Skip to comments.
Text of White House Response to Iraq
ap ^
| 9/16/02
Posted on 09/16/2002 5:57:38 PM PDT by knak
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-102 next last
To: knak
This is not a matter of inspections. It is about disarmament of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction and the Iraqi regime's compliance with all other Security Council resolutions.This is a tactical step by Iraq in hopes of avoiding strong U.N. Security Council action. As such, it is a tactic that will fail.
It is time for the Security Council to act.
It will take them two weeks to find pen and paper.
The only effective "inspection" is Bomb Damage Assessment.
To: virgil
I just can't figure how the media keeps saying we demanded the inspectors back in, The speech is very clear. Inspectors are nothing but appeasement. Saddam had his chance to conform, and as our President said:
My nation will work with the U.N. Security Council to meet our common challenge. If Iraq's regime defies us again, the world must move deliberately, decisively to hold Iraq to account. We will work with the U.N. Security Council for the necessary resolutions. But the purposes of the United States should not be doubted. The Security Council resolutions will be enforced -- the just demands of peace and security will be met -- or action will be unavoidable. And a regime that has lost its legitimacy will also lose its power. The President is not asking for compliance to old resolutions, he is demanding a resolution that makes it clear that Saddam has to go... PERIOD
62
posted on
09/16/2002 8:40:02 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
To: MJY1288
The media likes to use the term "cowboy" when referring to Bush and his foreign policy. They mean it as a slam, but I think deep down most Americans like the way our "cowboy" President rode into New York last week, kicked butt and started takin' names. Kinda feels like Marshall Dillion is back in Dodge City. It also reminded me of our other "cowboy" President who went to the Brandenberg Gate and kicked some tail as well.
To: Torie
Oh once the inspectors come they'll run into a gamut of obstacles and diversions. Saddam is ready to let the inspectors back in but you can bet the back of your hand he's not gonna show them any weapons of mass destruction. And naturally, they'll report back to New York: "See, Saddam has zero, zilch, nada weapons of weapons of mass destruction; therefore there's no justification for an American attack." At least that's Saddam's game plan to appear to comply with President Bush's demands and buy time for his regime. Except the White House knows that's exactly what Saddam was going to do all along: to string things out for awhile longer. To repeat a Bush mantra: its not the inspections, its the regime, stupid. Saddam has got to go!!!
To: Torie
Well, of course, we're parsing. But he never used the word "inspectors." Dang you!
65
posted on
09/16/2002 8:45:41 PM PDT
by
Howlin
To: MJY1288
If Iraq's regime defies us again = If Iraq defies us by failing to dump Saddam and abandon its agenda.
The above conflation seems to be your interpretation of the speech. That strikes me as a stretch of the English language.
66
posted on
09/16/2002 8:48:05 PM PDT
by
Torie
To: dollygirl
Well Im afraid our plans are in disarray. We were blind sided by this diabolical move. Any time you put the UN in the loop you are set up for a fall. I personally saw this coming...The administration was blind sided and our plans are in disarray?
But...
You, being the great military and political statigest that you are saw this coming?
Am I following the program?
67
posted on
09/16/2002 8:50:56 PM PDT
by
PFKEY
To: Carolinamom
Fools....all taking the easy line of least resistance That's the U.N. way....
All the more reason to cease paying dues to this global ship of fools, evict them from NYC, and escort every last one of those clowns to the nearest airport, dock or train station, and wave bye-bye as they fly/sail/ride off into the sunset.
To: knak
This is perfect, I can't wait to hear Dashle respond tomorrow.
To: Carolinamom
According to Brit Hume's show tonight, Kofi Annan released the letter to the press BEFORE the White House or the Security Council were notified.This was FNC's White House correspondent's characterization of the immediate response by the administration.
Here's my interpretation: Kofi, you weasley litte spinelss twit, how dare you take it upon yourself to use this worthless piece of paper as a photo op, and take it upon your miserable little self to make decisions and interpretations reserved for leaders? Sit down, shut up, and await further orders.
To: browardchad
Your characterization is right on. My word for him begins and ends with an S.
To: freedom4me
I didn't know what to expect from George W.
To be honest, I followed his campaign and I didn't see much difference in domestic policy from Al Gore other than "Accountability" and "conditions". To me that was the major difference. When it came to his foriegn policy promises he said he would "lead". They all say that, but when he got down in the mud with McCain he showed me that McCain couldn't handle him. I started then to become a supporter of him during his run against McCain(Who I never liked)
The last minute DUI story and the way GWB handled it made me believe he was an honest guy. I knew he would cave on the more popular domestic issues, just as he did in Texas, But he always put in accountability clauses and conditions for disbursement of funds which I liked. I learned during the Reagan terms that compromise is part of getting things done. Reagan was a master of chipping away at where he wanted us to go by compromising some to change the general direction of where we were headed.
I don't know how old you are, but I remember what Reagan did to change the direction of this country and many of his qualities are present in this President. In fact, I believe GWB has been far more successful in his first term than Reagan was BY FAR. As Reagan did, George W. Bush has a way of making us feel we have a sense of purpose. He is an Optimyst and So was Reagan and so am I.
The Chinese in air conflict could have been handled better, but in the end it worked out. GWB's annaugural Speech was the first time he really mentioned his faith and I found it refreshing. When GWB gave his first speech overseas to a Polish University, I realized at that point we had a winner. That speech was magnificant. Then he went to China and I stayed up until 3:00 Am EST to watch it and I believe it was the strongest speech ever given in China by a US president (NO MEDIA COVERGe THE NEXT DAY) Then after 9/11 his was able to show what he is made of and I believe we are in good hands, from his Administration to the POTUS himself. I thank God often that Gore didn't manage to steal the election, I'm not sure where we would be if things ended differently
72
posted on
09/16/2002 9:04:39 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
To: Torie
It's not a stretch, The way I read the speech is Iraq is in Violation of every resolution ever placed on it and Saddam is not the person to comply with them. So GWB is standing on the policy of regime change, as well as compliance. Very much like his position with the other cancer in that region...(Arafat) I believe we will never see Bush striking any deals with ruthless dictators, I know Musharif is a dictator, but we didn't have much choice but to look for his help, and Pakistan has helped much more than I thought they would.
73
posted on
09/16/2002 9:14:12 PM PDT
by
MJY1288
To: knak
Looks like little Kofi Anan violated one of the
PROVISIONAL RULES OF PROCEDURE OF THE SECURITY COUNCIL today:
Rule 6
The Secretary-General shall immediately bring to the attention of all representatives on the Security Council all communications from States, organs of the United Nations, or the Secretary-General concerning any matter for the consideration of the Security Council in accordance with the provisions of the Charter.Jumping in front of the cameras in time for the six-oclock news doesnt exactly qualify.
To: kayak
It is time for the Security Council to act.
to go to hell
75
posted on
09/16/2002 9:18:27 PM PDT
by
USA21
To: kayak
It is time for the Security Council to act.Bump
76
posted on
09/16/2002 9:21:19 PM PDT
by
PRND21
To: Fishtalk
Along with your account of watching Chris Matthews, I landed on Connie Chung's show tonight and she was talking with Andrea Koppel.
I had heard that Ted's daughter worked at CNN but not seen her before. This babe was positively GIDDY over this development.
She stated outright that this had pulled the rug out from under the WH. I do not agree with that at all.
But what was interesting was her excited expression and the way she referred to the United States in the same tone and manner as one does a foreign country.
It was quite illuminating.
To: ppaul
But too bad ol' Koffee Kup took the bait hook, line, and sinker. Yeah, well last I checked, Ghana was not on the U.N. Security Council...
78
posted on
09/16/2002 9:55:06 PM PDT
by
SunStar
To: dollygirl
Well Im afraid our plans are in disarray. We were blind sided by this diabolical move"Let not your heart be troubled.." It is the UN, and the international community that is in disarray. We have only now taken them to task for their failures. We have the most competent administration in decades. Let them do their work. Everything will turn out allright. Bush will not betray the welfare of the American people.
79
posted on
09/16/2002 10:09:26 PM PDT
by
GVnana
To: browardchad
Excellent! Good Catch! Annan is grandstanding. He's a CYA, incompetent boob. Maybe he learned "crawfishin'" from Saddam.
80
posted on
09/16/2002 10:15:43 PM PDT
by
GVnana
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 41-60, 61-80, 81-100, 101-102 next last
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson