Stratfor: Bush Issues Veiled Ultimatum to United Nations

Stratfor.com ^ | 12 September 2002

[Bigun]

LOL!

Yeah! I guess you are right, he COULD have done those things.

I stand corrected Sir!

[tet68]

Gee, they must have read my post from the other night.

[4CJ]

[N]ot abandon it altogether.

You sure know how to make someone cry ;o)

[Bigun]

I can't imagine we'd ever actually take that rational course of action.

Why Not? Pray tell me just what useful purpose that, Ahem, "organization" serves!

[agincourt1415]

"These conditions are not up for discussion or negotiation"

Please don't tease me LOL.

[Mr. Mojo]

Read my post a little more carefully. I'm one of the biggest advocates of leaving that commie organization that you'll ever find. The "rational course of action" I was referring was leaving the UN entirely.

[Mr. Mojo]

Read my post a little more carefully. I'm one of the biggest advocates of leaving that commie organization that you'll ever find. The "rational course of action" I was referring was leaving the UN entirely.

[Bigun]

Oh My! I think I need to have my glasses checked again!

SOMEHOW I read RATIONAL as RADICAL!

Sorry! It's been a long and trying day here!

[Mr. Mojo]

No problem, amigo.

[alloysteel]

If people would listen closely, President Bush did not advocate a unilateral strike. He called upon the UN to enforce its own directives, and made clear the effects of failure to carry out the injunctions which have already been called for on Saddam Hussein. Saddam may be counted upon, that he will do something so flatly arrogant, so egregious, that we shall have no other alternative but to remove him from any position of power. He really does have a choice, right now. Resign and go into exile, and we won't pursue. Allow a peaceful regime change, or there may be one H*ll of an election campaign in Baghdad.

[Tailgunner Joe]

U.S. rejoins UNESCO 18 years after withdrawal

[The Great Satan]

There was no ultimatum. What we heard today was just a stall, to keep the ball in play for another few months (or a couple of years once we start going with the tit-for-tat over utterly pointless weapons inspections) while we scramble to build up our defenses against Saddam's grab-bag of goodies. Nothing wrong with that, by the way -- it seems like a reasonable strategy for dealing with a very prickly situation. But let's not have any illusions about what happened today. Bush blinked.

[RGSpincich]

But let's not have any illusions about what happened today. Bush blinked.

That was a wink to the American people. Dubya's way of saying he won't let terrorists tread on US. He's not fooling around.

[The Great Satan]

He's not fooling around.

So, what's he going to do? Does Dubya have a magic protective shield that can protect us from Saddam's biological weapons?

[CIB-173RDABN]

"What we heard today was just a stall, to keep the ball in play for another few months (or a couple of years ..."

Have to disagree with you sir. The American people are not known for their patience. There will be a new government in Iraq before the 2nd anniversity of 9/11.

[CIB-173RDABN]

"Does Dubya have a magic protective shield that can protect us from Saddam's biological weapons?

No he doesn't. Saddam may very well use one of his weapons of mass destruction within our border. What is your point. We should do nothing, and hope for the best?

I fully expect at least one more terrorist attack within our borders. We can plan, and train, and attempt to prevent it, but it may very well happen.

But the possibility of it happening should not deter us, since that course of action will only gurantee more such acts.

I do not want to die anymore than anyone else, but are our lives more valuable then the men and woman we send off to fight for us? It has been a long time since civilians within our own borders had to worry about becoming casualties of war, but we are faced with it now.

As a very young man, I came to terms with my own mortality. Being afraid to die will sometimes get you killed.

[Dog Gone]

I've bashed Stratfor some really stupid things they have said, especially about military options.

But I'll have to give them credit here. This is exactly what I thought after I read the speech.

Bush put them in a nearly impossible position. And it doesn't matter which way the UN decides, because we're going anyway.

[maxwellp]

Why does the U.N. exist? Why does the President of the United States have to appear before the U.N. and explain the defense of the United States before a bunch of people, half of which, as Rush Limbaugh said today (and I agree) are terrorists, madmen, and dictators?

[maxwellp]

To mhking: "We gave them an old tomatoe". You said "What does that mean" and I wondered the same thing. Glad you asked it. I have a tendency not to pay much attention to posts that don't make any sense. When I saw this "old tomatoe" post, I thought that she thought President Bush was an "old tomatoe".

[maxwellp]

Re your post No. 27 - "true leadership". Yes, President Bush is a true leader and his speech before the U.N. led me to believe that no organization, no foreign country and no one individual will stop President Bush from doing what is most important to him right now and that is protecting the United States of America and American citizens from further harm. As a proud American citizen I bless President Bush and pray for him. This has got to be a heavy burden! And he gets very little support from a party composed of supposedly American citizens, namely, Democrats. God, please keep President Bush close and give him strength. Blessed Mother Mary, please help him and the rest of his administration.