• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Proof that Iraq is in "material breach" of UNSC resolution 687 since inception.

rikzilla

Ninja wave: Atomic fire-breath ninja
rikzilla
Joined
Aug 3, 2001
Messages
5,009
Proof that Iraq is in "material breach" of UNSC resolution 687 since inception.

#1. Saddam gave haven and support to the terrorist Abu Nidal and his organization (before he had him killed recently that is) in violation of 687, paragraph 32 which imposes the obligation under international law to report suspected acts of Iraqi support for international terrorism to the UN secretary general.which also addresses Iraq's support of terrorism.

#2. Abdul Rahman Yasin, the one terrorist not captured from the first WTC bombing is currently living free in Baghdad. The only named conspirator still at large. He was one of the "blind Sheik's" nutty Islamic fundie followers....so why did he run for Iraq...and why did Saddam harbor him in full disregard of UN Security Council Resolution 687? (paragraph 32 again)

#3. Abu Mussab al Zarqawi (al Qaida senior operative) is apparently free to operate in Baghdad as well. (pesky paragraph 32 again)
the link

#4. Ramzi Yusef aka Abdul Basit, the mastermind of WTC bombing #!. Was at the time suspected of being an active Iraqi intelligence agent. Also, when finally captured in the Phillipines, found to be also associated with Abu Sayyef (terrorist group known to be linked with al Qaida)

#5. Dr. Hamza's testimony that Iraq's Mukhabarat (political secret police) are running the concealment mechanism for their ongoing proscribed nuclear program. The link

#6. On August 8, 1995 Hussein Kamil (Saddam's son-in-law) defected to Jordan. He had supervised Iraqi unconventional weapons programs. His information confirmed that Iraq had developed and possesed weaponized biological agents.

#7. Egyptian officials arrested one of the first WTC bombers where he was hiding with family in Cairo. He is Abu Halima. He told them about the involvement of two Iraqi intelligence agents who had managed to flee.

#8. UNSCOM 227 inspection (from Ritter's book Endgame) uncovered Iraqi documents detailing biological and chemical agent testing done on humans. (political prisoners)...Endgame page 180.

#9. Calutrons (magnetic isotope seperators) of the kind used in the Manhattan project were found in the process of being moved around by the Iraqis way back in 1991. (another instance of deception, and active nuclear program)

#10. Mukhabarat terrorism "school" inadvertently found by UNSCOM 150 inspection team in 1996. (not part of UNSCOM mandated mission...not WMD's...just terror/torture etc...the issue of this find was not taken up by the UNSC) page 120 "Endgame.


For those of you who continue to cry for evidence I ask you now to attempt to rebut these facts. Put up or shut up. ;)

-z
 
Oh Yippee, we can now go off and kill a lot of innocent people because of that!

Incidently, International Law doesn`t count to you? An attack unsanctioned by the UN Security Council, or Article 51? Who is going to be in breach of those annoying little articles?

Warmongering has no limits. From the sublime to the ridiculous.
 
If I can`t, does that justify killing innocent people? Want to justify that?
 
Demon:

Back up just a bit. I understand you are angry. However, you have to address the points made. For, you see, one could turn around your question and note that the number of innocent people killed in recent conflicts--Gulf War I-The Motionless Picture and Afghanistan are far less than those being killed by Sadam.

Furthermore, that the UN is unwilling to enforce the "laws" they make. . . .

--J.D.
 
If I can`t, does that justify killing innocent people? Want to justify that?
 
demon said:
If I can`t, does that justify killing innocent people? Want to justify that?
Click to expand...

Just out of curiousity, what should the US/international community do in your opinion?
 
Everyone loves to waive the UN flag when it suites them. Sure you can find UN violations, but when the UN wants to try to work on more inspections we here "screw the UN they dont know what theyre doing."
 
demon said:
If I can`t, does that justify killing innocent people? Want to justify that?
Click to expand...

Innocent people are going to die, whether Saddam stays in power or he is removed. I (and many others) believe that if he is removed, far fewer innocents will die. How is this not justified?

I apply the same justification for removing the Taliban.

I continue on to the despots of Sub-Saharan Africa, by the way.

MattJ
 
I dont buy the "free the Iraqi people" arguments. More like propaganda if you ask me.

We never cared about the Taliban. If they wouldve turned over Bin Ladin and his crew right after 911, the Taliban would be in power today.
 
Tmy said:
I dont buy the "free the Iraqi people" arguments. More like propaganda if you ask me.
Click to expand...

Believe what you wish. Time will tell. Some didn't buy the "free the Poles" arguments, either.

Tmy said:
We never cared about the Taliban. If they wouldve turned over Bin Ladin and his crew right after 911, the Taliban would be in power today.
Click to expand...

Most likely true, but then that would have been our failure.

[Edit to note that this thread is going off track. If you want to respond, feel free to start another thread.]

MattJ
 
"Just out of curiousity, what should the US/international community do in your opinion"

Maybe stop setting them up and giving them weapons in the first place would help. Then the question of what we have to do with these terrible guys becomes moot.

Also, some of us here could do with learning a little history. We can`t start history yesterday because it is convenient for us to do so.

Anything boils down to nothing crackmonkey if left long enough. Including warmongers. Why don`t you "hypothesize" on that?
 
Ok back to topic................who should decide what a "material breach" is? GW? the UN???

Rumor has it the next inspector report gives Saddam a "B" for co operation. Its not an "A", so is that good enough reason to pull the trigger.
 
demon:

Maybe stop setting them up and giving them weapons in the first place would help. Then the question of what we have to do with these terrible guys becomes moot.
Click to expand...

Perhaps, but that does nothing about now.

For example, it seemed rather reasonable, to me, not to go after Sadam and depose him in GW-I--of course I had thought more of his "stuff" had been destroyed, "we" would support insurrections against him, et cetera--for it would appear the US conquering a nation.

Hind sight appears "we" should have dealt with him.

Of course "hind sight" states the French should not have violated the sanctions, the Clinton administratioin should have paid better attention, et cetera.

Whomever you wish to attribute the most blame to, the fact remains Hussein is a problem now.

Do we wish to have this same argument five years from now?

--J.D.
 
"Just out of curiousity, what should the US/international community do in your opinion"

Maybe stop setting them up and giving them weapons in the first place would help. Then the question of what we have to do with these terrible guys becomes moot.

Also, some of us here could do with learning a little history. We can`t start history yesterday because it is convenient for us to do so.

Anything boils down to nothing crackmonkey if left long enough. Including warmongers. Why don`t you "hypothesize" on that?
 
demon said:
"Just out of curiousity, what should the US/international community do in your opinion"

Maybe stop setting them up and giving them weapons in the first place would help. Then the question of what we have to do with these terrible guys becomes moot.

Also, some of us here could do with learning a little history. We can`t start history yesterday because it is convenient for us to do so.
Click to expand...

Okay, so starting today, the US, Russia, China, France, Britain, Germany, etc. will no longer export anything that is or could be used as a weapon. Good start.

Unfortunately, we cannot go back in time and change history either. So, given the situation with Iraq today, what would your solution to the problem be?

To keep this somewhat on track, I think the UN should be the body that decides if breaches have happened, the US should do what it can to help demonstrate such breaches if it will not jeopardize national security.
 
demon said:
Oh Yippee, we can now go off and kill a lot of innocent people because of that!

Incidently, International Law doesn`t count to you? An attack unsanctioned by the UN Security Council, or Article 51? Who is going to be in breach of those annoying little articles?

Warmongering has no limits. From the sublime to the ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Demon,

Please stick to the facts as put forth on this thread. International law is what has been broken by Saddam. Without Saddam's removal (and the removal from power of all the al Abu Nasir tribe BTW) Iraqi civilians will continue to die under UN economic sanctions. The status quo is too cruel to fathom. The sanctions cannot continue, and Saddam's cruel regime must still be contained. How to do it?? Give us your answer so that we may discuss it.

You can call me a warmonger all you want, but whether or not I am one makes no difference. The facts that I have presented in my initial post still remain. Ad Hominum will not help your argument here.

Like I said before...(it's old tired and trite, but I can think of nothing more apt) Put up or shut up. No more whining. Refute these facts, give us an alternative solution, or go away and say no more.

-zilla
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom