|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
 Posted - 05/02/2002 : 11:54:10 [Permalink]
|
Atomic, Iraq was bombed for over 40 days. Water plants, electric plants, roads, bridges, sewage plants, all the infrastructure was targeted for maximum damage to civilian life. Hospitals, schools, you name it. Parking lots look much better.
Then, there was a complete embargo followed by a minimal allowance of trade. Oil was the only thing Iraq could trade for years after that. Things have improved, but their culture was severely damaged. Iraq was not the United States, but everyone was healthy and abject poverty just didn't exist. Everyone was well-educated (often in the U.S.) and everyone was healthy and well-fed.
After all these years, the infrastructure has still not completely been repaired.
The only thing the sanctions have done is kill and maim people and destroy the culture of Iraq while making sure that Saddam Hussein gains greater wealth and power.
quote:
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.
I liked the part that said the State Department has "proof" of a lie. They've certainly never lied about anything, have they?
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
"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 : 11:59:40 [Permalink]
|
Gorgo, this was over 10 years ago. I have seen footage out of present day Iraq. It doesn't look all that devastated to me. But what's this about bombing scools and hospitals?? Give me a break!
I also know that there was indeed much poverty in Iraq prior to the war. You are not seriously going to take a stand that Iraq was the only nation on Earth without poverty in 1990???
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2002 : 12:00:40 [Permalink]
|
My question still hasn't been answered.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2002 : 12:02:24 [Permalink]
|
There were poor people but they were well fed and had good health care and education.
quote:
Gorgo, this was over 10 years ago. I have seen footage out of present day Iraq. It doesn't look all that devastated to me. But what's this about bombing scools and hospitals?? Give me a break!
I also know that there was indeed much poverty in Iraq prior to the war. You are not seriously going to take a stand that Iraq was the only nation on Earth without poverty in 1990???
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
"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 - 05/02/2002 : 18:45:13 [Permalink]
|
Atomic> So the country with the largest economy and the largest army gets to decide who can and can't have nuclear weapons??
“Iraq also demonstrated that it's leadership is irresponible.”
Hrmrmrm… And the USA has responsible leadership? I'm just trying to figure out what this has to do with who should decide, who can and can't have nuclear weapons.
“Do you recall Iraq invading an annexing Kuwait?”
Do you remember the US invading Grenada? How the US worked with the Saudi Arabian monarchy and encouraged coups which re-established the absolute rule of the Shah of Iran (1953) and gave power in Iraq to the Ba'ath Party? The abortive CIA invasion of Cuba? The 64' landing of US troops in the Dominican Republic? The '70 invasion of Cambodia. The CIA sponsored civil war in Angola. The US contra terrorism against Nicaragua?
“Do you remember that even that a multinational army defeated Iraq and forced Iraq to agree to terms that they later broke?”
Israel has ignored dozens and dozens of UN resolutions. Where are the sanctions against Israel?
“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.”
Ok, prove that Iraq can grow enough food to support its own population.
Natural resources: petroleum, natural gas, phosphates, sulfur
Land use:
arable land: 12%
permanent crops: 0%
permanent pastures: 9%
forests and woodland: 0%
other: 79% (1993 est.)
"All it takes to fly is to fling yourself at the ground... and miss."
- Douglas Adams |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/02/2002 : 19:19:54 [Permalink]
|
USA
Natural resources: coal, copper, lead, molybdenum, phosphates, uranium, bauxite, gold, iron, mercury, nickel, potash, silver, tungsten, zinc, petroleum, natural gas, timber
Land use:
arable land: 19%
permanent crops: 0%
permanent pastures: 25%
forests and woodland: 30%
other: 26% (1993 est.)
Denmark
Natural resources: petroleum, natural gas, fish, salt, limestone, stone, gravel and sand
Land use:
arable land: 60%
permanent crops: 0%
permanent pastures: 5%
forests and woodland: 10%
other: 25% (1993 est.)
Wow, Denmark can feed 3 times what the US can. I did not know that! But seriously, this is hardly an indication of what anyone can feed. Modern farming methods can have a small amount of land yield plenty of food.
I won't debate many of the other points. I just want to add that while it is the strong that dictate to the weak I don't think it should be this way but it is. And this has led to plenty of abuse by the US. I totally agree but i would still like to see Saddam never gots atomic weapons. The truth is I would prefer it if no one had any.
quote:
Do you remember the US invading Grenada? How the US worked with the Saudi Arabian monarchy and encouraged coups which re-established the absolute rule of the Shah of Iran (1953) and gave power in Iraq to the Ba'ath Party? The abortive CIA invasion of Cuba? The 64' landing of US troops in the Dominican Republic? The '70 invasion of Cambodia. The CIA sponsored civil war in Angola. The US contra terrorism against Nicaragua?
But you left out Vietnam, Chile, Korea, Taiwan, the Iraq-Iran war and Baywatch. I agree with all that but you also left out:
The Marshall Plan, airlifts to Berlin, the UN, Bosnia and Kosovo
I also agree with you about Israel. The US funded all of the settlements that are probably the biggest issue right now since it will be a problem to remove all those people. Especially since many of them are religious fanatics that move there so they can help Israel regain it's biblical boundaries. Yeah they won't go easily at all.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2002 : 08:43:08 [Permalink]
|
LOL, I could write one of those and cross out George Bush's name and write in Ghandi. And why not, then we's both have groundless accusations.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Omega
Skeptic Friend
Denmark
164 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2002 : 11:44:42 [Permalink]
|
Atomic> Ah. I think I have the core of the problem here. Let me start by saying: I do not think Hussein is much good for the Iraqi people. The sanctions does not bother him or the Ba'at party in the least.
But when a country is attacked, propaganda is usually used to get people to rally around “the leader”. For better or worse or whether the leader deserves it or not. Look at how popular Boy George is.
Now, with that being said: The sanctions against Iraq started very soon after the war. I've seen plenty of serious programs on the state of affairs in the country, and they haven't rebuilt it nor had the means to do so. The sanctions were made to get HUSSEIN to comply with the weapons-inspections. Hussein is not suffering.
The sanctions have killed 100.000 hapless Iraqi people, who can NOT decide whether or not to let weapons-inspectors into the country.
The sanctions harm the wrong people. Which is why they should be lifted. And why they are wrong.
Fish? :) Sorry, I'll be serious. I just recalled my childhood town that always stank of fish. Yep, there be fish here.
But note the “other”. For Iraq it's 79 percent. You have the Eufrat and Tigris river valleys in Iraq, the rest is desert.
“I won't debate many of the other points. I just want to add that while it is the strong that dictate to the weak I don't think it should be this way but it is.”
I asked “who should”, not “who is”.
And I left out quite a few things, I didn't mean to belabour on the subject. It just appeared to me as if your reasoning was: Iraq attacked Kuwait. A US-backed war defeated Iraq. Iraq did not comply with peace-agreement. Sanctions are ok. And I wanted to show that the USA has a much longer history of war-involvement than Iraq.
The Marshall plan was fine, but also done to prevent Russias Stalinism from spreading in especially a totally ruined Germany state. What is the point?
The US backed Iraqs war against the Khomeni-lead Iran.
I recall from the Arafat-Sharon debate, that we're pretty much in agreement on Israel. My point here is just, that if country A doesn not comply with international decisions, it does not always lead to sanctions. What is it that makes it especially “right” in the Iraq case?
Gorgo> Interesting site. I'll have to find time to go through it in detail :)
"All it takes to fly is to fling yourself at the ground... and miss."
- Douglas Adams
Edited by - Omega on 05/03/2002 11:46:16
Edited by - Omega on 05/03/2002 11:47:12 |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2002 : 11:55:53 [Permalink]
|
So, you think it's Gandhi's fault? I think it's AOL's fault for spreading terms like LOL! 
quote:
LOL, I could write one of those and cross out George Bush's name and write in Ghandi. And why not, then we's both have groundless accusations.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law!
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn
Edited by - gorgo on 05/03/2002 11:56:35 |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/03/2002 : 12:05:55 [Permalink]
|
Gorgo those accusations are ridiculous. Note that the accusers claim to know the "intent" to bomb mosques, churches, schools etc. First, these were hardly touched and when they were it was almost certainly an accident. But to claim that they were intended targets indicates the accusers have special knowledge and therefore proof. Let's see it.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 05/04/2002 : 06:17:54 [Permalink]
|
LOL IMHO.
Did I do that right?
If you're interested in proof, of course, then you'll push for a free press and reasonable and viable international law.
Since we don't have that, we'll have to take the word of individuals who take it upon themselves to find out what's happening. I quote from Ramsey Clark's The Fire This Time:
"After their fact-finding trip to Iraq, Commission [of Inquiry for the International War Crimes Tribunal] members Gemma and Abed reported:'In every city we visited, we documented severe damage to homes, electrical plants, fuel storage facilities, civilian factories, hospitals, churches, civilian airports, vehicles, transportation facilities, food storage and food testing laboratories, grain silos, animal vaccination centers, schools, communication towers, civilian government office buildings and stores. Almost all facilities we saw had been bombed two or three times, ensuring that they could not be repaired. Most of the bridges we saw destroyed were bombed from both ends.'
"Dr. David Levinson, who visited Iraq immediately after the war with the International Physicians for the Prevention of Nuclear war, said, 'There were many direct civilian casualties from the bombings, but these numbers do not reflect the true horror of this war.' Compounded by sanctions, the damage to life-support systems in Iraq killed more after the war than direct attacks did during the war.
"As Levinson testified at Commission hearings in San Francisco and Los Angeles, 'It was clear that the bombing war against Iraq has been a war directed against the civilian population through massive destruction of the country's infrastructure.'"
"INDISCRIMINATE BOMBING
Thousands of civilians were victims of indiscriminate bombing by B-52s and other aircraft. The result was inescapable when thousands of bombing sorties targeted densely populated areas. Most news reports focused on F-117 Stealth fighters, equipped with more accurate bombs. But B-52s, which drop free-falling, unguided bombs, carried out the bulk of the bombing.
Paul Walker testified that 'B-52s were used from the first night of the war to the last. Flying at 40,000 feet and releasing 40-60 bombs of 500 to 750 pounds each, their only function is to carpet bomb entire areas.' After the first days of the bombing, the B-52s flew at very high altitudes.
"At the Montreal Commission hearing on November 15, 1991, journalist Paul William Roberts, who traveled with Bedouin tribes in Iraq during the bombing, testified on his experience. He said the air attack was unlike anything he witnessed as a war correspondent in Vietnam. He recalled
'three waves of bombing at night. And I experienced bombing in Cambodia, but this was nothing like that....After 20 minutes of this carpet-bombing there would be a silence and you would hear a screaming of children and people, and then the wounded would be dragged out. I found myself with everyone else trying to treat injuries, but the state of people generally was one of pure shock. They were walking around like zombies, and I was too, because the disorienting effects of the blasts themselves formed a psychological warfare if you like...but if you've been kept awake every night for the past 10 days as everyone had, you begin to lose your perspective on reality.'"
quote:
Gorgo those accusations are ridiculous.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn
Edited by - Gorgo on 05/04/2002 06:18:57 |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/04/2002 : 10:52:45 [Permalink]
|
You completely missed my point. I never said those buildings had not been hit. My point was the intention of deliberately hitting them. Good luck proving that. We have some people that frequent these boards that were in those planes. Why don't you ask them why they deliberately bombed churches, schools, mosques and hospitals.
It's called war Gorgo. It's not pretty.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
|
Gorgo
SFN Die Hard
USA
5310 Posts |
Posted - 05/04/2002 : 12:56:31 [Permalink]
|
No, you completely miss any point.
Why don't you hold the U.S. to the same standards you hold everyone else?
quote:
You completely missed my point. I never said those buildings had not been hit.
"Not one human life should be expended in this reckless violence called a war against terrorism." - Howard Zinn |
|
|
|
@tomic
Administrator
USA
4607 Posts |
Posted - 05/04/2002 : 12:57:34 [Permalink]
|
I do hold the US to the same standards. I never said I didn't.
@tomic
Gravity, not just a good idea...it's the law! |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
