In a message dated 11/8/2002 4:36:53 PM Greenwich Standard Time,
[log in to unmask] writes:


> . What I find interesting in the lastest development
> are two things: first Syria's last minute decision to vote in support of
> the
> Resolution as opposed to the much expected abstention and second US
> Ambassador to the UN John Negroponte's statement that the resolution 'does
> not constrain any state' from acting against Iraq. Syria must have changed
> its position after consultations with other Arab states most of whom would
> like to see the back of Saddam without the attendant consequencies of a
> military confrontation. Ambassador Negroponte's reaffirmation of the US
> position confirms the fears of many that regardless of whatever happens at
> the UN HQ, Bush is going to pounce on Iraq anyway, and if necessary to do
> it
> alone with Blaire in a supporting cast role.

Sidi,

I was noticing the same thing, and I think you are right about Syria having
consulted with other Arab states. If I understsnd correctly, Syria's only
reason for abstaining was that they wanted the voting on the resolution to
take place after the Arab States summit in Cairo this coming saturday, not
before.

I was also amazed but not surprised that John Negroponti said what he did.
Not only that, but you can see that they have already set their media
propaganda in full motion. AOL is already headlining that  "UN BACKS BUSH IN
IRAQ RESOLUTION"  and the others are echoeing the same. This will no doubt
give the population the impression that the UN backed Bush in his quest to go
after Iraq.

After  all of this hullabalou at the U.N, one also wonders what it was all
about if the Bush administration is going to use this as a sanction to attack
Iraq as they are already laying the groundwork for? The whole exercise was
intended ot just say that he  did go through the UN as required and nothing
more.

 I thought that the French and the Russians said they did not want to just
give Bush a carte blanche to go to war even after Hussein messes up the
inspections, but that they wanted another debate at the U.N to determine what
should happen next.

Instead, either the Bush administration is deliberately misrepresentating
what is actually in this resolution for propaganda with the American public
most of whom will never examine the blueprint, or  they are intent on
twisting the meaning of the resolution to go after Iraq anyway without any
further consultation with the U.N. They have the piece of paper they were
looking for, and so that technicality has been taken care of.
It is much more evident now that  Bush is determined to attack Iraq and the
reason is not just weapons of mass destruction but Oil.
In the meantime, the way Bush is  handling the North Koreans with kid gloves
is interesting.

Jabou Joh

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L Web interface
at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
To contact the List Management, please send an e-mail to:
[log in to unmask]

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~