Us prassident bush demands free hand from the congress for war

In a resolution to the congress, Bush wants to precede a decision before the elections and also strain the truth

When Federal Minister of Justice Herta Daeller-Gmelin (SPD) actually, like that "Schwabische Tagblatt" reported, said that Bush with a war against Iraq, above all, distracted from domestic problems and such distraction manobs "A popular method since Adolf Hitler" be, then this was no different than stupid and unnotic. Although it is certainly largely true that US Prasident Bush is also forced from domestic grounds (but not only), a military approach to Iraq for the fall of Hussein, so the comparison with Hitler has been completely unnecessary, even if she after the Tag’s leaf already during the event added, you would not want to compare Bush with Hitler, which has never done it.

US Prassident Bush demands free hand from the Congress for War

Village Minister Powell reports Prasident Bush and VicePrasident Cheney on the progress of negotiations on a new UN Resolution

And if it’s just about the "method" If the animals of a war from domestic grounds is certainly as old as the war itself, because nothing is better suited for the production of unity on all differences as a war and threat of subeat. As so often, the Federal Minister of Justice had probably understood better in this case, not to expire immediately in the denial reflex ("I did not say that, just." – SZ from 20.9.), but to regret the unused stupidity. It ultimately helps that the American government can easily dispose of the legitimate criticism.

" At the United Nations Security Council It Is Very Important That The Members United Nations Is at Stake, That The Security Council Must Be Firm in Its Resolve To Deal With A Truth Threat To World Peace, And That Is Saddam Hussein. That the United Nations Security Council Must Work With the United States and Britain and Other Concerned Parties to Send a Clear Message That WE Expect Saddam to Disarm. And IF The United Nations Security Council Won’t Deal With The Problem, The United States And Some Of Our Friends wants." – Prasident Bush

In fact, US Prasident drives the case Iraq before the elections in the US with all determination ahead (brought out of kicking). In a resolution that today goes to the Congress, he seeks to are himself absolute action so that he could start a military attack at any time and unregistered. The formulation that one can be obtained to allow peace, to apply permission, also to apply violence, clearly realize that the Bush government wants to make the military map generally easier in the future, which also belongs, not just against Iraq to tackle a military first.

The Blank Hotel, which Bush wants to receive from the Congress, probably also tests the limits, because the declination resolution is by no means limited to Iraq, but was a free hand for military actions in the whole region. Oberdies was also the reason for a military shock not only in a break of UN resolutions, but generally in any threat to the US national security. It is also quite unflunted that weapon inspections and any destruction of found weapons of mass destruction are not the goal, as it is about the fall of the regime:

"The President Is Authorized to Use All Means That He Determines to Be ApproprIate, Including Force, In Order To Enforce The United Nations Security Council Resolutions Referenced Above, Defend The National Security Interests of the United States Against The Threat Posed by Iraq, And Restore International Peace and Security in the region."

With reference to previous congress decisions, the draft resolution refers to the fact that the US prasident, if an infringement of UN sanctions by Iraq enters, can use all means to enforce it. Oberdies is the prime to the prospective right to act militarically when national security is threatened. However, what American historians can remember, only the congress explain a war, but not the prasident. Uberthie’s must, so will explain in the petition that not only adopt the congress a resolution to authorize a war, he also has to debate and vote. A new UN sanction or legitimization of a war against Iraq through injury to UN sanctions were therefore a necessary means of explaining no war, but only one intervention.

" WE Too Watched With Shock The Horrific Events of September 11, 2001. WE Too Mourned The Thousands of Innocent Dead and Shook Our Heads at the Terrible Scenes of Carnage – Even AS WE Recalled Similar Scenes in Baghdad, Panama City, And, A Generation Ago, Vietnam. WE TOO JOINED The Anguished Questioning of Millions Of Americans Who Asked Why Search A Thing Could Happen.

But the Mourning Had Barely Begen, When The Highest Leaders of the Land Unleashed a Spirit of Revenge. They put out a simplistic script of "Good vs. Evil" That’s what takes up by a pliant and intimidated media. They Told US That Asking Why Thesis Terrible Events Had Happened Verged On Treason. There what to be no debate. There Were by Definition No Valid Political Or Moral Questions. The Only Possible Answer What To Be War Abroad and Represses at Home."

From a statement of conscience: distress in our name, a manifesto of American war opponents signed by many artists and intellectuals.

Frightening, however, is how the Bush government in the resolution by creating facts from amptions to crash the war necessity of the prasident. Thus, it is said that Iraq continues to violate the UN resolutions because he is still "has a significant amount of chemical and biological weapons and develops, actively involved in the possession of nuclear weapons to come looking for and supported terrorist organizations and hosts the US national security interests and international peace". Of course, it is again pointed out that the Iraq – at that time still the associated of the USA! – Mass destruction already used.

It also claims that you know that members of Al-Qaeda stay in Iraq. The attacks of the 11.9. Had the rough of the threat demonstrated, "that Iraq provides weapons of mass destruction to international terrorist organizations". Both are completely unproven so far as there is no evidence that the Iraq is actually or again on mass destruction weapons. Because, so the resolution continues, the USA after international law that "inherent law" Owning to use violence for self-preservation, which Iraq has already shown that he has the funds and the will to use mass destruction of weapons, in view of the high risk that these weapons become one "surprise attack" used to the US or international terrorists were to give this purpose, the export of violence on self-protection legitimate.

On the other hand, the conflicting and preparation of a renewed weapon inspection, the draft resolution is also based on how it calls clear conditions when military resources are to be used. It is therefore largely a blank check, which also after a discussion and some restrictions, the congress should approve the resolution, the US-Prassified extensive power without further coordination with the congress. You will have to see how the critical voices from the ranks of the Democrats continue to behave. In campaign times, the prere could be so rough that one gives the prassident extensive, lateral randomly more powerful power, not to be considered unpatriotic. Finally, Bush always ares that the nation is already in a long-lasting war, the national unity requires. And the resolution is such as to sell that they give the congress the chance to show that he "Administration gives way to preserve peace". Whether you just have to pull up, in the war.

Final resume from the biological income agreement

As the Washington Post reports, the Bush government has placed further negotiations on an addition to the Bio-Fare Agreement on the regulation of verification for the time being. At best 2006 you can meet again to discuss discussions. Until then, the Biowaffe Agreement is now a paper tiger, although the US government rejects her action against Iraq again and again that this has biod weapons.

Already last year, despite the anthrax letters, the negotiations fail in the short term, because the audit procedures allegedly do not sufficient to prevent states of developing or receiving biological weapons (bio-saving conference in Geneva failed). An Employee of the Aufemister has buried the jerking from the international agreement that the USA and the other states are so different that no agreement will be achieved. The USA rather than the International Agreement, which was allowed in member countries for fundamental suspicions of investments (also in the US), prefer that the states prohibit individually criminal the production, sale and possession of biological weapons. That had the advantage that the US has not been subject to any international agreement and have been free hand, but maybe the own action on self-protection as in Iraq does not have to be able to justify inspections of an international team.

Like this post? Please share to your friends:
Leave a Reply

;-) :| :x :twisted: :smile: :shock: :sad: :roll: :razz: :oops: :o :mrgreen: :lol: :idea: :grin: :evil: :cry: :cool: :arrow: :???: :?: :!: