Oh my......

Post #69,764 by Mike 12/18/02 8:02:56 PM Reply	Oh my...... Here is what was said between Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern and South Asian Affairs John H. Kelly, and Representative Lee Hamilton: Hamilton: If Iraq, for example, charged across the border into Kuwait, for whatever reason, what would be our position with regard to the use of US forces? Kelly: That, Mr. Chairman, is a hypothetical or a contingency, the kind of which I can't get into. Suffice it to say we would be extremely concerned, but I cannot get into the realm of "what if" answers. THEN..... Hamilton: In that circumstance, it is correct to say, however, that we do not have a treaty commitment which would obligate us to engage US forces? Kelly: That is correct. And this, THIS.....counts for "evidence" of our official position? -- The truth is somewhere in between --
Post #69,835 by Simon_Jester 12/19/02 7:58:03 AM Reply	I did state - as far as we can tell.... because that's what we were telling our own Congressmen and we've never admitted to having an official agreement with Kuwait that stated that we would assist them if Iraq invaded. However, Kuwait seemed to think so, as one of their leaders bragged that if Iraq came after them they'd send in the Americans. Also, Iraq produced after the invasion a document from the CIA that stated (to the effect) that we would offer Kuwait protection from Iraq. (The CIA denies that this is an official document and that no agreement existed - but then again, we run back into the problems with Iraq creating a forgery, if it wanted to create a forgery, wouldn't it have said something far worse?) And - Bush's final communication to Iraq prior to the invasion did state that the US was concerned - but did not mention Kuwait and did not mention that America would attack.
Post #69,858 by Mike 12/19/02 9:08:29 AM Reply	Yes >>However, Kuwait seemed to think so, as one of their leaders bragged that if >>Iraq came after them they'd send in the Americans. .....yes! And this much is also acknowledged by Tariq Aziz in his frontline interview. He even goes further.....he says Iraq were convinced that the U.S.A were actually supporting Kuwait in their economic warfare. -- The truth is somewhere in between --
Post #69,870 by Simon_Jester 12/19/02 9:51:38 AM Reply	Which goes back to my original question.... What were you saying about it being wrong to ransack your neighbors house?
Post #69,943 by Mike 12/19/02 1:22:33 PM Reply	I gerfot...... ...remind me? -- The truth is somewhere in between --
Post #70,194 by dmarker 12/20/02 9:03:46 PM Reply	Re: Debating Trees when discussion is about forests ... I find that Mike argues deeply at the detail level whilst ignoring the macro or high level. My this I mean he is quite good at talking about trees but too often the others in the debate are discussing forests. If you push him at the macro level, and that involes challenging US policy and behind the scenes US manipulation, he accuses you of being a conspiracy theorist, ie if the topic isn't documented somewhere in detail (barring heated debates about the meaning of words) then you are a conspiratist - doesn't seem able or willing to debate actions and there consequences as evidence of intention & deed. e.g. If we argue that Bush Snr & his admin blatantly manipulated the situation in Iraq/Iran/Kuwait particularly from 1980 to 1991 1) 1st to contain Iran - achieved by covertly supplying war materials & loans to Iraq 2) to then contain Iraq - by helping Iran, by encouraging Kuwait & Saudi to demand repayment for war loans at a time when Iraq's oil infrastructure was wreaked 3) by then encouraging Hussien to invake Kuwait so he could be isoltaed & villanized in the Arab world Why do all these things. One has to do a little bit of deduction & reading ... (Per FORBES magazine August 2002 page 23) Iraq is believed to have even greater reserves of oil than Saudi Arabia (but after what US did by manipulating Iraq over the Iran war, Iraq had no desire to deal with US companies - DSM). So Russia's Lukoil consortium had signed a deal with Iraq to develop the massive West Quarna field (est 8 billion barrels) & China's China National Petroleum had signed with Iraq to develop a smaller field. No western (US) based companies were making any progress in negotiating further exploration & development with Iraq (for plainly obvious reasons) - Last week (under war threat from US) Iraq cancelled the Russian deal. To avoid another potentially ugly & sematic war with Mike over the above - I will let the reader draw their own conclusions as to why US is really threatening Iraq and demonizing Saddam. But come back to the original point about describing the trees when often the discussion is about forests. Doug Marker

Welcome to IWETHEY!