Klaus,
"If it was about Disarming them because Iraq did not verifiably dissarm...
...why did they talk about self defense, unprooved al-quaida and 9/11 connections and why did they need faked "facts" from their security agencies."
#1 Verifiably disarming Iraq is an action of "Self Defense" for the region, and the entire world.
#2 It would have been inappropriate not to tell the public about any possible connections to Al Quada. The Administration said there were indications and there indeed were at the time, regardless if the possible connections seem less so today. This was the intelligence they had at the time, and they presented it.
#3 The Administration never used "Faked" facts but simply intelligence that proved later to be inaccurate in some cases. That is the nature of any and all intelligence and not some liberal BS conspiracy theory.
"And why - if they did it under the UN rules is the UN not in control of the whole operation?"
The UN is under control of the whole operation as indicated by resolution 1483 passed in May 2003 by the Security Council which declared the member states, USA, United Kingdom, and Australia to be the "Authority" in Iraq. Every aspect of this operation has been approved and authorized by the United Nations. Any further changes to the current structure in Iraq will have to be approved by the United Nations and the United Nations has not done so yet.
"Why was the threat of Iraq (against other countries) so imminent that they couldn't wait that unmovic finished its work?"
It is impossible for UNMOVIC to finish its work without help from SADDAM. If SADDAM will not verifiably show what happened to the 30,000 Bio/Chem shells, thousands of liters of Anthrax, and hundreds of pounds of Mustard Gas, then it is impossible for UNMOVIC to achieve Verifiable Disarmament. From the start in November 2002, Saddam insisted he destroyed the WMD from 1998, but showed no evidence of the destruction. Verifiable disarmament requires that he do this. His failure to do this means that further UNMOVIC operations in Iraq were essentially a waste of time. Unarmed inspectors cannot disarm an armed dictator who does not want to be verifiably disarmed!
The threat of Saddam's WMD was declared imminent back in March 1991. That is why he was forced then in there, with 250,000 US troops in Southern Iraq, to sign agreements to give up all his WMD, or face further military action.
"Why wasn't even the time to wait 3 more days were France and Germany said they would present an alternative at the UN forum?"
Because the weather in Iraq is a big factor in military operations. Hundreds of Thousands of soldiers are have Chem/Bio suits on in 110 degree plus heat. The USA and coalition I feel waited to long to launch the strike. It should have been done weeks earlier to give the soldiers cooler weather to operate in.
Secondly, there is no alternative to Verifiable Disarmament by Saddam. It is Saddam's responsibility per the resolutions to disarm.
It is unbelievable that Germany and France fought so hard to prevent the end of one of the most brutal regimes in history. Thousands of Iraqi's were dying every month because of Saddam's rule. How many more Iraqi's would have to die under the German and French plan. An Alternative German and French plan would have left Saddam in power.
It had been 12 years since March 1991 when the invasion was launched to bring total compliance of Saddam with the resolutions through military force. 12 years. 12 years Germany and France had to present their ineffective plan for Iraq.
France and Germany should understand that enforcement of the UNs most serious resolutions, those past under Chapter VII rules, are vital if the United Nations is going to have credibility in the future. France and Germany should also understand that they will never succeed in preventing other countries from protecting their vital national security interest. They should also understand that the only way to deal with Dictators like Saddam or through the tough rules and resolutions that were laid down back in 1991 and reafirmed multiple times since then. Resolutions that clearly authorized the use of force if Saddam failed to comply. They should also understand that if they take a tougher stand next time, they actually would be more helpful in bringing about compliance without military force.
But the war is over now, and despite the fact that Germany and France were on the wrong side of history when it came to war, they now have the opportunity to be on the right side of history when it comes to the Peace. Japan has just given a Billion dollars to help reconstruct Iraq after 30 years of rule under Saddam. What will France and Germany be willing to contribute to the future of the Iraqi people? The Iraqi people are watching and waiting.
"If it was about Disarming them because Iraq did not verifiably dissarm...
...why did they talk about self defense, unprooved al-quaida and 9/11 connections and why did they need faked "facts" from their security agencies."
#1 Verifiably disarming Iraq is an action of "Self Defense" for the region, and the entire world.
#2 It would have been inappropriate not to tell the public about any possible connections to Al Quada. The Administration said there were indications and there indeed were at the time, regardless if the possible connections seem less so today. This was the intelligence they had at the time, and they presented it.
#3 The Administration never used "Faked" facts but simply intelligence that proved later to be inaccurate in some cases. That is the nature of any and all intelligence and not some liberal BS conspiracy theory.
"And why - if they did it under the UN rules is the UN not in control of the whole operation?"
The UN is under control of the whole operation as indicated by resolution 1483 passed in May 2003 by the Security Council which declared the member states, USA, United Kingdom, and Australia to be the "Authority" in Iraq. Every aspect of this operation has been approved and authorized by the United Nations. Any further changes to the current structure in Iraq will have to be approved by the United Nations and the United Nations has not done so yet.
"Why was the threat of Iraq (against other countries) so imminent that they couldn't wait that unmovic finished its work?"
It is impossible for UNMOVIC to finish its work without help from SADDAM. If SADDAM will not verifiably show what happened to the 30,000 Bio/Chem shells, thousands of liters of Anthrax, and hundreds of pounds of Mustard Gas, then it is impossible for UNMOVIC to achieve Verifiable Disarmament. From the start in November 2002, Saddam insisted he destroyed the WMD from 1998, but showed no evidence of the destruction. Verifiable disarmament requires that he do this. His failure to do this means that further UNMOVIC operations in Iraq were essentially a waste of time. Unarmed inspectors cannot disarm an armed dictator who does not want to be verifiably disarmed!
The threat of Saddam's WMD was declared imminent back in March 1991. That is why he was forced then in there, with 250,000 US troops in Southern Iraq, to sign agreements to give up all his WMD, or face further military action.
"Why wasn't even the time to wait 3 more days were France and Germany said they would present an alternative at the UN forum?"
Because the weather in Iraq is a big factor in military operations. Hundreds of Thousands of soldiers are have Chem/Bio suits on in 110 degree plus heat. The USA and coalition I feel waited to long to launch the strike. It should have been done weeks earlier to give the soldiers cooler weather to operate in.
Secondly, there is no alternative to Verifiable Disarmament by Saddam. It is Saddam's responsibility per the resolutions to disarm.
It is unbelievable that Germany and France fought so hard to prevent the end of one of the most brutal regimes in history. Thousands of Iraqi's were dying every month because of Saddam's rule. How many more Iraqi's would have to die under the German and French plan. An Alternative German and French plan would have left Saddam in power.
It had been 12 years since March 1991 when the invasion was launched to bring total compliance of Saddam with the resolutions through military force. 12 years. 12 years Germany and France had to present their ineffective plan for Iraq.
France and Germany should understand that enforcement of the UNs most serious resolutions, those past under Chapter VII rules, are vital if the United Nations is going to have credibility in the future. France and Germany should also understand that they will never succeed in preventing other countries from protecting their vital national security interest. They should also understand that the only way to deal with Dictators like Saddam or through the tough rules and resolutions that were laid down back in 1991 and reafirmed multiple times since then. Resolutions that clearly authorized the use of force if Saddam failed to comply. They should also understand that if they take a tougher stand next time, they actually would be more helpful in bringing about compliance without military force.
But the war is over now, and despite the fact that Germany and France were on the wrong side of history when it came to war, they now have the opportunity to be on the right side of history when it comes to the Peace. Japan has just given a Billion dollars to help reconstruct Iraq after 30 years of rule under Saddam. What will France and Germany be willing to contribute to the future of the Iraqi people? The Iraqi people are watching and waiting.