I was going to make sort of a joke post here but after my second Scotch and Water, I find I am really concerned by my question.

We have been throwing around the word "War" for the last year or so. If memory serves me correctly, although we have been involved in dozens of conflicts since, the last time we declared war on anyone was December 8, 1941. We have been through several United Nations conflicts, Korea, Bosnia, Kosovo; a coalition conflict or two, Vietnam and The Gulf War; some fairly unilateral incursions, Panama and Grenada and some stranger ones such as Greece and Somalia.

In my time on this planet, I have not encountered the set of circumstances we face today in that we have a UN Resolution that makes certain demands on the country of Iraq that was basically signed off on by most of the UN member nations and the Security Council. Certain things then occured, inspections, which have led to the impasse of today which basically ends up with three countries saying the demands were not met, several countries not saying one way or the other and two countries threatening to veto a new resolution that clearly gives a very short deadline that if not met would result in "war".

At this point, I am not debating the whys and wherefores of who is going to vote which way, although I am sure I will have to before this thread is dead, but we are faced with some really tough choices here I believe.

Our President has made it quite clear that while he would like to have the UN sanction an invasion based on non-compliance with the Resolution he would reserve the right to act unilaterally if there was no UN agreement that Iraq had in fact not complied.
The inspectors reports obviously did not provide the solid evidence that would have overwhelmed whatever other agendas members of the Security Council may have as well as, from what I have read, the rest of the member nations.

To their credit, the three countries that seem to be convinced that Iraq has not complied and will not comply did at least attempt to salvage the best from a bad situation and prepared a second more severe resolution. That second Resolution seems likely to be a non-runner and may likely never be presented for a vote as to have it turned down would be a second major no-confidence vote for the position of the US, UK and Spain.

This has resulted in the call for a "Summit" meeting in the Azores off Portugal between these three countries. According to all the latest news buzz, the best case scenario is that the three countries will call themselves the "Alliance" and will proceed accordingly. Worst case scenario is that either the UK or Spain or both will look at their political hole cards and fold.

That worst case scenario would then leave us in the position of potentially invading a country/regime that has not up to this point done anything measurable against the US. Is the guy a maniac, does he kill ethnic groups he doesn't like, has he invaded both Iran and Kuwait? Sure, but he has not, nor is he very likely to invade us.

So, my question to the group is what do we call this incursion which is, I guess, a preemptive strike, and how does our President get this done?

Seems to me that he has to get a declaration/approval from both Houses of Congress since it seems we are not going to get the support of the UN and we may likely lose some/part/all of the support from the UK and Spain.

So group, open for opinions. What does our President call it and how does he get it into motion?
Bill

 

Damn Bill, first I gotta say you get a awful lot out of a scotch and water.

This war will be called:
"There's Oil In Them thar Hills!"

and it will be delared by a:
"One For The Money, Two For The show..."

 

President Bush, and I would believe Tony Blair know a lot more then do any of us. I would say if you looked at it like a book, President has the 20 chapter volume and we have only been shown the first few pages of chapter 1.

From information I have heard and read I do believe Iraq has been absolutely involved with terriosm against America. Has he invaded? No, he has absolutely no chance of doing so and succeeding in any way. Has he supplied training and weapons to those that oppose America? I say absolutely, and thus would not consider what is going to happen as preemptive but rather defensive in nature. Has he been involved with Alquadea (sp?) I believe yes he has. Let’s not forget that there were some Iraq defectors that gave information about an Iraq training area that has a hull of a 747. It was used in training terriost on how to take over an aircraft. This information, if I am correct, was known only a few months after 9/11. That is further proof of Saddam’s involvement in 9/11, at least in my opinion.

Does President Bush need a resolution from Congress to use the military against Iraq? Yes he does, and he already has it. Someone correct me if I am wrong, I don’t know the resolution number, but believe it was passed in October of 2001, a month after 9/11. The vote was overwhelming and gave President Bush the power to do what ever was necessary to protect America against terriosm and to take action on those that had “any” support of 9/11.

Now some of the democrats what a chance at a “re-do” and to President Bush’s credit he basically told them “kiss-off” since for these few democrats it is all about politics and their political careers.

So, everything is set, all authorization is complete and the only think left to do is kill Saddam and his inner circle. The majority of the Iraq people can not wait to be liberated and freed.

Of course no one has to believe a word I say here. To those I say, “Time will tell” and when it does will you then come back and admit you were wrong? I can answer that now the vast majority will not admit they were wrong and come up with some lame excuse.

The only thing really left to do, which I am sure is complete as well, is to name the invasion like “Desert Storm” in the 90’s. Other then that all the cards are lined up, all the T’s have been crossed and I’s dotted.

Now it is only a matter of time, either people like myself will be proven correct, or wrong. I, myself am not worried about it, I know what the outcome will be and in the end my position and reasons will be proven out.

For others on the other side, when all is said and done they are going to have one hell of a time back tracking, some democrats will loose their high paying careers and look like complete morons for trying to get political gain at the expense of millions of innocent civilians.

