Russia wants Iraqi children to starve - because of oil

[Imran Siddiqui]

Russia's position seems to be rather consistent. To bring closure to the matter of sanctions, someone has to officially report to the UN that Iraq has no WMDs.

Yes, consistent, but dumb .

The purpose was to prevent Saddam's Iraq from continuing to hold WMD. Saddam is gone, the purpose of the act is no more valid.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
I must admit to finding it odd to see che argue for continued sanctions on Iraq.

As far as I understand, Che was arguing for UN procedures, not for continued sanctions. It's odd that you don't seem to see the difference, DD.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
Yes, consistent, but dumb .

Well, legal procedures may look dumb, but they should be followed. Should I explain this to an American?

The purpose was to prevent Saddam's Iraq from continuing to hold WMD. Saddam is gone, the purpose of the act is no more valid.

So for a pro-US puppet government of Iraq it is OK to have WMDs?

[DinoDoc]

Originally posted by The Vagabond
As far as I understand, Che was arguing for UN procedures, not for continued sanctions.

It amounts to the same thing in this surreal thread. I feel as if I've steped down the rabbit hole with you people taking positions different from what you usually take.

[Imran Siddiqui]

Well, legal procedures may look dumb, but they should be followed. Should I explain this to an American?

When legal procedures have no force behind them, then they don't have to .

So for a pro-US puppet government of Iraq it is OK to have WMDs?

Yep. Unless the UN wants to pass another resolution sanctioning 'new' Iraq.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by DinoDoc
It amounts to the same thing in this surreal thread. I feel as if I've steped down the rabbit hole with you people taking positions different from what you usually take.

Positions should be considered in all their integrity. Then they won't seem too different from the usual ones.

[The Vagabond]

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

So for a pro-US puppet government of Iraq it is OK to have WMDs?

Yep. Unless the UN wants to pass another resolution sanctioning 'new' Iraq.

This is the most interesting statement made thus far in this thread.

[Shi Huangdi]

"
So for a pro-US puppet government of Iraq it is OK to have WMDs? "

What puppet government of Iraq? There is no Iraqi government, there is the US/UK occupation forces. Both of which countries have been accepted as having WMDs for a long time.

[Spiffor]

The chaos seems to be abating in Iraq now, and it is possible a civilian authority merges from the occupation authority in a few months/years. This civilian authority will obviously defend US interests, and will be massively supported by the US to make sure it happens.

I think the disarmament of Iraq should continue, and more than everything, inspectors should go back to Iraq to make sure these WMDs are destroyed. It should be easier to find them now that the scientists don't have to fear Saddam anymore. We cannot allow WMDs to be present in a loosely organised Iraq (where terrorists could get a hand on them), and we cannot let a US puppet government have them either.

But the objective of disarming Iraq doesn't have to go through this murderous and criminal sanction regime. This regime was mostly useless before. It is now completely useless. It should have been lifted years ago, and now that the US stopped enforcing it, it is the occasion to end this nightmare for good.

I have been disappointed by the lack of enthusiasm from my country's diplomacy in this regard.