by TR 24 Replies latest jw friends
jeff,
i hope you are not suggesting the UN is conspireing against the US pushing these numbers to support hussein....that would be more than rediculous.
ashitaka,
both sides give a shit about the starving children....neither saddam nor the people who push for this pointless embargo.
And giving money or aid to Iraq to "help these people" would only empower Saddam and would not really go to feed starving children, but strengthen Saddam's power. What can we learn from history?
In the early 90's the Americans tried to appease North Korea who threatened to build nukes and "rain down fire" (sound familiar) on the U.S. and its allies unless they recieved aid. So the U.S. helped North Korea, supplied it with money and fuel, which went right into their military in exchange for them not developing nukes. Well here we are about 10 years later and they're doing the same thing again, trying to hold the world hostage so that they can "shakedown" some more money from our pockets. Of course they are going back on promises they made and documents they signed, but what do you expect from a terrorist nation? Promisies and honor and civility mean nothing to these governments and to expect them to deal that way is folly.
Saddam lets his people starve because it makes shortsighted people blame the U.S. How many palaces does Saddam live in? He has the ability to take care of the people of Iraq, but he uses them as pawns to gain sympathy. Is there any more clear definition of evil?
Saddam has signed agreements to disarm and allow inspectors into the country. He went back on those agreements. We see now that he still has the capability to launch chemical and biological WMD, even though he said he didn't. Saddam is the one who is playing games with the international community, Saddam is the one who wants to develop and launch WMD on his neighbors. Saddam is a threat to world security. Saddam is an evil dictator. We need to deal with him now, while he is still relatively weak and while the situation is still developing. We tried containment in 91 and it didn't work.
Edited by - RandomTask on 17 January 2003 12:28:59
realist,
: if you look at how many people died from US bombardments and the sanctions against iraq (about a million according to the UN) it is as legitimate of saddam to accuse the US as it is the other way around.
The US allowed humanitarian aid from Iraqi oil sales. Many Iraqis died because they didn't get that aid. Sadaam built 65 palaces to his own glory, and I mean PALACES in the last 11 years.
But it's still the fault of the USA. Oh, I get it now.
Farkel
farkel,
a) i never said hussein is a good person. he is evil and power hungry. of course he does everything to stay in control...and keeping the people poor and blaming it all on the US is a normal response. all dictators do that which is not a secret. everyone realizes that such embargos whether against cuba or iraq or whomever don't work. they just help the dictators. so why keep it???
b) according to james rubin (in 1999) did hussein spend 2 billion dollars on building 45 palaces. now if you calculate...thats about 2 cents per person and day....so that alone wouldn't help the people very much.
fact is the oil for food deal is not sufficient!
| Published on Saturday, August 19, 2000 by Reuters | |
| U.N. Rights Body Calls for Lifting Iraq Embargo | |
| by Stephanie Nebehay | |
| GENEVA - A U.N. human rights body called on Friday for the lifting of 10-year-old sanctions on Iraq, saying they had ``condemned an innocent people to hunger, disease, ignorance and even death.'' The United Nations Sub-Commission on the Promotion and Protection of Human Rights also adopted a separate resolution urging states to reconsider their support for economic sanctions in general if they failed to bring about the desired changes in policy.
It was the fourth year in a row that the body dealt with the controversial issue of Iraqi sanctions. This week's debate became heated after Belgian's member called the sanctions ``unequivocally illegal'' which had caused a humanitarian disaster ``comparable to the worst catastrophes of the past decades.'' The resolution proposed by Morocco's representative urged all governments, including that of Iraq's President Saddam Hussein, to alleviate the Iraqi people's suffering by facilitating the delivery of food and medical supplies. Iraq has been under an international economic and trade embargo since its August 1990 invasion of oil-rich Kuwait. Oil-For-Food Deal Not Meeting All Needs -- Report The text said statistics issued by the U.N. oil-for-food program, which since December 1996 has allowed Iraq to sell limited quantities of oil to buy food, medicine and other essentials, showed the deal was meeting ``only part of the vital needs of the population.'' It noted with concern that ``the standard of living, nutrition and health of the population were continuing to deteriorate and that all economic activities were seriously affected, particularly in the areas of drinking water supply, electricity and agriculture.'' The Iraq resolution invoked the 1949 Geneva Conventions which it said ``prohibit the starving of civilian populations and the destruction of what is indispensable to their survival.'' In the second resolution, put forward by Norway's member, the Sub-Commission urged states to reconsider their support for sanctions ``even when legitimate goals pursued have not yet been achieved, if, after a reasonable period, the measures have not brought about the desired changes in policy.'' It urged states to seek ``prompt termination of all aspects of sanctions regimes that adversely affect human rights.'' |
Realist, the UN couldn't conspire to have a pissing match in a brewery. All I'm saying is that there are numbers being thrown around for which no one has any actual evidence.
: LOL! Saddam "the Hitman" Hussein is evidently dumb enough to believe that people don't know about his past and present brutal murderous rampages.
I think it's more like Saddam is smart enough to know that a lot of people don't know or don't care about those rampages.
Saddam is a canny mafioso style politician and plays his subjects like a fiddle. When he screams "persecution" it's as hollow as when Watchtower leaders do it. They do nasty things to people, or write nasty things about various groups, then cynically scream bloody murder when they get what they deserve.
Unfortunately, the Iraqi people, like the JW community, bears the brunt of retribution. But they often willingly go along with being deceived into thinking their leaders are wonderful. As has been said, a country often deserves its leaders.
AlanF
I just read that the son of a bitch has or had cancer........this is one guy where I hope they don't catch it in time. http://news.yahoo.com/fc?tmpl=fc&cid=34&in=world&cat=iraq
realist,
: b) according to james rubin (in 1999) did hussein spend 2 billion dollars on building 45 palaces. now if you calculate...thats about 2 cents per person and day....so that alone wouldn't help the people very much.
That of course, is assuming that ALL Iraqis are incapable of feeding themselves, which is not the case. It also assumes that Sadaam only wasted oil proceeds on his castles. Another far-fetched assumption. The real question is, if Sadaam would have used the oil proceeds to first feed the needy in his population, would he have been able to do so?
I don't take too kindly to strawmen arguments, but that is about all bleeding-heart liberals have to offer.
Farkel
b) according to james rubin (in 1999) did hussein spend 2 billion dollars on building 45 palaces. now if you calculate...thats about 2 cents per person and day....so that alone wouldn't help the people very much.
Realist, thank you for posting a perfect example of the kind of incorrect numbers I'm talking about.
The population of Iraq is about 24, 000,000 (per the CIA Factbook website). 24,000,000 X .02 X 365 = 175,200,000.
farkel,
ok then lets assume that only 1/10 of the population needs support...then it would be 20 cents per day....doesn't make it much better.
the money given to Iraq thanks to the oil for food program (which is also needed to import machinery, drugs etc.) is insufficient according to the UN commission and not according to liberals.
do you really think the US government gives a shit about the children in iraq? if so are you sure its not you who is unrealistic and naive about whats going on in the world?
PS: what exactly are your arguments? havn't seen too many.
jeff,
you have overlooked the fact that this money was spent over a period of 8 years.
Edited by - realist on 17 January 2003 17:11:58
