Lulua
29-08-2002, 01:12
U.S. Wants Saddam Out, with or Without Inspections
August 28, 2002 06:19 PM ET
Email this article Printer friendly version Purchase for Reprint
By Randall Mikkelsen
CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - The United States will seek the removal of President Saddam Hussein whether or not he allows a resumption of U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq, a U.S. official said on Wednesday.
"The case for regime change is broader than just WMD (weapons of mass destruction)," the official told Reuters, speaking on condition that he not be identified.
In remarks that stirred renewed unease around the globe, Vice President Dick Cheney this week said the U.S. case against Saddam also rested on what he said was the Iraqi leader's role as a supporter of terrorism and the threat he posed to regional stability.
U.S. allies have called on Washington to give the United Nations and other international bodies a chance to try diplomacy before any military action.
Iraq's neighbor Turkey, the only Muslim member of NATO which has been providing a base for current U.S. military flights over northern Iraq, reiterated its opposition to any imminent military action.
China and India, the world's two most populous nations, stressed their opposition to the use of force, and staunch U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak of Egypt has warned of widespread unrest across the Arab world should the United States act alone.
Skepticism also surfaced on Capital Hill.
Sen. John Warner of Virginia, top Republican on the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, called for more congressional inquiry into President Bush's demand for "regime change" in Iraq.
WHITE HOUSE STANDS BY 'REGIME CHANGE'
Citing what he called a "crescendo" of debate, Warner said the committee should hear from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, widely seen as a leading supporter of pre-emptive military action. The House of Representatives was planning hearings of its own.
But the U.S. official called Saddam a supporter of terrorism and a threat to the region, saying these were also crucial parts of the U.S. case against the Iraqi leader, with the demand for weapons inspections.
Asked whether there was anything Saddam could do to change the U.S. determination to oust him, the official said there was not. "Regime change is the policy of this government," he said.
Washington would, however, keep pressing Saddam to readmit U.N. inspectors and honor his commitments to disarm, he said.
The United Nations evacuated its inspectors from Iraq in December 1998, accusing the Iraqis of obstructing their work. Within weeks the United States and Britain staged Operation Desert Fox, a massive four-night bombing campaign against suspected Iraqi weapons facilities, missile sites and other military targets. The weapons inspectors have not returned.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan declined to say directly whether Saddam could avoid a U.S. attempt to oust him. However, "this is a regime that needs to be changed," he told reporters covering Bush during his vacation Texas.
CONCERN AMONG AMERICANS
Widespread disquiet abroad has been increasingly mirrored at home, and analysts say the issue could become central to the November congressional elections.
"There is no question ... we've taken a major step toward preparing for war," said military analyst Ken Allard, a retired Army colonel and adjunct national security professor at Georgetown University.
McClellan said the White House would cooperate with the planned congressional hearings -- in contrast with its unwillingness to send representatives to a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Iraq last month. "We look forward to participating and being cooperative with Congress as those hearings are held," he said.
The White House on Monday said Bush's lawyers had concluded he did not need formal congressional approval to attack Iraq, although it left the door open to seeking a vote of support. Key Democrats and some Republicans responded by demanding Bush seek approval for any attack.
Former assistant defense secretary Lawrence Korb, vice president of the Council on Foreign Relations think tank, said the administration appeared to be fighting to regain momentum for attacking Iraq.
Some senior former Republican foreign policy and defense officials have spoken out against an attack in recent weeks, adding to the sense of disunity in the president's own party.
Bush's special Middle East envoy, retired Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni, was one of the latest to raise his voice when he said an attack would be antagonistic to U.S. allies in the region, according to Florida newspaper reports of a speech he delivered last Friday.
"It's pretty interesting that all the generals see it the same way," Zinni said of reservations about an attack, "and all the others who have never fired a shot and are hot to go to war see it another way."
McClellan said the White House regarded such comments as reflecting a "healthy debate" encouraged by Bush.
http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml?type=topnews&StoryID=1384078&src=firehunt/GetContent:13
August 28, 2002 06:19 PM ET
Email this article Printer friendly version Purchase for Reprint
By Randall Mikkelsen
CRAWFORD, Texas (Reuters) - The United States will seek the removal of President Saddam Hussein whether or not he allows a resumption of U.N. weapons inspections in Iraq, a U.S. official said on Wednesday.
"The case for regime change is broader than just WMD (weapons of mass destruction)," the official told Reuters, speaking on condition that he not be identified.
In remarks that stirred renewed unease around the globe, Vice President Dick Cheney this week said the U.S. case against Saddam also rested on what he said was the Iraqi leader's role as a supporter of terrorism and the threat he posed to regional stability.
U.S. allies have called on Washington to give the United Nations and other international bodies a chance to try diplomacy before any military action.
Iraq's neighbor Turkey, the only Muslim member of NATO which has been providing a base for current U.S. military flights over northern Iraq, reiterated its opposition to any imminent military action.
China and India, the world's two most populous nations, stressed their opposition to the use of force, and staunch U.S. ally Hosni Mubarak of Egypt has warned of widespread unrest across the Arab world should the United States act alone.
Skepticism also surfaced on Capital Hill.
Sen. John Warner of Virginia, top Republican on the U.S. Senate Armed Services Committee, called for more congressional inquiry into President Bush's demand for "regime change" in Iraq.
WHITE HOUSE STANDS BY 'REGIME CHANGE'
Citing what he called a "crescendo" of debate, Warner said the committee should hear from Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld, widely seen as a leading supporter of pre-emptive military action. The House of Representatives was planning hearings of its own.
But the U.S. official called Saddam a supporter of terrorism and a threat to the region, saying these were also crucial parts of the U.S. case against the Iraqi leader, with the demand for weapons inspections.
Asked whether there was anything Saddam could do to change the U.S. determination to oust him, the official said there was not. "Regime change is the policy of this government," he said.
Washington would, however, keep pressing Saddam to readmit U.N. inspectors and honor his commitments to disarm, he said.
The United Nations evacuated its inspectors from Iraq in December 1998, accusing the Iraqis of obstructing their work. Within weeks the United States and Britain staged Operation Desert Fox, a massive four-night bombing campaign against suspected Iraqi weapons facilities, missile sites and other military targets. The weapons inspectors have not returned.
White House spokesman Scott McClellan declined to say directly whether Saddam could avoid a U.S. attempt to oust him. However, "this is a regime that needs to be changed," he told reporters covering Bush during his vacation Texas.
CONCERN AMONG AMERICANS
Widespread disquiet abroad has been increasingly mirrored at home, and analysts say the issue could become central to the November congressional elections.
"There is no question ... we've taken a major step toward preparing for war," said military analyst Ken Allard, a retired Army colonel and adjunct national security professor at Georgetown University.
McClellan said the White House would cooperate with the planned congressional hearings -- in contrast with its unwillingness to send representatives to a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on Iraq last month. "We look forward to participating and being cooperative with Congress as those hearings are held," he said.
The White House on Monday said Bush's lawyers had concluded he did not need formal congressional approval to attack Iraq, although it left the door open to seeking a vote of support. Key Democrats and some Republicans responded by demanding Bush seek approval for any attack.
Former assistant defense secretary Lawrence Korb, vice president of the Council on Foreign Relations think tank, said the administration appeared to be fighting to regain momentum for attacking Iraq.
Some senior former Republican foreign policy and defense officials have spoken out against an attack in recent weeks, adding to the sense of disunity in the president's own party.
Bush's special Middle East envoy, retired Marine Gen. Anthony Zinni, was one of the latest to raise his voice when he said an attack would be antagonistic to U.S. allies in the region, according to Florida newspaper reports of a speech he delivered last Friday.
"It's pretty interesting that all the generals see it the same way," Zinni said of reservations about an attack, "and all the others who have never fired a shot and are hot to go to war see it another way."
McClellan said the White House regarded such comments as reflecting a "healthy debate" encouraged by Bush.
http://www.reuters.com/news_article.jhtml?type=topnews&StoryID=1384078&src=firehunt/GetContent:13