Miguel
Advanced Member
Member # 47
|
posted
Rumsfeld to Israel: Don't retaliate to Iraqi attack
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JANINE ZACHARIA and MELISSA RADLER Sep. 20, 2002
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WASHINGTON US Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld has urged Israel not to respond militarily to an Iraqi strike, saying in rare public statement on the issue, it would be in Israel's "best interests" not to get involved.
During a hearing on Wednesday in the House Armed Services Committee, Representative Joel Hefley (R-Colorado) commented, "If we attack [Saddam], he showed in the Persian Gulf War that he'll send missiles to Israel. If he sends dirty bombs to Israel... I don't think we can restrain Israel this time."
Rumsfeld responded by saying that there is no question that Iraq's neighbors will be "vulnerable," but "there's also no doubt in my mind but that it would be in Israel's overwhelming best interests not to get involved."
Until now, senior US officials have largely avoided public statements on the question of Israel's involvement in the potential war.
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and other senior Israeli officials, fearing that the power of the threat of Israeli reprisal was eroded by the lack of response to Iraqi Scud missiles in 1991, have pledged that Israel will respond this time to any Iraqi attack.
Israel has won assurances from the Bush administration that it will receive adequate advance warning of any US military offensive.
That prospect seemed to draw nearer yesterday when President George W. Bush came down hard on Iraq again, saying "Iraq lies" and vowing that the US will deal with the "problem" of Saddam alone if the UN Security Council won't.
"If the United Nations Security Council won't deal with the problem, the United States and some of our friends will," Bush told reporters in the Oval Office yesterday after meeting with Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Yesterday, Bush sent suggested language of a congressional resolution of support up to Capitol Hill. The suggested language, Bush said, includes an authorization of the use of force.
"If you want to keep the peace, you've got to have the authorization to use force," Bush said. Bush said further that the time for negotiations with Iraq is over.
"There are no negotiations to be held with Iraq. They have nothing to negotiate. They're the people who said that they would not have weapons of mass destruction," Bush said.
Washington is having trouble winning agreement from Russia in particular for a new UN Security Council resolution, the outlines of which were to be discussed by Secretary of State Colin Powell at a dinner in Washington last night with Russian Foreign Minister Igor Ivanov. Bush will meet today with Ivanov and the Russian defense minister today.
Rumsfeld, in a television interview Wednesday night, suggested the only way to avert a US military action were if Saddam and his family fled Iraq or if there was an internal coup.
Asked if he saw a scenario short of military action that would lead to Iraq's disarmament, Rumsfeld said Saddam Hussein and his family could decide "the game is up" and decide to go live in another country, or that "it's entirely possible that the people" of Iraq could decide "to change the regime from the inside."
Iraqi Foreign Minister Naji Sabri, in a belligerent address to the General Assembly yesterday, accused the US of "acting on behalf of Zionism" and fabricating charges that his country is developing weapons of mass destruction.
Sabri, who spent most of his address reading out remarks from Saddam Hussein, reiterated Iraq's decision this week to allow UN weapons inspectors to return. However, he failed to mention other Bush administration demands, including abiding by more than a dozen Security Council resolutions, halting the repression of its own citizens and accounting for the whereabouts of more than 600 prisoners of war. He said that Iraq "is clear of all nuclear, chemical, and biological weapons."
Bush, said Sabri, "pretended to care for the people of Iraq after he and other presidents before him have killed by the use of weapons," and he said the president made his accusations against Iraq based on "official statements of lies, distortion, and falsehood."
"The US administration wants to destroy Iraq in order to control the Middle East oil, and consequently control the politics as well as the oil and economic policies of the whole world," said Sabri.
At various points in his speech, Sabri linked Iraq's position to the plight of the Palestinians, and he confirmed US allegations that the regime has sent funding to Palestinian terror groups and families of suicide bombers.
"The American president is correct in what he says, yet we feel that the support we have extended has not been as high as we would have hoped, because of the circumstances [sanctions] which have curtailed our means," said Sabri.
At the US mission to the UN, a spokesman criticized Sabri's speech as "an indictment of the regime." "It's not the speech of a leader who wishes to redeem the past and cooperate with the international community," said the spokesman, noting that Iraqi disarmament and willingness to comply with Security Council resolutions were not mentioned.
The US is currently pushing for a new Security Council resolution that would specify exactly what Iraq must do to fulfill its obligations and the consequences of failing to do so, he said.
--------------------
Romans 9:11-24
Our Eschatology may vary even our Ecclesiology may be disputed among us but our Soteriology most assume a singularity and exclusivity which in biblical term is known as Quote; "The Narrow Way" and Quote!
Posts: 2792 | From: Stockton,Ca | Registered: Jun 2002
| IP: Logged | 
|
Printer-friendly view of this topic
