Allies withdraw resolution

[Evanauto]

The United States, Britain and Spain withdrew their resolution on Iraq, blaming a threatened French veto for their decision to abandon efforts to win U.N. backing for a war. President Bush planned to address the nation Monday night to give Saddam Hussein a final ultimatum.

Also Monday, Secretary of State Colin Powell said Iraq didn't comply fully with United Nations Resolution 1441. "No further purpose would be served by pushing the resolution," Powell said, referring to the second U.N. resolution drafted by the United States, Britain and Spain.

The dramatic announcements, ahead of closed-door Security Council talks on the Iraq crisis, came as the United States advised the United Nations to withdraw its inspectors from Baghdad, countries closed their embassies and foreign journalists left Iraq.

Ending weeks of silence on the issue, Russian President Vladimir Putin condemned military action against Iraq, saying earlier Monday that war would be a mistake that could imperil world security.

But British Ambassador Jeremy Greenstock singled out France for threatening to veto the resolution, which would have given Iraq an ultimatum to disarm by Monday or face military action.

"We have had to conclude that council consensus will not be possible," Greenstock said, flanked by U.S. Ambassador John Negroponte.

Negroponte said he thought the vote would have "been close."

"We regret that in the face of an explicit threat to veto, the vote-counting became a secondary consideration," Negroponte said.

Moments later, French ambassador Jean-Marc de La Sabliere said that in one-on-one consultations in the past hours "the majority of the council confirmed they do not want a use of force."

Shortly after the ambassadors spoke, the White House announced that Bush would address the nation.

"The diplomatic window has closed as a result of the U.N.'s failure to enforce it's own resolutions for Saddam to disarm," spokesman Ari Fleischer said.

He declined to say whether Saddam would be given a deadline. "I will not get into any discussions about when military hostilities may or may not begin," he said.

On Sunday, the president and his allies from Britain and Spain, meeting in the Azores, announced that they would give the U.N. one day to resolve the diplomatic dispute.

The United States, Britain and Spain introduced their resolution last month in hopes of winning U.N. support to disarm Iraq by force. The resolution would have authorized war anytime after Monday unless Iraq proved before then that it had disarmed.

But weeks of intense diplomacy and pressure from the Bush administration failed to convince a majority of the council's 15 members that the time for war had come.

In an effort to change members' positions, Britain offered some amendments but council members weren't swayed.

Earlier Monday in Moscow, a top diplomat said the council would not approve the U.S.-backed resolution. "This draft has no chances for passage," Deputy Foreign Minister Yuri Fedotov told Interfax news agency. "No additional resolutions are necessary."

Previously, Putin deliberately seemed to be seeking to avoid opposing Washington even as the Russian Foreign Ministry battered home the message that Russia would join France in opposing any U.N. resolution that automatically authorized force.

"We are for solving the problem exclusively by peaceful means," Putin was quoted as saying by the Interfax news agency. He said Russia's position was clear, comprehensible and unwavering.

"Any other development would be a mistake — fraught with the toughest consequences, leading to victims and destabilization of the international situation as a whole," Putin told Chechen spiritual leaders, according to Interfax.

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin said earlier Monday that France could not accept a second U.N. resolution that includes an ultimatum or resorts to automatic use of force to disarm Iraq. Speaking to Europe-1 radio, de Villepin reiterated France's threat to use its veto in the Security Council to block the resolution.

Prime Minister Tony Blair said Sunday that British diplomats would work through the night to try to persuade France to reverse course. But clearly, the efforts didn't yield results.

France was undeterred from the start and scheduled Monday's round of consultations to discuss a joint declaration by Paris, Moscow and Berlin calling for foreign ministers from the 15 council nations to meet Tuesday to discuss a "realistic" timetable for Saddam Hussein to disarm.

The declaration, released Saturday, said there was no justification for a war on Iraq and that U.N. weapons inspections were working.

French President Jacques Chirac said Sunday he was willing to accept a one-month or two-month deadline for Iraq to disarm, provided the move was endorsed by the chief U.N. weapons inspectors. But U.S. officials dismissed the idea as a nonstarter and Germany opposed it, saying it wanted no ultimatum.

German Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder said he would continue to fight for peaceful disarmament.

"I think it is always worth it — even in the last minute — to push for peace and to fight for a peaceful disarmament," Schroeder told German television ZDF late Sunday.

Vice President Dick Cheney dismissed the French proposal, saying "it's difficult to take the French seriously."

[TheEvilOne]

Well, ladies and gentlemen, in case you haven't figured it out yet, this is, well, it. There will be war.

I hope that the French are REAL proud of themselves. They have prevented the adoption of a resolution authorizing force. I hope they're proud of their actions for world peace.

By the time this is over, the French are going to look ridiculous, as usual. Saddam will be overthrown, and the French will look on as our troops find the weapons that supposedly didn't exist. The Iraqi people will finally be free, and won't have to live in fear of a brutal dictator. And the oil? We will buy oil from the new government, and the people of Iraq will benefit tremendously, as will the US. And the world will be rid of a threat to peace. The only losers are Saddam and France.

Ladies and gentlemen, I've really enjoyed debating this issue with you. It now appears that the time for debate is over. We're going in.

Let's Roll™.

[JMHX]

``The time for diplomacy is past,'' Mr. Powell said. ``I can think of nothing Saddam Hussein could do diplomatically.''

Well, I say that the anti-war movement is finally over as well. Time to move on to something else, like protesting the 50,000 children (using figures from the 1991 gulf war) that were killed during the initial invasion.

Just kidding, I don't like children.

[mysecondstar]

At 3/17/03 01:54 PM, Dig_the_Man wrote:

Time to move on to something else, like protesting the 50,000 children (using figures from the 1991 gulf war) that were killed during the initial invasion.

Just kidding, I don't like children.

He he... stupid children!

ummm...anyway...

about the children, i'm sure you all heard of the e-bomb under development in the US. there is a small explosion and then an electromagnetic pulse. and as you know it short circuits anything in the blast radius which means we can stop biological/chemical missle launches etc.

[mysecondstar]

wow that post just disappeared! it's magic!

[Empanado]

Can you explain me, please, how can the yanks attack, if no one has found a shit on Irak? Anyway, i guess you yanks can be proud. The world order is back to as usual. USA over all the rest, there will be a war, USA will win (odds: 9999999-0.0001), USA will set another dictator there or, maybe, heh, a "democratic" government. You will buy oil, you will have the whole Middle East under control after the normal conflicts that will erupt after the war, Bush will be re-elected, the palestinian "terrorists" will slowly fade due that there will be no more support from other nations, and the "terrorists" of other countries will take Irak as proof of what happens to the countries who don't do a shit, but don't like what the U.S. do. And again, the United Nations will look as if they were actually useful for something, hiding the fact that they were created as a way of preventing wars from occurring, but the only time that there's actually a war threat, they don't do a shit.

I may ask, again, why will the U.S. attack, if there's no proof of a shit yet? isn't that an unexplained attack, and by the way, an invasion? And, other question, Why the U.S. didnt chose to take their resolution to voting, if they are supposed to be "democratic"?
And why they banned the resolution proposed by the President of Chile, with no chance of voting or discussion? and, to finish, WHY DO THE U.S. DO WHAT THE FUCK THEY WANT, AND NO ONE EVER HAS A SHIT TO SAY ABOUT IT? WHY DO THEY HAVE BIOLOGICAL, CHEMICAL, NUCLEAR WEAPONS -and, in fact, any kind of weapon invented so far if i'm not wrong- AND THEY CAN USE THEM, AND THE UN DOESNT HAVE A SHIT TO SAY ABOUT IT?
don't you think that maybe, just maybe, they are A BUNCH OF FUCKING ARROGANT, IMPERIALISTIC TYRANTS?
just answer my questions and i'll shut up. For now.
And please, don't come with the "we are the eagles, we are the reluctant warriors, blah blah blah blah"
because that's pure shit. Im not saying that Hussein is a "nice fella" or an innocent good man, but there is no reason to attack, for God sake.

And yes, they will find weapons, the world is just too stupid (or cowand a lot, they will find the weapons that BUSH is going to get there, to have evidence, but ard) to say anything about it. Why? Because, if they say anything, their country will be the next Irak.

[Empanado]

wait, the last 5 lines should read:
"And yes, they will find weapons, and a lot, they will find the weapons that BUSH is going to get there, to have evidence, but the world is just too stupid (or coward) to say anything about it. Why? Because, if they say anything, their country will be the next Irak."

small mistake. Sorry if i have any mispelling btw, i need to improve my english. Anyway, you catch the idea.

[Der-Ubermensch]

All I want to say is that after the events of September 11, I was there with the rest of my unit at the Airport of my hometown guiding grounded American tourists, consoling women, children and doing whatever I personally could to make their unwanted visit a safe and pleasant one. The United States had my sincerest condolences then. This time around though it is the American people, through the authority of its government who cry out for blood and war. You will most definitely be served. I pray for your women and children, I really do.

[NEMESiSZ]

You really want to help the USA? Stop italicizing all your replies, reading them makes us all hate life.

[NJDeadzone]

unfortunately, the US will be attacked from the inside by the sleeper cells, once war is underway. This is not a dove speech because i feel war is necessary to remind Europe who's the superpower and who's the weak collection of nations that never survived WWII. As for terrorism is concerned, start learning from the Israelis, they know the most about dealing with disaster. Expect cruelty, expect unfairness from the government, the 90s were a spoiled time for Americans, this decade is the rude awakening of things to come...

[NEMESiSZ]

What are you talking about? The USA had a huge amount of terror attacks prior to 9/11, 9/11 was just the largest isolated attack. You really need to think before you post....

[NJDeadzone]

please define huge because i'm too stupid to realize we've been dealing huge amounts of Arab funded terrorism in America in the 90s

[JMHX]

At 3/17/03 03:52 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: You really want to help the USA? Stop italicizing all your replies, reading them makes us all hate life.

I was pondering this as well. It makes them seem like all quotes. Argh! I still have a small bone to pick with the French for their entire deal in this Iraq thing. A picture in Newsweek showed a certain French president drinking wine and laughing with a certain Iraqi "president" back in the 70's.

Bwah.

[Der-Ubermensch]

At 3/17/03 03:52 PM, NEMESiSZ wrote: You really want to help the USA? Stop italicizing all your replies, reading them makes us all hate life.

Resorting to stupidity when at a loss for words is a sign of childishness or mental retardation. Which is it for you?

[NJDeadzone]

keep your integrity ruination, the italics make you special