From: Mike Lorrey (mlorrey@yahoo.com)
Date: Mon Sep 16 2002 - 16:46:46 MDT
--- Jeff Davis <jrd1415@yahoo.com> wrote:
> Extropes,
>
> --- Brian D Williams <talon57@well.com> wrote:
> >
> > As part of the surrender agreement at the end of the
> > Gulf War Iraq
> > had to agree to weapons inspectors/inspections.
> >
> > Since it has never been completed, the surrender is
> > not valid, and
> > resumption of hostilities can take place. This would
> > not be a new
> > action.
>
> However, it turns out that the weapons inspection was
> used as a cover for intelligence agents/espionage,
> which was NOT agreed to, and which arguably voided
> the agreement, and justified Iraq's termination of
> compliance with the inspection requirements.
>
> The OTHER side of the story.
More Davisian BS. Have you actually READ the cease-fire agreement? It
never said that inspectors could not report information to their home
governments. THe only person who is making a deal of 'we were using
inspections to spy on Iraq' as if that is a bad thing is Scott Ritter,
the $400k man. THink about what you are saying, Jeff. To inspect also
requires that an inspector report the results of the inspection to the
UN Security Council, which is made up of several governments, INCLUDING
the US. I.E the job of a weapons inspector in Iraq is to spy on Iraq
for the nations of the UNSC.
__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! News - Today's headlines
http://news.yahoo.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:05 MST