Article

2003-01-29 Axis of Evil

Archived material is restricted to Rantburg regulars and members. If you need access email fred.pruitt=at=gmail.com with your nick to be added to the members list. There is no charge to join Rantburg as a member.

Posted by Steve 2003-01-29 12:40 pm|| || Front Page|| [2 views since 2007-05-07] Top

#1 Note that we need 9 votes on the UNSC even if nobody vetoes. if france russia china abstain, germany, syria, pakistan vote no, we cant afford to lose a single remaining vote.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-01-29 13:55:44|| 2003-01-29 13:55:44|| Front Page Top

#2 liberalhawk, you think that's going to stop us? If its voted down, that's the end of the UN.

Posted by Steve 2003-01-29 14:34:06|| 2003-01-29 14:34:06|| Front Page Top

#3 What it will all come down to is this. On Feb 5 Powell will do his Adlai Stephenson imitation, show everybody the pictures and the intelligence, and then they all have an excuse to get with the program with their asses firmly covered.

Posted by tu3031 2003-01-29 15:25:35|| 2003-01-29 15:25:35|| Front Page Top

#4 We just bought Angola, Cameroon and Guinea's vote with the African AIDs program.

Posted by Steve 2003-01-29 15:43:40|| 2003-01-29 15:43:40|| Front Page Top

#5 well of course we can go without the UNSC, as bush said last night; as long as UK is along thats probably multilateral enough to go ahead. But if we are discussing resolutions and UNSC votes, it is well to remember that avoiding a veto may not be enough to pass a resolution - if we want a resolution we may have to settle for a relativaly weak one, or else release alot of inof Feb 5 - at cost to sources and methods.

Posted by liberalhawk 2003-01-29 16:00:28|| 2003-01-29 16:00:28|| Front Page Top

#6 Syria and Pakistan may worry about US military action against them and vote yes. If the US cares, we can twist arms to get the votes.

Posted by paj 2003-01-29 16:01:18|| 2003-01-29 16:01:18|| Front Page Top

#7 If the stakes are high enough, and evidently Bush believes they are, they'll release the info on Feb 5th.

Posted by tu3031 2003-01-29 16:15:33|| 2003-01-29 16:15:33|| Front Page Top

#8 Proposing financing and contracts is more efficient than twisting the arms.

Posted by Sacha 2003-01-29 16:16:52|| 2003-01-29 16:16:52|| Front Page Top

#9 LiberalHawk, I'm hard-pressed to seeing Pakistan vote anything other than "yes". Perv is in up to his neck with us, and if he votes "no" on this, he's done for at home. The jihadis will become emboldened and he won't have us to turn to anymore. I think Perv will writhe some and vote "yes".

Syria is lost. Germany is probably a "no" EVEN if we come in with the smoking gun -- Schroeder needs to keep the Greens and they're reflexively against the war.

So we get U.S., U.K., Angola, Cameroon, Guinea, Spain, Italy, Pakistan, ...

... and the wild card is Mexico. And they're making all sorts of worrying noises.

Posted by Steve White 2003-01-29 22:49:45|| 2003-01-29 22:49:45|| Front Page Top

#10 mexico????

Posted by Raptor 2003-01-30 06:57:39|| 2003-01-30 06:57:39|| Front Page Top

08:44 Frank G
08:37 Raptor
08:04 tu3031
07:50 tu3031
06:57 Raptor
05:39 Mike
02:45 Anonymous
23:28 mojo
23:24 mojo
23:14 mojo
22:59 Steve White
22:49 Steve White
22:00 Fred
21:38 Tripartite
21:13 Doug
21:09 Doug
21:09 Anonymous
21:05 Doug
21:01 Anonymous
20:16 Alaska Paul
19:39 Joe
19:18 Denny
19:05 Frank G
19:05 Atomic Conspiracy