Did Powell's presentation convince you?

[lord of the mark]

curious to know if this really had any effect

[Drake Tungsten]

From what I've seen on CNN so far, very few people who were opposed to war before Powell's speech came out of it with a different opinion. Just as I predicted...

[Ned]

I was already convinced. I have heard some of the leading Democrats have issued statements that they are convinced. The foreign ministers at the UN SC merely read canned speeches. We will learn more about whether Powell's presentation changed any of their positions tomorrow.

[Kontiki]

I watched most of the speech. Powell even said before that there would be no "smoking gun" contained within the presentation, so in effect it was just a one-stop summary of what's been largely known/suspected all along.

[Sandman]

Powell only gets the impossible jobs. His life is like some sort of Ancient Greek hell.

This whole 'convincing evidence' thing reminds me of a Saturday morning cartoon where they use the exact same 'power-up' sequence in every single episode.

[Sandman]

Double post (my first ever)

[DRoseDARs]

Originally posted by Sandman
Double post (my first ever)

Cherish the moment...

I agree that it seems like a bunch of silliness. DBZ is like that. After about the fiftieth powerup in a single ten minute span, you start wishing one of them would split their pants right down the middle of their buttock, bringing an immediate and embarasing end to their posturing...

...Not that I'd wish that on Colin Powell 'cause I like the guy. He's not an ass like most of the Bush Jr. Posse.


As far as convinced I've always believed Saddam is a threat to everyone in the region, including the Iraqis, but I believe the inspections should continue and even be intensified as suggested by *ugh* France. However, adding more people isn't enough; they need to be far more aggressive, perhaps even to the bleeding edge of beligerence. Saddam needs to be forced to squirm. Allied forces need to be kept at threatening levels in the region, ready to attack any moment Saddam resists significantly.

But today's episode of "As the War Drum Beats..." was as I feared: weak and unconvincing. "National Security Concerns" were cited as predicted, meaning they have nothing concrete, just more circumstantial evidence and hearsay.

*Sigh...* Why does Colin even bother hanging around anymore if Bush Jr. refuses to let him do his job to the best of his ability? What a waste of talent, charisma, and expertise...

[lord of the mark]

im having a real hard time mapping the posts here to the poll votes. When you post, could you indicate how you voted (i mean you can maintain secret ballot if you like, but it would clarify things)

[SlowwHand]

I was convinced already.

[Boris Godunov]

I haven't had a chance to thoroughly read up on his presentation, but I've talked with several people who did, and not a one changed their opinion, whatever it was beforehand.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by DRoseDARs


But today's episode of "As the War Drum Beats..." was as I feared: weak and unconvincing. "National Security Concerns" were cited as predicted, meaning they have nothing concrete, just more circumstantial evidence and hearsay.

So you think Iraq is not in violation of 1441???

And did the tapes of Iraqi conversations about evacuating the sites count as circumstantial evidence or hearsay?

And did the photos of trucks showing up just prior to inspections count as circumstantial evidence or hearsay?

[Felch]

I don't really know. I'm not bothered by a war in Iraq, but I'm not excited about one either. It seems to me like we've got this hyperactive military with a whole bunch of guns, and frankly I'd rather turn them loose on a psychotic dictator than say, Canada.

EDIT: It seems clear to me that Iraq is at least in violation of 1441. If we want to maintain credibility, kicking Saddam's butt would be a good idea, but I don't think he's a real threat to our national security.

[chequita guevara]

I have to take a look at the whole thing, but what I've seen so far leaves me feeling less than satisfied. I really was expecting the Administration to do a smackdown on Iraq, smoking gun, see you wussy anti-war folks are FoS. I'm not getting that impression, but more study is needed.

Then again, as I've said all along, I don't care what Iraq has. This is about US imperialism, to which I'm irrevocably opposed. I just wish the Administration wouldn't live down to my expectations.

[DuncanK]

I think Powell showed how inspections will not reveal a smoking gun. It would be neccessary for Iraq to stand down while the inspections take place. They aren't doing that. They continue to hide evidence. I think Powell showed that. Therefore stop the inspections and get that ****er out of there. And another thing, I think that France and the rest of the idiots just showed how they will never support military action just continued inspections whether they work or not.

[Mercator]

I'm leaning a bit more towards Iraq being in violation...
Ahem... But that was before I read what exactly resolution 1441 was.

There seem to be two main points to the resolution:
1. Give Iraq a final opportunity to disarm/show they have disarmed. It's the job of the inspectors to verify this.
2. Make sure Iraq cooperates fully.

As for point 1, there's no way the inspectors could search all of Iraq in a month. So either the US added this to make it seem as if they were being gentle and truly interested in the inspections, the future of which would be determined at the end of the 60 day term, OR Bush just thought February/March was a good time to start a war, so he could just as well pretend to cooperate with the UN for a bit.

As for point 2, the US has now brought some evidence that Iraq isn't cooperating, more so even than Hans Blix said earlier. IMHO, I still think it's mainly up to the discretion of the inspectors to decide whether Iraq is cooperating enough or not. Mr. Blix seemed happy enough...

After reading the resolution, I'm still slightly more convinced Iraq may be violating, but I think it's mainly the inspector's task to judge that.

But if for the US this means war, I disagree. I think war will only **** up Iraq and the entire region more than it already is, and increase the "Arab/Muslim hatred" for the US. I just don't see how that will do anyone any good. Maintaining the pressure of a war and American military presence, however, is, for now, a good thing.

I think Britain and the US are wrong by wanting to go to war right now (and pretending to be all diplomatic about it), but France et al. would be unwise if they were consistently dismissing it all since that stance could give Iraq the possibility to continue kind-of violating UN resolutions.

I think inspections should be stepped up one or two notches, perhaps even have the inspectors guided by UN troops, and use US intelligence to locate the problems. At the same time they could lift the trade embargo. That way the situation in Iraq could improve, while the noose around Saddam's neck is tightened.