DAMN he's good ...
... but a lot of y'all won't like him.
He is the Syrian ambassador to the US.
I LOVE that answer to the "You've got chemical weapons!" attack.
The answer: introduce a resolution at the UN calling for the total removal of ALL WMD in the Middle East while simultaneously inviting in the inspectors.
Brilliant. Syria has chemicals; Israel has more dangerous nukes.
Will the US use its veto? CAN they?
Damn good. And good for peace.
He is the Syrian ambassador to the US.
I LOVE that answer to the "You've got chemical weapons!" attack.
The answer: introduce a resolution at the UN calling for the total removal of ALL WMD in the Middle East while simultaneously inviting in the inspectors.
Brilliant. Syria has chemicals; Israel has more dangerous nukes.
Will the US use its veto? CAN they?
Damn good. And good for peace.
Comments
Originally posted by Harald
... but a lot of y'all won't like him.
He is the Syrian ambassador to the US.
I LOVE that answer to the "You've got chemical weapons!" attack.
The answer: introduce a resolution at the UN calling for the total removal of ALL WMD in the Middle East while simultaneously inviting in the inspectors.
Brilliant. Syria has chemicals; Israel has more dangerous nukes.
Will the US use its veto? CAN they?
Damn good. And good for peace.
Yes it's a good answer, but Syria is not free of critics . He control Liban, he support terrorism, he is not ranked first for human rights.
However they never use them, contrary to Saddam.
BTW, it point out an important thing, what give the right to the more powerful countries to decide who have the right to have WOMD and who have not this right ?
Originally posted by Harald
The answer: introduce a resolution at the UN calling for the total removal of ALL WMD in the Middle East while simultaneously inviting in the inspectors.
Syria invited inspectors in?
I heard about them proposing all chemical weapons removed, but I never heard anything about them letting inspectors in.
Originally posted by groverat
Syria invited inspectors in?
I heard about them proposing all chemical weapons removed, but I never heard anything about them letting inspectors in.
I guess i heard them letting inspectors in, at the mere condition the same inspectors will came in Israel, a subtile way to say no ...
Originally posted by Powerdoc
...a subtile way to say no ...
If Syria put the offer on the table then it won't be their fault if the inspections don't happen.
But that's just a guess.
Groveman: Yeh ... I heard him say it myself.
Good huh?
Originally posted by bunge
If Syria put the offer on the table then it won't be their fault if the inspections don't happen.
That's why it's subtile, and let's say well put.
Toronto Globe
UNITED NATIONS (AP) ? Syria asked the UN Security Council today to approve an Arab-backed resolution calling for the Middle East to be free of weapons of mass destruction.
The United States said it supports the idea of a Middle East free of weapons of mass destruction, or WMD, but accused Syria of having such weapons itself.
The Syrian resolution was aimed at Israel, which is widely believed to have nuclear weapons. Israel refuses to confirm or deny the claim and is not party to global treaties aimed at controlling the spread of nuclear, chemical or biological weapons.
The proposed resolution calls on all countries in the Middle East to ratify the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty, the nuclear test ban treaty, and the conventions to control chemical and biological weapons.
"We believe such a draft resolution is a very important factor for the peace process and settling the peace and security in the Middle East," Syrian Ambassador Mikhail Wehbe said.
Yes indeed.
Iraq should be only the start! Send in the inspectors! Co-operate!
Or face invasion!
Or be Israel.
taqiya, what taqiya?
Originally posted by ena
Yes, with the rampant honesty that exists in the mideast inspections are definitly the way to go.
taqiya, what taqiya?
Yeh, you're right. Let's just cut straight to the bombs.
Syria first or Israel ena?
Originally posted by Harald
Doc: I don't like Tony Blair but as a politician he's damn good. Same amoral sense re. Mikhael?
Yes, he is damn good. However i don't have bad feelings for him, he appears to me that he is more pragmatic than Bush. I think in fact, it's a much better politician
Yeh, you're right. Let's just cut straight to the bombs.
Syria first or Israel ena?
I wasn't aware of any U.N. resolutions calling for them to disarm.
Maybe I missed it.
Originally posted by ena
I wasn't aware of any U.N. resolutions calling for them to disarm.
Maybe I missed it.
You are correct. There is no UN resolution calling for Syria to disarm...
Originally posted by ena
I wasn't aware of any U.N. resolutions calling for them to disarm.
Maybe I missed it.
Neither country has been asked to disarm by the UN. The Syrian resolution calls for both countries to disarm their undeclared WMD.
Why are Israel's WMD OK?
Originally posted by Harald
Neither country has been asked to disarm by the UN. The Syrian resolution calls for both countries to disarm their undeclared WMD.
Why are Israel's WMD OK?
How can you take seriously a country whose foreign policy includes suicide bombers---how much of this insanity do you want to legitimize?
Originally posted by ena
How can you take seriously a country whose foreign policy includes suicide bombers---how much of this insanity do you want to legitimize?
Answer my question and I'll respond to your (unrelated) question.
Why are Israel's WMD OK when Syria's aren't?
Originally posted by ena
How can you take seriously a country whose foreign policy includes suicide bombers---how much of this insanity do you want to legitimize?
This not the point. The point is who decide who have the right to have WOMD or not. For example what give any countrie the right to say to Israel to remove all his (unofficial) nukes ?
Why US, GB, France, Russia, China, India, Pakistan have the right to have nukes, and other countries not. This is a moral question, and may be pragmatic one considering that if the cold war is over for occident and russia, it's still there for Pakistan and India, who are in competition for the countrie with the best nuclear weapons.