 

One for the money
Two for the show........

is cracking me up

 

"the Iraqi attacki"

 

Gulf War II is what it will proably be tagged by the media. I think I have already heard Fox news refer to the possibility of Gulf War II or Desert Storm II, one of them.

 

01 XLT Sport... I like your thinking and I salute you!

 

You could've called your scoth and water a drink and we still would have known what you meant- (unless scotch is more pertinent than say bourbon, or a Martini) One big thing that I like about Bush, is that he doesn't waste time on semantics. Nor should we.
Let's get on with it already.



WT

Just in case there's any former democratic presidents out there reading this, the last definition is the one I meant.

Main Entry: 1it
Pronunciation: 'it, &t
Function: pronoun
Etymology: Middle English, from Old English hit -- more at HE
Date: before 12th century
1 : that one -- used as subject or direct object or indirect object of a verb or object of a preposition usually in reference to a lifeless thing <took a quick look at the house and noticed it was very old>, a plant <there is a rosebush near the fence and it is now blooming>, a person or animal whose sex is unknown or disregarded <don't know who it is>, a group of individuals or things, or an abstract entity <beauty is everywhere and it is a source of joy> -- compare HE, ITS, SHE, THEY
2 -- used as subject of an impersonal verb that expresses a condition or action without reference to an agent <it is raining>
3 a -- used as anticipatory subject or object of a verb <it is necessary to repeat the whole thing> -- often used to shift emphasis to a part of a statement other than the subject <it was in this city that the treaty was signed> b -- used with many verbs as a direct object with little or no meaning <footed it back to camp>
4 -- used to refer to an explicit or implicit state of affairs or circumstances <how is it going>
5 : a crucial or climactic point <this is it>

 

In deference to Star Wars, it should be called "The Clone of the Attack" because it's basically....

1. Going to be like the first Gulf War but better.
2. Bigger Budget.
3. Same cast - Powell, Rummy, US and Brit forces.
4. Happy Ending.

 

Hey WT:

Actually, I am a snob and I also like to hear myself talk and now with the www I can see what I said as often as I like.

Seriously, I was trying to be a little bit funny with a not so funny subject. Also I am not really a snob, I drink Scoresby Scotch which is to Johnny Walker Black what Ripple is to Champagne.

Also, I am a thinking plunger if that makes sense. I try to look at a problem top and bottom, both sides, inside and out and once I have it down I plunge. I've always lived my life that way and it has served me well, had a hell of a ride so far. I also do this pretty fast.

In any case, it seems that at or around 8:00 tonight the question I posed will start to be answered. Interesting bit it is that now we are back to a 48-72 hour demand that Saddam and his immediate family abdicate and leave Iraq and, as far as I have read, there may not be a war. If you follow the upper paragraph, I am having a little problem meshing that demand with the statement 48-72 hours ago that this same family would or could be prosecuted for "crimes against humanity" or some such. Does this mean, said with tongue firmly inserted in cheek, we overlook all of those crimes and let him live in luxury in some Middle Eastern Palace for the rest of his life? Ain't RealPolitik grand!!
Bill

 

Bill,

I didn't mean to imply that you were a snob based on your drinking scotch. I'm a bit of a plunger myself an saw an analogy between the implied understanding of " a drink" and "war", ya know "A rose by any other name".... (I know, I may have a wiring issue in my brain.)
I was a bit too hasty to maybe say it and not explain it. But I digress. What's wrong with Ripple?? Just kidding.
I don't see Saddam abdicating. I see him trying to be a hero of "The Muslim (Arab) Cause". That means launching on Israel if he can and doing some kind of damage to us- if he can. I don't see how he can blow the dams and kill all those people just to foil us unless they are a different flavor muslim than he. That would tarnish his "legend." He only really cares about what the arab world thinks - they would "forgive" him for using Chem/bio against us infidels
He has a bunker 300 feet down that is like a resort spa that he built to withstand an irainian nuke attack. Maybe he's got that in mind. I think he'll take a bullet from within if he tries to hang with the troops. so if he don't go to ground he'll be welcome in exile in FRANCE, then we just nuke France- Done deal. On to Iran and Korea.

That's my story and I'm stickin to it.

 

I changed my mind, I like that one better!

 

I know it is a little off topic...and no offense to the French, but...

Q: Why don't they have fireworks at Euro Disney? A: Because every time they shoot them off, the French try to surrender.

Q. How do you introduce yourself in French? A. "Don't shoot, I give up!"

Q. How many French soldiers does it take to defend Paris? A. Don't know, it's never been tried.

I noticed that MSNBC had a countdown to war on their screen this morning.

 

Yeah i saw that countdown too. Time to get outta Dogde soddom, gettin' your room ready at the Boot Hill hotel.

(I kinda like the spelling of saddam with the o's. kinda fitting.

 

Not trying to be a smart aleck at all here,but i did ask the questions.

So, it is called Operation Iraqui Freedom and from what I could see Bush did it sort of by proclamation using I assume the Joint Resolution of Congress someone mentioned earlier.

To our Boys & Girls, Men and Women Godspeed and Good Luck.