OT Way to go Spain; that'll teach 'em. . .

"MADRID, Spain (CNN) -- Spain's 1,400 troops in Iraq will be withdrawn
"in the shortest possible time," the country's new prime minister said
Sunday.

Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero said his defense minister-designate, Jose
Bono, was ordered to make the arrangements as soon as he had been
sworn into office with the rest of the new Cabinet on Sunday."

"Scott Ferrin" wrote in message
...


"MADRID, Spain (CNN) -- Spain's 1,400 troops in Iraq will be withdrawn
"in the shortest possible time," the country's new prime minister said
Sunday.

Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero said his defense minister-designate, Jose
Bono, was ordered to make the arrangements as soon as he had been
sworn into office with the rest of the new Cabinet on Sunday."



Those Spanish cowards are in some fierce competition with the Frech cowards.
Not wanting to be outdone, I wonder what France's next move is going to be?
Make Osama an honorary citizen of Paris (like they did with Mumia Abu
Jamal)? That would leave Spain with no choice but to appoint Osama as their
president.

Should be interesting.

Those Spanish cowards are in some fierce competition with the Frech cowards.

In what way Spanish are cowards?

90 % of the Spanish population is against Spanish forces in Iraq.
Zapatero's party promised to bring their soldiers back already way
before the election, if they win.

Should be noted that both Spain and France are actively participating at
Afganistan, which is UN operation. Iraq is unlawful invasion, with no
United Nations backing. So it was an error in first place to even send
forces to Iraq, which they are now correcting.

"Jukka O. Kauppinen" wrote in
message ...

Iraq is unlawful invasion, with no
United Nations backing. So it was an error in first place to even send
forces to Iraq, which they are now correcting.


The resumption of hostilities in Iraq was sanctioned under U.N. Security
Council Resolution 1441.

"Steven P. McNicoll" wrote:

"Jukka O. Kauppinen" wrote in
message ...

Iraq is unlawful invasion, with no
United Nations backing. So it was an error in first place to even send
forces to Iraq, which they are now correcting.


The resumption of hostilities in Iraq was sanctioned under U.N. Security
Council Resolution 1441.

It doesn't sanction a "resumption of hostilities", only further
inspections, and those only by the IAEA and UNMOVIC. It is silent on
the consequences of Iraq's failure to comply, however, the last
paragraph, "[The Security Council _decides_] to remain seized of the
matter.", implies that the consequences are something to be determined
at a latter date (something the French and Russians prevented). From
http://ods-dds-ny.un.org/doc/UNDOC/G...df?OpenElement

1. Decides that Iraq has been and remains in material breach of its
obligations under relevant resolutions, including resolution 687
(1991), in particular
through Iraq’s failure to cooperate with United Nations inspectors and
the IAEA,
and to complete the actions required under paragraphs 8 to 13 of
resolution 687
(1991);

2. Decides, while acknowledging paragraph 1 above, to afford Iraq, by
this
resolution, a final opportunity to comply with its disarmament
obligations under
relevant resolutions of the Council; and accordingly decides to set up
an enhanced
inspection regime with the aim of bringing to full and verified
completion the
disarmament process established by resolution 687 (1991) and
subsequent
resolutions of the Council;

3. Decides that, in order to begin to comply with its disarmament
obligations, in addition to submitting the required biannual
declarations, the
Government of Iraq shall provide to UNMOVIC, the IAEA, and the
Council, not
later than 30 days from the date of this resolution, a currently
accurate, full, and
complete declaration of all aspects of its programmes to develop
chemical,
biological, and nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and other
delivery systems such
as unmanned aerial vehicles and dispersal systems designed for use on
aircraft,
including any holdings and precise locations of such weapons,
components, sub-components,
stocks of agents, and related material and equipment, the locations
and
work of its research, development and production facilities, as well
as all other
chemical, biological, and nuclear programmes, including any which it
claims are for
purposes not related to weapon production or material;

4. Decides that false statements or omissions in the declarations
submitted
by Iraq pursuant to this resolution and failure by Iraq at any time to
comply with,
and cooperate fully in the implementation of, this resolution shall
constitute a
further material breach of Iraq’s obligations and will be reported to
the Council for
assessment in accordance with paragraphs 11 and 12 below;

5. Decides that Iraq shall provide UNMOVIC and the IAEA immediate,
unimpeded, unconditional, and unrestricted access to any and all,
including
underground, areas, facilities, buildings, equipment, records, and
means of transport
which they wish to inspect, as well as immediate, unimpeded,
unrestricted, and
private access to all officials and other persons whom UNMOVIC or the
IAEA wish
to interview in the mode or location of UNMOVIC’s or the IAEA’s choice
pursuant
to any aspect of their mandates; further decides that UNMOVIC and the
IAEA may
at their discretion conduct interviews inside or outside of Iraq, may
facilitate the
travel of those interviewed and family members outside of Iraq, and
that, at the sole
discretion of UNMOVIC and the IAEA, such interviews may occur without
the
presence of observers from the Iraqi Government; and instructs UNMOVIC
and
requests the IAEA to resume inspections no later than 45 days
following adoption of
this resolution and to update the Council 60 days thereafter;

6. Endorses the 8 October 2002 letter from the Executive Chairman of
UNMOVIC and the Director-General of the IAEA to General Al-Saadi of
the
Government of Iraq, which is annexed hereto, and decides that the
contents of the
letter shall be binding upon Iraq;

7. Decides further that, in view of the prolonged interruption by Iraq
of the
presence of UNMOVIC and the IAEA and in order for them to accomplish
the tasks
set forth in this resolution and all previous relevant resolutions and
notwithstanding
prior understandings, the Council hereby establishes the following
revised or
additional authorities, which shall be binding upon Iraq, to
facilitate their work in
Iraq:

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall determine the composition of their
inspection
teams and ensure that these teams are composed of the most qualified
and
experienced experts available;

– All UNMOVIC and IAEA personnel shall enjoy the privileges and
immunities,
corresponding to those of experts on mission, provided in the
Convention on
Privileges and Immunities of the United Nations and the Agreement on
the
Privileges and Immunities of the IAEA;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have unrestricted rights of entry into
and out
of Iraq, the right to free, unrestricted, and immediate movement to
and from
inspection sites, and the right to inspect any sites and buildings,
including
immediate, unimpeded, unconditional, and unrestricted access to
Presidential
Sites equal to that at other sites, notwithstanding the provisions of
resolution
1154 (1998) of 2 March 1998;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to be provided by Iraq the
names of all personnel currently and formerly associated with Iraq’s
chemical,
biological, nuclear, and ballistic missile programmes and the
associated
research, development, and production facilities;

– Security of UNMOVIC and IAEA facilities shall be ensured by
sufficient
United Nations security guards;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to declare, for the
purposes of
freezing a site to be inspected, exclusion zones, including
surrounding areas
and transit corridors, in which Iraq will suspend ground and aerial
movement
so that nothing is changed in or taken out of a site being inspected;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the free and unrestricted use and
landing
of fixed- and rotary-winged aircraft, including manned and unmanned
reconnaissance vehicles;

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right at their sole discretion
verifiably
to remove, destroy, or render harmless all prohibited weapons,
subsystems,
components, records, materials, and other related items, and the right
to
impound or close any facilities or equipment for the production
thereof; and

– UNMOVIC and the IAEA shall have the right to free import and use of
equipment or materials for inspections and to seize and export any
equipment,
materials, or documents taken during inspections, without search of
UNMOVIC or IAEA personnel or official or personal baggage;

8. Decides further that Iraq shall not take or threaten hostile acts
directed
against any representative or personnel of the United Nations or the
IAEA or of any
Member State taking action to uphold any Council resolution;

9. Requests the Secretary-General immediately to notify Iraq of this
resolution, which is binding on Iraq; demands that Iraq confirm within
seven days of
that notification its intention to comply fully with this resolution;
and demands
further that Iraq cooperate immediately, unconditionally, and actively
with
UNMOVIC and the IAEA;

10. Requests all Member States to give full support to UNMOVIC and the
IAEA in the discharge of their mandates, including by providing any
information
related to prohibited programmes or other aspects of their mandates,
including on
Iraqi attempts since 1998 to acquire prohibited items, and by
recommending sites to
be inspected, persons to be interviewed, conditions of such
interviews, and data to
be collected, the results of which shall be reported to the Council by
UNMOVIC and
the IAEA;

11. Directs the Executive Chairman of UNMOVIC and the Director-General
of the IAEA to report immediately to the Council any interference by
Iraq with
inspection activities, as well as any failure by Iraq to comply with
its disarmament
obligations, including its obligations regarding inspections under
this resolution;

12. Decides to convene immediately upon receipt of a report in
accordance
with paragraphs 4 or 11 above, in order to consider the situation and
the need for
full compliance with all of the relevant Council resolutions in order
to secure
international peace and security;

13. Recalls, in that context, that the Council has repeatedly warned
Iraq that
it will face serious consequences as a result of its continued
violations of its
obligations;

14. Decides to remain seized of the matter.
--
Andrew Chaplin
SIT MIHI GLADIUS SICUT SANCTO MARTINO
(If you're going to e-mail me, you'll have to get "yourfinger." out.)

"Jukka O. Kauppinen" wrote:


I disgree that the Spanish troops might be cowards, like the French.

But ...

Should be noted that both Spain and France are actively participating at
Afganistan, which is UN operation. Iraq is unlawful invasion, with no
United Nations backing.

Unlawful invasion my ass. Read UN resolution 1441
(and the dozen or so earlier ones, almost all of
which charge the members with forcing Iraq to comply
with the resolutions). A few members accepted their
role (e.g. - US, UK, others) - while others were too
busy trying to cover their own violations of the sanctions
- and maintaining some very lucrative deals with Saddam.

Scott Ferrin wrote in message . ..
"MADRID, Spain (CNN) -- Spain's 1,400 troops in Iraq will be withdrawn
"in the shortest possible time," the country's new prime minister said
Sunday.

Jose Luis Rodriguez Zapatero said his defense minister-designate, Jose
Bono, was ordered to make the arrangements as soon as he had been
sworn into office with the rest of the new Cabinet on Sunday."

It wont teach 'em. And more to the point the Spainards dotn seem to be
interested in teaching 'em. Why should they?

Quick question, what exactly are we teaching them?.

Cheers

John Cook

Any spelling mistakes/grammatic errors are there purely to annoy. All
opinions are mine, not TAFE's however much they beg me for them.

Email Address :-
Spam trap - please remove (trousers) to email me
Eurofighter Website :- http://www.eurofighter-typhoon.co.uk

On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 20:08:15 +1000, John Cook
wrote:


Quick question, what exactly are we teaching them?.

Cheers

John Cook


Do you watch the news much? Spain gets a huge terrorist incident
right before an election so they vote in a terrorist sympithizer (may
as well be) and his first order of business is to have any Spanish
troops in Iraq leave so fast all you see is the cloud of dust. I was
being sracrastic when I said "that'll teach 'em". Incidents like this
only encourage the terrorists. Next time they want something in
Spain they'll just blow something up to make sure they get it. And I
thought the French were bad.

Scott Ferrin wrote in message . ..
On Mon, 19 Apr 2004 20:08:15 +1000, John Cook
wrote:


Quick question, what exactly are we teaching them?.

Cheers

John Cook


Do you watch the news much? Spain gets a huge terrorist incident
right before an election so they vote in a terrorist sympithizer (may
as well be) and his first order of business is to have any Spanish
troops in Iraq leave so fast all you see is the cloud of dust. I was
being sracrastic when I said "that'll teach 'em". Incidents like this
only encourage the terrorists. Next time they want something in
Spain they'll just blow something up to make sure they get it. And I
thought the French were bad.

i know you were being sarcastic, I was just wondering what we are
teaching Iraqi's.

The Iraqi situation is a **** up, the whole premise of the invasion
was based on lies or at best stage managed intellegence, then despite
warnings that without international support it would quickly turn into
a **** fight, The US decided to 'save' the Iraqi's from Saddam (I
can't find any good reference to Saddams links with Al Queda).

Ask yourself a couple of questions,
Why are we in Iraq?.
Why don't the people in Iraq want us there?.

Then look at what other countries fit into the reasons why we went to
war, China, North korea, virtually the whole middle east, Russia.

Its beginning to look like the 'war on terrorism' is just an excuse
for some really terrible political decisions.

How do you think the US has managed to turn the overwhelming
international support and outrage of the Sept 11th attack into a
minority of 'hard core' countries that now find it difficult to
disengage from the whole sorry mess.

People are calling the French cowards (and I'm not a great fan of the
french) but all they did was say that it was a bad idea to invade on
the flaky intellegence available and they wouldn't support such an
action (now they have been proved correct), the UN said wait till the
weapons inspectors have finished their work because they were
exausting all possible avenues, The US decided to give Saddam an
ultimatum, produce the WMD in 10 days or else. (Well the US has had a
year wheres the WMD?, 'oops we made a mistake' seems a little thin.)

Preemptive attacks are a pretty stupid idea especially when the
reasons for the attack evaporate, and It certainly hasn't helped the
US now, In fact the whole Iraq fiasco has helped the extremist anti
western elements hugely, uniting diverse factions against western
interests, splitting western allies, and destroying US international
credability especially its Integellence agencies.

Now ask yourself what positives have been achieved?.

The Iraqi's are now being 'helped' by the US, they are spending the
Iraqi Oil money with mainly American companies to rebuild the war torn
country.
Thats rather like having a mugger break into your house, and you pay
him to fix the damage he's done..


All in All the war on terrorism seems to be acheiving the extremists
aims more that western interests, its not a question of cowardice.
Whats required is common sense and sensible foreign policys to stop a
crusader type new holy war breaking out either through stupidity or
the perception that is a christian v muslim thing..


Just My 2 pennys worth

Cheers