It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

no second resolution

page: 1
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:
arc

posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 09:14 AM
link   
just in on the BBC news site - uk and us will not be seeking second un resolution.

No further info as yet but I think it's just a matter of hours now before this war starts. Will post any further details as soon as I can




posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 09:23 AM
link   
Yeah arc that just pooped up on my comp as well. Here is the other headline that popped up as well.

"President Bush to address the nation at 8 p.m. EST tonight; will say Saddam Hussein must leave Iraq to avoid war. Full story soon. "

_____________________________________________
Be Cool
K_OS


arc

posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 09:28 AM
link   
aaah I saw that one but we got given 0100 GMT, which means I'll be asleep or certainly should be by then



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 09:34 AM
link   
hmm, I guess I'll be watching CNN this evening/night.
There is NO way Saddam and his chiefs of staff will leave Iraq...


dom

posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 09:35 AM
link   
When you won't win a vote, don't even bother getting people to vote...

Democracy in action.

I'd like to see Russia table the same resolution, and then veto it so that we can get a true feeling for where people are in relation to this resolution... incidentally, they could also attach an ammendment with reasonable disarmament benchmarks and a 45 day time limit and vote in favour of that. Just to show that they're not being unreasonable...



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 09:54 AM
link   


arc

posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 09:58 AM
link   
notice one thing though - Bush will stand up and make a speech to the US, but it doesn't seem as if Blair is going to do the same with the UK. Odd....



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 10:54 AM
link   
I hope Bush's speech is strong and convincing. I thought the one last week wasn't bad, but some people on here really tore him up, mostly because it was scripted. It should be pretty basic though, Either Saddam leaves or we're coming in! I respect everyone's opinion that is anti-war but I hope that they realize it's too late to stop it, and although they still might not agree with it, I really hope our troops get the support they need. These are very courageous men and women who are willing to sacrifice their lives and freedom for ours. I mean US and UK troops and whoever else joins us. They need our support!!!!


arc

posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 11:01 AM
link   
I totally agree with you PA. Whether we are for or against this war, it seems to be going ahead regardless and all we can do now is support our troops who are prepared to give their lives for this cause as best we can. If we're all freaked out sat at home watching this unfold, can you imagine how bad the troops are feeling sat in a desert being handed gas masks and anti nerve gas agents, praying for strength?



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 11:13 AM
link   
I told everyone before, (especially Nans) that by not supporting us, you cause more hurt than harm. If we had the 'United' Nations to help us, we could all go in at once and there would be no problem at all.(even with France)



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 11:22 AM
link   
Are all americans bad loosers or is it just their alcoholical President ?



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 11:52 AM
link   
Emmm.....just a word of warning!!

We have some vry proud american brethren on this board and many of them should have the member status of BitchSlapper2003 on them!!

Pick a fight with these guys..you will lose!!!



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 11:54 AM
link   
Do you even know what your talking about? Not all Americans are bad losers. That's a stereotype, and it has been proven that most stereotypes are false. (if not all) You're obviously a younger person from another country who has been brainwashed by their media to think all Americans are ignorant, fat, slobs. Who said GWB was an alchoholic? Probably just another liberal rant, eh?


I say get your facts straight before you go around offending peoples from other countries.

I'll let it go this time, but don't let it happen again...

(hey guys, do I make a good mad person? heh
)

[Edited on 17-3-2003 by joehayner]



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 11:55 AM
link   
Could you be more specific ?


dom

posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 11:58 AM
link   
The point is, in the US, the failure of diplomatic routes is seen as the fault of France, Germany and Russia.

Regardless of the fact that the people unwilling to budge are the US, and to a lesser but significat extent, the UK. It's my opinion that diplomacy has failed because the US/UK have undermined the UN, not because France has done anything wrong. All France has wanted is a serious attempt at peaceful disarmament before we use war as the last resort.

Peaceful disarmament has not run it's course, ask the inspectors...



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 12:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by Karl Molarius
Are all americans bad loosers or is it just their alcoholical President ?


Karl , that is a very immature statement, we try to debate as adults on here.

Not a very good way to earn respect here either!



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 12:09 PM
link   
Excuse me, but as the American President is an alcoholic, he cannot be treated as an adult either.

How often did he lie about an iraqi nuclear weapons program ?

Why i picture him as a bad looser is because he sought a vote in the UN, lost this vote, and instead of complying with the UN demands that the inspectors continue disarming iraq, he bombs Iraq.

Now is he irresponsible, mad, or plainly evil ?



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 12:15 PM
link   
dom...I'm sorry to say this, but you're right.

Diplomacy has failed. We gave Iraq twelve years to disarm, what makes you think that they will disarm now?
(in a liberal-like voice) "Saddam we'd like you to destroy all your weapons of mass destruction. We'd also like you to leave your country and give up all your money so your country can have an economy.
We don't like the way you run things so we are going to replace your government"
(in a Saddam-like voice) "Oh, gee-wiz. I was wrong.
I don't deserve to lead my people or have the entire currency of a country in my pocket. I'll leave now and let you people take over my country and turn it into a democracy."

I just don't see it working like that. (sorry if I seem like an @$$, just trying to get my point across)



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 12:19 PM
link   
[What makes me think that he disarms now is that he disarms now.

Why we must bomb him while he disarms, i dont understand.



posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 12:20 PM
link   

Karl Molarius
...instead of complying with the UN demands that the inspectors continue disarming iraq, he bombs Iraq.

Karl...
The inspectors are not there to 'disarm' Iraq. I don't see where you came up with this idea. They are there to 'watch' Saddam destroy weapons, to make sure that he is actually destroying them. They are not there to look for weapons.

And umm... To my knowledge Bush 2 hasn't bombed Iraq yet. And where do you get this notion that he is an alchoholic? How come I haven't heard of this?

And Iraq is NOT disarming! They have only used a few WMD as a distraction. They are, in fact, building more WMD as we speak.


[Edited on 17-3-2003 by joehayner]



new topics

top topics



 
0
<<   2 >>

log in

join