[kj] back to oil!!!

[Mister Black]

Iraq did initially allow weapons inspectors in, but Saddam refused to allow them in at the later stages for some reason , refusing to allow the weapons inspectors in contravened the terms of the first gulf wars cease fire agreement and left the allies with no other  option  but to launch a second gulf war . If Saddam would have continued to allow weapons inspectors in to search anywhere they choose , the second gulf war would never have happened .
  Whatever happen in North Korea , Israel or Iran is irrelevant in this discussion , please start a new thread if you wish to discus these Countries , you are trying the same ploy as Greg, going on a world trip of all the hotspots to dilute the discussion




========================================
Message Received: Jul 21 2007, 01:15 PM
From: "B. Oliver Sheppard" 
To: "A list about all things Killing Joke (the band!)" 
Cc: 
Subject: Re: [kj] back to oil!!!

Actually, Mr. Black - you're the one who's incorrect.

Iraq allowed weapons inspectors -- Hans Blix and others -- who never 
found anything. Well, but that's the UN, right? "They're useless," 
right-wing pundits said. Let us in Iraq, and we'll find 'em!

That didn't happen. So then the rationale changed. Several times, 
retroactively, hopping for the sort of chronic amnesia much of the US 
public demonstrates to its detriment. At one point Bush said Iraq was 
invaded to unilaterally enforce a UN decision, something no one but the 
UN Security Council has the power to authorize. And in this case, it 
didn't. If every nation decided to unilaterally enforce something the UN 
says, but without UN consent, like Bush said the US was doing, you'd 
have many countries invading Israel, and that's just for starters.

Bush's picking March, 2003, right after the militaristic US right-wing 
had been handed a major gift in the form of 9/11, to be able to pursue 
policies they wanted to follow anyway, because inspectors weren't 
allowed in, well, why then, at that point? Countries that 
UNCONTROVERSIALLY have WMDs, like North Korea and Iran -- you know, thos 
eother two Axis of Evil countries from which no 9/11 hijackers came 
from, either -- aren't invaded. So methinks WMDs or suspicion of them 
wasn't the problem. In fact, a country's possession of WMDs ensures they 
won't be invaded by the US. The fact the US invaded Iraq essentially 
proves they had no WMDs. Countries that do have WMD don't get invaded by 
the US.

The reasons given by the actual decision-makers for invading changed 
quite a bit as reality has collided unfortunately with the bullshit they 
spun to the public.

Now, wishful thinking as to why hopefully why "we" really invaded is an 
interesting academic exercise, but I';m talking about what the real 
decision-makers told people, not reasons I'd like to think they invaded. 
Just go by what they said. It's changed many times. No need to invent a 
good reason from your armchair.

The 1st Gulf War is another story.

-Oliver



Mister Black wrote:

>

> You are also incorrect B.

>

> The first gulf war was because the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq and 

> the second gulf was was because Saddam wouldn't allow weapon 

> inspectors in to inspect his country.

>

> Its very simple, those are the reasons for both of the gulf wars .

>

> And I dont see how you can interpret the fact that we are discussing 

> things as being a sign that we dont trust the reasons that Politicians 

> gave us .We discuss things because ...............well I dont know 

> why....we just do

>


_______________________________________________
Gathering mailing list
Gathering at misera.net
http://four.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/gathering
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://four.pairlist.net/pipermail/gathering/attachments/20070721/4a5ac576/attachment.html>