What if????? WHY? talking thinking out loud

[BTS]

Ok I am just talking & thinking out loud here.....



I am thinking how brave all the soldiers are to defend my RIGHT to WRITE this........



At the same time I am PISSED that they are so HATED around the world for serving their country.....



I am thinking how many mothers grandmothers grandfathers & fathers have sons and daughters in the war on terrorism.



Then I think this:



What if the UN backed the invasion of Iraq?



What if we were supported WORLD wide and went in with FULL force?



How many would have died?



Less than have so far?





I really think less would have been killed and this war would have been over with a show of the WHOLE worlds force.



How many sanctions did the the UN have against Iraq prior to the US's invasion.............





......... Remember the "OIL FOR FOOD SCAM?"......



This is when it all ("OIL FOR FOOD SCAM")started....







Resolution 712 (1991) of 19 September 1991 allowed for a partial lifting of the embargo, which would have enabled Iraq to sell some oil to use the proceeds for humanitarian purposes. In return, Iraq would have been subject to strict UN monitoring of the contracts and distribution of humanitarian goods bought with the oil revenues.







I like this in the resolution and wanted to reprint:



"In return, Iraq would have been subject to strict UN monitoring of the contracts and distribution of humanitarian goods bought with the oil revenues. "



JUST LOOK at ALL these resolutions from the toothless UN........

And ask yourself if they bluffed with their resolutions then ask did Bush bluff......



Then ASK........... Who do you want to protect you from terrorism?

A BLUffer (UN) or a NON Bluffer (Bush)????????



I know my choice and I stand by it still today







USE OF SANCTIONS UNDER CHAPTER VII


OF THE UN CHARTER


(Updated January 2006)




IRAQ
















Resolution 661 (1990) of 6 August 1990 imposed economic sanctions on Iraq, including a full trade embargo barring all imports from and exports to Iraq, excepting only medical supplies, foodstuffs, and other items of humanitarian need, as determined by the Security Council sanctions committee, which was also established by Resolution 661. The sanctions committee is chaired by the Ambassador of Ghana, with the delegations of Congo and Denmark providing vice chairmen. (Note: All 15 Council Members sit on the sanctions committee).

Resolution 687 (1991) of 3 April 1991, the cease-fire resolution, declared that the full trade embargo against Iraq would remain in place, pending periodic reviews every 60 days (para. 21) and every 120 days (para. 28) of Iraqi compliance with the obligations imposed under Resolution 687.

Resolution 712 (1991) of 19 September 1991 allowed for a partial lifting of the embargo, which would have enabled Iraq to sell some oil to use the proceeds for humanitarian purposes. In return, Iraq would have been subject to strict UN monitoring of the contracts and distribution of humanitarian goods bought with the oil revenues.

Resolution 986 (1995)of 14 April 1995 enables Iraq to sell up to $1 billion of oil every 90 days and use the proceeds for humanitarian supplies to the country. On 20 May 1996, the UN and the Government of Iraq concluded the Memorandum of Understanding that codified the practical arrangements for the implementation of the oil-for-food agreement. The sanctions committee subsequently adopted on 8 August 1996 the Procedures for the implementation of Resolution 986. On 9 December 1996, the Secretary-General reported to the Security Council (S/1996/1015) that all the steps necessary to ensure the effective implementation of Resolution 986 had been concluded. As a result, Resolution 986 went into effect at 00.01 hours Eastern Standard Time on 10 December 1996. The first food shipment arrived in Iraq on 20 March 1997.

Resolution 1051 (1996) of 27 March 1996 established the export/import monitoring system for Iraq. Iraq and countries exporting to Iraq must notify UNSCOM (United Nations Special Commission) and the IAEA (International Atomic Energy Agency) regarding the supply of "dual-use" items to Iraq. Such items are subject to inspection upon their arrival in Iraq as well as at the site where the items will be used.

Resolution 1111 (1997) of 4 June 1997 decided that the provisions of Resolution 986, except those contained in paragraphs 4,11 and 12, shall remain in force for another period of 180 days beginning at 00.01 hours, Eastern Daylight Time, on 8 June 1997; further decided to conduct a thorough review of all aspects of the implementation of this resolution 90 days after the entry into force of paragraph 1 and again prior to the end of the 180 day period, on receipt of the reports referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4, and expressed its intention, prior to the end of the 180 day period, to consider favourably renewal of the provisions of this resolution, provided that the reports referred to in paragraphs 3 and 4 indicate that those provisions are being satisfactorily implemented.

Resolution 1115 (1997) of 21 June 1997 decided not to conduct the reviews provided for in paragraphs 21 and 28 of resolution 687 (1991) until after the Special Commission submits its next consolidated progress report due on 11 October 1997, after which time those reviews will resume in accordance with Resolution 687.

Resolution 1129 (1997) of 12 September 1997 decided that the provisions of Resolution 1111 should remain in force, except that States are authorized to permit the import of petroleum and petroleum products originating in Iraq, including financial and other essential transactions directly relating thereto, sufficient to produce a sum not exceeding a total of one billion United States dollars within a period of 120 days from 00.01 hours, Eastern Daylight Time, on 8 June 1997 and, thereafter, a sum not exceeding a total of one billion United States dollars within a period of 60 days from 00.01 hours, Eastern Daylight Time, on 4 October 1997; and decided further that the provisions of paragraph 1 shall apply only to the period of implementation of Resolution 1111.

Resolution 1134 (1997) dated 23 October 1997 expressed the firm intention, if Iraq does not comply with paragraphs 2 and 3 of Resolution 1115, to adopt measures which would oblige all States to prevent without delay the entry into or transit through their territories of all Iraqi officials and members of the Iraqi armed forces who are responsible for or participate in the instances of non-compliance of paragraphs 2 and 3 of Resolution 1115. It decided not to conduct the reviews provided for in paragraphs 21 and 28 of Resolution 687 until after the next consolidated progress report of the Special Commission, due on 11 April 1998, after which those reviews will resume in accordance with Resolution 687, beginning on 26 April 1998.

Resolution 1137 (1997) dated 12 November 1997 imposed travel restrictions on all Iraqi officials and members of the Iraqi armed forces who were responsible for or participated in the instances of non-compliance including the denial of entry to Iraq to Special Commission officials on the grounds of their nationality and the denial of entry to sites designated by the Special Commission for inspection to Special Commission inspectors on the grounds of their nationality. The resolution decided that the review provided in paragraphs 21 and 28 of Resolution 687 shall resume in April 1998 in accordance with paragraph 8 of Resolution 1134, provided that the Government of Iraq shall have rescinded its decision of 29 October 1997 to impose conditions on cooperation with the Special Commission.

By Resolution 1143 (1997) of 4 December 1997 the Security Council decided that the provisions of Resolution 986, except those contained in paragraphs 4, 11 and 12, shall remain in force for another period of 180 days beginning at 00.01 hours, Eastern Standard Time, on 5 December 1997.

By Resolution 1153 (1998) of 20 February 1998 the Security Council decided that the provisions of Resolution 986, except those contained in paragraphs 4, 11 and 12, shall remain in force for a new period of 180 days beginning at 00.01 hours, Eastern Standard Time, on the day after the President of the Council has informed the members of the Council that he has received the report of the Secretary-General requested in paragraph 5 of Resolution 1153, on which date the provisions of Resolution 1143, if still in force, shall terminate, except as regards sums already produced pursuant to that resolution prior to that date.

Also by Resolution 1153, the Security Council decided that the authorization given to States by paragraph 1 of Resolution 986 shall permit the import of petroleum and petroleum products originating in Iraq, including financial and other essential transactions directly relating thereto, sufficient to produce a sum, in the 180-day period referred to in paragraph 1 of Resolution 1153, not exceeding a total of 5.256 billion United States dollars, of which the amounts recommended by the Secretary-General for the food/nutrition and health sectors should be allocated on a priority basis, and of which between 682 million United States dollars and 788 million United States dollars shall be used for the purpose referred to in paragraph 8 (b) of Resolution 986, except that if less than 5.256 billion United States dollars worth of petroleum or petroleum products is sold during the 180 days period, particular attention will be paid to meeting the urgent humanitarian needs in the food/nutrition and health sectors and the Secretary-General may provide a proportionately smaller amount for the purpose referred to in paragraph 8 (b) of Resolution 986.

By Resolution 1158 (1998) of 25 March 1998 the Security Council decided that the provisions of Resolution 1143 shall remain in force, subject to the provisions of Resolution 1153, except that States are authorized to permit the import of petroleum and petroleum products originating in Iraq, including financial and other essential transactions directly relating thereto, sufficient to produce a sum not exceeding a total of 1.4 billion United States dollars within the period of 90 days from 00.01 hours, Eastern Standard Time, on 5 March 1998.

Resolution 1175 (1998) of 19 June 1998 authorized States, subject to the provisions of paragraph 2 of the resolution, to permit, notwithstanding the provisions of paragraph 3 (c) of Resolution 661, the export to Iraq of the necessary parts and equipment to enable Iraq to increase the export of petroleum and petroleum products, in quantities sufficient to produce the sum established in paragraph 2 of Resolution 1153.

By the same resolution, the Committee established by Resolution 661, or a panel of experts appointed by that Committee may approve contracts for the parts and equipment and up to a total of 300 million United States dollars may be used for that purpose.

Resolution 1175 also noted that the distribution plan approved by the Secretary-General on 29 May 1998, or any new distribution plan agreed by the Government of Iraq and the Secretary-General, will remain in effect, as required, for each subsequent periodic renewal of the temporary humanitarian arrangements for Iraq and that, for this purpose, the plan will be kept under constant review and amended as necessary through the agreement of the Secretary-General and the Government of Iraq and in a manner consistent with Resolution 1153.

Resolution 1194 (1998) of 9 September 1998 decided not to conduct the review scheduled for October 1998 provided for in paragraphs 21 and 28 of Resolution 687, and not to conduct any further such reviews until Iraq rescinds its above-mentioned decision of 5 August 1998 and the Special Commission and the IAEA report to the Council that they are satisfied that they have been able to exercise the full range of activities provided for in their mandates, including inspections.

By Resolution 1194, the Security Council also reaffirmed its intention to act in accordance with the relevant provisions of Resolution 687 on the duration of the prohibitions referred to in that resolution and notes that by its failure so far to comply with its relevant obligations Iraq has delayed the moment when the Council can do so.

By Resolution 1210 (1998) of 24 November 1998, the Security Council decided that the provisions of Resolution 986, except those contained in paragraphs 4, 11 and 12, shall remain in force for a new period of 180 days beginning at 00.01 hours, Eastern Standard Time, on 26 November 1998. The resolution also decided that paragraph 2 of Resolution 1153 shall remain in force and shall apply to the above-mentioned 180-day period.

In January 1999, the Security Council decided to establish three panels on disarmament, humanitarian issues and prisoners of war and Kuwaiti property to discuss options that would lead to the full implementation of all relevant Security Council resolutions concerning Iraq. Ambassador Amorim (Brazil) chaired all three panels. He submitted the panels' reports in the spring of 1999 (S/1999/356), and the Council considered the recommendations contained therein.

Resolution 1242 (1999) of 21 May 1999, extended the oil-for-food programme for a further 180 days starting on 25 May 1999.

Resolution 1266 (1999) of 4 October 1999 decided that paragraph 2 of Resolution 1153, as extended by Resolution 1242, shall be modified to the extent necessary to authorize States to permit the import of petroleum and petroleum products originating in Iraq, including financial and other essential transactions directly related thereto, sufficient to produce an additional sum, beyond that provided for by Resolution 1242, equivalent to the total shortfall of revenues authorized but not generated under Resolutions 1210 and 1153, 3.04 billion United States dollars, within the period of 180 days from 00.01 hours, eastern standard time, on 25 May 1999.

Resolution 1281 (1999)of 10 December 1999, extended the oil-for-food programme for a further 180 days starting on 12 December 1999 (phase VII).

On 17 December 1999, after several months of intensive consultations, the Security Council adopted Resolution 1284 (1999), stressing the need for a comprehensive approach to the full implementation of all relevant Security Council resolutions and Iraq compliance with these resolutions. The resolution established the United Nations Monitoring, Verification and Inspection Commission (UNMOVIC) to undertake the responsibilities of the former UNSCOM, which was charged with monitoring the elimination of weapons of mass destruction in Iraq. The resolution also removed the ceiling on Iraqi oil exports and provided for additional specific arrangements for facilitating humanitarian supplies to Iraq, including the conditional suspension of the sanctions regime.

On 8 June 2000, the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1302 (2000) by which it extended the "oil for food" programme for a further 180-day period beginning 9 June 2000. The Council repeatedly extended the programme for 180-day periods over the following years.

Then, on 14 May 2002, the Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 1409 (2002), which adopted a revised Goods Review List of military-related goods or commodities, which was to enter into effect on 30 May 2002. From that date onward, States are authorised to sell or supply any commodities not included on the Goods Review List, while the Council would regularly conduct thorough reviews of the Goods Review List.

By Resolution 1483 (2003), adopted 22 May 2003, the Security Council determined that, except for prohibitions related to the sale or supply to Iraq or arms and related material, all prohibitions related to trade with Iraq and other sanctions measures established by Resolution 661 (1990) and subsequent resolutions shall no longer apply.

[Accountable]

The UN is toothless, and should be, regardless of its charter. It should never have been allowed to be anything more than a debate club to help reach international consensus.



Had this been the case, there never would have been the toothless and useless resolutions (what an ironic term, considering what happens with most New Year's resolutions). The first Gulf War would have been the end of Hussein, assuming he ever would have come to power.



The UN is a parasite, sucking political power and money from the member nations for the benefit of the member ambassadors. It may have been necessary when it was created, but it does more harm than good now.

[Galbally]

I think that trying to pin the blame on the UN for the Iraq war is slightly ridiculous no? I mean the reason why there was so much disquiet at the time of the invasion was precisely because U.N. weapons inspectors could not find any serious evidence for WMDs and were requesting more time to look, (and erm, the reason was because there were none, so there goes the supposed premise of this war), also many countries simply believed that invading Iraq was a bad idea and they were not going to get into something they didn't think was right or wise, given the way it has turned out, it would appear that for once the French had a point.

I an not the greatest fan of the UN either, but I am unsure of what other talking shop would work given the world we live in. At least its a forum within which the countries of the world get to let off a bit of steam. It also does useful work in places such as Africa through unicef and other resources.

[Accountable]

I'm not blaming the UN for the current war. Jr used the UN resolutions (disappointed looks and finger-shaking really) to help his case to move. I'm talking about the first Gulf War. That's when we should have gone in and gotten Hussein.



We should never have an international body with the power to use our military for their purposes, full stop.

[spot]

If we step back to "the original thought which sparked the discussion, "I am thinking how brave all the soldiers are to defend my RIGHT to WRITE this", perhaps we could ask who, anywhere, is seeking to attack that right?

Do we envisage an Iranian army annexing Texas? Is California going to wake up one morning to find a million Chinese troops parachuted in and holding the airfields?

The only thing, it seems to me, that's going to change the rights of citizens of the USA, is the will of the people of the USA. If half of you abandon Christianity for Islam, for example, then maybe you'll have an internal negotiation on incorporating Sharia principles into your Constitutional arrangements, but no Ayatollah in the mountain fastness of Persia is going to force it on you.

Where's the "enemy of freedom" with the power to cancel your right to write this, BTS? Abroad? I've never seen a single hint of how anyone abroad is meant to be able to achieve it, just rubbish about "they want a single worldwide Islamic Nation" as though, even if they did, they could.

Your brave soldiers are outside your country's borders in large numbers at the moment, but they're doing nothing whatever to defend your right to write here.

[Accountable]

Diuretic;506077 wrote: Bush has destroyed your military, he just won't face the fact. No, instead he's going to send more and more soldiers to Iraq. Most people when they realise what they're doing is not working will step back and try something else. But not Bush. Nope. He's going to send someone else's son, daughter, husband, wife, lover and he's going to send them in huge numbers.
Unfortunately, history shows that the real heroes are the ones who ignore convention and public outcry and stay the course. Churchill, Lincoln, Roosevelt ..... The message: Plow on in the face of discontent and you will be rewarded in the final rinse.

[Accountable]

Diuretic;506099 wrote: I can't agree wth that analysis Acc. I don't know much about Lincoln and the Civil War (later I will read my Samuel Eliot Morrison to fix that particular lack of knowledge) but I do know that Bush has failed already. He isn't doughty and determined as Churchill (he's also more sober than Churchill was). Nor is he in the same mould as Roosevelt, who knew he was dying but was determined to see an Allied victory. He has already lost. He refuses to admit it. In that sense and that sense only he is more like Churchill's and Roosevelt's opposing number in Europe (I hesitate to mention the H word lest someone invoke Godwin's Law). Throwing in more and more troops when you're winning - Churchill and Roosevelt (and I have to say Stalin) - is a different proposition from throwing in more and more troops when you're losing or, arguably, have already lost.
I'm not claiming he's right, I'm only trying to see it from his point of view. His whole family has a realy sense of history, and their influence on it. I don't think he is more than mildly concerned about the short-term.

[Galbally]

Accountable;506095 wrote: Unfortunately, history shows that the real heroes are the ones who ignore convention and public outcry and stay the course. Churchill, Lincoln, Roosevelt ..... The message: Plow on in the face of discontent and you will be rewarded in the final rinse.


Erm, I think quite a lot of Wermacht generals were quite adamant about retreating from the Soviet Union in 1942, Herr Hitler decided to carry on regardless, and the rest is erm, history. Not that there is a parallel in terms of the leaders, just that principal, in war its as at least as important to know when to run away as it is to attack, no?

[Accountable]

Galbally;506128 wrote: Erm, I think quite a lot of Wermacht generals were quite adamant about retreating from the Soviet Union in 1942, Herr Hitler decided to carry on regardless, and the rest is erm, history. Not that there is a parallel in terms of the leaders, just that principal, in war its as at least as important to know when to run away as it is to attack, no?
That's the 'learn from history' deal that always seems to escape these guys. They only see what the heroes did. They fail to notice that the big losers do the same thing.

[Accountable]

Diuretic;506622 wrote: What's that saying about history being repeated as farce? Only this time it's not that funny is it?
With the news I just posted in another thread, I'm worried.

[Accountable]

Diuretic;506643 wrote: I missed that, I hope I just didn't pull a faux pas.
Sorry, I don't speak Spanish.