Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Bush: U.S. will enforce resolution on Iraq
UPI ^ | March 1, 2003 | Kathy A. Gambrell

Posted on 03/01/2003 8:10:50 AM PST by MadIvan

WASHINGTON, March 1 (UPI) -- President George W. Bush on Saturday said the United States was determined to enforce the U.N. Security Council resolution demanding Iraqi President Saddam Hussein surrender the country's weapons of mass destruction and called on Iraq to undergo a regime change.

"This dictator will not be allowed to intimidate and blackmail the civilized world, or to supply his terrible weapons to terrorist groups, who would not hesitate to use them against us. The safety of the American people depends on ending this threat," Bush said during his weekly radio address.

Bush used his remarks to argue his case for possible military action in Iraq. The United States has criticized the Arab nation for its failure to account for missing biological and chemical weapons, its stockpile of al-Samoud 2 missiles and what it calls the Iraqi government's brutality toward its citizens.

"The lives and freedom of the Iraqi people matter little to Saddam Hussein, but they matter greatly to us," Bush said Saturday.

The United States, Britain and Spain introduced a draft resolution late Monday afternoon during a meeting of the Security Council in New York. In the terse, carefully crafted one-line statement, the three nations declared that: "Iraq has failed to take the final opportunity afforded to it in Resolution 1441." National security adviser Condoleezza Rice told reporters this week: "In that sense, it is an affirmation of the council's willingness to enforce its own resolution."

The president stepped up his public relations campaign to convince the American public and the international community that Hussein remains a threat to stability in the Middle East and world security.

"If conflict comes, he could target civilians or place them inside military facilities. He could encourage ethnic violence. He could destroy natural resources. Or, worst of all, he could use his weapons of mass destruction," Bush said Saturday.

On Wednesday, Bush delivered a nationally televised speech before the American Enterprise Institute, a conservative think tank. He revealed his vision of how a war with Iraq could reshape the Middle East where U.S. power would remain to guarantee a democratic government for Iraq and bolster reforms in other Middle Eastern states. But Bush said the United States would not determine the form of Iraq's new government.

"That choice belongs to the Iraqi people. Yet we will ensure that one brutal dictator is not replaced by another. All Iraqis must have a voice in the new government, and all citizens must have their rights protected," Bush said.

The administration is seeking $379.9 billion in its 2004 budget request for the Pentagon. U.S. officials said this week that Bush has not yet been briefed on the amount the Pentagon is planning to ask for. According to various news reports, the Office of Management and Budget has said the Pentagon's portion of the budget is likely to be around $60 billion. That would be close to what was spent in the 1991 Persian Gulf War, which cost $61 billion. Of that amount, $50 billion was paid by the allies, who transferred the money to the United States.

This week the Defense Department revealed plans that could mean 200,000 U.S. troops would stay in Iraq for an indefinite period. The administration also detailed its plans for humanitarian efforts to aid civilians likely to be caught in the fighting.

"We will deliver medicine to the sick, and make sure that Iraq's 55,000 food distribution sites, operating with supplies from the oil-for-food program, are stocked and open as soon a possible," Bush said Saturday. "We are stockpiling relief supplies, such as blankets and water containers, for 1 million people. We are moving into place nearly 3 million emergency rations to feed the hungry."

Bush said the United States and Great Britain are providing tens of millions of dollars to the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, the World Food Program and UNICEF so they will be ready to provide emergency aid to the Iraqi people.

Critics have drawn parallels between U.S. efforts in Afghanistan and what they believe will happen in Iraq should it wage a war there. Analysts who have studied what the United States has done in the year since it began its military campaign in Afghanistan say that Bush administration officials have failed miserably in providing Afghanistan with the billions of dollars in assistance to rebuild the tiny nation.

The United States in October 2001 launched a major military offensive aimed at ridding the nation of its terrorist ties and a massive global manhunt for suspected terrorist mastermind Osama bin Laden and the country's Taliban leadership. While a few members of the Taliban were captured, bin Laden and members of his inner circle have never been found.

Promises of a Marshall Plan-like reconstruction plan for Afghanistan never materialized, Peter Singer, a foreign policy fellow with the Brookings Institution in Washington, told United Press International. It is estimated it would take about $20 billion to get Afghanistan on track, but the U.S. financial commitment has fallen far short of that figure, he said. The Bush administration forgot to add funding in its 2004 federal budget proposal to reconstruction efforts in Afghanistan, only to have go back and put in $300 million.

Some humanitarian groups fear that what they have seen happen in Afghanistan will happen in Iraq if there is war. Bush said Saturday that rebuilding Iraq would require a "sustained commitment" from many nations, including the United States.


TOPICS: Breaking News; Foreign Affairs; Government; News/Current Events; US: District of Columbia; United Kingdom; War on Terror
KEYWORDS: aznar; blair; blix; bush; iraq; saddam; spain; uk; un; us
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 next last
Keep right on, Mr. President.

Regards, Ivan

1 posted on 03/01/2003 8:10:50 AM PST by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: Kip Lange; dixiechick2000; UofORepublican; kayak; LET LOOSE THE DOGS OF WAR; keats5; ...
Bump!
2 posted on 03/01/2003 8:11:08 AM PST by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
bump.

Go, W, go!
3 posted on 03/01/2003 8:14:21 AM PST by headsonpikes
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Thanks for the ping, amigo. And for all your timely threads.
4 posted on 03/01/2003 8:15:58 AM PST by JohnHuang2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
"Promises of a Marshall Plan-like reconstruction plan for Afghanistan never materialized, Peter Singer, a foreign policy fellow with the Brookings Institution..."

