≡ Menu

Blix criticizes Iraq

In his report to the U.N., chief weapons inspector Hans Blix sharply criticized Iraq for not being cooperative with the inspections:

“It is not enough to open doors. Inspection is not a game of catch as catch can,” he said. “Iraq appears not to have come to genuine acceptance, not even today, of the disarmament that was demanded of it.”

In general, though, Blix didn’t come down either for or against war with Iraq. It’s one of those on-the-fence reports that every country will spin in order to fit with its political positions. The United States will claim that it is further evidence that war is necessary, and countries such as Germany and France can claim that there’s no smoking gun, therefore no reason to go to war.

In short, this report changes nothing. And at the same time, it changes everything.

Today is a milestone. A turning point, if you will. With Bush’s State of the Union address tomorrow night, and the Israeli elections tomorrow, today is a pivotal day in world politics. It is getting to be the time where every country will be called upon to examine its concience and cast its loyalties. The only question is, who will inspire more loyalty – Bush or Saddam?

{ 6 comments… add one }
  • Ikram saeed 01.27.03, 10:17 PM

    Bush or Saddam???

    Bah. It’s more of that with us or against us claptrap. I am neither a fan of Joseph Camberlain or Paul Kruger. I dislike both the Montagues and the Capulets. I don’t care for the Raiders or the Buc’s. Your beer does not taste great, and it is not less filling.

    Canada was able to navigate around the oer war effectively. I expect we will do the same in this war. By obfuscating, we’ll satisfy both the modern day Dalton Mcarthy and the modern day Henri Bourassa.

    And the way the Canadian public seems to be going –(see Ekos polls) the Canadian branch of the party of war would probably be happier if we didn’t come down firmly on one side, since the a plurality of the public is agaisnt war.

    (and in a phone in non-pol “poll”, 90% said GWB was a greater threat to world peace than Saddam Hussein.!!)

  • Ikram saeed 01.27.03, 10:19 PM

    That should be “Boer war”, not “oer war”.

    Although the clever compromise that Laurier fashioned (a force of unofficial volounteers paid for by the gvt of CAnada) is not available to Chretien. He’ll have to think of something else to square the circle. Else we’ll stay out like we did in Vietnam.

  • Meryl Yourish 01.28.03, 12:15 AM

    The State of the Union Address is tomorrow, not today.

    Unless Canada’s time zone changed. 😉

  • Peter 01.28.03, 12:18 AM

    Anyone want to wager on when the war will begin? I predict February 25th.

  • segacs 01.28.03, 2:04 AM

    Thanks for pointing out the typo, Meryl. All fixed.

  • Meryl Yourish 01.28.03, 7:06 AM

    I just read something that made me realize that this is one of the most important State of the Union addresses in many years.

    We stand on the brink of war. Anyone who thinks that if the UN says don’t, we will not invade Iraq, is hopelessly naive. You don’t send the bulk of your armed forces to the Middle East only to pack them up and send them home again because Hans Blix and Co. want to take another six months to see if Saddam is in compliance.

    I’m going to be riveted to the TV tomorrow night. I think it may be one of those moments that you read about in the history books. Certainly, it has the potential to greatly affect the world to come. What President Bush decides over the next few weeks may change the face of the Middle East. Here’s hoping it’s for the better.

Leave a Comment