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.

 

ROLLING START

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 11:12 PM
link   
ROLLING START - The Idiot Prince Will Have His War

March 17, 2003, 1500 hrs PST (FTW) -- The full-scale, unilateral US invasion of Iraq appears to many to be imminent as this is written. In just hours President Bush is expected to give Saddam Hussein a 72-hour ultimatum to leave the country or else the bombs start falling. I have a reservation or two left about that, based partly on hope, but partly on the even riskier assumption that this administration realizes that it has miscalculated and that the consequences of invasion may now outweigh the risks from their standpoint of no invasion.

Here is the rest of the article:
www.fromthewilderness.com...




posted on Mar, 17 2003 @ 11:56 PM
link   
Zu Befehl!

forwarded it to a hundred people



posted on Mar, 18 2003 @ 07:29 AM
link   
To act or not act...

Either way, international politics just took a giant step backwards....


I really think he should've waited for results for the last resolution vote, despite France's imminent veto... It at least would've shown patience.... Ironic, that it's the French's anti-war at any cost policy, that moved up the start of war....



posted on Mar, 18 2003 @ 07:39 AM
link   
Indeed Gaz, ironic and sad that the French position "forced" (please note sarcasm indicated by the quotations) Bush to move up the start of the war.
I hope against hope that this does not destroy the U.S. internationally. I realize that the administration has botched his diplomatically but I hope we can still count the French and the Germans as friends at the conclusion of this.

I have viewed the whole nasty affair as a squabble between brothers and I hope it ends like one, with everyone looking at each other, bruised but none the worse for wear.



posted on Mar, 18 2003 @ 08:10 AM
link   

I realize that the administration has botched his diplomatically but I hope we can still count the French and the Germans as friends at the conclusion of this.

I have viewed the whole nasty affair as a squabble between brothers and I hope it ends like one, with everyone looking at each other, bruised but none the worse for wear.


I have the same hopes as you, especially since i know that in Europe most people understand that this illegal mass murder isnt being done in the name of the average american.

It is the american governement that defies international law, the law we have TOGETHER sworn to uphold. This is seen as a betrayal of common values by many and it arouses our anger.

Our hope is that this new american madness will disappear as fast as it came up.


dom

posted on Mar, 18 2003 @ 08:14 AM
link   
The reason there was no vote, was that there were going to be 3 vetos, and



posted on Mar, 18 2003 @ 08:25 AM
link   
Just stating the irony...


" have viewed the whole nasty affair as a squabble between brothers"

Agreed...and I harbor the same hopes...



posted on Mar, 18 2003 @ 01:13 PM
link   
Sigh! People with college degrees & loads of resources at their disposal & they still acting like children in the playground, bully-groups & all...
...You have to blame the perents for that...


dom

posted on Mar, 18 2003 @ 01:22 PM
link   
Yeah Gazrok, I was just trying to say that I don't think the French affected the time that war would start at all. They just ensured that it would start without UN backing.

I really don't think Bush would have waited for any more than a couple of days, and a couple of days wasn't acceptable to the French/Russians/Germans.

I think there's another thing that people haven't talked about, and that's why the French were not going to authorise a second resolution with an automatic "then we go to war" clause. And the reason is simply this... they didn't trust the US/UK to allow the UN security council to make the decision as to whether or not Iraq had fulfilled the disarmament benchmark criteria. If they'd signed up to a resolution like that it would be easy for the US/UK to claim moral legitmacy and just announce that, in their opinion, Saddam had failed the benchmarks.

There was no real expectation that Saddam would be able to satisfy the US/UK, all this resolution was about was gaining the US/UK a figleaf of international legitimacy.

Again, I'm not angry at you Gazrok, just angry at our politicians.



new topics

top topics



 
0

log in

join