Re: IRAN.....Diplomacy vs. Belligerence...

[TooTall]

Kerry and Clinton, gullible or afraid. OK! It sure looked to me like they were the war mongers. They even voted that way in the Senate.

I posted on another thread the numbers of Dems vs Repubs who voted for and against Iraq. The Dems come off MUCH better...

What LEADING Democrats voted nay?

Irrelevant. 126 Dems in congress voted against it, while 82 for. 215 Repubs voted for it while a paltry 6 voted against it. The Dem ratio against the war in the house far exceeded that of the GOP.

48 GoP senators voted for it, 1 against. 21 Dem Senators voted against it, while 29 voted for.

An absolute failure by the warmongering right.

Overall 147 Dem politicians voted against it while 103 voted for it. As a political party the vast majority were against it.

Overall 263 GoP politicians voted for it, while 7 against. That is a massive majority for the war.
Irrelevant. 126 Dems in congress voted against it, while 82 for. 215 Repubs voted for it while a paltry 6 voted against it. The Dem ratio against the war in the house far exceeded that of the GOP.

48 GoP senators voted for it, 1 against. 21 Dem Senators voted against it, while 29 voted for.

An absolute failure by the warmongering right.

Overall 147 Dem politicians voted against it while 103 voted for it. As a political party the vast majority were against it.

Overall 263 GoP politicians voted for it, while 7 against. That is a massive majority for the war.

It is rather amusing that more Democrats than Republicans voted to protect a dictator that was starving and using poison gas to kill his own people.

 

[Dr Grump]

It is rather amusing that more Democrats than Republicans voted to protect a dictator that was starving and using poison gas to kill his own people.

If you're gonna go to war with every dictator, you're gonna be very busy...

 

[TooTall]

It is rather amusing that more Democrats than Republicans voted to protect a dictator that was starving and using poison gas to kill his own people.

If you're gonna go to war with every dictator, you're gonna be very busy...

Only the ones that threaten the entire world's oil supply would be a start, as well as those that the UN declares in material breach of a UN mandated cease fire and is authorized by a majority in the US Congress.
We will leave the rest of them alone.

 

[ogibillm]

It is rather amusing that more Democrats than Republicans voted to protect a dictator that was starving and using poison gas to kill his own people.

If you're gonna go to war with every dictator, you're gonna be very busy...

Only the ones that threaten the entire world's oil supply would be a start, as well as those that the UN declares in material breach of a UN mandated cease fire and is authorized by a majority in the US Congress.
We will leave the rest of them alone.

you left out the wmds. why would you leave out the wmds?

 

[TooTall]

It is rather amusing that more Democrats than Republicans voted to protect a dictator that was starving and using poison gas to kill his own people.

If you're gonna go to war with every dictator, you're gonna be very busy...

Only the ones that threaten the entire world's oil supply would be a start, as well as those that the UN declares in material breach of a UN mandated cease fire and is authorized by a majority in the US Congress.
We will leave the rest of them alone.

you left out the wmds. why would you leave out the wmds?

Why do you think the UN declared Iraq in material breach of the cease fire? I will tell you since you don't seem to know very much. Iraq did not or would not disclose the location of or account for all of the WMD's that they had after several tons had been turned over and destroyed.

 

[Dr Grump]

Only the ones that threaten the entire world's oil supply would be a start, as well as those that the UN declares in material breach of a UN mandated cease fire and is authorized by a majority in the US Congress.
We will leave the rest of them alone.

So when do you invade your friends Saudi Arabia?

Or how about North Korea?

What threat was Saddam? Hint- None..

 

[Dr Grump]

Why do you think the UN declared Iraq in material breach of the cease fire? I will tell you since you don't seem to know very much. Iraq did not or would not disclose the location of or account for all of the WMD's that they had after several tons had been turned over and destroyed.

That's because he had none. at the end of the day Bush's war of choice has cost the unnecessary deaths of thousands

 

[TooTall]

Only the ones that threaten the entire world's oil supply would be a start, as well as those that the UN declares in material breach of a UN mandated cease fire and is authorized by a majority in the US Congress.
We will leave the rest of them alone.

So when do you invade your friends Saudi Arabia?

Or how about North Korea?

What threat was Saddam? Hint- None..

As soon as the UN declares them in material breach of a cease fire and the US Congress gives the President the authority to do so.

 

[Dr Grump]

As soon as the UN declares them in material breach of a cease fire and the US Congress gives the President the authority to do so.

Oh so NOW the UN matters...

 

[TooTall]

As soon as the UN declares them in material breach of a cease fire and the US Congress gives the President the authority to do so.

Oh so NOW the UN matters...

'Only to avoid being accused of violating international law. If they would do what they were designed to do they would be setting up shelters in friendly middle eastern countries for the million of refugees fleeing Syria. Of course that would take some leadership from Obama to introduce a resolution in the UN.

I noticed you ignored the US Congress. NOW they don't matter to you?

 

[Dr Grump]

I noticed you ignored the US Congress. NOW they don't matter to you?

US Congress never has. I'm a New Zealander living in Australia.

I just love how the right wing in the US generally can't stand the UN, but is somehow their best mate when it comes to piss-poor excuses for invading Iraq...

 

[TooTall]

I noticed you ignored the US Congress. NOW they don't matter to you?

US Congress never has. I'm a New Zealander living in Australia.

I just love how the right wing in the US generally can't stand the UN, but is somehow their best mate when it comes to piss-poor excuses for invading Iraq...

The UN doesn't determine what our President does, the US Congress does. What you called piss poor excuses the members of the UN considered factual based on their investigation.

 

[Dr Grump]

The UN doesn't determine what our President does, the US Congress does. What you called piss poor excuses the members of the UN considered factual based on their investigation.

Really? Is that why they told Bush NOT to invade Iraq? And it was by far inconclusive. You hear of a weapons inspector called Hans Blix? He disagrees with you assessment.

That aside, North Korea and Saudi Arabia show more signs of problems for the west than Iraq ever did. But they've never tried to kill Shrub's daddy.

 

[TooTall]

The UN doesn't determine what our President does, the US Congress does. What you called piss poor excuses the members of the UN considered factual based on their investigation.

Really? Is that why they told Bush NOT to invade Iraq? And it was by far inconclusive. You hear of a weapons inspector called Hans Blix? He disagrees with you assessment.

That aside, North Korea and Saudi Arabia show more signs of problems for the west than Iraq ever did. But they've never tried to kill Shrub's daddy.

This conclusion to the UN by Hans Blix was interesting to say the least.

By contrast, the task of "disarmament" foreseen in resolution 687 (1991) and the progress on "key remaining disarmament tasks" foreseen in resolution 1284 (1999) as well as the "disarmament obligations", which Iraq was given a "final opportunity to comply with" under resolution 1441 (2002), were always required to be fulfilled in a shorter time span.

Regrettably, the high degree of cooperation required of Iraq for disarmament through inspection was not forthcoming in 1991. Despite the elimination, under UNSCOM and IAEA supervision, of large amounts of weapons, weapons-related items and installations over the years, the task remained incomplete, when inspectors were withdrawn almost 8 years later at the end of 1998.

If Iraq had provided the necessary cooperation in 1991, the phase of disarmament - under resolution 687 (1991) - could have been short and a decade of sanctions could have been avoided. Today, three months after the adoption of resolution 1441 (2002), the period of disarmament through inspection could still be short, if "immediate, active and unconditional cooperation" with UNMOVIC and the IAEA were to be forthcoming.
Full text: Hans Blix's briefing to the UN security council