|
|
|
Omega
Skeptic Friend
Denmark
164 Posts |
 Posted - 03/28/2002 : 18:30:58 [Permalink]
|
Atomic> That is a truly disgusting picture.
The sanctions against Iraq have only hurt the Iraqi people, leaving them starved and ill and unable to overthrow Hussein, if they want to. So why are they still there? They were implemented to get Hussein to let weapon inspectors check for weapons of mass-destruction.
Where are the weapons-inspectors to check other potentially dangerous countries for their biological, chemical or even nuclear weapons.
Who's to decide who can have those weapons and who can't?
"All it takes to fly is to fling yourself at the ground... and miss."
- Douglas Adams |
 |
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/02/2002 : 05:50:00 [Permalink]
|
The United States of America.
quote:
Who's to decide who can have those weapons and who can't?
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
Omega
Skeptic Friend
Denmark
164 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2002 : 18:19:11 [Permalink]
|
quote:
The United States of America.
quote:
Who's to decide who can have those weapons and who can't?
Why?
"All it takes to fly is to fling yourself at the ground... and miss."
- Douglas Adams |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2002 : 19:15:00 [Permalink]
|
Because the United States says so 
I'm not saying it should be this way but the US is the largest economy and has the largest, most mobile army in the world. Iraq also demonstrated that it's leadership is irresponible. Remember the launching of scud missles at Israeli cities a la Hitler's V2 attacks in WW II? Do you recall Iraq invading an annexing Kuwait? Do you remember that even that a multinational army defeated Iraq and forced Iraq to agree to terms that they later broke?
Saddam Hussein is starving his own people and is using that as propaganda. I find it hard to believe that these people can't grow enough food to at least survive. It's not as if humanitarian aid is not sent there.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2002 : 19:34:04 [Permalink]
|
Anything to back up that statement?
quote:
Saddam Hussein is starving his own people and is using that as propaganda.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2002 : 19:38:17 [Permalink]
|
I made lots of statements. Back up that Iraq lost the war and agreed to weapon inspectors?
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Omega
Skeptic Friend
Denmark
164 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2002 : 20:05:25 [Permalink]
|
Atomic> :)
So the one with the biggest army should say?
Yes, I do remember that Golf War. I didn't really say Iraq should decide who can and can't have weapons of mass destruction. Some countries have, some don't, I'm just wondering who really should decide what countries can and can't.
Actually the rest of the world is helping in the starvation of the Iraqi people, through the sanctions. Which does not really do anything to remove Hussein but just seem to strengthen his position of power.
“I made lots of statements. Back up that Iraq lost the war and agreed to weapon inspectors?”
Okay, either it's very late or that didn't make any sense.
"All it takes to fly is to fling yourself at the ground... and miss."
- Douglas Adams |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2002 : 20:07:19 [Permalink]
|
I quoted the statement that I was asking about. How do you know anyone is starving in Iraq, and how do you know that it has anything to do with anything Saddam Hussein did?
quote:
I made lots of statements. Back up that Iraq lost the war and agreed to weapon inspectors?
@tomic
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2002 : 20:08:03 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Atomic> :)
So the one with the biggest army should say?
This was after I said: I'm not saying it should be this way but the US is the largest economy and has the largest, most mobile army in the world.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 04/04/2002 : 20:21:50 [Permalink]
|
http://www.nonviolence.org/vitw/pages/192.htm
(Salon)
If the American regime-change plan does not go through, how long do you think the "oil-for-food" program could continue in its present form? The executive director of the U.N.'s Iraq program, Benon Sevan, has just stated that, because of the restrictions on Iraqi oil exports -- championed by many Western diplomats as a means to curb smuggling by the regime -- the program is now close to broke. How viable is "oil-for-food" as a long-term humanitarian program?
(Denis Halliday)
"Oil for food" was designed to fail. It was designed to stop further deterioration in Iraq at a time when famine conditions prevailed. That's exactly what it has done. It has maintained quasi-famine conditions for many Iraqis now for over six years. So we've nothing to be proud of -- all we've done is stave off mass starvation.
Now the problem is the political game being played by Washington and London, in particular via the 661 Committee -- the sanctions committee. There's now over $5 billion worth of essential pharmaceutical and medical goods and equipment on hold.
But the fact is that this program was never designed to resolve the crisis of Iraq; it was not designed to resolve the economic collapse -- in fact the money is not to be used, according to the Security Council, for investment or reconstruction of important infrastructure. And as we know, in the case of Iraq today, the majority of children die from water-borne disease, not from starvation per se. So this is a program which has modest value, although it's essential.
With the $5 billion in contracts on hold, together with the bureaucracy and the politics of the U.N. and the Iraqi desire to have some sort of kickback on oil sales -- so they can use that money outside of the oil-for-food program -- it's going to be a real standoff situation where somebody will have to back down. And hopefully that will be the U.N. -- in the best interests of the Iraqi people.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn
Edited by - gorgo on 04/04/2002 20:24:24 |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2002 : 09:25:19 [Permalink]
|
Here's a little something I found today relating to all this. You've asked for some proof. Here's something along that line.
How Saddam reaps illegal oil profits
http://www.msnbc.com/news/746401.asp?pne=msn
Every time you fill your tank, you're aiding a terrorist regime!
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2002 : 10:49:47 [Permalink]
|
Just to be clear; this is proof of what, exactly?
quote:
Here's a little something I found today relating to all this.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2002 : 10:54:46 [Permalink]
|
It is part of an argument that Saddam is diverting money that should go to feed his people. There are also indications that he is getting money from Jordan, Syria etc that is also not going to feed his people. So the money is there but Saddam has more important uses for it.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2002 : 11:20:13 [Permalink]
|
Well, this is something that I asked a long time ago, but no one ever answered. How much money is it that "Saddam" has that should be going to "feed the people." How much money is needed to run the society and repair the infrastructure and "feed the people?" Should Iraq have no military in this hostile region? How much should be used to pay for that?
How much does this money matter if the U.N. is witholding needed supplies?
How much of a surprise is it to you that "Saddam" is a crook? Is this big news?
Is this supposed to be proof that the U.N. sanctions are a good idea, or is it proof that the sanctions are being used to make sure the Ba'ath Party stays in power, that Turkey and other U.S. allies are appeased, and that Western companies are making a shitload of cash from the sanctions?
quote:
It is part of an argument that Saddam is diverting money that should go to feed his people.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2002 : 11:41:11 [Permalink]
|
Gorgo, Iraq was not turned into a parking lot. There is still infrastructure left and Iraq does have some economy beyond selling oil. These oil sales were meant to provide money so that they could purchase supplies to supplement what they could produce themselves. Iraq was never a rich country. Saddam diverted so much money to his military over the years that your average Iraqi didn't see much.
Iraq, by the way, still has one of the world's largest armies and they can defend themselves just fine. More than fine really unless the US comes knocking and he will never be able to defend against that.
What does bother me is that is seems that Bush doesn't seem to care as long as the oil companies pulling his strings don't. The President has a rather confusing policy when it comes to terrorism and who our enemies are. The way it seems to work is that a blind eye is turned wherever American businesses are making money.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
 |
|
Topic Locked
