Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Bush's foreign policy was guided by the think tanks and foreign policy leaders after the cold war.
Bush's foreign policy of kicking UN inspectors out and then invading Iraq became defined as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. There wouid have been no ground invasion of Iraq were it not for the Pentagon and WTC being hit on Bush's watch.
Bush and most of the country's of the world were correct to demand that Iraq be brought into compliance with the UNSC resolutions in the WMD matter.
Where Bush went wrong was to seek war rather than let the inspections continue.
Bush's foreign policy was guided by the think tanks and foreign policy leaders after the cold war.
Bush's foreign policy of kicking UN inspectors out and then invading Iraq became defined as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. There wouid have been no ground invasion of Iraq were it not for the Pentagon and WTC being hit on Bush's watch.
Bush and most of the country's of the world were correct to demand that Iraq be brought into compliance with the UNSC resolutions in the WMD
People find reasons to do anything malicious for all kinds of reasons. A reasonable person should be able to understand that Bush was given a green light by his policy makers to do as he saw fit based upon the stupidity of the masses. Most people in this retarded country couldn't tell the difference between a Sunni or Shiite, let alone find Iraq on a map. Useful idiots.
Might as well have been the boiler explosion in the U.S. Maine.
The 54% majority of Americans did not need to know the difference between Sunni and Shiite to know that Bush had no business invading Iraq without UN authorization. The majority were not stupid. Bush did a stupid thing and lied about why he was doing it.
It says that within the body of resolution 1441, that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations.
Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:
The UNSC in Resolution 1441:
{{ 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);
2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;
4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;
11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;
12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;
13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;
14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}
Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.
Do you recognize that fact now?
Bush's foreign policy of kicking UN inspectors out and then invading Iraq became defined as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. There wouid have been no ground invasion of Iraq were it not for the Pentagon and WTC being hit on Bush's watch.
Bush and most of the country's of the world were correct to demand that Iraq be brought into compliance with the UNSC resolutions in the WMD
People find reasons to do anything malicious for all kinds of reasons. A reasonable person should be able to understand that Bush was given a green light by his policy makers to do as he saw fit based upon the stupidity of the masses. Most people in this retarded country couldn't tell the difference between a Sunni or Shiite, let alone find Iraq on a map. Useful idiots.
Might as well have been the boiler explosion in the U.S. Maine.
The 54% majority of Americans did not need to know the difference between Sunni and Shiite to know that Bush had no business invading Iraq without UN authorization. The majority were not stupid. Bush did a stupid thing and lied about why he was doing it.
The US does not need UN authorization to invade Iraq.
It says that within the body of resolution 1441, that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations.
Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:
The UNSC in Resolution 1441:
{{ 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);
2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;
4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;
11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;
12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;
13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;
14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}
Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.
Do you recognize that fact now?
Where is the clause that President Bush used that said if he decided too, even though we signed on to SCR 1441, he could simply opt out and invade and occupy Iraq without the UNSC or it's resolutions?
Recognizing the threat Iraqs non-compliance with Council resolutions and
proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and long-range missiles poses to
international peace and security,
Recalling that its resolution 678 (1990) authorized Member States to use all
necessary means to uphold and implement its resolution 660 (1990) of 2 August
1990 and all relevant resolutions subsequent to resolution 660 (1990) and to restore
international peace and security in the area,
Recalling that in its resolution 687 (1991) the Council declared that a ceasefire
would be based on acceptance by Iraq of the provisions of that resolution, including
the obligations on Iraq contained therein,
Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its
obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular
through Iraqs failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA,
and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687
Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that
it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its
obligations;
Its not a lie that the United States and other intelligence agencies around the world had intelligence that Saddam had WMD.
You are not responding to what I've written. On 07-13-2014 10:24 AM I wrote, I have presented a case that Bush lied on March 17, 2003 that he claimed to have intelligence that left no doubt that Iraq was concealing the most lethal weapons ever devised from UN inspectors."
No Democrats made that claim. I am not disputing that "the United States and other intelligence agencies around the world had intelligence that Saddam had WMD" in the past.
We all know that Saddam "had" WMD. Bush lied on March 17, 2003 because ten days before that he exposed the truth that he did not have any such incriminating intelligence that would justify a US and UK invasion.
If some intelligence was obtained after March 7, 2003 Bush was obligated as a UNSC member nation to offer that intelligence to the UN inspectors to be checked out. There was no offer because the inspectors left on March 18 an 19 because Bush was planning to invade. Are you suggesting that he lied to the UNSC by concealing intelligence from them?
It says that within the body of resolution 1441, that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations.
Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:
The UNSC in Resolution 1441:
{{ 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);
2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;
4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;
11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;
12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;
13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;
14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}
Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.
Do you recognize that fact now?
We invaded Iraq because hussein kept violating un sanctions and not allowing inspectors where they needed to be.
There were no serious reports by Blix or el Beradai that the 2003 UNSC inspections by UNMOVIC or the IAEA were denied full access to sites by Iraq. Blix said that Iraq cooperated on process immediately with very few issues. Blix referred to cooperation on process meaning access to sites and other logistical requirements to allow the inspectors to do their work.
Saddam Hussein in December 2002 offered Bush to send US military and intelligence inspectors into Iraq to look for WMD firsthand. That offer in no way can be construed to mean that Iraq would not let inspectors access to all sites. You are quite wrong.
Bush's foreign policy was guided by the think tanks and foreign policy leaders after the cold war.
Bush's foreign policy of kicking UN inspectors out and then invading Iraq became defined as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. There wouid have been no ground invasion of Iraq were it not for the Pentagon and WTC being hit on Bush's watch.
Bush and most of the country's of the world were correct to demand that Iraq be brought into compliance with the UNSC resolutions in the WMD matter.
Where Bush went wrong was to seek war rather than let the inspections continue.
Bush's foreign policy of kicking UN inspectors out and then invading Iraq became defined as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. There wouid have been no ground invasion of Iraq were it not for the Pentagon and WTC being hit on Bush's watch.
Bush and most of the country's of the world were correct to demand that Iraq be brought into compliance with the UNSC resolutions in the WMD
People find reasons to do anything malicious for all kinds of reasons. A reasonable person should be able to understand that Bush was given a green light by his policy makers to do as he saw fit based upon the stupidity of the masses. Most people in this retarded country couldn't tell the difference between a Sunni or Shiite, let alone find Iraq on a map. Useful idiots.
Might as well have been the boiler explosion in the U.S. Maine.
The 54% majority of Americans did not need to know the difference between Sunni and Shiite to know that Bush had no business invading Iraq without UN authorization. The majority were not stupid. Bush did a stupid thing and lied about why he was doing it.
No one lied, and Bush had more support for the military action he took from the public than his father did for the first Gulf War. He also had overwhelming congressional approval. He was then re-elected President in 2004! That's called approval by tens of millions of people, far greater than any poll could demonstrate.
It says that within the body of resolution 1441, that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations.
Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:
The UNSC in Resolution 1441:
{{ “1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);
“2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;
4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;
11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;
12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;
13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;
14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}
Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.
Do you recognize that fact now?
Where is the clause that President Bush used that said if he decided too, even though we signed on to SCR 1441, he could simply opt out and invade and occupy Iraq without the UNSC or it's resolutions?
It says that within the body of resolution 1441, that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations.
Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:
The UNSC in Resolution 1441:
{{ 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);
2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;
4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;
11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;
12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;
13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;
14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}
Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.
Do you recognize that fact now?
Sorry, but you should read the following: 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), !
It specifically states that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations. Yes, 1441 states this.
The United States already had the authorization to use military force from resolution 678. Nothing in 1441 changes that and 1441 reaffirms resolution 678!
The 54% majority of Americans did not need to know the difference between Sunni and Shiite to know that Bush had no business invading Iraq without UN authorization. The majority were not stupid. Bush did a stupid thing and lied about why he was doing it.
The US does not need UN authorization to invade Iraq.
That is true, but it helps with foreign relations to get approval.
Booooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooshhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh Lied people Diedddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddddd
You've got that right. Pretty low class of you to be joking about it.
Are you backing away from your mistaken claim on 07-12-2014 at 02:28 PM when you wrote, "1441 already says that SADDAM is in material breech and in violation of resolution 1441 itself." You need to admit your error because the language of 1441 is written as follows:
The UNSC in Resolution 1441:
{{ 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), in particular through Iraq's failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and the IAEA, and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of resolution 687 (1991);
2.Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and subsequent resolutions of the Council;
4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to comply with, and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations and will be reported to the Council for assessment in accordance with paragraph 11 and 12 below;
11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by Iraq with inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with its disarmament obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under this resolution;
12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in accordance with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and the need for full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order to secure international peace and security;
13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned Iraq that it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued violations of its obligations;
14. Decides to remain seized of the matter. }}
Iraq was not in material breach of 1441 when it was written and passed in November 2002. That is a ridiculous claim.
Do you recognize that fact now?
Sorry, but you should read the following: 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), !
It specifically states that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations. Yes, 1441 states this.
The United States already had the authorization to use military force from resolution 678. Nothing in 1441 changes that and 1441 reaffirms resolution 678!
".....while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process..."
The US signed onto SCR 1441 and the reneged on the obligation when:
"The government of Iraq decided not to avail itself of its final opportunity under Resolution 1441 and has clearly committed additional violations," Negroponte said.
Without following the terms of that agreement.
U.S. Cites 1991 U.N. Cease-Fire Resolution as the Legal Basis for Its Invasion - Los Angeles Times
Sorry, but you should read the following: 1.Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687 (1991), !
It specifically states that Iraq is in material breech of its obligations. Yes, 1441 states this.
The United States already had the authorization to use military force from resolution 678. Nothing in 1441 changes that and 1441 reaffirms resolution 678!
".....while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by this resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament obligations under relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up an enhanced inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified completion the disarmament process..."
The US signed onto SCR 1441 and the reneged on the obligation when:
"The government of Iraq decided not to avail itself of its final opportunity under Resolution 1441 and has clearly committed additional violations," Negroponte said.
Without following the terms of that agreement.
U.S. Cites 1991 U.N. Cease-Fire Resolution as the Legal Basis for Its Invasion - Los Angeles Times
Regardless of the "Final Oportunity", it clearly states that Iraq is in MATERIAL BREECH OF ITS OBLIGATIONS. Being offered a "final opportunity" does NOT change that FACT!
It also does not change the fact that the United States and other member states already had authorization under prior UN resolutions reaffirmed in 1441, to use military force and had been using military force against Iraq, EVERY YEAR since 1991!
Regardless of the "Final Oportunity", it clearly states that Iraq is in MATERIAL BREECH OF ITS OBLIGATIONS. Being offered a "final opportunity" does NOT change that FACT!.
The US does not need UN authorization to invade Iraq.
Its up to Saddam to resolve the issues and bring about compliance in total and full with every aspect of all 17 UN Security Council Resolutions passed under Chapter VII rules.
