Political:Powell Spoke.

[Kevin]

Well Secretary Powell laid out the case and has shown Iraq to be in material breech of 1441 and other past resolution and the ceasefire agreement. I am wondering what are some thoughts, did it convince anyone, did you watch it?

[Sea Tyger]

Sorry, I was on my way to work when Secretary Powell spoke, so I was unable to listen in. I'll have to catch the highlights with Brit Hume tonight.

[Kevin]

Too bad Sea tyger it was very good presentation. Try to catch the whole thing on Cspan or where ever it will be re-aired.

I was very impressed with the Iraq-terrorist connection.

And what British Foreign Minister Jack Straw had to say was icing on the cake.

[qerlin]

Decent. Showed more evidence than I expected.

Won't convince those who don't wish to be.

[Evan van Eyk]

I saw it on TV and found nothing of interest, Powell presented - however it was a review ( but pro-American ).

He showed the tape with the officer talk, whcih had the following content:

"Have you received the message? If yo and you followed its orders, destroy the message!"


"Have you brought it away? - Yes Its all away!"


While the second one might indicate that the two officers were speaking about WMDs, it could be any secret material common with any army - sadly there was no note on the context of that tape.
The first one is nothing remarkable - every military has secret messages, why should Iraq be different - for anything we know that could be the plan of two officers for a surprise party for Saddam's birthday.


The next thing I saw was a video tape. It was meant to show an Iraq fighter-craft - well it could have been a flying cow as well, the quality was terrible bad. I think the US have better equipment in their plane.


Concluding, I have to say, there was nothing convincing. The photos shown were to small to see anything, the tapes were out of context ( 'do not trust any quote you have not torn out of context yourself' ) and the video showed nothing than someblack and white dots.
However I do not think they showed the public the interesting stuff or sensitive information- I would not do that either, so its completely up to the Council members.

[Dan Stack]

It should be noted that the "smoking gun" evidence of the Cuban Missile Crisis was not quite the smoking gun people today make it out to be. High ranking British officials, for example, questioned what they were viewing - a bunch of images with stuff circled and arrows drawn all over. Some said to consider the source, the CIA.

[First of Two]

Total victory: Powell.

Evan was apparently watching some other program, as I never saw a fighter jet (but did see a picture of an unmanned drone Iraq outfitted with spray tanks to spray biological agents.)

He must also have heard a garbeled version of both tapes, as the second one clearly had one agent telling another to remove all mentions of "nerve agents" from a location, while the first one said that they had "evacuated" (not "destroyed" or "prepared for inspection") materials prior to the inspection team's arrival.

"I'm afraid that you have forgotten some" is not typical chatter.

[Julian]

The thing that amazes me is how much they showed. I mean let's face it the US has not proven that they could so easily watch a country so well since Cuba. Man I figure the Chinese Minister was a bit worried. In that smae note I think that is the exact reason why it was not more of a smoking gun. Do you really want the world to know everything your counrty can find out? I doubt it. I think you have to look more at the big picture, If they showed all that imagine what they have NOT shown.

Also the fact that the US is pushing this so much is the part that gfreaks me out the most. The have got to be scared to be wanting to convince everyone this badly.

Of course this is all IMHO

[First of Two]

Even France is backpedaling. They've already issued a statement changing their position from "War is not an option" to "War is an option of last resort"... and they haven't even had time to analyze and digest the findings.

[Julian]

I don't like France....I get the distinct feeling that a Unified world is something they do not want...even though it saved there asses twice now

IMHO

[Dan Stack]

Julian, I'm not quite sure I follow you regarding a "unified world".

I think one problem with the Europe vs. America debate - if not the problem - is a matter of perspective. Western Europe and America can look at the same thing and see two totally different things. I think it helps to understand why different peoples think different things. The French and Germans both learned in WWII that war has some pretty horrible consequences. Both nations suffered the humiliation of conquest and occupation and in so doing learned some rotten consequences of war. They have also been through a number of brutal wars all over the Europran continent. With the EU becoming more of a reality, from their perspective it is, in my opinion, logical to believe there has to be another way than war.

The American perspective is, in my opinion, different. I think Americans are looking at this from the perspective of Pearl Harbor and September 11. Both times America slept while its enemies made ready. Both times America ignored a problem that could have been confronted earlier - not easily, and not without pain, but in 20/20 hindsight it would have been better to have been proactive.

Maybe I'm wrong about the European perspective and maybe I'm wrong about the American one.

I also don't want to sound like I'm a moral relativist. There is a right and a wrong. And as I've said before, I disagree with the position of France and Germany. But I do believe that one owes it to oneself to understand how reasonable people could come to a conclusion one disagrees with.


That Hussein is a threat, all seem to agree. That Iraq has not complied fully with weapons inspectors, all seem to agree as well. What is the disagreement? Two questions, I think. The first - is Iraq an immediate or short-term threat? The second is, what should be done?

People of intelligence and good conscience can disagree on those, despite the gravity of the situation and their consequences. Both perspectives can be very wrong. If the American view is right and nothing is done, the cost can be thousands or more dead Americans after some biological terror is unleashed. If the Americans are wrong, the consequence can be more suffering for the Iraqi people and a potentially less stable Middle East for a vain purpose.

[First of Two]

Keep in mind that Powell must have provided the other members with this data, that they might analyze it at their leisure, so that they can make their own conclusions.

Also keep in mind that when, several times, Powell described information that came from "friendly intelligence services" He did not mean our own. Basically, he's saying "this is what some of your OWN intelligence agencies told us." While some of these countries may not trust us, they tend to trust their own, and not ignore their reccommendations

[C5]

Actually, I agree with Dan's analysis. I've noticed that sometimes, European and American point of view can be very far apart, for historical reasons.

I've not yet seen Powell's speech so I can't comment on it otherwise.

Oh, one last thing : Julian, please posts with statements like "I don't like XXX". When you happen to be from the aforementionned XXX, you can't help being a bit annoyed, especially if a rather fuzzy explanation follows.

[Ramage]

I was unable to hear Sec. Powell speak this morning, but I intend to listen to a full repeat broadcast this evening when I get home.

I was, however, listeing to a fellow (last name of Kagan, didn't catch his first name -- apoliogies for this) on NPR (National Public Radio) the other day who laid out the basic differences between European and American mindsets regarding conflict at the moment.

First point: Euorpe went through two horrible, brutal, bloody wars in the 20th century, each of which threatened to end the whole of their way of life. As such, European leaders have, since WWII, attempted to move towards non-military approaches in many matters. The steps have often been imperfect, but there is an unstated goal of moving more towards international legal bodies and away from combative solutions. The United States, conversely, has not had an active war on its own territory for quite some time and hasn't had foreign troops actively invading its territory since the 19th C.

Second point: European powers used to be, well, powerful. Now they are not, at least in comparison to the United States. When France, England, and Germany had a more dominant military force, and thus world role, they tended to be more aggressive and posturing. Now that they are less powerful they are less aggressive. Conversely the United States used to be pretty weak and, during those times, tended to push more for non-intervention and finding solutions other than military ones. Now that the US is the "sole superpower" (although China might not entirely agree) our foreign policy is much more aggressive and less interested in international tribunals.

Now these points are not 100% accurate in all instances, yet they are good general benchmarks for comparison of tone between the United States and European countries in general. YMMV, of course.

Given this, France & Germany are following the general pattern that they have established over about the past couple of decades.

Admittedly my personal taste would be to move towards a world where more international cooperation (yes, very much including from Iraq) and international law would be the norm and less resorting to war and violence. This may be a dream, but it is a hopeful one.

[Cybrludite]

Originally posted by Evan van Eyk
The next thing I saw was a video tape. It was meant to show an Iraq fighter-craft - well it could have been a flying cow as well, the quality was terrible bad. I think the US have better equipment in their plane.

That tape was taken by the Iraqis, & discovered during the last round of hide-n-seek back in 1998. The jet was a Mirage F-1, with a centerline 2000l droptank converted into a bio-chem sprayer. Still, it doesn't seem to matter. A live transmission showing Saddam and Osama sitting on live nukes while stirring a fresh batch of Anthrax while thumbing their noses at UN inspectors, and France & Germany's governments will still say that it only proves that the inspections need more time...