
Blairs Moment Of Truth posted Sat Mar 1 2003 19:47:32 by GDB
Canberras Day Of Terror (For The Aussies) posted Wed Jan 29 2003 02:32:07 by ADG
Japanese Dictionary For The World Cup posted Wed Jun 19 2002 15:18:25 by Racko
Slovenia Qualifies For The World Cup posted Wed Nov 14 2001 21:21:28 by PHX-LJU