babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Iraq deputy PM: We don't have the means to attack Israel

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Iraq deputy PM: We don't have the means to attack Israel
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 14 February 2003 07:16 AM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"President Saddam Hussein was born in Iraq, we were born in Iraq, and will stay in Iraq until the last minute of our existence," Aziz said. "If we are attacked, we will fight until the last minute of our existence."

Interestinlgy we see a lot of 'expert' analysis but hear vey little from the other side.


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Apples
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3558

posted 14 February 2003 08:27 PM      Profile for Apples     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Why'd you choose that quote as the hypertext link?
From: no | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 14 February 2003 08:32 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Because he could.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
mandrake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3127

posted 14 February 2003 11:36 PM      Profile for mandrake     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
"We can't talk of reprisals when we don't have the means," Aziz said, speaking in an interview live from Rome, where he was to meet with Pope John Paul II on Friday. "We aren't a threat to anyone."

And I have some swampland, er, uh, I mean waterfront property in Florida going cheap.

quote:
"President Saddam Hussein was born in Iraq, we were born in Iraq, and will stay in Iraq until the last minute of our existence," Aziz said. "If we are attacked, we will fight until the last minute of our existence."

Now there's something to look forward to. Unfortunately, when the 'last moment' arrives, historically, cowards like these are never to be seen.


From: erehwon | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 14 February 2003 11:45 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
If Iraq was a threat to anyone don't you think that Saddam Hussein would have given orders to such an effect years ago?

I must also tirelessly repeat:

Iraq. does. not. have. the. ability. to. launch. a. missile. at. North. America.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
minimal
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2222

posted 15 February 2003 12:01 AM      Profile for minimal     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Over the years Saddam Hussein has systematically murdered and tortured anyone who has dared to oppose him in any way. He has waged war on his own people. The political opposition in Iraq is non-existent or is being imprisoned and tortured. So the deputy pm says that his brutal cronies do not have the means to attack Israel. They've reserved all those means to subjugate and brutalize the Iraqi people. I get the feeling that Saddam is being made into some kind of folk hero just because the U.S.A. is contemplating an attack against him. Suddenly we see "human shields" going to Iraq. Why? To shield Saddam Hussein and his thugs? Has the Left suddenly gone nuts? Support Saddam? Shield Saddam? Protest for the continuation of his brutal regime? There are better causes for these human shields and protests. Maybe it's because Saddam calls himself a socialist. But so did someone else more than half a century ago.
From: Alberta | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 15 February 2003 12:12 AM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
He's not a folk hero. But he's also just another in a long line of garden-variety thug dictators who make lives miserable all over.

Focussing attention on him in this lopsided fashion will just impede a peaceful resolution to this conflict.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mandrake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3127

posted 15 February 2003 11:56 AM      Profile for mandrake     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If Iraq was a threat to anyone don't you think that Saddam Hussein would have given orders to such an effect years ago?

He did. During the Gulf War he launched missles at Israel and Saudi Arabia, remember? What makes you think he would not do it again? Should we wait for him to repeat his attacks before we take him out?

quote:
I must also tirelessly repeat:

Iraq. does. not. have. the. ability. to. launch. a. missile. at. North. America.


And must I tirelessly repeat; These.days.you.don't.need.an.ICBM.to.inflict.major.damage.on.North.America. Sometimes you just need a boxcutter and a VISA card!


From: erehwon | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 15 February 2003 12:32 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Now there's something to look forward to. Unfortunately, when the 'last moment' arrives, historically, cowards like these are never to be seen.

Are you leaving?

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 15 February 2003 01:52 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
During the Gulf War he launched missles at Israel and Saudi Arabia, remember?

Two things.

1. This was DURING the Gulf War, not afterwards, when the Iraqi economy and society were being suffocated under the dead weight of sanctions and after stringent inspections designed to destroy Iraq's Weapon-of-Mass-Destruction capability.

2. Most of the SCUDs appear to be duds, if the article about the Patriots not even working properly is to be taken as true.

In short, since the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein has not demonstrated any such thing like his country's capacity to do much more than scuff about and whimper as the dead hand of sanctions continues to lay heavy on the landscape.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
verbatim
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 569

posted 15 February 2003 03:01 PM      Profile for verbatim   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
To shield Saddam Hussein and his thugs? Has the Left suddenly gone nuts? Support Saddam? Shield Saddam? Protest for the continuation of his brutal regime?
No, to sheild the Iraqi people, who will be the ones dying in the US/UK attack. If the US and UK were simply going to march into Iraq, grab Saddam Hussein and his followers, and then leave, I'd be cheering. I think you're confusing means and ends.

From: The People's Republic of Cook Street | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mandrake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3127

posted 15 February 2003 04:22 PM      Profile for mandrake     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Are you leaving?
(Wingnutt)

What? And cede the field to the feckless and the witless? Not a chance!


From: erehwon | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
mandrake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3127

posted 15 February 2003 04:28 PM      Profile for mandrake     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In short, since the Gulf War, Saddam Hussein has not demonstrated any such thing like his country's capacity to do much more than scuff about and whimper as the dead hand of sanctions continues to lay heavy on the landscape.

Very poetic, doc. Poetic but illogical. If he had demonstrated any such capacity, his ass would be grass at this very moment. He has blustered, and threatened both Israelis, and Americans troops, with terrible retribution should war break out. Is he bluffing, or is he concealing? Either way, the tyrant must be destroyed.


From: erehwon | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 15 February 2003 05:46 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
What? And cede the field to the feckless and the witless? Not a chance!


You cannot at once both leave the field and occupy it.

From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 15 February 2003 08:50 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Very poetic, doc. Poetic but illogical. If he had demonstrated any such capacity, his ass would be grass at this very moment.

So you are saying that even if Iraq did have any WMD capability, they would not be able to use it because "his ass would be grass at this very moment." A very excelent point.

If the alledged WMD are useless as you have made clear above, then why support a war to eradicate them?

Talk about feckless and witless argumentation. Try and hold a consitent logical line at least.


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
Flowers By Irene
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3012

posted 16 February 2003 01:23 AM      Profile for Flowers By Irene     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Ok, you know what, according to an Iraqi defector some years ago, Saddam Hussein is on the record as intending to nuke Tel Aviv "regardless of the consequences."

Well, he hasn't yet, which leads me to one or both of two conclusions:

1)Defectors are so full of shit their breath stinks.

2)Since Tel Aviv still exists, Iraq does not have the capacity to launch such an attack.

I'll dig around for a link to the quote...

Ed. to add: I can't find the specific quote I was looking for, but it comes from an Iraqi Nuclear scientist named Hamzi or Hamza; he says Saddam's nuclear weapons program didn't begin until after the bombing of Osirak - which he also says is the main motivation for Hussein's intent to "retaliate" against Israel. I think he wrote a book on the subject. Anyone got the info?

[ 16 February 2003: Message edited by: Flowers By Irene ]


From: "To ignore the facts, does not change the facts." -- Andy Rooney | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
mandrake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3127

posted 16 February 2003 11:40 AM      Profile for mandrake     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
If the alledged WMD are useless as you have made clear above, then why support a war to eradicate them?

And precisely where did I post this alleged utterance? Even Blix, at the U.N. the other day, said that Iraq's missiles have a range longer than permitted.

quote:
Well, he hasn't yet, ...

2)Since Tel Aviv still exists, Iraq does not have the capacity to launch such an attack.


By all means, let's wait until he does.

That argument is not even borderline rational. One might as well say. "Since Washington still exists, al Quida does not have the capacity to launch such an attack." The victims of 911 might well disagree, were they not prime evidence to the contrary.

How about, "Since Baghdad still exists..." to prove that Bush does not have the capacity to carry out his threats? Ludicrous!


From: erehwon | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 16 February 2003 12:41 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Aha. I see your logic, mandrake. Time to bomb 'em all, all those places that wouldn't/might not exist if all the evil people everywhere in the world had/have the capacities they might or might not have to bomb all the people/places they hate, and then we'll be able to prove that the world is full/empty of hatefilled/hatable people.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mandrake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3127

posted 16 February 2003 02:44 PM      Profile for mandrake     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
skdadl:

Was your post babble or merely irrational and incomprehensible jabber? I was merely refuting the idea that, just because someone has not yet done something, they don't have the capability to do that thing. I haven't made it with Nicole Kiddman yet; that doesn't mean that I don't have the capability to do so. I merely lack the opportunity.

I've changed my opinion on the whole Iraq thing. I think that the U.N. should withdraw the inspectors and drop the sanctions. I think that the U.S. and Britain should withdraw completely, leaving Saddam to do whatever it is he does, and leaving his people to their fate. That way, everyone except Bush gets what they want, and if there is to be a reckoning with Saddam, it can come later, when the world is less prepared and more vulnerable. "Peace in our time."


From: erehwon | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 16 February 2003 02:49 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Uh huh. The all-or-nothing approach to problem-solving, mandrake. So useful in real life.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mandrake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3127

posted 16 February 2003 05:57 PM      Profile for mandrake     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
The all-or-nothing approach to problem-solving, mandrake. So useful in real life.

Exactly so, skdadl, just as you set out in your previous and almost totally incomprehensible post.


From: erehwon | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 16 February 2003 06:39 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I don't think it was at incomprehensible. In fact, I think it was quite clear. Perhaps if you weren't so hate filled you could see beyond the narrow confines of your own self-indulgence.
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 16 February 2003 07:37 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
All right, if this is just going to degenerate into namecalling then I'll close the thread.
From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
mandrake
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3127

posted 16 February 2003 09:57 PM      Profile for mandrake     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I don't think it was at incomprehensible. In fact, I think it was quite clear.

Yes, I thought you might!

That wasn't name calling, was it, Michelle?

[ 16 February 2003: Message edited by: mandrake ]


From: erehwon | Registered: Sep 2002  |  IP: Logged
swallow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2659

posted 17 February 2003 01:06 PM      Profile for swallow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Back to Aziz, maybe? .... apparently the question had to be asked twice before he agve an answer:

quote:
But when a correspondent for the Israeli newspaper Maariv stood up and asked whether, in the case of war, Iraq intended to attack Israel, Aziz responded:

"When I came to this press conference, it was not in my agenda to answer questions by the Israeli media. Sorry."

The response drew boos and hisses from some journalists and several walked out. Later, another journalist asked the same question and Aziz answered: "We don't have the means to attack anyone outside our territory."


Deputy mayor of Rome refuses to meet Aziz


From: fast-tracked for excommunication | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca