🚀 go-pugleaf

On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 20:57:34 -0400, Joeseph P. Blow <jpblow@gmail.com>
wrote:

>On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 19:14:47 -0500, Al <albert.finney000@geemail.coom>
>wrote:
>
>>In article <f7ec0q$rs8$2@blackhelicopter.databasix.com>,
>> Joeseph P. Blow <jpblow@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We raised weaopons against them by funding and supplying Israel,
>>> dumbass.  Surely you can't be that blind.
>>
>>But we supply money and weaponry to several Muslim countries that 
>>cumulatively surpasses aid to israel, not to mention oil money. Israel 
>>has no oil.
>
>Yes, I agree we supply money and weaponry to several Muslim contries.
>I doubt it surpasses that sent to israel if you don't count money for
>oil but even if it did, the point is the money supporting Israel is
>what I'm talking about.  You can' deny it.
>
>>
>>The great majority of US dollars in the mideast go to Muslims one way or 
>>another, so this victim argument seems a little weak.
>
>It's not a victim argument, it's a fact.  We support Israel and Muslim
>extremists use it as an excuse.  Take away the excuse, take away
>another part of the problem.
>
>>
>>Some people buy it though.
>
>Some people buy the lie that there were WMD in Iraq. 

You mean the one that Clinton told?

Clinton demands total access for U.N. arms inspectors

WASHINGTON (CNN) -- U.S. President Clinton said Tuesday that
Washington still favors a diplomatic solution to the Iraq crisis, but
stressed that any solution must include free and unfettered access for
U.N. weapons inspectors.

"A diplomatic solution must include, or meet, a clear, immutable,
reasonable, simple standard: Iraq must agree -- and soon -- to free,
full, unfettered access to these (inspection) sites anywhere in the
country," Clinton said.

Clinton spoke at the Pentagon, after military leaders briefed him on
preparations for possible strikes. Accompanying him were Vice
President Al Gore, Secretary of Defense William Cohen and Joint Chiefs
of Staff Chairman Gen. Hugh Shelton.

 President Clinton gives an update on Iraq

The president urged Americans to be ready for a possible attack on
Iraq, and he warned that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein had used
biological weapons against his own people -- and would likely use the
weapons again unless he were prevented from doing so.

Hussein, said the president, "threatens the security of all the rest
of us."

Clinton said Hussein and the Iraqi leadership had repeatedly lied to
the United Nations about the country's weaponry.

"It is obvious that there is an attempt here based on the whole
history of this (weapons inspections) operation since 1991 to protect
whatever remains of his capacity to produce weapons of mass
destruction, the missiles to deliver them and the feedstock necessary
to produce them," Clinton said.

The president said that after the Gulf War ended in 1991, Iraq
admitted having a massive offensive biological warfare capability,
including:

    * 5,000 gallons of Botulinum (causing Botulism)
    * 2,000 gallons of Anthrax
    * 25 biological-filled Scud warheads
    * 157 aerial bombs 

Clinton said Iraq still posed a threat to the national security of the
United States and the "freedom-loving world." 

***

Text Of Clinton Statement On Iraq

Text of President Clinton's address to Joint Chiefs of Staff and
Pentagon staff:

Please be seated. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Mr. Vice President, for your remarks and your
leadership. Thank you, Secretary Cohen, for the superb job you have
done here at the Pentagon and on this most recent very difficult
problem. Thank you, General Shelton, for being the right person at the
right time.

Thank you, General Ralston, and the members of the joint chiefs,
General Zinni, Secretary Albright, Secretary Slater, DCIA Tenet, Mr.
Bowles, Mr. Berger, Senator Robb thank you for being here and
Congressman Skelton. Thank you very much, and for your years of
service to America and your passionate patriotism both of you. And to
the members of our armed forces and others who work here to protect
our national security.

I have just received a very fine briefing from our military leadership
on the status of our forces in the Persian Gulf. Before I left the
Pentagon, I wanted to talk to you and all those whom you represent the
men and women of our military. You, your friends and your colleagues
are on the front lines of this crisis in Iraq.

I want you, and I want the American people, to hear directly from me
what is at stake for America in the Persian Gulf, what we are doing to
protect the peace, the security, the freedom we cherish, why we have
taken the position we have taken.

I was thinking as I sat up here on the platform, of the slogan that
the first lady gave me for her project on the millennium, which was,
remembering the past and imagining the future.

Now, for that project, that means preserving the Star Spangled Banner
and the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution and the Bill
of Rights, and it means making an unprecedented commitment to medical
research and to get the best of the new technology. But that's not a
bad slogan for us when we deal with more sober, more difficult, more
dangerous matters.

Those who have questioned the United States in this moment, I would
argue, are living only in the moment. They have neither remembered the
past nor imagined the future.

So first, let's just take a step back and consider why meeting the
threat posed by Saddam Hussein is important to our security in the new
era we are entering.

This is a time of tremendous promise for America. The superpower
confrontation has ended; on every continent democracy is securing for
more and more people the basic freedoms we Americans have come to take
for granted. Bit by bit the information age is chipping away at the
barriers economic, political and social that once kept people locked
in and freedom and prosperity locked out.

But for all our promise, all our opportunity, people in this room know
very well that this is not a time free from peril, especially as a
result of reckless acts of outlaw nations and an unholy axis of
terrorists, drug traffickers and organized international criminals.

We have to defend our future from these predators of the 21st century.
They feed on the free flow of information and technology. They
actually take advantage of the freer movement of people, information
and ideas.

And they will be all the more lethal if we allow them to build
arsenals of nuclear, chemical and biological weapons and the missiles
to deliver them. We simply cannot allow that to happen.

There is no more clear example of this threat than Saddam Hussein's
Iraq. His regime threatens the safety of his people, the stability of
his region and the security of all the rest of us.

I want the American people to understand first the past how did this
crisis come about?

And I want them to understand what we must do to protect the national
interest, and indeed the interest of all freedom-loving people in the
world.

Remember, as a condition of the cease-fire after the Gulf War, the
United Nations demanded not the United States the United Nations
demanded, and Saddam Hussein agreed to declare within 15 days this is
way back in 1991 within 15 days his nuclear, chemical and biological
weapons and the missiles to deliver them, to make a total declaration.
That's what he promised to do.

The United Nations set up a special commission of highly trained
international experts called UNSCOM, to make sure that Iraq made good
on that commitment. We had every good reason to insist that Iraq
disarm. Saddam had built up a terrible arsenal, and he had used it not
once, but many times, in a decade-long war with Iran, he used chemical
weapons, against combatants, against civilians, against a foreign
adversary, and even against his own people.

And during the Gulf War, Saddam launched Scuds against Saudi Arabia,
Israel and Bahrain.

Now, instead of playing by the very rules he agreed to at the end of
the Gulf War, Saddam has spent the better part of the past decade
trying to cheat on this solemn commitment. Consider just some of the
facts:

Iraq repeatedly made false declarations about the weapons that it had
left in its possession after the Gulf War. When UNSCOM would then
uncover evidence that gave lie to those declarations, Iraq would
simply amend the reports.

For example, Iraq revised its nuclear declarations four times within
just 14 months and it has submitted six different biological warfare
declarations, each of which has been rejected by UNSCOM.

In 1995, Hussein Kamal, Saddam's son-in-law, and the chief organizer
of Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program, defected to Jordan. He
revealed that Iraq was continuing to conceal weapons and missiles and
the capacity to build many more.

Then and only then did Iraq admit to developing numbers of weapons in
significant quantities and weapon stocks. Previously, it had
vehemently denied the very thing it just simply admitted once Saddam
Hussein's son-in-law defected to Jordan and told the truth. Now listen
to this, what did it admit?

It admitted, among other things, an offensive biological warfare
capability notably 5,000 gallons of botulinum, which causes botulism;
2,000 gallons of anthrax; 25 biological-filled Scud warheads; and 157
aerial bombs.

And I might say UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq has actually
greatly understated its production.

As if we needed further confirmation, you all know what happened to
his son-in-law when he made the untimely decision to go back to Iraq.

Next, throughout this entire process, Iraqi agents have undermined and
undercut UNSCOM. They've harassed the inspectors, lied to them,
disabled monitoring cameras, literally spirited evidence out of the
back doors of suspect facilities as inspectors walked through the
front door. And our people were there observing it and had the
pictures to prove it.

Despite Iraq's deceptions, UNSCOM has nevertheless done a remarkable
job. Its inspectors the eyes and ears of the civilized world have
uncovered and destroyed more weapons of mass destruction capacity than
was destroyed during the Gulf War.

This includes nearly 40,000 chemical weapons, more than 100,000
gallons of chemical weapons agents, 48 operational missiles, 30
warheads specifically fitted for chemical and biological weapons, and
a massive biological weapons facility at Al Hakam equipped to produce
anthrax and other deadly agents.

Over the past few months, as they have come closer and closer to
rooting out Iraq's remaining nuclear capacity, Saddam has undertaken
yet another gambit to thwart their ambitions.

By imposing debilitating conditions on the inspectors and declaring
key sites which have still not been inspected off limits, including, I
might add, one palace in Baghdad more than 2,600 acres large by
comparison, when you hear all this business about presidential sites
reflect our sovereignty, why do you want to come into a residence, the
White House complex is 18 acres. So you'll have some feel for this.

One of these presidential sites is about the size of Washington, D.C.
That's about how many acres did you tell me it was? 40,000 acres.
We're not talking about a few rooms here with delicate personal
matters involved.

It is obvious that there is an attempt here, based on the whole
history of this operation since 1991, to protect whatever remains of
his capacity to produce weapons of mass destruction, the missiles to
deliver them, and the feed stocks necessary to produce them.

The UNSCOM inspectors believe that Iraq still has stockpiles of
chemical and biological munitions, a small force of Scud-type
missiles, and the capacity to restart quickly its production program
and build many, many more weapons.

Now, against that background, let us remember the past here. It is
against that background that we have repeatedly and unambiguously made
clear our preference for a diplomatic solution.

The inspection system works. The inspection system has worked in the
face of lies, stonewalling, obstacle after obstacle after obstacle.
The people who have done that work deserve the thanks of civilized
people throughout the world.

It has worked. That is all we want. And if we can find a diplomatic
way to do what has to be done, to do what he promised to do at the end
of the Gulf War, to do what should have been done within 15 days
within 15 days of the agreement at the end of the Gulf War, if we can
find a diplomatic way to do that, that is by far our preference.

But to be a genuine solution, and not simply one that glosses over the
remaining problem, a diplomatic solution must include or meet a clear,
immutable, reasonable, simple standard.

Iraq must agree and soon, to free, full, unfettered access to these
sites anywhere in the country. There can be no dilution or
diminishment of the integrity of the inspection system that UNSCOM has
put in place.

Now those terms are nothing more or less than the essence of what he
agreed to at the end of the Gulf War. The Security Council, many times
since, has reiterated this standard. If he accepts them, force will
not be necessary. If he refuses or continues to evade his obligations
through more tactics of delay and deception, he and he alone will be
to blame for the consequences.

I ask all of you to remember the record here what he promised to do
within 15 days of the end of the Gulf War, what he repeatedly refused
to do, what we found out in 1995, what the inspectors have done
against all odds. We have no business agreeing to any resolution of
this that does not include free, unfettered access to the remaining
sites by people who have integrity and proven confidence in the
inspection business. That should be our standard. That's what UNSCOM
has done, and that's why I have been fighting for it so hard. And
that's why the United States should insist upon it.

Now, let's imagine the future. What if he fails to comply, and we fail
to act, or we take some ambiguous third route which gives him yet more
opportunities to develop this program of weapons of mass destruction
and continue to press for the release of the sanctions and continue to
ignore the solemn commitments that he made?

Well, he will conclude that the international community has lost its
will. He will then conclude that he can go right on and do more to
rebuild an arsenal of devastating destruction.

And some day, some way, I guarantee you, he'll use the arsenal. And I
think every one of you who's really worked on this for any length of
time believes that, too.

Now we have spent several weeks building up our forces in the Gulf,
and building a coalition of like-minded nations. Our force posture
would not be possible without the support of Saudi Arabia, Kuwait,
Bahrain, the GCC states and Turkey. Other friends and allies have
agreed to provide forces, bases or logistical support, including the
United Kingdom, Germany, Spain and Portugal, Denmark and the
Netherlands, Hungary and Poland and the Czech Republic, Argentina,
Iceland, Australia and New Zealand and our friends and neighbors in
Canada.

That list is growing, not because anyone wants military action, but
because there are people in this world who believe the United Nations
resolutions should mean something, because they understand what UNSCOM
has achieved, because they remember the past, and because they can
imagine what the future will be depending on what we do now.

If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is
clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's
weapons of mass destruction program. We want to seriously reduce his
capacity to threaten his neighbors.

I am quite confident, from the briefing I have just received from our
military leaders, that we can achieve the objective and secure our
vital strategic interests.

Let me be clear: A military operation cannot destroy all the weapons
of mass destruction capacity. But it can and will leave him
significantly worse off than he is now in terms of the ability to
threaten the world with these weapons or to attack his neighbors.

And he will know that the international community continues to have a
will to act if and when he threatens again. Following any strike, we
will carefully monitor Iraq's activities with all the means at our
disposal. If he seeks to rebuild his weapons of mass destruction, we
will be prepared to strike him again.

The economic sanctions will remain in place until Saddam complies
fully with all U.N. resolutions.

Consider this already these sanctions have denied him $110 billion.
Imagine how much stronger his armed forces would be today, how many
more weapons of mass destruction operations he would have hidden
around the country if he had been able to spend even a small fraction
of that amount for a military rebuilding.

We will continue to enforce a no-fly zone from the southern suburbs of
Baghdad to the Kuwait border and in northern Iraq, making it more
difficult for Iraq to walk over Kuwait again or threaten the Kurds in
the north.

Now, let me say to all of you here as all of you know the weightiest
decision any president ever has to make is to send our troops into
harm's way. And force can never be the first answer. But sometimes,
it's the only answer.

You are the best prepared, best equipped, best trained fighting force
in the world. And should it prove necessary for me to exercise the
option of force, your commanders will do everything they can to
protect the safety of all the men and women under their command.

No military action, however, is risk-free. I know that the people we
may call upon in uniform are ready. The American people have to be
ready as well.

Dealing with Saddam Hussein requires constant vigilance. We have seen
that constant vigilance pays off. But it requires constant vigilance.
Since the Gulf War, we have pushed back every time Saddam has posed a
threat.

When Baghdad plotted to assassinate former President Bush, we struck
hard at Iraq's intelligence headquarters.

When Saddam threatened another invasion by amassing his troops in
Kuwait along the Kuwaiti border in 1994, we immediately deployed our
troops, our ships, our planes, and Saddam backed down.

When Saddam forcefully occupied Irbil in northern Iraq, we broadened
our control over Iraq's skies by extending the no-fly zone.

But there is no better example, again I say, than the U.N. weapons
inspection system itself. Yes, he has tried to thwart it in every
conceivable way, but the discipline, determination, year-in-year-out
effort of these weapons inspectors is doing the job. And we seek to
finish the job. Let there be no doubt, we are prepared to act.

But Saddam Hussein could end this crisis tomorrow simply by letting
the weapons inspectors complete their mission. He made a solemn
commitment to the international community to do that and to give up
his weapons of mass destruction a long time ago now. One way or the
other, we are determined to see that he makes good on his own promise.

Saddam Hussein's Iraq reminds us of what we learned in the 20th
century and warns us of what we must know about the 21st. In this
century, we learned through harsh experience that the only answer to
aggression and illegal behavior is firmness, determination, and when
necessary action.

In the next century, the community of nations may see more and more
the very kind of threat Iraq poses now a rogue state with weapons of
mass destruction ready to use them or provide them to terrorists, drug
traffickers or organized criminals who travel the world among us
unnoticed.

If we fail to respond today, Saddam and all those who would follow in
his footsteps will be emboldened tomorrow by the knowledge that they
can act with impunity, even in the face of a clear message from the
United Nations Security Council and clear evidence of a weapons of
mass destruction program.

But if we act as one, we can safeguard our interests and send a clear
message to every would-be tyrant and terrorist that the international
community does have the wisdom and the will and the way to protect
peace and security in a new era. That is the future I ask you all to
imagine. That is the future I ask our allies to imagine.

If we look at the past and imagine that future, we will act as one
together. And we still have, God willing, a chance to find a
diplomatic resolution to this, and if not, God willing, the chance to
do the right thing for our children and grandchildren.

Thank you very much.