| Topic: |
Religions > Atheism |
| User: |
"maff" |
| Date: |
23 Sep 2003 06:01:24 AM |
| Object: |
OT: Annan challenges US on force |
Annan challenges US on force
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1047803,00.html
UN secretary general to warn that pre-emptive strikes are a threat to
world peace and stability
Julian Borger in Washington and Jon Henley in Paris
Tuesday September 23, 2003
The Guardian
The UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, will openly challenge the White
House doctrine of preemptive military intervention today, arguing that
it could lead to the unjustified "lawless use of force" and posed a
"fundamental challenge" to world peace and stability.
In a speech to be delivered shortly before George Bush addresses the
UN general assembly, Mr Annan will declare that the Iraq crisis
brought the UN to a "fork in the road" as decisive as 1945 when the
world body was formally established.
George Bush
http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&cat=&q=+%22George+Bush%22&sa=N&tab=dn
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22George+Bush%22&sa=N&tab=nw
http://groups.google.com/groups?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22George+Bush%22&sa=N&tab=wg
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22George+Bush%22&sa=N&tab=gd&cat=gwd%2FTop
Kofi Annan
http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&cat=&q=+%22Kofi+Annan%22&sa=N&tab=dn
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22Kofi+Annan%22&sa=N&tab=nw
http://groups.google.com/groups?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22Kofi+Annan%22&sa=N&tab=wg
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22Kofi+Annan%22&sa=N&tab=gd&cat=gwd%2FTop
.
|
|
| User: "Dr. DuFonet" |
|
| Title: Re: Annan challenges US on force |
23 Sep 2003 08:08:13 AM |
|
|
"maff" <maff91@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:18510aff.0309230301.21d388be@posting.google.com...
Annan challenges US on force
http://www.guardian.co.uk/international/story/0,3604,1047803,00.html
UN secretary general to warn that pre-emptive strikes are a threat to
world peace and stability
Julian Borger in Washington and Jon Henley in Paris
Tuesday September 23, 2003
The Guardian
The UN secretary general, Kofi Annan, will openly challenge the White
House doctrine of preemptive military intervention today, arguing that
it could lead to the unjustified "lawless use of force" and posed a
"fundamental challenge" to world peace and stability.
In a speech to be delivered shortly before George Bush addresses the
UN general assembly, Mr Annan will declare that the Iraq crisis
brought the UN to a "fork in the road" as decisive as 1945 when the
world body was formally established.
George Bush
http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&cat=&q=+%22George+Bush%22&sa=N&tab=dn
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22George+Bush%22&sa=N&tab=nw
http://groups.google.com/groups?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22George+Bush%22&sa=N&tab=wg
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22George+Bush%22&sa=N&tab=gd&cat=gwd%2FTop
Kofi Annan
http://news.google.com/news?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&cat=&q=+%22Kofi+Annan%22&sa=N&tab=dn
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22Kofi+Annan%22&sa=N&tab=nw
http://groups.google.com/groups?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22Kofi+Annan%22&sa=N&tab=wg
http://www.google.com/search?num=100&hl=en&lr=&ie=UTF-8&oe=UTF-8&scoring=d&q=+%22Kofi+Annan%22&sa=N&tab=gd&cat=gwd%2FTop
*When you come to a fork in the road, take it.
--
Hillybilly dingdong Choochoo
Hillybilly dingdong Choochoo
Hillybilly dingdong Choochoo
Choochoo Eisenbahn
--
I'm a troll, folderol
I'm a troll, folderol
I'm a troll, folderol
And I'll eat you for supper!
--
"Everythin's better with DoFunny on it."
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "anne marie hovgaard" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Annan challenges US on force |
23 Sep 2003 10:58:41 AM |
|
|
Hmmm... preemptive military intervention sounds a bit like the
"pre-crime" stuff in "Minority Report" - punishing people for crimes
the government's psychics say they will commit at some point in the
future. I wonder what "intelligence" the Bush adm. _really_ based
their decisions on! Maybe they have their own prophet.
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Annan challenges US on force |
23 Sep 2003 01:08:59 PM |
|
|
"anne marie hovgaard" <amhovgaard@yahoo.no> wrote
Hmmm... preemptive military intervention sounds a bit like the
"pre-crime" stuff in "Minority Report" - punishing people for
crimes the government's psychics say they will commit at some
point in the future.
Not really, no.
The way I envisioned it -- before Bush made it clear that by
"pre-emptive engagement" he meant "take the oil from the sand
niggers -- was that we were no longer going to worry about
stepping on toes.
Why, for example, were we asking Pakistan for permission to
over fly their territory for some of our earliest, pre-Dubya
attacks? Pakistan wasn't exactly investing heavily in the war
against terrorism, there was plenty of rumors of collusion between
Pakistan and Al Qaida (risking the loss of surprise) and yet we
wouldn't go in before asking "Mother may I" and receiving a
proper & official, "You may."
By "Pre-emptive" I had thought they meant that they weren't going
to wait until the terrorists left their training camps & safe houses
-- to kill people -- before we actually did something. By
"pre-emptive" I thought we weren't going to wait for a body count
before we stopped worrying about the "Sovereignty" of those nations
that harbor terrorists, or stand in our way of dealing with terrorism
effectively. Boy, was I wrong!
Under the Whistle-***** doctrine:
"Pre-emptive engagement" == "Regime change"
Another way of putting it:
"Pre-emptive engagement" == "Creating terrorism"
.
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Annan challenges US on force |
23 Sep 2003 02:25:46 PM |
|
|
Why, for example, were we asking Pakistan for permission to
over fly their territory for some of our earliest, pre-Dubya
attacks?
Because the Iranians certainly weren't going to give us permission. Thus the
problems with Afghanistan being landlocked. Unannounced hostile combat aircraft
violating a sovereign nation's airspace is an act of war. We had to tell the
Pakistanis what we were doing.
They had originally said yes to Clinton in 1998 when he wanted to go after
al-Qaeda but then the Musharraf coup hit and Pakistan locked up tight. Bush
seems to find it much easier to deal with a terrorist military dictatorship
than Clinton did.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Ill-Legal Dept. "Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here"
"My country, right or wrong; to be defended when right and righted when wrong."
- Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
| User: "JTEM" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Annan challenges US on force |
23 Sep 2003 05:29:02 PM |
|
|
"Lord Calvert" <forlornh@aol.commode> wrote
Why, for example, were we asking Pakistan for permission to
over fly their territory for some of our earliest, pre-Dubya
attacks?
Because the Iranians certainly weren't going to give us
permission.
No. The question is: "Why were we asking permission?"
Unannounced hostile combat aircraft violating a sovereign
nation's airspace is an act of war. We had to tell the
Pakistanis what we were doing.
No, actually, we felt that we had to ask Pakistan. In reality though,
the government of Pakistan was definitely in collusion with the
Taliban, and rumored to be in collusion with Al Qaida. We couldn't
ask Pakistan's permission without also telling the Taliban that we
were coming, and, in so doing, warn Al Qaida of our attack.
They had originally said yes to Clinton in 1998 when he wanted
to go after al-Qaeda but then the Musharraf coup hit and Pakistan
locked up tight.
They did say yes, Clinton did order a strike, and we missed Bin
Laden by a matter of a few hours. We did manage to kill a number
of others, granted, but rumors persist that Bin Laden escaped because
he was warned of the impending attack.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Tapio Erola" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Annan challenges US on force |
24 Sep 2003 08:27:14 AM |
|
|
"JTEM" <jaytem@yahoo.com> writes:
"Lord Calvert" <forlornh@aol.commode> wrote
Why, for example, were we asking Pakistan for permission to
over fly their territory for some of our earliest, pre-Dubya
attacks?
Because the Iranians certainly weren't going to give us
permission.
No. The question is: "Why were we asking permission?"
Because a) non-permissioned military overflight is an act of war,
b) Pakistan has a highly significant islamist faction
and (highly important) b) Pakistan is a nuclear state.
US has to handle Pakistan and Musharraf with silken gloves or
CNN might have to report one day that Islamists have staged a coup
and now Al Qaida has The Bomb.
Nuclear deterrent works. It's a ticklish, unforgiving and cruel but
it works.
--
Tapio Erola (txr@tols17.oulu.fi) No mail to please!
"A mind is like a parachute. It doesn't work if it not open."
--Frank Zappa
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Lord Calvert" |
|
| Title: Re: OT: Annan challenges US on force |
23 Sep 2003 11:58:01 AM |
|
|
Hmmm... preemptive military intervention sounds a bit like the
"pre-crime" stuff in "Minority Report" - punishing people for crimes
the government's psychics say they will commit at some point in the
future. I wonder what "intelligence" the Bush adm. _really_ based
their decisions on! Maybe they have their own prophet.
Reagan had Jeane Dixon. Maybe Bush has Miss Cleo.
Rich Goranson, Amherst, NY, USA (aa#MCMXCIX, a-vet#1)
EAC Ill-Legal Dept. "Abandon Hope All Ye Who Enter Here"
"My country, right or wrong; to be defended when right and righted when wrong."
- Thomas Jefferson
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
