Inspections after the war?

[MaynardTee]

Just reading a bit. Seems like there are discussions going on about UN inspections following the war. I personally hope that US and its' allies does their own investigating and let the UN have it after they are finished.

[RogerAdam]

Originally posted by MaynardTee
Just reading a bit. Seems like there are discussions going on about UN inspections following the war. I personally hope that US and its' allies does their own investigating and let the UN have it after they are finished.

Let the UN do what it does best --- distribute humanitarian aid.
They obviously can not handle inspections.

[jaydee116]

I don't think there will be a need for inspectors after the war. Saddam will use the very weapons in question in the war as he knows he will have nothing to loose. If that isn't evidence enough then nothing is.

[asmolenski]

UN Inspections? Yeah right...

Especially if Blix is involved. He is so hard to understand, in regard to his beliefs on Iraq. His latest comment:

'Iraq will not use bio or chem weapons if he is attacked if he has them, but I'm not saying he does....'

Well then why the heck make that statement if you don't think he has them? Covering you own butt in case we prove that he DOES has these weapons?

[Superburn]

Originally posted by RogerAdam
Let the UN do what it does best --- distribute humanitarian aid.
They obviously can not handle inspections.

Especially when they're not given time to complete them 'eh!!

[asmolenski]

Originally posted by Superburn
Especially when they're not given time to complete them 'eh!!

What most people don't realize is they were never supposed to have this much time anyway. If you go back and actually look at resolution 1441 you will see the purpose of the inspections was to VERIFY that the Iraq would destroy it's weapons, not to go hunt for the weapons that he 'forgot' to discolse or destroy. By failing to declare the weapons he was already in breach of 1441. 1441 was solely to give Iraq a chance to tell the UN EVERY weapon he had, all the inspections would do if they were extended was to uncover more and more of the weapons that he 'forgot' to declare. This cat and mouse game could have dragged on for years, 200 inspectors to search a dessert as big as Iraq? That's worse than the needle in a haystack cliche.... Iraq lied in the declaration, making it a breach of 1441 in the very first weeks of the process. The inspectors did their job, they went in and found that Iraq lied in the declaration and that was all they were supposed to do. Of course, that purpose of 1441 was lost in all the international bickering...

[Superburn]

Originally posted by asmolenski
The inspectors did their job, they went in and found that Iraq lied in the declaration and that was all they were supposed to do. Of course, that purpose of 1441 was lost in all the international bickering...

yes, they found some metal Tubes that Could be used for terroristic acts...Better take the fertilizer away from the farmers!!! They could use it to make bombs!!

[asmolenski]

Originally posted by Superburn
yes, they found some metal Tubes that Could be used for terroristic acts...Better take the fertilizer away from the farmers!!! They could use it to make bombs!!

Metal tubes? How about missiles that were capable of delivering chem and bio agents? Then missiles with range beyond UN prescribed limits, Drones that were capable of distributing chem/bio agents, machinery and equipment for the manufacturer of these weapons and of the agents... need I go on? These are all items contained in the written reports by the inspectors. ALL the items mentioned had been banned by the original UN resolution 12 years ago, NONE were mentioned in the decleration, a breach of 1441. It goes way beyond the evidence that they bought tubes whose only other use beside agriculture (which we all know Iraq is a HUGE farming community) is for nuclear power. I alo guarentee there is other evidence that has not been released to the public due to sensitivity of it.

[enduser]

The thing I found interesting is that Dr. Blix is from Germany which is a country that has opposed war. It seems to me that the policy of Germany and Blix are one and the same. Blix would have helped Saddam Hussien stall for years if he could have. He was only trying to make it look good.

[RogerAdam]

Blix is from Sweden. He witheld information on reports always turned in intermediate stance to appease both sides, and if "evidence" was compelling enough he would over exaggerate Iraqi's cooperation. He obviously had a point of view, he doesn't conceal it well at all.... funny thing about the inspectors is their "mission" was to inspect what the Iraqi's devolged, nothing more nothing less.

The mere fact it is based on Iraqi disclosure makes it a farce, as evidenced by the fact when the previous inspections where seeking out WMD's which was their mission initially, they were expelled usually after a major discovery, and usually under the guise of espionage. Iraq only "agreed" (lol) to 1441 and more inspections only if Iraq disclosed information and materials, ie no more searching by the inspectors. Now tell me how does one verify Iraq is "complying" or in your words "the inspections were working and needed more time", when in the past on several occasions the Iraqi's were caught concealing weapons? Also how does one explain Dr. Blix's objectiveness who clearly didn't want this to end up in war?

[Superburn]

Originally posted by asmolenski
Drones that were capable of distributing chem/bio agents, machinery and equipment for the manufacturer of these weapons and of the agents It goes way beyond the evidence that they bought tubes whose only other use beside agriculture (which we all know Iraq is a HUGE farming community) is for nuclear power. I alo guarentee there is other evidence that has not been released to the public due to sensitivity of it.

I hardly call the "Drones" With a possible 5 mile limit threatening. and I contend that Iraq does have a significant agriculture industry Referenced here: http://www.1upinfo.com/country-guide...aq/iraq53.html

Since the beginning of recorded time, agriculture has been the primary economic activity of the people of Iraq. In 1976, agriculture contributed about 8 percent of Iraq's total GDP, and it employed more than half the total labor force. In 1986, despite a ten-year Iraqi investment in agricultural development that totaled more than US$4 billion, the sector still accounted for only 7.5 percent of total GDP, a figure that was predicted to decline. In 1986 agriculture continued to employ a significant portion--about 30 percent--of Iraq's total labor force. Part of the reason the agricultural share of GDP remained small was that the sector was overwhelmed by expansion of the oil sector, which boosted total GDP.

[asmolenski]

Originally posted by Superburn
I hardly call the "Drones" With a possible 5 mile limit threatening. and I contend that Iraq does have a significant agriculture industry Referenced here: http://www.1upinfo.com/country-guide...aq/iraq53.html

Sorry, but land use for permanent crops in Iraq accounts only for .22% of the total land of Iraq, and only 12.13% of Iraqi land is even arable. That is only 1,400 square kilometers worth of agricutural land, most states have more agriculture thatn Iraq has as a whole. Also, under that 30% agriculture numbers in your article, wool, mutton, sheepskin and lambskin are included in that number, the actual food portion of the agriculture industry is quiet small, which is why Iraq is so heavily dependent on foreign countries for foodstock, particularly Australia, who provides a very large portion of it's wheat stock to Iraq.

And as for the Drones, any drone capable of delivering chem or bio weapons was banned by the original resolution, no matter the distance. I can't believe you think that ANY item that disperses chem or bio weapons can be called not a threat! How would you like to have that take off from you local small private airstrip, controlled by a terrorist loaded with VX or anthrax? The closest private strip to my house is less than 3 miles away. 5 kilometers.... Sorry that's close enought to consider 5 kilometer s a threat. Ask any of the kurds or Iranians what they think of the non-threat of bio/chem weapons that Iraq has, I'd bet you'd hear some pretty nasty stories about what they endured.

You also never addressed the issue that the inspections under 1441 were solely to validate the disclosure to be 100% accurate, which they showed it was not, how is that NOT completing their mission?

[Big Whip]

I've noticed that a huge issue the pro-inspection crowd misses is the fact that the inspectors were not there to FIND WMD, but to VERIFY the destruction. No matter how many times that point is made, it goes right over their head because admitting to that fact would invalidate their entire arguement. I'm not talking about one person in particular here, so if anyone takes offense to this I apologize. But I feel like whenever I talk to a 'pro-inspection' person I'd be better off talking to a stump. Neither one can understand the fact that this wasn't supposed to be a game of hide and seek. It was a last chance for Iraq to FULLY and UNCONDITIONALLY disarm EVERYTHING, not just what the inspectors saw when they pulled up to the front door.

[Mordeth]

Originally posted by Big Whip
I've noticed that a huge issue the pro-inspection crowd misses is the fact that the inspectors were not there to FIND WMD, but to VERIFY the destruction. No matter how many times that point is made, it goes right over their head because admitting to that fact would invalidate their entire arguement. I'm not talking about one person in particular here, so if anyone takes offense to this I apologize. But I feel like whenever I talk to a 'pro-inspection' person I'd be better off talking to a stump. Neither one can understand the fact that this wasn't supposed to be a game of hide and seek. It was a last chance for Iraq to FULLY and UNCONDITIONALLY disarm EVERYTHING, not just what the inspectors saw when they pulled up to the front door.

You said it. The so called "peace activists" and "pro-inspectors" won't address these questions you have asked because to do so would invalidate entirely their "mission". So they play blind under the guise of "peace", meanwhile supporting such groups as ANSWER who are nothing more than communists bent on destroying this country. Why don't they take to the streets and protest Saddam's murder, oppression and enslavement of his own people? Why don't they demand he step down to bring peace? Why don't they demand he give up his banned weapons immediately? Why? Why? Why? I'll answer it for them, seeing that they have not the courage to do so. It is because most of them are anti-American, and their motives are other than they preach. That is why. This is not an insult, this is calling a spade a spade. Do the research on the groups supporting these so called protests and you will see what their true intent is, and it is anything but "peace". Perhaps a few people who protest in these 'rallies' aren't anti-American, perhaps a few simply disagree with the way we are handling the situation and are exercising their Constitutionally protected right to peacefully assemble, and perhaps they still support this country and are patriotic. But this represents not the bulk, but a small minority.

Mordeth

[Chris Of Death]

Originally posted by Mordeth
You said it. The so called "peace activists" and "pro-inspectors" won't address these questions you have asked because to do so would invalidate entirely their "mission". So they play blind under the guise of "peace", meanwhile supporting such groups as ANSWER who are nothing more than communists bent on destroying this country. Why don't they take to the streets and protest Saddam's murder, oppression and enslavement of his own people? Why don't they demand he step down to bring peace? Why don't they demand he give up his banned weapons immediately? Why? Why? Why? I'll answer it for them, seeing that they have not the courage to do so. It is because most of them are anti-American, and their motives are other than they preach. That is why. This is not an insult, this is calling a spade a spade. Do the research on the groups supporting these so called protests and you will see what their true intent is, and it is anything but "peace". Perhaps a few people who protest in these 'rallies' aren't anti-American, perhaps a few simply disagree with the way we are handling the situation and are exercising their Constitutionally protected right to peacefully assemble, and perhaps they still support this country and are patriotic. But this represents not the bulk, but a small minority.

Mordeth

Mordeth, spare us the psychic reading. Disagreeing with how our government handles itself is anything but 'anti-American,' and for you, the great government apologist, to say you truly understand the issues and motives behind the protests is laughable. Your posts are spiraling ever closer to McCarthiest name-calling - and you take every chance you get to undercut the opinions of others by questioning their patriotism. Now you've latched onto this "Red Scare" nonsense. I nominate you to be the chair of the next House Un-American Activities Committee. Congratulations.

A mission statement from a typical peace organization:

1. Peace and justice, not war and revenge.
2. Unity and respect for diversity: stop scapegoating and harassment.
3. Protect human rights and civil liberties at home and abroad.

I fail to see how these goals are anything but laudable. Either put up or shut up, I don't see you on the streets campaigning for what you believe.