Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Nightline: A conversation with General Anthony Zinni

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU
 
coda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:39 PM
Original message
Nightline: A conversation with General Anthony Zinni
Looks to be good.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
jab105 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:42 PM
Response to Original message
1. Wow...this is good!!
watching now.....
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:43 PM
Response to Original message
2. QUITE good so far!
I wish Koppel would let Zinni run on a bit more -- he keeps jumping in with new questions before the General finishes his point...

sw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jab105 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:46 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. Nightline really should be an hour long....
having a comedy show like Jimmy Kimmel on after Nightline makes no sense!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:59 PM
Response to Reply #4
10. I agree.
Half hour just doesn't get it done.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlemingsGhost Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:02 PM
Response to Reply #4
11. Jimmy Kimmel in any television time slot makes no sense.
Whadda wank-fest.

The man is nothing without Adam Corolla. And vice-versa...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FubarFly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:46 PM
Response to Original message
3. They had a plan for Iraqi reconstruction years ago?
Oh my. This should be interesting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:47 PM
Response to Reply #3
5. "They" as in who?
Clinton, Gore and Kerry worked on one, but, NOTHING like Bush's plan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FubarFly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:52 PM
Response to Reply #5
6. They = The Pentagon, in 98
Edited on Thu Sep-25-03 10:53 PM by FubarFly
2 extra divisions used immediately for security

Also let the regular Iraqi army know that they weren't the enemy, and use them.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:58 PM
Response to Reply #6
8. Yes...that was the Clinton-Gore-Kerry plan.
They wanted to target Saddam with overwhelming groundforce, NOT widespread bombing to lessen civilian casualties. Then secure the country WITHOUT occupying it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FubarFly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:10 PM
Response to Reply #8
14. You wouldn't happen to have a link would you?
I'd like to read up on this.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:16 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. I know there were hearings....
Edited on Thu Sep-25-03 11:16 PM by blm
Kerry even had Scott Ritter testify, but, that was when Ritter was saying that Saddam still had capabilities and that was why Kerry was for going in. Heck, even Kucinich was for it then.

There should be some way to access the transcript of the hearings from back then.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FubarFly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:20 PM
Response to Reply #15
16. Thanks.
I'll keep looking. This is what I've found so far.

---
http://www.biu.ac.il/Besa/meria/journal/2000/issue1/jv4n1a3.html

THE IRAQ LIBERATION ACT (1998)

On September 29, 1998, a bipartisan group of eight U.S. senators introduced a bill entitled the Iraq Liberation Act (ILA) to “establish a program to support a transition to democracy in Iraq.” (19) The bill, which passed the Senate unanimously without amendment, outlines Iraq’s transgressions from its invasion of neighboring Iran in 1980 to its unilateral suspension of cooperation with UNSCOM the previous August. The act stipulates that U.S. policy should seek the removal of Saddam Husayn and assist in replacing his regime with a democratic form of government. The U.S. is also to provide military assistance to the Iraqi opposition in the amount not to exceed $97 million, in addition to funding the United States Information Agency effort to publicize the opposition’s struggle.

Concurrent with the signing of the ILA into law by President Clinton, Radio Free Iraq began broadcasting to Iraq. Then, in November 1998, U.S. assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern affairs, Martin Indyk, met with a delegation of 17 representatives from Iraqi opposition parties, urging them to work jointly towards the goal of forming a new government in Baghdad. The Iraqi group identified by the United States to spearhead opposition is the London-based Iraqi National Congress (INC). Early in 1999, the United States appointed Frank Ricciardone as Special Representative for Transition in Iraq (SRTI) and charged him with uniting the INC’s political platform and facilitating Washington’s contacts with the various Iraqi groups. (20)

On August 11, 1999, eight senators and congressmen who were the principal proponents of the ILA sent a letter to President Clinton expressing their “dismay over the continued drift in U.S. policy toward Iraq.” (21) They pointed to four areas to which they believe the Clinton administration had not given proper attention. The first area addresses the absence of international weapons inspections in Iraq the letter and argues that the “whole point of Operation Desert Fox was” that the world could not afford to allow Saddam Husayn to reconstitute his WMD capabilities. However, following Desert Fox the administration is still unsure of what is taking place inside Iraq. (22) Other countries have also raised this criticism. In a commentary representative of his country’s views, French journalist Alain Gresh wrote that the United States launched Operation Desert Fox to restore UNSCOM’s right to conduct its weapons inspection and OMV in Iraq. However, many months have passed without UN inspectors in Iraq and the United States seems to be very relaxed about this state of affairs. (23)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FubarFly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:22 PM
Response to Reply #16
17. More...
19) “Iraq Liberation Act of 1998” United States Senate, document S.2525, September 29, 1998 <http://www.senate.gov/legislative/index.html>. The ILA was introduced by six Republican senators (Lott, McCain, Helms, Shelby, Brownback and Kyl) and two Democratic senators (Kerrey and Lieberman).

20) For an official U.S. account of the steps taken towards the implementation of the ILA see “Letter to Congressional Leaders Reporting on Iraq’s Compliance with United Nations Security Council Resolutions” Public Papers of the Presidents, March 3, 1999 <http://web.lexis-nexis>

21) The letter is signed by U.S. Senators Lott, Leiberman, Helms, Kerrey, Shelby and Brownback and US House of Representative members Gilman and Berman. For a text of the letter see <http://www.nci.org>.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
blm Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:27 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. They did want to end the UN sanctions against Iraq
since it was hurting the poor of Iraq more than anyone else. Plus, Bin Laden had Saddam targeted for assassination and overthrow and Clinton did NOT want to see Bin Laden in control of what chemical and bioweapons HAD been in Iraq, nor the Iraqi oil production.

It is a much more complex story than the media will ever get into. There are so many layers to it, with various pressures to factor in from different groups on the left and on the right.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FubarFly Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Sep-26-03 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #15
19. Here's a transcript of the hearings. Interesting reading.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
coda Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:57 PM
Response to Original message
7. "imminent"
That's how he heard it too. :-)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Cush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 10:58 PM
Response to Original message
9. not good for bushie
"I don't think he had them, he didn't want to be caught with the smoking gun. I think he had the framework set for when sanctions were finally lifted"
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:03 PM
Response to Original message
12. There WASN'T AN IMMINENT THREAT.
Said it straight out!

DAMN, it's over! This REALLY needs to be an hour long program! But I suppose we ought to consider ourselves lucky that it's still on the air at all. Remember when they talking about replacing Nightline with Letterman? *sigh*

sw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
scarletwoman Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Sep-25-03 11:08 PM
Response to Original message
13. Pretty good closing statement by Koppel...
To loosely paraphrase: (re: changeover in administrations) "New blood/fresh starts can be good. But institutional memory is also important. Too much of one at the expense of the other can lead to messy situtations." (Not the exact words, but hopefully a transcript will be forthcoming)

Anyway, rather a pointed dig at the bush* junta, imho...

sw
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Dec 27th 2024, 03:03 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (Through 2005) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC