Posted by Esperanza from 66-42-118-155.lsan.dial.netzero.com (184.108.40.206) on Sunday, February 09, 2003 at 3:34PM :
Voices: Powell's evidence against Iraq
We asked readers whether U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell presented his case for an invasion of Iraq during a presentation to the U.N. Security Council Feb. 5. Here's some of what you had to say on the evidence offered by Powell:
The people who claim this evidence is fabricated . . . are living in a dream world. Sometimes peaceful countries must commit themselves to war, and now is such a time.
-Paul Egri, Toronto, Feb. 6
I do not doubt that Iraq is not cooperating fully and probably deceiving the world but I do not see the immediate threat the U.S. speaks of especially with inspectors on the ground.
-Joseph Sanders, Toronto, Feb. 6
A choice must be made whether to stop a ruthless tyrant before he can kill more innocent people or wait until he does and then rise up with delayed outrage at his crimes. Imagine the horror if Adolf Hitler had been given enough time to develop the atomic bomb his scientists were working on when he was defeated.
-Bob Freeman, Kennesaw, Georgia, Feb. 6
I don't think Colin Powell has convinced any independent thinker of his case against Iraq, even though Saddam is not an angel.
-Navraj Grewal, Toronto, Feb. 6
He did make a good case to attack. Who needs the French or the Germans to approve any US action?
-C. Sprat, Spokane, Washington, Feb. 6
The whole Powell show was rather fishy and more interpretation than information.
-Andreas Niewerth, Bonn, Germany, Feb. 6
What proof does the U.S.A. have that the conversation on the tape was really between two military officers of Iraq? Could it have been someone from another country or even an American?
-Wanda McLaughlin, Sault Ste. Marie, Feb. 6
Maybe I'm ignorant, but I don't understand how Iraq poses an immediate threat to the world. The only immediate threat seems to be the high price for oil.
-Uwe Roeder, Berlin, Feb. 6
Powell presented the world with circumstantial and unsubstantiated evidence, which would be torn apart if it were subjected to expert scrutiny and cross examination
-Nadeem Siddiq, Oakville, Feb. 6
While I believe that Hussein is a dangerous man, I don't believe that there is nearly enough concrete evidence to justify a war that would result in the inevitable killing of innocent Iraqis.
-Heather McGregor, Toronto, Feb. 6
Part of Powell's evidence was fabricated and the audio tape stuff was misinterpreted.
-Badri Ramanathan, Ames, Feb. 5
Powell's has presented proof which can't be passed up. I have no idea how Russia, France, Germany, and China can say there's still a chance of dealing with this peacefully.
-Philip Bloch, Toronto, Feb. 5
Was this "evidence" also produced by the same people who manufactured that last bin Laden video tape, the same one which independent, expert European organizations deemed as doctored/fake?
-Anne Marie Joseph, Toronto, Feb. 5
There is no basis for war with Iraq. Iraq is disarmed and poses no threat to anyone. Furthermore, the presence of inspectors guarantees that this will stay the same.
-Jerome Klassen, Toronto, Feb. 5
Some of the evidence is compelling but evidence can always be conjured up to make any man look like a hero or a villain.
-Shelley Sheremata, Atlanta, Feb. 5
Though I have always thought of Collin Powell to be truthful and honest, I don't think the sparse "evidence" produced is any reason to effect the death and destruction that George W. is so hell bent to inflict.
-Michael Doyon, Gander, Newfoundland, Feb. 5
Since when was the question "Saddam Hussein"? What happened to that Osama bin Laden guy? The only compelling evidence here is compelling evidence of a big distraction.
-Sara Stewart, London, Feb. 5
The UN inspectors can go anywhere in Iraq to search. Why doesn't the US just show them the pictures and guide them to pick up the "evidence"?
-James Zhang, Toronto, Feb. 5
When's the last time any of you were in a confrontation, and your opponent said "I'm going to hit you in the face now?'' Saddam will not declare war. He will continue his lying, murdering ways, and while you're all scratching your heads wondering whether or not he should have more time, he'll be busy launching weapons of mass destruction.
-Marc Mandelbaum, Richmond Hill, Feb. 5
Why couldn't the U.S present this "evidence" earlier if it is so legitimate? I guess it takes a while to generate phoney evidence.
-James Chen, Mississauga, Feb. 5
I am dismayed by the number of comments from Canadians that show they are far more willing to believe the endless lies and games of Iraq than they are Colin Powell. This disappointing ostrich-like display of wishful thinking is reminiscent of 1940 Europe.
-Bill Perks, Cincinnati, Feb. 5
Don't be fooled by today's report at the UN. Where is the hard evidence? We want more than rhetoric.
-Robert Campbell, Trenton, Feb. 5
There was not one smoking gun - there were a dozen. He made the case 100%. The inspectors were not sent to play hide and seek. The onus has been on Iraq to reveal everything. Powell showed how much the Iraqi's are concealing.
-Kevin Topalian, Toronto, Feb. 5
Is Colin Powell's compelling evidence possibly from the same sources who gave us that last doctored video tape of bin Laden?
-Anne Marie Joseph, Toronto, Feb. 5
What more proof do you need to see that Saddam is a serious threat to the world? What part of Colin Powell's speech don't you get?
-Jody Keydash, Baltimore, Feb. 5
The Russian delegate was correct. Hand over all the proof the US and Britain have created, see if it is in fact "real" and then the UN will decide.
-Imran Abdullah, Brampton, Feb. 5
Collin Powell just reminded the world with whom they are dealing with. Its absurd that the UN continues to debate this issue while Iraq continues to stockpile weapons
-Zvi Vaxman, Toronto, Feb. 5
I wouldn't care even if Iraq does weapons of mass destruction, I'm more worried about our southern neighbour. Why is everyone focusing on Iraq, while the US pumps in additional billions of dollars into its nuclear program.
-Thomas Kalkowski, Queensville, Feb. 5
I have seen more than enough evidence for a military attack on Iraq. What evidence do you need to see in order to be convinced? A mushroom cloud over Kuwait City perhaps?
-Kevin Barry, Toronto, Feb. 5
If any of this evidence had really been worth anything, why didn't the US turn it over to the UN weapons inspectors months ago?
-William Hornbostel, Toronto, Feb. 5
The naysayers keep demanding proof. Truth be told, the naysayers are not interested in any proof. Anything shown to them they will decry as faked. I'm sure Hussein appreciates their support.
-Richard Carlson, Norway, Michigan, Feb. 5
I have little doubt that Iraq is in some way up to no good, but invading is not the answer. By invading them we will not eliminate an enemy but create a stronger one
-Jonathan Robbins, Toronto, Feb. 5
The inspectors are never going to find any 'smoking gun' because the Iraqi's have had 11 years to hide their weapons. Every round of UN weapons inspections produces the same results, that Iraq is hiding something and is not cooperating. How many chances are we to give him?
-John Laird, Scarborough, Feb. 5
The evidence is clear, oil is worth more than blood.
-Larry Chiu, Markham, Feb. 5
No, he showed only pictures. Pictures can be twisted and turned to show what they want, yet it could be real. If they are, there still is no reason for war.
-William Andrews, Toronto, Feb. 5
There is still no reason to go to war. If the U.S. has these pictures and knows about these vehicles, then let the UN inspectors go find them and show us the 'smoking gun.' I don't believe the US anymore than I believe Saddam.
-Jonn Martin, Thorold, Feb. 5
That's it? That's the best they could do after working for over a year to catch Iraq with the goods? If the UN falls in line with this U.S. war for oil, that will be the end of its credibility.
-John Bell, Toronto, Feb. 5
Secretary of State Powell made a good case for using force for the purpose of disarming Saddam Hussein and changing the regime in Iraq. Unfortunately, simply allowing the inspectors to continue with their futile attempts to track down Iraq's weapons of mass destruction will only give Saddam more time to upgrade his illicit collection.
-Stephen Auerback, Toronto, Feb. 5
Powell made a good case for using force for the purpose of disarming Saddam Hussein and changing the regime in Iraq. Simply allowing the inspectors to continue with their futile attempts to track down Iraq's weapons of mass destruction will only give Saddam more time to upgrade his illicit collection.
-Stephen Auerback, Toronto, Feb. 4
No concrete evidence has been found that shows they are building weapons yet they are still guilty.
-Chris Seddon, Newmarket, Feb. 4
I see no evidence of anything. The only "evidence" they may have that's worth beans is the audio tape, which has yet to be validated.
-Brooke Grant, Toronto, Feb. 4
The evidence is compelling and clearly demonstrates that Iraq is in material breach of UN resolutions. The USA and her allies are entirely justified in removing the present regime in Iraq and I feel that a mistake was made in not having done so previously during the last Gulf War.
-Luke Driscoll, Toronto, Feb. 4
This is all still propaganda and hearsay. The Americans have still not produced clear evidence.
-Bobbi Singh, Vancouver, Feb. 4
Showing pictures and listening to audios (which are probably made up by the US) don't justify any war.
-David Gall, Toronto, Feb. 4
-- signature .
Post a Followup