No WMD in Iraq

[SlowwHand]

continued

- UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall determine the composition of their
inspection teams and ensure that these teams are composed of the most
qualified and experienced experts available;

- All UNMOVIC and IAEA personnel shall enjoy the privileges and
immunities, corresponding to those of experts on mission, provided in the
Convention on Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations and the
Agreement on the Privileges and Immunities of the IAEA;

- UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have unrestricted rights of entry into
and out of Iraq, the right to free, unrestricted, and immediate movement to
and from inspection sites, and the right to inspect any sites and buildings,
including immediate, unimpeded, unconditional, and unrestricted access to
Presidential Sites equal to that at other sites, notwithstanding the
provisions of resolution 1154 (1998);

- UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to be provided by Iraq the
names of all personnel currently and formerly associated with Iraq's
chemical, biological, nuclear, and ballistic missile programmes and the
associated research, development, and production facilities;

- Security of UNMOVIC and IAEA facilities shall be ensured by
sufficient United Nations security guards;

- UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to declare, for the
purposes of freezing a site to be inspected, exclusion zones, including
surrounding areas and transit corridors, in which Iraq will suspend ground
and aerial movement so that nothing is changed in or taken out of a site
being inspected;

- UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the free and unrestricted use and
landing of fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft, including manned and unmanned
reconnaissance vehicles;

- UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right at their sole discretion
verifiably to remove, destroy, or render harmless all prohibited weapons,
subsystems, components, records, materials, and other related items, and the
right to impound or close any facilities or equipment for the production
thereof; and

- UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to free import and use of
equipment or materials for inspections and to seize and export any
equipment, materials, or documents taken during inspections, without search
of UNMOVIC or IAEA personnel or official or personal baggage;

8. Decides further that Iraq shall not take or threaten
hostile acts directed against any representative or personnel of the United
Nations or the IAEA or of any Member State taking action to uphold any
Council resolution;

9. Requests the Secretary-General immediately to notify Iraq
of this resolution, which is binding on Iraq; demands that Iraq confirm
within seven days of that notification its intention to comply fully with
this resolution; and demands further that Iraq cooperate immediately,
unconditionally, and actively with UNMOVIC and the IAEA;

10. Requests all Member States to give full support to UNMOVIC
and the IAEA in the discharge of their mandates, including by providing any
information related to prohibited programmes or other aspects of their
mandates, including on Iraqi attempts since 1998 to acquire prohibited
items, and by recommending sites to be inspected, persons to be interviewed,
conditions of such interviews, and data to be collected, the results of
which shall be reported to the Council by UNMOVIC and the IAEA;

11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the
Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any
interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by
Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations
regarding inspections under this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in
accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation
and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council
resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;

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;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.




Annex



Text of Blix/El-Baradei letter









United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission



The Executive Chairman

International Atomic Energy Agency





The Director General







8 October 2002



Dear General Al-Saadi,



During our recent meeting in Vienna, we discussed practical
arrangements that are prerequisites for the resumption of inspections in
Iraq by UNMOVIC and the IAEA. As you recall, at the end of our meeting in
Vienna we agreed on a statement which listed some of the principal results
achieved, particularly Iraq's acceptance of all the rights of inspection
provided for in all of the relevant Security Council resolutions. This
acceptance was stated to be without any conditions attached.



During our 3 October 2002 briefing to the Security Council,
members of the Council suggested that we prepare a written document on all
of the conclusions we reached in Vienna. This letter lists those conclusions
and seeks your confirmation thereof. We shall report accordingly to the
Security Council.



In the statement at the end of the meeting, it was clarified
that UNMOVIC and the IAEA will be granted immediate, unconditional and
unrestricted access to sites, including what was termed "sensitive sites" in
the past. As we noted, however, eight presidential sites have been the
subject of special procedures under a Memorandum of Understanding of 1998.
Should these sites be subject, as all other sites, to immediate,
unconditional and unrestricted access, UNMOVIC and the IAEA would conduct
inspections there with the same professionalism.























H.E. General Amir H. Al-Saadi
Advisor
Presidential Office
Baghdad

Iraq




We confirm our understanding that UNMOVIC and the IAEA have
the right to determine the number of inspectors required for access to any
particular site. This determination will be made on the basis of the size
and complexity of the site being inspected. We also confirm that Iraq will
be informed of the designation of additional sites, i.e. sites not declared
by Iraq or previously inspected by either UNSCOM or the IAEA, through a
Notification of Inspection (NIS) provided upon arrival of the inspectors at
such sites.



Iraq will ensure that no proscribed material, equipment,
records or other relevant items will be destroyed except in the presence of
UNMOVIC and/or IAEA inspectors, as appropriate, and at their request.



UNMOVIC and the IAEA may conduct interviews with any person
in Iraq whom they believe may have information relevant to their mandate.
Iraq will facilitate such interviews. It is for UNMOVIC and the IAEA to
choose the mode and location for interviews.



The National Monitoring Directorate (NMD) will, as in the
past, serve as the Iraqi counterpart for the inspectors. The Baghdad Ongoing
Monitoring and Verification Centre (BOMVIC) will be maintained on the same
premises and under the same conditions as was the former Baghdad Monitoring
and Verification Centre. The NMD will make available services as before,
cost free, for the refurbishment of the premises.



The NMD will provide free of cost: (a) escorts to facilitate
access to sites to be inspected and communication with personnel to be
interviewed; (b) a hotline for BOMVIC which will be staffed by an English
speaking person on a 24 hour a day/seven days a week basis; (c) support in
terms of personnel and ground transportation within the country, as
requested; and (d) assistance in the movement of materials and equipment at
inspectors' request (construction, excavation equipment, etc.). NMD will
also ensure that escorts are available in the event of inspections outside
normal working hours, including at night and on holidays.



Regional UNMOVIC/IAEA offices may be established, for
example, in Basra and Mosul, for the use of their inspectors. For this
purpose, Iraq will provide, without cost, adequate office buildings, staff
accommodation, and appropriate escort personnel.



UNMOVIC and the IAEA may use any type of voice or data
transmission, including satellite and/or inland networks, with or without
encryption capability. UNMOVIC and the IAEA may also install equipment in
the field with the capability for transmission of data directly to the
BOMVIC, New York and Vienna (e.g. sensors, surveillance cameras). This will
be facilitated by Iraq and there will be no interference by Iraq with
UNMOVIC or IAEA communications.



Iraq will provide, without cost, physical protection of all
surveillance equipment, and construct antennae for remote transmission of
data, at the request of UNMOVIC and the IAEA. Upon request by UNMOVIC
through the NMD, Iraq will allocate frequencies for communications
equipment.



Iraq will provide security for all UNMOVIC and IAEA
personnel. Secure and suitable accommodations will be designated at normal
rates by Iraq for these personnel. For their part, UNMOVIC and the IAEA will
require that their staff not stay at any accommodation other than those
identified in consultation with Iraq.



On the use of fixed-wing aircraft for transport of personnel
and equipment and for inspection purposes, it was clarified that aircraft
used by UNMOVIC and IAEA staff arriving in Baghdad may land at Saddam
International Airport. The points of departure of incoming aircraft will be
decided by UNMOVIC. The Rasheed airbase will continue to be used for UNMOVIC
and IAEA helicopter operations. UNMOVIC and Iraq will establish air liaison
offices at the airbase. At both Saddam International Airport and Rasheed
airbase, Iraq will provide the necessary support premises and facilities.
Aircraft fuel will be provided by Iraq, as before, free of charge.

On the wider issue of air operations in Iraq, both fixed-wing
and rotary, Iraq will guarantee the safety of air operations in its air
space outside the no-fly zones. With regard to air operations in the no-fly
zones, Iraq will take all steps within its control to ensure the safety of
such operations.



Helicopter flights may be used, as needed, during inspections
and for technical activities, such as gamma detection, without limitation in
all parts of Iraq and without any area excluded. Helicopters may also be
used for medical evacuation.



On the question of aerial imagery, UNMOVIC may wish to resume
the use of U-2 or Mirage overflights. The relevant practical arrangements
would be similar to those implemented in the past.



As before, visas for all arriving staff will be issued at the
point of entry on the basis of the UN Laissez-Passer or UN Certificate; no
other entry or exit formalities will be required. The aircraft passenger
manifest will be provided one hour in advance of the arrival of the aircraft
in Baghdad. There will be no searching of UNMOVIC or IAEA personnel or of
official or personal baggage. UNMOVIC and the IAEA will ensure that their
personnel respect the laws of Iraq restricting the export of certain items,
for example, those related to Iraq's national cultural heritage. UNMOVIC and
the IAEA may bring into, and remove from, Iraq all of the items and
materials they require, including satellite phones and other equipment. With
respect to samples, UNMOVIC and IAEA will, where feasible, split samples so
that Iraq may receive a portion while another portion is kept for reference
purposes. Where appropriate, the organizations will send the samples to more
than one laboratory for analysis.



We would appreciate your confirmation of the above as a
correct reflection of our talks in Vienna.



Naturally, we may need other practical arrangements when
proceeding with inspections. We would expect in such matters, as with the
above, Iraq's co-operation in all respect.




Yours sincerely,



(Signed)
(Signed)
Hans Blix
Mohamed ElBaradei
Executive Chairman
Director General
United Nations Monitoring,
International Atomic Energy Agency
Verification and Inspection Commission

[Japher]

Sloww, facts are beside the point

By the way, how many avatar changes does that make this month?

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Jac de Molay
Lies, deception, and completely botched intelligence notwithstanding, we got rid of a big bad meany and now the world can rejoice.

Don't ask the hard questions of why the reasons for war were so badly misrepresented. Go back to your regularly scheduled episode of Friends.

You're only partially right.

Some semblance of stability needs to be set up in Iraq. Then I fervently hope we tackle some more horrendoes regimes like Burma. It's a forlorn hope, but it's a hope nonetheless.

The reasons for war, at least as far as I'm concerned, were more than just putative WMDS. I'm capable of forming my own opinions, thank you.

Incidentally, "Friends" is for girls.

[Japher]

Incidentally, "Friends" is for girls.

Or guys who like girls

[Q Classic]

how does this defend your arguments that this war was fought on humanitarian grounds? at least, as the rationale, pre-war?

[Jac de Molay]

Originally posted by Japher


If what was said was based off of botched intelligence would that still make what was said a lie?

Ok, it was either a lie or a major intelligence f*ck-up- take your pick.

Either way, it completely undermines the notion of "imminent threat" as the major reason for going to war. The adminstration played on fear- something it has a knack for.

"Patient", something many jackasses in the country have not been.

Well, I hope you have the patience of the Dalai Lama himself, then. Because we're gonna be in that sinkhole for a long, long time.

[SlowwHand]

Originally posted by Japher
Sloww, facts are beside the point

By the way, how many avatar changes does that make this month?

Don't I know it ? A truer statement, I've not seen here.
I'm keeping this avatar for a while.
"A while". That's one of those "it's all relative" terms.

[SlowwHand]

Jac, Jac, Jac.
You poor lost soul.

[Japher]

how does this defend your arguments that this war was fought on humanitarian grounds? at least, as the rationale, pre-war?

To me, and I know others will disagree, that pre-war justification stem from the 9-11 attacks and stood as a retaliation to the terrorist cells that conducted it, as well as other terrorist acts since 1991.

If that is not enough, I was for the war with the intelligence received about Saddam's WoMD stance and his Al Quidadada links. Now that we "know" it is not true (something I am still in denial over), to me, does not debunk the past - hind sight IS 20/20...

If that is not enough. Reports show Saddam bluffed about his WoMD, thus the "intelligence" and "threat" stemed from the horses mouth itself. If he didn't want to get hurt he shouldn't of picked on the big boys.

If that is not enough his lack of consecions to 1441 didn't help either. He had violated a cease fire agreement that required him to allow weapons inspectors to observe the dismantling of his weapons - he did not comply... Wasn't there a "no fly zone" ordinance that he didn't honor too?

If that is not enough and we want to only look at this from today's stand point and not remember where we stood but 1 year ago then his acts of genocide more than adequately justify the attacks, IMO.

If that is not enough, then that is to bad and you are not an American, an upholder of UN sanctions and laws, an interpreter of facts, a brave entity that will not be threatened, nor a humanitarian...

Sorry if I offend anyone, but that is how I see it. I will not fall victim to revisionist history that so many of you are so quick to destroy...

[Bugs ****ing Bunny]

Originally posted by Q Cubed
how does this defend your arguments that this war was fought on humanitarian grounds? at least, as the rationale, pre-war?

Just check the archives at HRWatch.

HRWatch has an in-depth feature on Anfal. It's not pleasant reading. It doesn't even take into account the repression of the Marsh Arabs either.

In the months before the invasion, people voicing criticism of the Ba'athists were having their tongues cut out. Whatever your views on the WMD, no-one sane could describe Saddam's regime as anything other than utterly monstrous.

Result? He's out with a damned low bodycount.

[Q Classic]

see, i buy the war was fought in the interest of defense. i didn't completely agree with the case made for "imminent" threat, but i thought it was something we'd have to do sooner or later.

my gripes with the war lie primarily with how the bush administration sold --or rather, didn't sell-- it to the rest of the world, and how it appears that rumsfeld and co. weren't completely right about the aftermath. so now we lose face and have to go begging--begging!--to a international body that we so kindly gave the finger to not one year ago. it's humiliating and it's shameful. what's even worse is that we have to now swallow the bile we spat at them, because in all reality, we can't afford it--monetarily and militarily--alone.

as for the true rationale of the war... i've noticed that many (neo)-conservative pundits who drool over bush like little schoolgirls...
hannity says this war wasn't preemptive, just a resumption of a hostile status from 1990. if that's the case, why did the bush admin give that little speech at west point about preemptive doctrine? or ari fleischer at several press conferences discuss the need to attack them before they attack us?
then we have others, hannity included, who say that weapons of mass destruction had very little to do with us going to war. well, see, the resolution above focuses precisely on womd. without the spectre of womd in iraq, that resolution wouldn't be there, and we'd have virtually no causus belli. often, these are the same ones that say that we went to war on humanitarian grounds, not after womd; again, we have the small problem of the fact that the ratio of speeches regarding iraq, by the bush administration, pre-war, with the rationale of humanitarian concerns as opposed to womd concerns... it's fractional.
who's being revisionist now? it's these rightists who are, and for them to scream and rage about the left "revising history" smacks of disgusting hypocrisy.

i'd buy the humanitarian concerns if i'd seen the us get involved militarily in other conflicts where such evils were taking place: east timor and rwanda, for instance. even afghanistan, before sept 11. i know we're not, and we can't be, the world's policeman--no country can afford to do that--which is why i can't believe that the us got involved for humanitarian reasons in iraq, period. going in there and getting rid of the fcuks in power, well, that was a good thing, and the indirect benefit of stopping those atrocities, that's a good thing too--but it's a side benefit, nothing more.
we didn't go there for humanitarian reasons.

honestly, i don't even think we went there for the stated reason, the womd.

it was power that we were looking for. it's difficult to project power across water, unless you have a large technological advantage. and even with a technological advantage, it's difficult to maintain power across water. the middle east, being a fertile terrorist breeding ground, as well as being of strong strategic interest for us, is a singularly important place for us to ensure we have adequate power in the region to protect our interests. that's why we went to war in iraq; it was the only nation in the region which we could strike without too many repercussions. that's what the war was about. not womd, not mercy, not anything noble and honorable. it was power, plain and simple. a shrewd move, too, if i may say so, but it would have been much better had we actually prepared more for the aftermath.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Lazarus and the Gimp
Just check the archives at HRWatch.

HRWatch wasn't making the case for war, Bush and his poodle were. Bush and his poodle kept hammering on WMDs and al-Qaeda. Both have turned out to be untrue, and the government had the evidence that it wasn't true from the beginning.

If we're going to be liberating people, that's a long as war over the entire world. If' we're going to be spending trillions reconstructing the world, why can't we do that at home too?

The reason is because it was never about the Iraqi people. If they had to slaughter 100,000 Iraqis, they still would have done it. They're just pawns.


Ultimately, the war wasn't even about Iraq itself. It was about distracting the American people from Enron, Worldcom, Qwest, and even Bush's own insider trading. And it worked. Here we are, over a year later, and a man who stole 10 times what the Clinton's lost in Whitewater is still President, when he should have been impeached over his corporate crimes.

[Japher]

Q Cubed, I agree with everything you said.

I feel like we are the big brother who beat up a bully only to slip and fall on a banana peel afterwards and then get chewed out by mom for picking on some kid.

Oh, well. We need to handle it ourself. It is our mess and we need to clean it up. I wish Bush wouldn't go around begging like he is, but I also wish France et al would stop telling us what to do...

[Proteus_MST]

Originally posted by Sirotnikov

This theory falls apart on the grounds that Saddam is not a complete moron.

On the countrary. Only were a Saddam a complete moron, would he leave the evidence justifying the Americans in place to be caught.

The germans began destroying evidence of the holocaust. They started it too late, and enough evidence was caught.

Still, an ever growing population today says that the evidence were mis enterpreted by the evil zionists and americans.

If you speak of the German Population I must deny this Statement.
The Claim that here has never been a holocaust has been popular among parts of the Neonazis-Movement and some other extreme Right-Wingers in Germany. This was the case 20 years ago and this still is the case.

But there is no Evidence, that the number of people which support this claim or who support the Neonazi-Movement is growing, at least not in Germany.
The Neonazi-Movement exists, but it is scorned by the large Majority of the german Population, and people who think that the Holocaust didn´t exist are extremly rare outside of this movement.
But of course I can only speak of the german population, maybe in other countries the Situation may be different.

AFAIK the Claims that the Holocaust didn´t exist also aren´t made because of the Scarcity of Evidences (if there were any efforts to get rid of evidences, they must have been just in the Beginnings as the Americans/Russians arrived) but because those who deny the Existence of the Holocaust pretend, that the Photographs taken by the Russians and Americans are just Fakes, mae to justify the War against Germany.

From Bushs Speech on September 20th 2001

America will never forget the sounds of our national anthem playing at
Buckingham Palace, on the streets of Paris and at Berlin's Brandenburg Gate.

It seemed they forgot it very quickly, s soon as the German and especially the French Government didn´t move like the Hawks in Bushs Government wanted them to move

As for Gulf War 3:
Was it justified because of WMDs?
Obviously not.
As we now see, that the UN Inspectors couldn´t find something that wasn´t there. American Inspectors even needed amost half of a year to come to this conclusion, with full access to the whole country and lots of suport by american troops.
Reminds me of UN-Inspectors saying prior to war that they just needed more time

Was it justified because of Al Qaeda-Links?
Again no. And dspite some people rom the American government fevereshly trying to link Saddam to Al Quaeda there has never been any clear link which could serve as a justification for war.

Was it justified for humanitarian reasons?
Not sure. Although Sadam was removed from Power, which is obviously a good thing, Iraq has turned into a very unstable Region, with Terror Atacks going on against Infrastructure, Soldiers, UN, Reporters and the Iraqi People.
There is also a (not small) chance, that Iraq might turn into a islamist Stronghold.
Only time will tell.

Was it justified because of UN-Resolutions
Doubtfully.
Although the Hawks always claim, that it was justified because of 1441, a number of other people say, that it wasn´t, because 1441 didn´t say anyting about the measues to be taken in the Case of a non Compliance of Iraq.
In their Opinion another Referendum of the Security Council was necessary to consider the Option of going to war. The american Govrnment sied away rom a new Referendum, because they knw, they wouldn´t get enough votes pro War.

[Ramo]

Yes- that's true. However the fact that other countries dithered doesn't leave me thinking it was somehow rendered immoral. I always considered it justified on humanitarian grounds alone.

It should've been extensively planned ahead, and the plans should've been subject to public scruitiny to insure the liberties of Iraqis are being protected. The only plan Rummy created was to rely on a man convicted of a couple hundred million dollar bank fraud. Opposing a war and occupation run by a certain incompetent and evil administration doesn't mean opposing a war indefinitely.