I heard on the radio a couple of days ago that FREE ENTERPRISE was exploding in Afghanistan!!!

That's one heck of a lot better than any "Marshall Plan-like reconstruction!" But it's what these Bush "critics" fear more than anything!!!

5 posted on 03/01/2003 8:22:06 AM PST by SierraWasp (Like, hey man, SHIFT_HAPPENS!!!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
"The safety of the American people depends on ending this threat," Bush said during his weekly radio address."

BS.

If that was true, we should have taken Saddam out long ago.

If someone is a threat to the safety of your family, wouldn't you take immediate action?

6 posted on 03/01/2003 8:24:23 AM PST by CoolGuyVic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: CoolGuyVic
Unfortunately, a very simplistic statement, sir.
7 posted on 03/01/2003 8:29:21 AM PST by ItisaReligionofPeace ((the original))
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
Ivan, you are truly a friend of the US. We greatly appreciate your support.
8 posted on 03/01/2003 8:29:37 AM PST by cardinal4
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
At first I thought the American left knew Bush was deadly serious but felt that through public wailings they could force the first term politician to succumb to reelection pressure.

Today I think the left has listened to their own mantra too long and will be absolutely shocked when the bombs start falling. These self made apologists now actually believe that Bush has worked himself into a political corner and wouldn't dare step outside the UN mandates.

My guess is that given a choice between a second term and resolving the Iraq issue, Bush wouldn't even blink as he picked up the phone to call Franks.

9 posted on 03/01/2003 8:29:49 AM PST by Amerigomag
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SierraWasp; MadIvan
I heard that property values in Iraq are exploding, anticipating the return of overseas Iraqis with dollars in their pockets and business deals to cut.

Property value rise is the most accurate barometer of the true Iraqi feeling of hope and anticipation at their impending liberation.

10 posted on 03/01/2003 8:29:56 AM PST by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Amerigomag
I don't know. I read that Powell today said that the US would be willing to wait a couple of more weeks for the inspectors, that there was no hurry about voting on the US resolution, and that the US did not intend to put in place a new government or system in Iraq. He made a couple of perfunctory statements at the end about how Saddam should disarm now and how the Iraqis would like democracy, if that's any help.

I'm getting really tired of this.
11 posted on 03/01/2003 8:36:44 AM PST by livius
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: CoolGuyVic
If someone is a threat to the safety of your family, wouldn't you take immediate action?

You've had the years from 1992 to 2000 wiped from your memory. Right?

12 posted on 03/01/2003 8:36:51 AM PST by Harmless Teddy Bear (Sometimes "peace" is another word for surrender.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
. . . and make sure that Iraq's 55,000 food distribution sites . . .

Christ! Are these Seven-Elevens? Or Wal-Marts? Or liberal media outposts? Shouldn't this be a damn clue to somebody? Like the bleeding-hearters who "care so damn much" while us war-mongers only want to "maim and kill?" If a country, any damn country, needs 55,000 HAND-OUT CENTERS, I would think those self-righteous little bastards on the leftist side of the fence would be concerned about all "the little people" who have to trudge to these governmental places pulling their little red wagons to beg for food.

Oh yeah, I forgot, that's the conservative take on this problem so . . . NATURALLY . . . the grubby maggots have to espouse the opposite view and compare GW to Adolf.

Silly me. Charles Darwin's Evolutionary Ladder wouldn't be complete without shitbugs to start the process.

13 posted on 03/01/2003 8:38:23 AM PST by geedee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Travis McGee
The Iraqi people will surely be better off without the likes of Saddam and his henchmen. Other Arab states will think very hard about their support of terrorism and so we will be safer not just from Saddam's removal but from the attitude adjustment his neighbors recieved. Don't ever forget Qadaffi's behavior modification Reagan instilled in him. Force works.
14 posted on 03/01/2003 8:39:01 AM PST by umgud (War determines who is left, not who is right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: MadIvan
It is estimated[by Mr. Singer (who IS this Solomon?]it would take about $20 billion to get Afghanistan on track Exactly what does this mean? Is this seed money he is talking about or some public works funding that socialists are so fond of? The West Germans have pumped that much into the former DDR without result. I think, however, that the Afghanis are better businessmen than the Ossies.
15 posted on 03/01/2003 8:40:48 AM PST by RobbyS
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

Comment #16 Removed by Moderator

To: Harmless Teddy Bear
"You've had the years from 1992 to 2000 wiped from your memory. Right?"

Must have, because I have no idea what you mean.

17 posted on 03/01/2003 8:41:45 AM PST by CoolGuyVic
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: RobbyS
It is already happening - one example of which I am aware is mobile telephones: because it's very expensive to set up the cabling required for conventional phone service. wireless services are stepping in and are wildly popular in Afghanistan.

The Afghanis' biggest problems are re-starting the schools which the Taliban shut down, and repairing the roads and infrastructure. Beyond that, they are not incapable of helping themselves.

Regards, Ivan

18 posted on 03/01/2003 8:42:58 AM PST by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Harmless Teddy Bear
Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't a rapist in charge for the eight years before GW took over? One who worried more about his date-date-book than if So-Dumb and Kim the Kewpie Doll developed WMD's or not.

I seem to remember GW took on the "axis of evil" far, far sooner than he had to.

19 posted on 03/01/2003 8:43:04 AM PST by geedee
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies]

To: CoolGuyVic
Must have, because I have no idea what you mean.

Fellow named Bill Clinton was in charge. You know, the evil blighter who was more interested in the fresh crop of college girl interns than doing his duty.

Ivan

20 posted on 03/01/2003 8:44:03 AM PST by MadIvan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 101-105 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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson