Did Powell's presentation convince you?

[SlowwHand]

Mercator, they are in violation.
They hide things, deny access, detain inspectors.
What's it take?

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by SlowwHand
What's it take?

Perhaps a valid reason to go to war, besides satisfying Texan bloodlust. Maybe we should build you guys a Roman Collusseum, where you can throw Christians to lions.



You people aren't gonna be happy until the US is at permanent war with the rest of the world.

[SlowwHand]

Screw off with your little personal insults, Chegitz. T
his is a U.N. thing. In theory.
If they'd follow up on their "demands".

[MichaeltheGreat]

It convinced me as to having an adequate casus belli. I'm still not convinced the US has a clue what to do, or how, with a post-Saddam Iraq, such that we don't create a bigger mess than exists now.

[SlowwHand]

I just started a poll that deals with that issue, MtG.

[rah]

The only thing it proves to me is that Iraq is yanking their chain. No proof of WMD or that they are a serious risk to the US. But yanking their chain is a violation and provides cause to respond. Whether war is the proper responce is still not a given to me. I too am a bit concerned that not enough thought has been given to what happens after. I don't want to spill all that blood and still have it screwed up.

But being in violation of a UN resolution has never been that serious of a thing since the UN rarely backs up it's threats. Which is why so many people don't take the UN very seriously.

I think for Bush, he has enough cause, but I don't think the American people do. Bush really needs the UN to stand up before he can move. But once he's convinced that he'll never get it, he'll move without it and take the PR hit. (fortunately or unfortunately, bush is a man of conviction and I believe that if he feels that strongly that what he's doing is right, the PR hit won't be a deterence) I hope today wasn't the final straw. It would give more time to figure out what to do after.

RAH

[Lawrence of Arabia]

It has started to make me think abour war as a viable option.

[Sava]

Another day, another uneventful load of crap from the Bush administration. Human intelligence is very unreliable, and that's what the entire Bush case is based on. Sure, they have great circumstancial evidence, but it's simply not enough to risk American lives in a war, and certainly not worth killing Iraqi civilians.

I don't get why the media was hyping Powell's speech as the most significant since Stevenson's. I see a great many differences between the two. The US actually had proof of Cuban missiles; whereas the US now just has the testimonies of a few Iraqi dissenters. I wonder if it's occurred to anyone that Saddam might be putting these informants up to misinform the US?

I say, keep the pressure on. I don't see Saddam making any WMD's or giving them to terrorists with all eyes on Iraq and the inspectors looking around. And if Saddam can't give WMD's to terrorists or use them against the US, there's no point to invading. He's not going anywhere. Time is on our side. I certainly think that with all the stakes involved, we shouldn't risk starting a war unless there is a smoking gun.

[GePap]

LoTM:

You forgot one option: it did not convince me cause I disagree with the fundamentals.

This month will be like watching the show trial of a guilty man: A painfull farce.

The US has decided to go to war: the major decision was taken back in August, no matter how much they tell you that the president has still to decide. All Powell won was how to get to this point. It was a good choice for the admin. cause by making this all about 'disarmament', instead of what it really is about, National-engineering, they get most people on board.

In the end everyone save the Germans will climb on board: most states value their relation with the US too much and this admin. is so bent on demanding loyalty tests to its party line that it can't see the forest beyond the trees. The Chinese won't say no, neither will the Russkies, and the French, the primal pragmatists, will at some point latter this month decide that Bush wants this so hard, its best just to go with it.

Lets get on with it. We will be wat war at the end of the month.

[Goingonit]

It wasn't a smoking gun, and it dodn't prove everything they set out to. But it did definitely prove that the Iraqis are in violation of international law in certain areas.

And those intercepted convercations were great. "Hey muhammad! Stop talking about nerve gas in wireless transmissions." "Nerve gas?" "That's right." "Transmissions?" "Wireless transmissions."

[DuncanK]

4 people said Iraq hasn't violated 1441. Silly

[Darius871]

Originally posted by Sava
Another day, another uneventful load of crap from the Bush administration. Human intelligence is very unreliable, and that's what the entire Bush case is based on.

the US now just has the testimonies of a few Iraqi dissenters.

Um, did you watch it? This case was based partly on human intelligence, not entirely as you just said verbatim. How 'unreliable' can satellite photos and wireless intercepts be?

[Joseph]

Without reading the whole thread, I say, we need about 500 inspectors and about 100 Cessnas flying the whole damm country at about 300 feet above the country side at about 80 MPH and look for any thing that does not appear to be normal.

[Dauphin]

It didn't convince me, but the "say something enough times sooner or later people will believe it" is slowly kicking in.

[DinoDoc]

It's the fact that they have the "dove" of the administration saying it this time that helps it along, BC.