1 posted on
03/27/2003 2:21:35 AM PST by
kattracks
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
To: kattracks
Woo hoo! Take that Chiraq, Schroloser and Puke!!!
To: kattracks
France is now as irrelavent as the obsolete u.n.!
To: kattracks
YES! (gosh, i hope this is true)
5 posted on
03/27/2003 2:29:36 AM PST by
hotpotato
(TX native stuck in CA)
To: kattracks
*Bump* for Powell !
8 posted on
03/27/2003 2:38:47 AM PST by
ex-Texan
(primates capitulards toujours en quete de fromage!)
To: kattracks
OUR BLOOD.
OUR TREASURE.
OUR RULES.
To: kattracks; RnMomof7
Powells tough talk signaled that the Bush administration is ready to take a hard line with the United Nations after it failed to get tough with Saddam or enforce 17 resolutions demanding he disarm.
British Prime Minister Tony Blair, who last night began a quickie summit with President Bush at Camp David, also signaled that he doesnt foresee any quick turnover of Iraq to any kind of U.N. administration.
This is what I wanted to hear. The U.N. has to be excluded. France and Germany and Russia have to be excluded and their former contracts and debts voided by the new Iraqi government. And Turkey gets no seat at the table either. They've all forfeited our goodwill in this matter. We may patch things up with them later but they cannot be allowed to prosper from their attempt to harm us and our real allies.
To: kattracks
11 posted on
03/27/2003 3:01:09 AM PST by
tm22721
(May the UN rest in peace)
To: kattracks
Sec'y Powell is an incredible American!
13 posted on
03/27/2003 3:09:13 AM PST by
WaterDragon
(Playing possum doesn't work against nukes.)
To: kattracks
The UN MUST face the facts. It ain't gonna happen. Could be the end of the UN has started.
14 posted on
03/27/2003 3:17:03 AM PST by
gulfcoast6
(FREEDOM is such a powerful word, our troops are taking it to a lot of folks today.)
To: kattracks
I can just see Jaqueass and Koffi wringing thier hands!!
15 posted on
03/27/2003 3:39:59 AM PST by
mylife
To: kattracks
its a two edged sword though -
1) UN gets gobsmacked and shut out for being not relevant any more - hurray
2) UN responds by becoming an aggressive in your face, take no prisoners "obey us or we will be a "preventive" invading force in the future - bad thing
Suggestion to Powell - cut UN funding, send the cash to fund the war and allow a major tax cut for America to restart the economy.
You can leave the UN in NY, just make sure we have properly "bugged" every office.
16 posted on
03/27/2003 3:44:55 AM PST by
artios
To: kattracks
19 posted on
03/27/2003 3:59:23 AM PST by
logic101.net
(ALASKA FOR ALASKANS!)
To: kattracks
Ok, sorry. Thought about my previous comment and regret it. He is a moderate, but he is a fighter when pushed enough; it just takes alot of pushing!
MARK A SITY
http://www.logic101.net/
20 posted on
03/27/2003 4:01:12 AM PST by
logic101.net
(ALASKA FOR ALASKANS!)
To: kattracks
Chirac's plan last weekend was even more bizarre:
...the U.N. (e.g. France) would run the oil-for-food programs etc., but the U.S. and Brits alone would pick up the reconstruction tab for the "illegal war."
21 posted on
03/27/2003 4:04:15 AM PST by
angkor
To: kattracks
the United Nations failed to live up to its responsibilities in confronting Saddam, meaning its more or less on probation now. Huzzah!
To: kattracks
Get US Out of the United NationsIn God We Trust
..Semper Fi
To: kattracks
Powell?s tough talk signaled that the Bush administration is ready to take a hard line with the United Nations after it failed to get tough with Saddam or enforce 17 resolutions demanding he disarm. A stronger message to the UN could not be sent. It raises the bar for compliance on N. Korea, and terrorism, and lays out the consequences for abbrogation.
25 posted on
03/27/2003 4:25:35 AM PST by
Starwind
To: kattracks
"We would not support . . . essentially handing everything over to the U.N. for someone designated by the U.N. to suddenly become in charge of the whole operation," Powell added. He's not saying that there is no role for the U.N. What he's saying is that we will not give carte blanche to the U.N. to put whomever they want in charge of reconstruction. In other words, don't think for a moment that France, Russia, and China are going to run this. But if the management is more acceptable to the U.S., we'll accept a U.N. role.
27 posted on
03/27/2003 4:35:07 AM PST by
XJarhead
To: kattracks
you're either with us, or you're against usPresident Bush didn't draw a line in the sand, he drew a line on the globe.
Terrific President, Outstanding Administration
28 posted on
03/27/2003 4:43:53 AM PST by
PGalt
To: kattracks
Based on past experience, Powell is a globalist. His allegiance toward the ideal of nationhood is absent. He bows to the notion of an unelected world governing body.
His words to Congress are standard Situational Ethics 101 - tell 'em anything, if it accomplishes the purpose.
As daily practitioners of the big lie, Congress couldn't see the truth if it was stained into a blue dress.
I would sooner trust a rattlesnake than tust Powell.
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-20, 21-33 next last
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson