The white house memo, so much for diplomacy

[aeon]

Channel 4 News tonight reveals extraordinary details of George Bush and Tony Blair's pre-war meeting in January 2003 at which they discussed plans to begin military action on March 10th 2003, irrespective of whether the United Nations had passed a new resolution authorising the use of force.



Channel 4 News has seen minutes from that meeting, which took place in the White House on 31 January 2003. The two leaders discussed the possibility of securing further UN support, but President Bush made it clear that he had already decided to go to war. The details are contained in a new version of the book 'Lawless World' written by a leading British human rights lawyer, Philippe Sands QC.

President Bush said that:

"The US would put its full weight behind efforts to get another resolution and would 'twist arms' and 'even threaten'. But he had to say that if ultimately we failed, military action would follow anyway.''

Prime Minister Blair responded that he was: "solidly with the President and ready to do whatever it took to disarm Saddam."

But Mr Blair said that: "a second Security Council resolution would provide an insurance policy against the unexpected, and international cover, including with the Arabs."

Mr Sands' book says that the meeting focused on the need to identify evidence that Saddam had committed a material breach of his obligations under the existing UN Resolution 1441. There was concern that insufficient evidence had been unearthed by the UN inspection team, led by Dr Hans Blix. Other options were considered.

President Bush said: "The US was thinking of flying U2 reconnaissance aircraft with fighter cover over Iraq, painted in UN colours. If Saddam fired on them, he would be in breach."

He went on: "It was also possible that a defector could be brought out who would give a public presentation about Saddams WMD, and there was also a small possibility that Saddam would be assassinated."

Speaking to Channel 4 News, Mr Sands said:

"I think no one would be surprised at the idea that the use of spy-planes to review what is going on would be considered. What is surprising is the idea that they would be used painted in the colours of the United Nations in order to provoke an attack which could then be used to justify material breach. Now that plainly looks as if it is deception, and it raises some fundamental questions of legality, both in terms of domestic law and international law."

Also present at the meeting were President Bush's National Security Adviser, Condoleeza Rice and her deputy Dan Fried, and the Presidents Chief of Staff, Andrew Card. The Prime Minister took with him his then security adviser Sir David Manning, his Foreign Policy aide Matthew Rycroft, and and his chief of staff, Jonathan Powell.

Those present, as documented in Mr Sands' book, also discussed what might happen in Iraq after liberation.

President Bush said that he: "thought it unlikely that there would be internecine warfare between the different religious and ethnic groups."

http://www.channel4.com/news/special-reports/special-reports-storypage.jsp?id=1661

great governement!!

Some think, even in here, they used all diplomatic issue to avoid the war in iraq, wow this world is so full of naive peoples.

With everything we know so far on those guys, how come they are still people who believe them??

 

[Huck]

There was no way the USA were not going to iraq. They HAD to go, and FAST, or their evil empire would begin to crumble...

 

[I think not]

Well it's a good thing we prevented the crumbling, I'd hate to move.

 

[Jersay]

That makes me sick, using the U.N.

 

[Huck]

Well it's a good thing we prevented the crumbling, I'd hate to move.

Well, i have been talking a lot about the dollar hegemony lately, USA crumble, etc. But i can not blame the americans for willing to protect themselves. Its in fact quite normal. Plus, as a canadian, i would much rather have the USA strong than otherwise...

I guess its "the principle of freedom" vs. our own selfish well being...

 

[neallo]

so they went to wra for the wrong reasons, neverthe less if was a good move. now we have 2 forces blocking iran should they attempt to build nukes. second the iraqi's can look to a better future.

 

[Mogz]

I'll be the first to admit that aspects of the U.S. call to arms were flakey at best. However in the big picture the War is, as I have said in previous posts, a preemptive strike to protect the Western way of life. The U.S. used the September 11th attacks to fast-track their global security initiative, an initiative that was at the top of the Bush Administrations "To Do" list before September 2001. Do I agree with every nuance of the War in Iraq? No, however I do support the foresight of the U.S. in making our World a safer place. My Country didn't agree to go to War in Iraq, however we have committed to Afghanistan, another hotbed that needs to be reigned in. For those that have not followed the U.S. defensive strategy since the Bush Administration got in to office, their top 5 security concerns were:

Iran
Iraq
North Korea
Global Terrorism
Control of the worlds oil by fundamentalist/extremist Governments

As a result the U.S. has begun to wage a preemptive war on these security concerns. The war isn't simply a military one, it is also largely political and in some instances economical. I for one support their actions, because as i've stated, it has a great deal of foresight attached to it. Something the West has lacked since the Cold War ended.

 

[ElPolaco]

I know, I admit I'm naive, but I don't see how the neocon/pnac invasion of Iraq had to do with protecting us. Heck, I don't even know what a "western way of life" is.

 

[annabattler]

Reined in??? Why would we,in the comfortable west,need to "rein in" any other country on this small planet?
Just what exactly have these countries done to threaten us...and I do not include the perpetrators of 9/11 in this...
Iraq had been a sitting target for American and British jets and their bombs for over ten years. Iraq HAD been an American ally,particularly during Iraq's war against Iran.
This preemptive war IS about oil,it certainly is political(how better to avoid domestic issues,as long as you can "find" an "enemy" twelve time zones away), and if it is about economics, then we truly have arrived at a sorry state.
Frankly,North Korea,with their known nuclear capability should have been number one on America's list of "perceived" threats,given that poor nation's loony leader . Maybe the fact that China is still an "ally" of North Korea helped tilt the balance.

 

[Mogz]

1. Do you think the World was safe with Saddam Hussein in charge of Iraq? A man that used chemical weapons on his own people? If a man can use nerve-toxins on his own countrymen, what's to stop him from one day developing a long-range capability of deploying that agent, then using it on anyone he sees fit?

2. The Western way of life is the life we live day to day. If you've ever traveled abroad, you'd know that each continent has it's own flavour. Europeans are very different than Americans or Canadians. The Western way of life is often envied by the rest of the World, largely to the point of disdain.

 

[Mogz]

Reined in??? Why would we,in the comfortable west,need to "rein in" any other country on this small planet?

Our life is comfortable now, but will it remain so? Warfare has never really touched the West directly because of the preemptive actions we've been taking since the later half of the 20th Century.

Just what exactly have these countries done to threaten us...and I do not include the perpetrators of 9/11 in this...

Threats come in many forms. North Korea threatened to build a nuclear arsenal, which they'd obivously intend to use on Japan, thus destabilizing the entire region. Iran is also in the process of enriching uranium, a nation that has called for the destruction of Israel. Once again the nuclear threat. Iraq, as I mentioned in my post above, has used chemical weapons in the past on it's own people, nothing was stopping them from researching long-range deployment and attacking Israel or worse, the West. Iraq may have been an ally during the Iran/Iraq war, but the U.S. often plays the politicaly savy game of siding with the lesser of the evils. The strike is not soley about oil, that is the atypical small-minded view of the hamburger helper eating joe American. People often fail to look at the bigger picture, the picture I just painted above. Iraq, as it stood, was a threat to us, you and me. Maybe not today, maybe not a year from now, but if Iraq had stayed as it was, eventually chemical attacks would have landed somewhere outside of Iraqs borders. If you think not, I suggest you read up on the history of Iraq and the "moral stance" the former Government took on humanity.

 

[ElPolaco]

Re: RE: The white house memo, so much for diplomacy

1. Do you think the World was safe with Saddam Hussein in charge of Iraq? A man that used chemical weapons on his own people? If a man can use nerve-toxins on his own countrymen, what's to stop him from one day developing a long-range capability of deploying that agent, then using it on anyone he sees fit?

2. The Western way of life is the life we live day to day. If you've ever traveled abroad, you'd know that each continent has it's own flavour. Europeans are very different than Americans or Canadians. The Western way of life is often envied by the rest of the World, largely to the point of disdain.

I don't think the world is safe with a man like bush in charge. SH was a tyrant, but the US has supported hundreds like him (and even him at one time), a threat to their own people, yes, to the world, only with US help. SH then wasn't a threat to the "western way of life", but to the Kurdish and Shiite way of life.

 

[Mogz]

Any man that delcares the West indifdels and therefore free to kill at will is an enemy to my way of life, how about you?

 

[ElPolaco]

Re: RE: The white house memo, so much for diplomacy

Any man that delcares the West indifdels and therefore free to kill at will is an enemy to my way of life, how about you?

That wasn't SH. He tried to do that during the first gulf war but couldn't because he wasn't recognized as an Islamic leader. The US did Iran's job for them and the Islamic fundamentalist's job for them. They are now setting up a pro-Iranian Shiite state in Iraq. If that contributes to the security of my "western way of life", I guess they've succeeded.

 

[aeon]

Re: RE: The white house memo, so much for diplomacy

I'll be the first to admit that aspects of the U.S. call to arms were flakey at best. However in the big picture the War is, as I have said in previous posts, a preemptive strike to protect the Western way of life. The U.S. used the September 11th attacks to fast-track their global security initiative, an initiative that was at the top of the Bush Administrations "To Do" list before September 2001. Do I agree with every nuance of the War in Iraq? No, however I do support the foresight of the U.S. in making our World a safer place. My Country didn't agree to go to War in Iraq, however we have committed to Afghanistan, another hotbed that needs to be reigned in. For those that have not followed the U.S. defensive strategy since the Bush Administration got in to office, their top 5 security concerns were:

Iran
Iraq
North Korea
Global Terrorism
Control of the worlds oil by fundamentalist/extremist Governments

As a result the U.S. has begun to wage a preemptive war on these security concerns. The war isn't simply a military one, it is also largely political and in some instances economical. I for one support their actions, because as i've stated, it has a great deal of foresight attached to it. Something the West has lacked since the Cold War ended.

Iran has oil, iraq has oil, global terrorism is total bullstrawbery crap, except for the bush administration, who are in fact the global terror on themselves.

Saying they want to make the world safer, is also full of straberry crap, donald rumsfeld own coorporation sold nuclear technologie to north korean, also since bush is in office, terrorism has grown this time for real, what is their top priority, which is in the pnac web site, is to globally dominate the economy by any necessary means, which we have seen their stupidity for the war in iraq, by deniying the world and the united nations, in other word they are the NAZI of the modern time, but this time they are really well prepared, which the nazi wasnt.

 

[aeon]

Re: RE: The white house memo, so much for diplomacy

Any man that delcares the West indifdels and therefore free to kill at will is an enemy to my way of life, how about you?

So you admit that you are their ennemy??

You support a nation that illegally invaded a foreign nation, based on a lie, how do you want them to see us??

Ohh thank you west peoples, you make so much sense, you sent your troops in my land and destroyed everything we had, and on top of it, your cooporation are sucking our main ressources, and billions of money from that oil are lost, and what makes me smile, you are on the other side of the planet, and still you have a good life overthere, and still dont do anything to bring your military, coorporation back and so on, even after we see that everything about the war was fake, thank you we will be very much please about it, and by the way, thank you very much to make our friends in palestine a better life, by supporting israel,probably the only nation that support israel, thank you again, wow.

 

[Mogz]

Iran has oil, iraq has oil, global terrorism is total bullstrawbery crap, except for the bush administration, who are in fact the global terror on themselves.

Saying they want to make the world safer, is also full of straberry crap, donald rumsfeld own coorporation sold nuclear technologie to north korean, also since bush is in office, terrorism has grown this time for real, what is their top priority, which is in the pnac web site, is to globally dominate the economy by any necessary means, which we have seen their stupidity for the war in iraq, by deniying the world and the united nations, in other word they are the NAZI of the modern time, but this time they are really well prepared, which the nazi wasnt.

Yes, they both do have oil...which ties in with #5. These religious nutbars control vast amounts of oil. If Russia controlled a wack of oil like Iran and Iraq do, yes perhaps the U.S. would be slightly uneasy, but it wouldn't be on the scale as with Iran and Iraq. The problem with zealots is you cannot negotiate with them. They're right, end of story. Allah has spoke, kill the infidels, etc etc. Secondly both of those nations are known to completely violate human rights, something I know you like to preach about in other posts. You claim the U.S. abuses human rights at Gitmo, yet over look the mass graves in Iraq and the torture squads in Iran. Both of those nations were/are run by madmen, people who have no problem killing and abusing their own countrymen. As i've said before, can we really trust people who use chemical weapons on their own people? Can we really trust people who torture their own simply for having a difference of opinion? No, we cannot, pass the ammo.

You're equating a nation with the foresight to protect themselves with the NAZI party of circa 1930 Germany? Yikes, man read a history book. The NAZI party orginally started as a politcal party, with no aspirations of European dominance, however Adolf Hitler rose to power and changed all that. It's odd really how you can equate a nation such as the U.S., who dolls out millions of dollars in internation aid, sends troops to help struggling nations, and is the only country that poses a large military yet does not use it on it's own people, with the NAZI party. The NAZI party was corrupted, as I said above, by Hitler who appointed his "like-minded" friends to positions of power and therefore took utter control of the German Government. Furthermore he played upon the dispair of post-World War I to unite the German people in to a vision of "libenstraum" or living space, more room for the German people who'd lost land after the Treaty of Versailles. Compile that with the fact that in the 30's people we not as in tune with the World as they are today and you have the kindling of a global conflict, one which occured. Lastly to say the NAZI's weren't prepared, well the German Army of the 30's and 40's has been deemed one of the top three militarys of all time. The only reason Germany lost was because they opened a war on 3 fronts. Hitler had complete control of the German Military, a mistake made however unavoidable due to his postion of extreme power. He made military judgements that paled in the face of logic and thus his military suffered. If the Germans had simply taken on France/the U.K. at first they would have won the war and we'd all be speaking German right now. To claim the Germans were't prepared for war, they were, by far, however choices made by Hitler caused the downfall of the 3rd Reich.

So you admit that you are their ennemy??

Yes sir, anyone that threatens to destroy my way of life is my enemy, I believe I iterated that clearly. I didn't choose it, they did. They crashed planes in to American buildings, killing thousands of innocent men and women just going about their, many of which were Canadians working in the U.S. When that happened, our nation went to war against terrorism. I said goodbye last week to 3 close friends who flew out of Edmonton on a CC-150 Polaris Airbus for Kandahar Afghanistan. They're going because of what happened in 2001, they're going to prevent shit like that from touching our continent again. They're going so future generations of Canadians don't have to endure what we've gone through in the last 5 years.

You support a nation that illegally invaded a foreign nation, based on a lie, how do you want them to see us??

Illegal? Please. I for one think the World is a far better place than it was with a madman in power in Iraq. If the U.S. wants to invade Iran next, i'll suport that too, just one more extremist Government down the toilet.

Ohh thank you west peoples, you make so much sense, you sent your troops in my land and destroyed everything we had, and on top of it, your cooporation are sucking our main ressources, and billions of money from that oil are lost, and what makes me smile, you are on the other side of the planet, and still you have a good life overthere, and still dont do anything to bring your military, coorporation back and so on, even after we see that everything about the war was fake, thank you we will be very much please about it, and by the way, thank you very much to make our friends in palestine a better life, by supporting israel,probably the only nation that support israel, thank you again, wow.

And the award for most impressive run-on sentance goes to...Aeon! Seriously though, you take this spin that the U.S. has soley destroyed everything in Iraq, yet to fail you either remember or acknowledge the countless acts of destruction carried out by insurgents against their own people. Might want to head over to ogrish.com and watch a few videos of isrugents blowing up things where no colaition military targets are present, might change your view. Furthermore no resources are being sucked out of Iraq, if anything the insurgents are hurting their own economy, blowing up their own oil pipelines. Smart boys, really smart. Yes we do have a good life in North America, because it's a democracy and we built it this way over years of sweat and blood. I find it funny how a country like Iraq which has existed for thousands of years is so ass-backwards compared to Canada which hasn't even existed for 200. Why is that? Oh right the fundamentalism and religious zeal thing, right. If people want to blame us for having an excellent way of life, let them. It's easy to accomplish, look at Kuwait, they've got it good and they're right next to Iraq. Why are they better off? Oh right, no madmen and extremists leading the Country. Lastly, Israel, oy, I love how they get pulled in to everything regarding warfare and the Muslim way. In regards to people who support them, you claim the U.S. is the only one, might want to look at the stances most of the World takes to Palestine. I can name 5 countries that support Israel:

The u.S.
Britain
Canada
France
Germany

That's not to say we don't agree Palestine has a right to live, we just have the foresight to realise that if we do nothing Israel will be oblierated.

 

[zoofer]

Some more skinny for you aeon.

Most insurgents in Iraq are CIA members in disguise.
The reason Iraq's nuclear plants will be destroyed is not to prevent another Israeli Holocaust or vaporization of an American city, but to secure a rebuilding contract for Haliburton.

China's bloody annexation of Tibet got a world pass because Rumsfeld determined there was no oil there.

 

[aeon]

Re: RE: The white house memo, so much for diplomacy

Yes, they both do have oil...which ties in with #5. These religious nutbars control vast amounts of oil. If Russia controlled a wack of oil like Iran and Iraq do, yes perhaps the U.S. would be slightly uneasy, but it wouldn't be on the scale as with Iran and Iraq. The problem with zealots is you cannot negotiate with them. They're right, end of story. Allah has spoke, kill the infidels, etc etc. Secondly both of those nations are known to completely violate human rights, something I know you like to preach about in other posts. You claim the U.S. abuses human rights at Gitmo, yet over look the mass graves in Iraq and the torture squads in Iran.

What about the mass graves in iraq?? did you know iraq was under united nation sanctions for 13 years, that resulted to 1.5 millions of death innoncent peoples??

Did you know us was constantly bombing iraq since 1998??


When allah said to kill infidels??

torture squad in iran?? what the hell is that?? show me proof, not opinion based on what you see on fox news.

Both of those nations were/are run by madmen, people who have no problem killing and abusing their own countrymen. As i've said before, can we really trust people who use chemical weapons on their own people? Can we really trust people who torture their own simply for having a difference of opinion? No, we cannot, pass the ammo.

Can we trust people who sells those weapons around the world?? reagan administration sold those chemicals technologie to saddam during the 80s, don t be hypocryte with me, i know what happened in iraq .

You're equating a nation with the foresight to protect themselves with the NAZI party of circa 1930 Germany? Yikes, man read a history book. The NAZI party orginally started as a politcal party, with no aspirations of European dominance, however Adolf Hitler rose to power and changed all that. It's odd really how you can equate a nation such as the U.S., who dolls out millions of dollars in internation aid, sends troops to help struggling nations, and is the only country that poses a large military yet does not use it on it's own people, with the NAZI party. The NAZI party was corrupted, as I said above, by Hitler who appointed his "like-minded" friends to positions of power and therefore took utter control of the German Government. Furthermore he played upon the dispair of post-World War I to unite the German people in to a vision of "libenstraum" or living space, more room for the German people who'd lost land after the Treaty of Versailles. Compile that with the fact that in the 30's people we not as in tune with the World as they are today and you have the kindling of a global conflict, one which occured. Lastly to say the NAZI's weren't prepared, well the German Army of the 30's and 40's has been deemed one of the top three militarys of all time. The only reason Germany lost was because they opened a war on 3 fronts. Hitler had complete control of the German Military, a mistake made however unavoidable due to his postion of extreme power. He made military judgements that paled in the face of logic and thus his military suffered. If the Germans had simply taken on France/the U.K. at first they would have won the war and we'd all be speaking German right now. To claim the Germans were't prepared for war, they were, by far, however choices made by Hitler caused the downfall of the 3rd Reich.

I compare the bushes to hitler, cause just like hitler, bush uses the terrorism card, hitler blew up his own reich, put the blame on terrorist communist, and install martial law, what happened on 9-11?? bush put the blame on terrorist, and install patriot act.

Yes sir, anyone that threatens to destroy my way of life is my enemy, I believe I iterated that clearly. I didn't choose it, they did. They crashed planes in to American buildings, killing thousands of innocent men and women just going about their, many of which were Canadians working in the U.S. When that happened, our nation went to war against terrorism. I said goodbye last week to 3 close friends who flew out of Edmonton on a CC-150 Polaris Airbus for Kandahar Afghanistan. They're going because of what happened in 2001, they're going to prevent shit like that from touching our continent again. They're going so future generations of Canadians don't have to endure what we've gone through in the last 5 years.

Bull strawberry crap, who is threatening a way of life to soemone??

who is occupying arab nation?? usa, israel and allies

It is incredible how ignorant you are.

Illegal? Please. I for one think the World is a far better place than it was with a madman in power in Iraq. If the U.S. wants to invade Iran next, i'll suport that too, just one more extremist Government down the toilet.

Have you forget london?? madrid?? bahli? damn where were you in the last 5 years??

And the award for most impressive run-on sentance goes to...Aeon! Seriously though, you take this spin that the U.S. has soley destroyed everything in Iraq, yet to fail you either remember or acknowledge the countless acts of destruction carried out by insurgents against their own people. Might want to head over to ogrish.com and watch a few videos of isrugents blowing up things where no colaition military targets are present, might change your view. Furthermore no resources are being sucked out of Iraq, if anything the insurgents are hurting their own economy, blowing up their own oil pipelines. Smart boys, really smart. Yes we do have a good life in North America, because it's a democracy and we built it this way over years of sweat and blood. I find it funny how a country like Iraq which has existed for thousands of years is so ass-backwards compared to Canada which hasn't even existed for 200. Why is that? Oh right the fundamentalism and religious zeal thing, right. If people want to blame us for having an excellent way of life, let them. It's easy to accomplish, look at Kuwait, they've got it good and they're right next to Iraq. Why are they better off? Oh right, no madmen and extremists leading the Country. Lastly, Israel, oy, I love how they get pulled in to everything regarding warfare and the Muslim way. In regards to people who support them, you claim the U.S. is the only one, might want to look at the stances most of the World takes to Palestine. I can name 5 countries that support Israel:/

The u.S.
Britain
Canada
France
Germany

That's not to say we don't agree Palestine has a right to live, we just have the foresight to realise that if we do nothing Israel will be oblierated.

There is more than 180 countries aroound the world, and insurgent doesnt have a big budget for the military.

 

[The Gunslinger]

What about the mass graves in iraq?? did you know iraq was under united nation sanctions for 13 years, that resulted to 1.5 millions of death innoncent peoples??

Did you know us was constantly bombing iraq since 1998??


When allah said to kill infidels??

torture squad in iran?? what the hell is that?? show me proof, not opinion based on what you see on fox news.

UN supported sancions my friend. You invade another country, you pay the consequences. Dude, even I've heard of the torture squads in Iran, a lot of people have heard of the torture squads in Iran.

Can we trust people who sells those weapons around the world?? reagan administration sold those chemicals technologie to saddam during the 80s, don t be hypocryte with me, i know what happened in iraq .

And so what if he did? No one asked Saddam to gas and kill tens of thousands of Kurds. If i seel you a gun, I'm going to assume you aren't batshit insane and go and kill fifteen people.

I compare the bushes to hitler, cause just like hitler, bush uses the terrorism card, hitler blew up his own reich, put the blame on terrorist communist, and install martial law, what happened on 9-11?? bush put the blame on terrorist, and install patriot act.

The good ole' Bush=Hitler parallel. Bush isn't even close to Hitler. Hitler invaded France, Poland, Denmark, Belgium, Holland, the USSR, and Norway. He also annexed a good part of Czechoslovakia, fought in Italy. Not to mention bombing England, and using a policy of unrestricted submarine warfare trying to starve her into submission. Bush has invaded Afghanistan, after a terrorist attack killed thousands of people and Iraq, who had a dictator muh akin to Hitler.

Hitler gassed millions of Jews in an effort to destraoy a race of people. Bush has done... oh ya, NOTHING.

I'm afraid Bush isn't even remotely close to Hitler buddy.

Bull strawberry crap, who is threatening a way of life to soemone??

who is occupying arab nation?? usa, israel and allies

It is incredible how ignorant you are.

Iraq gassed and killed tens of thousand of it's own people, we "have" to be there to prevent it. Israelis get blown up by Palestinians all the time, not a good way to build a country.

Have you forget london?? madrid?? bahli? damn where were you in the last 5 years??

And Saddam hasn't gassed tens of thousands of Kurds, coincidence?