Pretty Incredible Development - Is the War on Terror Over?

  • Thread starter Thread starter 1X83Z
  • 23 comments
  • 637 views
1

1X83Z

Premium
Messages
20,944
United States
usa
Iraq Unconditionally Accepts Return of U.N. Weapons Inspectors

Iraq unconditionally accepted the return of U.N. weapons
inspectors late Monday, Secretary General Kofi Annan said.

"I can confirm to you that I have received a letter from the
Iraqi authorities conveying its decision to allow the return
of inspectors without conditions to continue their work."
Read More: http://www.nytimes.com/?8na
Click to expand...

Y'all think the War on Terrorism is over?
 
if the inspectors are denied access anywhere, or hassled in any way, then it will be Bombs Over Baghdad.

but what happens if the inspectors are let in, and they find weapons? will they simply destroy them, or will there be greater action taken?

and even if they find some weapons, there is no way they will find all of them. so where does that leave the conflict?

weapons inspections are definately better than war, but we will have to see how effective they are. the conflict hasnt been averted, just delayed.
 
Well, no - Iraq and the terrorist network, whilst interconnected, are two separate things.

I'm hopeful this will mean no war for the short to medium term, but Dubya is chomping on the bit to go - any small issue will result, as SaleenASL so succintly put it, in 'bombs over Baghdad'.

Personally I don't want a war - settlement on my new house goes through today, and given how financial stretched my partner and I will be for the next three months, I really didn't need the economic shock a war there would have created.
 
Originally posted by SaleenASL
yah, war wouldnt be good for a number of reasons.

im just not sure how weapons inspections can end this matter, long term.
Click to expand...

Unless they find something, I don't think they can.

The only way I can see this ending, long term, is:
- there is a war and Saddam is overthrown (which would happen if inspectors find something, or if the US lose patience and/or come up with further evidence as to weapons/terrorism)
- Saddam is deposed internally (VERY unlikely).

There was some comment yesterday from the British that there was evidence that Iraq had some involvement in training Al Qaeda/<fill in other terrorist organisation here>. If this is the case the US will instantly move on Iraq, citing 9/11 as an Act of War.
 
I would tend to think that since Iraq has decided to let the weapons inspectors back in, is that over the 4 or so years that the weapons inspectors were not allowed in, Saddam has finally finished hiding all the stuff that would get him into hot water.

Saddam might be sitting back now knowing that all his weapons are hidden now and saying, "Sure, let the inspectors come back in. I have nothing to hide!"

But I don't know, food for thought I guess.
 
exactly. even if we find some weapons, how can we be sure we have found them all. if some weapons are destroyed, some can still remain undiscovered, and pose a global threat.
 
Originally posted by vat_man
Well, no - Iraq and the terrorist network, whilst interconnected, are two separate things.
Click to expand...


Yes, vat_man - brilliant people like you and I (;))understand this, but I'm not sure George Bush does. Definitely, if inspectors are let in "unconditionally," there will be no attack.
 
Originally posted by M5Power


Yes, vat_man - brilliant people like you and I (;))understand this, but I'm not sure George Bush does. [/B]
Click to expand...

mister W doesnt know alot about what goes on. i hope the so called war on terrorism is over.
 
Originally posted by M5Power


Yes, vat_man - brilliant people like you and I (;))understand this, but I'm not sure George Bush does. Definitely, if inspectors are let in "unconditionally," there will be no attack. [/B]
Click to expand...

Sorry to sound cynical, but I think Dubya does understand this - he just doesn't care.

The rather cynical response from the US doesn't fill me with hope - I still think there's a 60-70% chance of war on Iraq within the next twelve months. I think Dubya's just looking for an excuse.

From what I've been hearing the US military is geared to go - and it'd be unlike the US to be dressed up and just wear the party being cancelled.
 
I'm a big wait and see kind of person. Regardless of the kind of support Iraq is lacking, I suspect the motive for their current complacency has more to do with regime preservation. Now, Saddam can keep his empire after serving pennance for UN resolution defiance.

He's managed to weasel into a more favorable position than he was in.
 
Originally posted by vat_man
Well, no - Iraq and the terrorist network, whilst interconnected, are two separate things.
Click to expand...
I don't know about that... Iraq is Saddam, and Saddam is a terrorist.
 
Originally posted by Jordan
I don't know about that... Iraq is Saddam, and Saddam is a terrorist.
Click to expand...
I was actually referring to Al Qaeda - I've no doubt the two are interconnected - and in the context of the war of terror I think the Iraq war is a separate issue.

...and after Bush's comments overnight, I revise my my probability of war to 80-90%.
 
I don't think this means the war is over...but it is pleasant to have a "cooling off" period. I had almost convinced myself that we were headed for World War Three in a real hurry.
 
A lot rides on what happens over the next four weeks, like:
- how quickly inspectors will be let in
- just how unrestricted their access will be (for example, will they be allowed into Saddam's palaces?
- what goes on at the UN Security Council. China and Russia have indicated they don't think there's a need for a UN resolution on this, and US has indicated they think there is (specifically, the moment Iraq play up it's military action)
- what evidence turns up regarding Iraq's involvement in terrorist training.

I have heard rumours that the UK has fairly explicit evidence of Iraqi involvement in training and arms supply to various terrorist groups (including Al Qaeda), but I can't for the life of me work out why this evidence has yet to be released - you'd have thought that with all the build-up they'd have been chomping on the bit to release a 'smoking gun', especially with Blair's tough talk.
 
They don't think there is a need? Perhaps not, but the moral/ethical consistency out of parts of Europe and Asia is inspiring.
 
Originally posted by Talentless
They don't think there is a need? Perhaps not, but the moral/ethical consistency out of parts of Europe and Asia is inspiring.
Click to expand...

Uhh, I really don't think any member of the UN Security Council has what you'd call an inspiring record on that front.
 
Perhaps not, but I think more than the S.C, which is claimed to be pro American, or some such thing, is guilty of it.
 

Latest Posts

Back