| Author | Message | | Guest-400c | | Posted: Fri Jan 24, 2003 8:39 pm Post subject: We're Going for Oil (and Radical Zionism) |
| Daily Mirror January 21, 2003
We're Going for Oil (and Radical Zionism)
Exclusive By Gary Jones, Tom Newton Dunn and Bob Roberts
British troops will seize control of Iraq's oilfields under a secret
invasion plan already agreed with America.
Yesterday the government ordered another 26,000 soldiers to the Gulf, taking
the total towards 40,000.
It could mean the biggest land operation since Suez in 1956.
Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon continued to insist war with Saddam Hussein was
"not inevitable".
But a battleground blueprint has already been drawn up, the Daily Mirror has
learned, with Britain earmarked to secure Saddam's fuel supplies and squash
suggestions of a US "oil grab".
Today, with many Labour MPs convinced the war decision has been taken, we
ask YOU the readers to sign our Page One petition opposing any action not
sanctioned by the United Nations.
Labour MP and Father of the Commons Tam Dalyell - echoing growing anti-war
anger - said of the task-force order: "I think this means war is inevitable
now but that should not stop us doing everything, day and night, to oppose
it.
"Because the Americans are concerned not to take body bags back home, there
will be tremendous bombing. God knows how many casualties that will lead to.
The Arab world will explode."
Details learned from defence show President Bush is determined to avoid
accusations that deposing Saddam is about oil, not weapons of mass
destruction.
Pentagon chiefs have told the Ministry of Defence: "You take the the
oilfields. We're not going to take the flak for taking the oil."
The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1991 ended with its oil ablaze and it took
eight months to quench the flames.
Now the US wants to stop Saddam torching his huge reservoirs - and the 4,000
marines of 3 Commando Brigade have been assigned the task.
They are already en route to the region - and Mr Hoon's Commons announcement
yesterday will take the British presence to one quarter of our armed forces.
Four thousand sailors also on their way in the Ark Royal convoy will join
1,000 pilots and ground crew stationed around the Middle East.
Twenty-six thousand Army soldiers - including two regiments of Paras - will
make up a huge land force, involving heavy armour and giving commanders
every fighting option. It is highly likely the total will swell to 40,000,
10,000 of whom will be combat soldiers and marines.
The editor of Jane's World Armies, Major Charles Heyman, said: "This is an
enormous deployment." The US has massed 100,000 troops in the Gulf. British
strategists have been told that a full-scale invasion force must be in place
by February 15.
The Daily Mirror has learned there will be 14 days of intensive air strikes
against military installations before the spearhead marines of 40 and 42
Commando are ordered in.
It will be a two-pronged attack by land and sea. The 600 riflemen of 40
Commando will make an amphibious landing along Iraq's 60-kilometre coastline
in the north Arabian Gulf.
The four sabre companies of 42 Commando will dash across the Kuwaiti border
up to the Euphrates.
Basra, the strategically-vital southern port where Saddam's Republican army
is based, will be targeted first. It is regarded as crucial to the success
of the invasion.
The commandos will be backed by a full squadron of artillery and specialist
engineers.
Thousands of men will be deployed across land from Kuwait to "ring-fence"
oil installations in the southern tip of Iraq and in the south west and
north east. Once Basra is isolated and the oilfields secured, the US will
push towards Baghdad,
Speed is the key to prevent Saddam destroying key assets.
Battle orders will be to "surround and contain", in the hope that Iraqi
forces will quickly ditch Saddam.
Power supplies and roads will be left intact. A senior officer involved in
planning, said: "Saddam is desperate for us to fight him in the cities and
we're not going to fall into his trap."
The first marines are already in Kuwait and preparing for the full brigade's
arrival in two weeks.
Military chiefs here are committed to "winning at minimum cost to life"
although they are sceptical about the reasons for the conflict.
The source said: "We take our orders from 10 Downing Street but that doesn't
mean we aren't aware that this is mostly about oil.
"This war will cost billions and someone must pick up the tab. Iraqi oil is
going to pay for it all."
US officials stress that the oilfields will remain the property of Iraq.
They have told the MoD: "We don't mind Iraqi flags flying over them as long
as Saddam is not in power."
Military chiefs have little idea how the Iraqi people will respond. The
source added: "There's a degree of optimism that Iraq can be taken within
days and without mass bloodshed. How realistic this is, is anyone's guess."
An invasion would be the biggest occupation of a country since the seizure
of Japan and Germany in 1945.
Special forces are already operating inside Iraq and air assaults are taking
their toll.
The lead headquarters elements of 16 Air Assault Brigade will be the first
of the land force to leave, flying to Kuwait this week.
Mr Hoon told MPs yesterday that the deployment was "no ordinary measure".
But he added: "A decision to employ force has not been taken, nor is such a
decision imminent or inevitable."
Ex-minister Glenda Jackson said pledges that war was avoidable now rang
hollow. She added: "In principle the decision has been taken."
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12554272&method=full&
siteid=50143 | |  | | Guest-400c | | | | Guest-400c | | | | Your mutter | | Posted: Fri Jan 24, 2003 9:12 pm Post subject: Re: We're going for oil |
| | Guest-400c wrote: | Daily Mirror January 21, 2003
We're going for oil
Exclusive By Gary Jones, Tom Newton Dunn and Bob Roberts
British troops will seize control of Iraq's oilfields under a secret
invasion plan already agreed with America.
Yesterday the government ordered another 26,000 soldiers to the Gulf, taking
the total towards 40,000.
It could mean the biggest land operation since Suez in 1956.
Defence Secretary Geoff Hoon continued to insist war with Saddam Hussein was
"not inevitable".
But a battleground blueprint has already been drawn up, the Daily Mirror has
learned, with Britain earmarked to secure Saddam's fuel supplies and squash
suggestions of a US "oil grab".
Today, with many Labour MPs convinced the war decision has been taken, we
ask YOU the readers to sign our Page One petition opposing any action not
sanctioned by the United Nations.
Labour MP and Father of the Commons Tam Dalyell - echoing growing anti-war
anger - said of the task-force order: "I think this means war is inevitable
now but that should not stop us doing everything, day and night, to oppose
it.
"Because the Americans are concerned not to take body bags back home, there
will be tremendous bombing. God knows how many casualties that will lead to.
The Arab world will explode."
Details learned from defence show President Bush is determined to avoid
accusations that deposing Saddam is about oil, not weapons of mass
destruction.
Pentagon chiefs have told the Ministry of Defence: "You take the the
oilfields. We're not going to take the flak for taking the oil."
The Iraqi invasion of Kuwait in 1991 ended with its oil ablaze and it took
eight months to quench the flames.
Now the US wants to stop Saddam torching his huge reservoirs - and the 4,000
marines of 3 Commando Brigade have been assigned the task.
They are already en route to the region - and Mr Hoon's Commons announcement
yesterday will take the British presence to one quarter of our armed forces.
Four thousand sailors also on their way in the Ark Royal convoy will join
1,000 pilots and ground crew stationed around the Middle East.
Twenty-six thousand Army soldiers - including two regiments of Paras - will
make up a huge land force, involving heavy armour and giving commanders
every fighting option. It is highly likely the total will swell to 40,000,
10,000 of whom will be combat soldiers and marines.
The editor of Jane's World Armies, Major Charles Heyman, said: "This is an
enormous deployment." The US has massed 100,000 troops in the Gulf. British
strategists have been told that a full-scale invasion force must be in place
by February 15.
The Daily Mirror has learned there will be 14 days of intensive air strikes
against military installations before the spearhead marines of 40 and 42
Commando are ordered in.
It will be a two-pronged attack by land and sea. The 600 riflemen of 40
Commando will make an amphibious landing along Iraq's 60-kilometre coastline
in the north Arabian Gulf.
The four sabre companies of 42 Commando will dash across the Kuwaiti border
up to the Euphrates.
Basra, the strategically-vital southern port where Saddam's Republican army
is based, will be targeted first. It is regarded as crucial to the success
of the invasion.
The commandos will be backed by a full squadron of artillery and specialist
engineers.
Thousands of men will be deployed across land from Kuwait to "ring-fence"
oil installations in the southern tip of Iraq and in the south west and
north east. Once Basra is isolated and the oilfields secured, the US will
push towards Baghdad,
Speed is the key to prevent Saddam destroying key assets.
Battle orders will be to "surround and contain", in the hope that Iraqi
forces will quickly ditch Saddam.
Power supplies and roads will be left intact. A senior officer involved in
planning, said: "Saddam is desperate for us to fight him in the cities and
we're not going to fall into his trap."
The first marines are already in Kuwait and preparing for the full brigade's
arrival in two weeks.
Military chiefs here are committed to "winning at minimum cost to life"
although they are sceptical about the reasons for the conflict.
The source said: "We take our orders from 10 Downing Street but that doesn't
mean we aren't aware that this is mostly about oil.
"This war will cost billions and someone must pick up the tab. Iraqi oil is
going to pay for it all."
US officials stress that the oilfields will remain the property of Iraq.
They have told the MoD: "We don't mind Iraqi flags flying over them as long
as Saddam is not in power."
Military chiefs have little idea how the Iraqi people will respond. The
source added: "There's a degree of optimism that Iraq can be taken within
days and without mass bloodshed. How realistic this is, is anyone's guess."
An invasion would be the biggest occupation of a country since the seizure
of Japan and Germany in 1945.
Special forces are already operating inside Iraq and air assaults are taking
their toll.
The lead headquarters elements of 16 Air Assault Brigade will be the first
of the land force to leave, flying to Kuwait this week.
Mr Hoon told MPs yesterday that the deployment was "no ordinary measure".
But he added: "A decision to employ force has not been taken, nor is such a
decision imminent or inevitable."
Ex-minister Glenda Jackson said pledges that war was avoidable now rang
hollow. She added: "In principle the decision has been taken."
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/allnews/page.cfm?objectid=12554272&method=full&
siteid=50143 |
The title and the "oil grab" nonsense is deceptive, but some of the rest looks fairly accurate.
Not just special forces are in Iraq. Regular US troops have already been operating inside Iraq, and the Iraqi troops will not approach.
There will be airstrikes, but there will be few casualties away from any military installations.
Power supplies will remain intact, but electronics will get fried. | | | | Guest-400c | | Posted: Fri Jan 24, 2003 9:53 pm Post subject: UK and BUSH REGIME Feeling the Pressure from World and US.. |
| Radical (JINSA-Jewish Institute of National Security Affairs of the Richard Perle/Paul Wolfowitz/Dick Cheney cabal in the BUSH Regime) Zionism and OIL are the reasons we are going, and the entire world needs to know it as soon as possible....
61 % of US Public Wants to Give UN Inspectors More Time:
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/01/23/61-of-us-public-wants-to-give-un-inspectors-more-time.php
No Iraq Nuclear Evidence Found, Agency Says
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-012403uniraq_wr,0,2298661.story?coll=la%2Dhome%2Dheadlines
UPDATE
No Iraq Nuclear Evidence Found, Agency Says
From Associated Press
January 24 2003, 9:47 AM PST
VIENNA, Austria -- The head of the U.N. nuclear agency will tell the Security Council next week that his inspectors need more time in Iraq, but that Saddam Hussein gets a "B" for his cooperation, an agency spokesman said today.
International Atomic Energy Agency director Mohamed ElBaradei, due to brief the council in New York on Monday along with chief U.N. inspector Hans Blix, will give Iraq "quite satisfactory" grades despite the need for improvement, spokesman Mark Gwozdecky said.
"Their report card will be a 'B,'" he told The Associated Press.
Gwozdecky said ElBaradei will tell the Security Council that Saddam's government has provided good access to inspectors searching for weapons of mass destruction.
"Access and cooperation are good," he said. "We've been getting where and when we want to get, and we've been generally successful in getting what we need."
But ElBaradei also will say that the Iraqis "need to help themselves by coming forward" with evidence rather than waiting for the inspectors to sniff it out.
He said the IAEA chief also would make a case for additional pressure on Baghdad to encourage Iraqi scientists to consent to private interviews with the U.N. inspectors. So far, the scientists have refused.
Earlier today, the IAEA said analyses of samples taken by nuclear inspectors in Iraq have so far not revealed any evidence of prohibited nuclear activity.
The results will be included in the agency's report to the Security Council, IAEA spokeswoman Melissa Fleming said.
"The results so far ... have revealed no indication of prohibited nuclear activities at the locations where the samples were taken," she said. "This is not the end. The inspectors take these samples continuously."
David Donohue, head of the agency's laboratory in Seibersdorf, about 40 miles east of Vienna, said 11 samples delivered before Christmas had been analyzed. Those samples were considered "high-priority," he said, adding that eight samples delivered since were not considered as crucial.
"We will just do those in the next weeks or so," he said. "We expect that there will be a steady flow of samples for the next months."
The high-priority samples were cotton swabs that had been swiped at suspect sites. Using sophisticated technology, laboratory workers analyze the cloths to determine if there has been any nuclear activity at the swipe site, Fleming said.
The samples also were sent to a few other laboratories to ensure accuracy, she said. The other labs also found no evidence of illegal nuclear activity.
Like we have been saying...
Inspections won't work. They are inspectors, not hunters.
http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-fg-iraq24jan24,0,4557884.story?coll=la%2Dhome%2Dheadlines
U.S., Britain May Give More Time on Iraq
Powell and Straw discuss letting arms monitoring proceed for weeks if they get assurances from allies that inspections won't drag on.
By Robin Wright
Times Staff Writer
January 24 2003
WASHINGTON -- The outlines of a possible compromise on Iraq began to take shape Thursday, as the United States and Britain seriously considered allowing U.N. weapons inspections to continue for several weeks in hopes of making the case with skeptical allies and public opinion.
The two allies came to no formal conclusions during talks between Secretary of State Colin L. Powell and British Foreign Secretary Jack Straw. But both deliberated the option of giving the arms monitors extra time in exchange for assurances from allies that inspections won't drag on indefinitely, according to U.S. and British officials.
"You need space to show that the policy is working and to convince public opinion that you have let this process take its course. There's no need to go to war in February, for example," said a British official who requested anonymity.
Powell and Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld also moved to shore up support on Capitol Hill, where some key senators have complained that the Bush administration has failed to make a case for war. Behind closed doors, the pair acknowledged the administration's concern over allied opposition to military intervention in Iraq, made most vocally this week by France and Germany.
Powell and Rumsfeld indicated that the administration is prepared to let the U.N. teams continue their work "a little longer," maybe a month or so, according to Sen. Joseph R. Biden Jr. (D-Del.), the ranking Democrat on the Foreign Relations Committee.
In New York, Deputy Defense Secretary Paul D. Wolfowitz charged that Iraqi President Saddam Hussein is blocking cooperation by Iraqi scientists under threat of death. "We know from multiple sources that Saddam has ordered that any scientists who cooperate during interviews will be killed, as well as their families," he said in a speech outlining the scope of Iraq's noncompliance at the Council on Foreign Relations.
Behind the scenes, the administration is scrambling to deflect the mounting international pressure.
"We came slowly to the realization that this is a real crisis. A lot of people thought it could be managed and the Europeans brought along," said a well-placed U.S. official who requested anonymity.
The aggressive French and German campaign to mobilize support against war and some "diplomatic but direct" language from Britain has now convinced many, but not all, of the principal administration players of the need to look for middle ground, he added.
In a spate of speeches and background briefings with senior U.S. officials this week, the administration has worked hard to make its case that there is evidence that Iraq is not complying with inspections, and that no "smoking gun" is needed.
Washington has been deeply frustrated that the barometer of cooperation has been whether or not the U.N. teams find hidden nuclear, chemical or biological weapons or ballistic missiles — and not that Hussein voluntarily turn over known outstanding items.
Serving as the bridge between the United States and Britain's European neighbors, London is particularly concerned with closing the growing chasm over what to do next in Iraq, British officials said.
Britain, which has now committed one-quarter of its standing army to the Persian Gulf region, shares the U.S. conviction that Iraq is guilty of violating its promise to disarm, and London is prepared to stand with Washington if the United Nations does not, according to British and White House officials.
But London also is pressing for credible evidence of one of three circumstances, British officials say, to justify military intervention: a "smoking gun" in the form of concealed weapons; evidence that Hussein is lying; or tangible proof that Baghdad is blocking the inspections process.
While some senior U.S. and British officials insisted that London is not pressuring Washington to prolong inspections indefinitely, Prime Minister Tony Blair, due here for talks next Friday, is likely to urge President Bush to allow U.N. teams time to show that Hussein is not complying.
"We need something more decisive than this general feeling that Iraq is not really cooperating," one senior British official said. "From our point of view, we don't have enough to go to war at this point — we will prefer to wait until the circumstances are more favorable to broader support."
Under growing pressure from allies and Iraq's neighbors, the United States engaged in heavy diplomacy Thursday to prevent a diplomatic face-off over Baghdad at the United Nations next week, with the White House acknowledging that some of America's closest allies may end up on the sidelines of any U.S. military action.
"It is their prerogative, if they choose, to be on the sideline," White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer said Thursday.
Russia joined the diplomatic skirmishing Thursday when President Vladimir V. Putin told Bush during a telephone call initiated by Moscow that there are no grounds yet to use force against Hussein.
"The efforts of the international community must be directed now at helping international inspectors perform their mission," Russian Foreign Minister Igor S. Ivanov said at a news conference in Athens. "There are no grounds at the moment to use military force against Iraq.
"We would like to hope that no one would take any unilateral action and bypass the U.N. Security Council," Ivanov said, according to the Interfax news agency.
With U.N. inspectors' assessment of Iraq's cooperation due Monday, four of the five veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council are now campaigning hard for continued inspections and diplomacy, despite what chief weapons inspector Hans Blix has characterized as Baghdad's failure so far to fully cooperate with the inspections.
Even Britain said Thursday that it would prefer a second U.N. resolution on the use of force to disarm Iraq. Powell said another resolution is still "an open question."
At the same time, however, Britain sided with the United States in plotting strategy to pressure the Security Council to face both the realities and consequences of inaction.
"To say, 'Never mind, I'll walk away from this problem or ignore it or allow it to be strung out indefinitely without no end,' I think, would be a defeat for the international community and a serious defeat for the United Nations," Powell said after his talks with Straw.
No decisions on next steps will be made, however, until after Blix makes his first mandated report 60 days after inspections resumed Nov. 27 under a unanimous Security Council resolution.
"Both sides are interested in seeing what happens Monday before they talk again and make any decisions," the well-placed U.S. official said. "None of this is going to get any clearer until then."
In the meantime, the United States is now scrambling to influence Blix and also the other Security Council members — and redefine the debate that will follow his report.
At a closed-door meeting in New York, a senior State Department official told Blix on Thursday that his job is not to find a "needle in a haystack" but for Iraq to hand over its needles to the United Nations, according to U.N. diplomats.
The U.S.-led effort to confront Hussein got a boost Thursday from a summit of Iraq's neighbors in Turkey. The six states, also including Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan, called on Baghdad to be "more active" in disarming "in full conformity" with U.N. resolutions so the region is not put through yet another war.
"We therefore solemnly call on the Iraqi leadership to move irreversibly and sincerely toward assuming their responsibilities in restoring peace and stability in the region," a communique said.
Times staff writers Ronald Brownstein and Janet Hook in Washington, Maggie Farley in New York and David Holley in Moscow contributed to this report.
UK and US Governments Feeling the Pressure
From the above referenced Los Angeles Times article, it looks like the UK government and the US ZOG (Zionist Occupied Government) is feeling the pressure from the world and from the US public (as shown in the poll of 61 percent of the US public wanting to give the UN weapons inspectors more time to do their job as we need to send them to Israel as well):
http://www.warwithoutend.co.uk/middle-east-and-asia/2003/01/23/the-israeli-poison-gas-attacks.php | | | | Guest-400c | | | | Guest-400c | | | | Guest-c651 | | | | Guest-cd46 | | Posted: Sat Jan 25, 2003 6:01 pm Post subject: |
| | Thank G-d for the Jews. Without them, you jerks would have no one to blame but yourselves. | | | | Alpha | | | | | ©2002-2009 WarWithoutEnd.co.uk |
