Get Your War On

[onthebottom]

You're right Goober, Saddam is as you put it, an asshat. And it is very hard to say where the money is going, but judging the fact that he continues to build palaces while his people starve he liekly isn't distributing it very well. If he complied, perhaps the sanctions would be lifted.

But is an estimated half million civillians the price you are willing to pay to get compliance out of him? Does this not ammount to terror on our part? Do you think it's right that the US wants to imprison people for attempting to get medical supplies and food into Iraq? Are we not using civillians as hostages here? Is there a better way to ensure compliance?

I'm not suggesting we kiss Saddams ass. He's a creep and a butcher and he deserves to be punished. But can't we even explore a course of action that doesn't result in a humanitarian disaster?

Let's not forget that it was the US that intervened in the inspection process in 98 and halted it. Let's not forget that the US has consistently tried to abuse the inspections process and exploit the Oil for Food program (which is a farce).

A world trade center a month in casualties in Iraq and somehow this is justice?

And why does it matter that we haven't done things to our own people? Shouldn't the fact that we've done it be damning enough, regardless of who we've done it to? Never mind that our nations are both founded in the blood of genocide and religious persecution, slavery and terror.

Dr.

Again, propaganda at it's worst.

The sanctions have nothing to do with the people suffering in Iraq, as stated in the above post he has more than enough means to feed, clothe and medicate his population. He chooses not to.

Estimated half a million casualties, from which orifice did you extract this number? This rings of the dire comments on the first Gulf war and the comments about how if the Russians couldn't beat Afghanistan in 10 years how could we do it. There won't be 1/10th that many casualties on both sides combined, likely not 1/100th. Sadam has killed more of his people in two wars and terror in a decade than we will ever kill. The real mess will be after the war, getting the tribes to live together without tearing themselves to pieces.

What other action would you suggest. The policy of active containment has not worked. The weak in the world (France, Russia) are ready to sell their soles to Iraq for a quick lucrative contract. He has massive WMD and will use them (ask the Kurds or Iranians). This is not an if, it's a when. The French have supplied the nuclear plants and technology, the Germans the chemical technology.

Sadam ended the inspection regimen in 98 when it was becoming too successful. After the defection of his two brother in laws (who returned and were killed), which was an intel field day for the UN, the UN realized how many of the WMD they had missed. There was a concerted effort to disperse and hide these weapons (managed by a 3 person committee, one of which was the above mentioned brother-in-law, another was the recognizable Tariqu Azzez sp?)

Why is the oil for stuff program a farce?

Does the fact that we've done it (what ever it is) make it right? Should we not use our power to make the world a safer place and restore some order to the lives of the Iraqi people?

The 64,000 question is, will the people of Iraq be better off with or without an invasion and a regime change. Will the world be a better place? Should the US do it (with Briton) or should the UN do it, that's pretty obvious. But what do we (US) do if the UN won't do it. In this case I think that do nothing is the most dangerous option.

OTB

 

[onthebottom]

I like it

I'm working on my idea, good luck.

OTB

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Sanctions pt 1

OTB: You really haven't been paying attention, have you? <sigh> Alright, time for school.

Let's start at the casualties due to sanctions and the effectiveness of the sanctions themselves and the oil for food program.

I used the modest figure of 3000 a month. UNICEF, conducting a whole lot of on the ground work in Iraq figures on about 5000 per month. The UN estimates are 5 to 6 thousand. The World Health Organization claims sanctions have resulted in 1 million deaths since their inception.

From the press release on the UNICEF report:

"UNICEF, in a widely publicised study carried out jointly with the Iraq Ministry of Health, determined that 500,000 children under five years old had died in "excess" numbers in Iraq between 1991 and 1998, though UNICEF insisted that this number could not all be ascribed directly to sanctions. UNICEF used surveys of its own as part of the basic research and involved respected outside experts in designing the study and evaluating the data. UNICEF remains confident in the accuracy of its numbers and points out that they have never been subject to a scientific challenge."

A clip on another, more modest study:

"Prof. Richard Garfield of Columbia University carried out a separate and well regarded study of excess mortality in Iraq. Garfield considered the same age group and the same time period as the UNICEF study. He minimized reliance on official Iraqi statistics by using many different statistical sources, including independent surveys in Iraq and inferences from comparative public health data from other countries. Garfield concluded that there had been a minimum of 100,000 excess deaths and that the more likely number was 227,000. Garfield now thinks the most probable number of deaths of under-five children from August 1991 to June 2002 would be about 400,000." (Iraq Sanctions: Humanitarian Implications and Options for the Future, 8/6/02, http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/2002/paper.htm )

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Sanctions pt 2

More from UNICEF:

"The Oil for Food plan has not yet resulted in adequate protection of Iraq's children from malnutrition/disease. Those children spared from death continue to remain deprived of essential rights addressed in the Conventions of Rights of the Child."

Karl and John Mueller, Foreign Affairs (May-June 1999):

“economic sanctions may well have been a necessary cause of the deaths of more people in Iraq than have been slain by all so-called weapons of mass destruction throughout history.”

Two administrators of the Oil for Food program have resigned in protest over the gross humanitarian tragedy of the sanctions, Denis Halliday in 1997 and Hans Von Sponeck in 2000.

Press clippings on Halliday:

"Denis Halliday, head of UN humanitarian operations in Iraq, resigned his post effective last week. He announced his intention to resign last July, citing personal opposition to the economic blockade. Halliday managed the oil for food program for 13 months and prior to that had been with the UN for 30 years.

On October 6 he told a briefing in Washington, DC, organized by the Arab-American Institute and the American-Arab Anti-Discrimination Committee, that UN estimates of 5,000 to 6,000 Iraqi children dying every month were "probably modest." "The death of one Iraqi child attributable to economic sanctions is one death too many. Unfortunately, we are faced with thousands," Halliday said. "It is unnecessary and unacceptable to allow this human tragedy to continue."

In earlier comments to the Reuters news agency Halliday called sanctions "a totally bankrupt concept." He said the trade embargo violated the UN charter and UN conventions on human rights. "There is an awful incompatibility here, which I can't quite deal with myself. I just note that I feel extremely uncomfortable flying the UN flag, being part of the UN system here," he said.

Halliday noted the "4,000 to 5,000 children dying unnecessarily every month due to the impact of sanctions, because of the breakdown of water and sanitation, inadequate diet and the bad internal health situation." "

It has been noted that a three fold increase in childhood cancer has erupted in Southern Iraq, where US and allied forces concentrated much of their depleted uranium weaponry.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Sanctions pt 3

Let us also recall that it is estimated 60% of the dead are children under the age of seven. In addition, the number one cause of death for these children, according to UNICEF and the UN is dehydration from diarrhea caused by water borne illnesses. These illnesses have been rapidly on the rise since US warplanes began targeting power grids that supplied water treatment plants, water and wastewater treatment facilities themselves and since many of the chemicals and replacement parts required to properly operate treatment plants are barred due to sanctions.

The government does not even deny the deaths. In May 1996, Leslie Stahl of 60 Minutes asked Madeleine Albright, then U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, "We have heard that half a million children have died . . . is the price worth it?" Albright replied, "I think this is a very hard choice, but the price -- we think the price is worth it."

Some supporters of the sanctions argue that any humanitarian suffering is a result not of the sanctions but of Hussein's manipulations of the sanctions regime. There is no doubt that Hussein has a callous disregard for his people's hardships and bears some of the responsibility for the situation. However, as the Select Committee on International Development of the British House of Commons noted (1/27/00), this does not "entirely excuse the international community from a part in the suffering of Iraqis. A sanctions regime which relies on the good faith of Saddam Hussein is fundamentally flawed."

Your claim that Saddam does not use the Oil for Food program is ridiculous. Of course he does. But he can't, as you claim buy whatever he wants with the money. The money is held in escrow and all purchases must be approved. As of July 2002, 5.4 billion worth of goods destined for Iraq are being held up, mostly at the insistence of the UK and US, covering such supplies as water purification systems, sewage pipes, medicines, hospital equipment, electricity and communications infrastructure, and oil field equipment.

But you insist it is Saddam inflicting this on his own people? Please. You are probably right in saying he has and would mis-spend funds allocated to the aid of the Iraqi people. In that case, why argue in support of a program that relies on the generosity of Saddam in order to operate, as the oil for food program does?

Isn't it funny that you rely on a mass murderer who has displayed a callous disregard for the lives of his own people (with our support and our turning of blind eyes) to properly dispense humanitarian aid, yet you will prosecute people who try and personally deliver much needed supplies to Iraqis and circumvent the very obstacle you say is to blame? Your argument needs some work, OTB...

You claim this is all leftists propaganda. So are UNICEF and the UN now "leftist" organizations? What of the WHO? Or how about publications like Foreign Affairs or the New York Times? All are sources of the information I've provided here. Leftist propaganda indeed....

To continue to deny the facts would be outrageous. 3000 or 6000 deaths in any case or in between ammounts to a humanitarian catastrophe that verges on the genocidal, and you sir would tritely dismiss it. To that I can only say shame on you, sir...shame on us all.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

More Lessons

Let's wrap up all this nonsense about Iraq:

OTB:
<<Estimated half a million casualties, from which orifice did you extract this number? This rings of the dire comments on the first Gulf war and the comments about how if the Russians couldn't beat Afghanistan in 10 years how could we do it. There won't be 1/10th that many casualties on both sides combined, likely not 1/100th. Sadam has killed more of his people in two wars and terror in a decade than we will ever kill. The real mess will be after the war, getting the tribes to live together without tearing themselves to pieces. >>

The casualty estimates reflect CURRENT casualties due to sanctions. The casualty estimates for actually war in Iraq, meaning invasion, are staggering.

Baghdad has a population of about 5 million people. The US, following it's strategy for low intensity conflict, will try and avoid too much urban combat with ground forces. It will likely follow doctrine and smash resistance with the type of air campaigns we have seen escalating since Vietnam. Imagine a city of 5 million being bombed into submission. The casualties will be horriffic, but only for Iraqis. Sure it's possible the Iraqi army could just surrender, but good planning would not count on such a thing.

Saddam has murdered many, there is no doubt. But more than the US? Hardly. Not including deaths from proxy forces (Latin America, East Timor, Haiti, etc..) if we examine the record we see as many as 4 million deaths in Indochina alone. To suggest more have died at the hands of Saddam is absoloutely outrageous. WE have killed more Iraqis than Saddam has killed anyone else.

More on our own record of terror and atrocities later....

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

More Lessons pt 2

<<He has massive WMD and will use them (ask the Kurds or Iranians). This is not an if, it's a when. The French have supplied the nuclear plants and technology, the Germans the chemical technology.>>

The weapons he used against the Kurds and Iranians were supplied by the US, the massacares were carried out with US support in the case of Iran and US indifference in the case of the Kurds. The US, not the Germans supplied Saddam with the means to create a chemical and biological weapons program. Saddam was a good friend to Washington when he obeyed orders.

Many former UN weapons inspectors acknowledge that they feel about 90-95% of Saddams WMD capability was successfully destroyed by allied bombings and subsequent inspections programs. Even the moderate consensus is that his capabilities are "severely diminshed". So I ask you, what would Saddams motive be to use such weapons? Surely he doesn't have enough to strike a decisive blow to all of enemies (and he has plenty of enemies), so wouldn't any kind of attack be tantamount to suicide? Sure, he may net himself a few thousand kills before Iraq gets turned into a radioactive sheet of glass, but this is not the behaviour of someone who values thier own life enough to reside in bunkers and employ "doubles" to confuse would be assassins.

<<Sadam ended the inspection regimen in 98 when it was becoming too successful. After the defection of his two brother in laws (who returned and were killed), which was an intel field day for the UN, the UN realized how many of the WMD they had missed. There was a concerted effort to disperse and hide these weapons (managed by a 3 person committee, one of which was the above mentioned brother-in-law, another was the recognizable Tariqu Azzez sp?)>>

Absoloutely false. Washington ordered inspectors out in 98 to make way for it's Desert Fox bombing campaign to punish Iraq for objecting to US spies being sent in with UN inspectors.

As the Washington Post reported on March 2, 1999: "United States intelligence services infiltrated agents and espionage equipment for three years into United Nations arms control teams in Iraq to eavesdrop on the Iraqi military. The information that the U.S. gathered was used to pick targets for the December 1998 bombing campaign"

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

More Lessons pt 3

<<Should we not use our power to make the world a safer place and restore some order to the lives of the Iraqi people?>>

If the real concern was the Iraqi people and I saw a real benefit to them, perhaps I'd be inclined to agree. As it stands, our attitude towards the people of Iraq has been callously indifferent. War is not going to help these people. Would they be better off without Saddam? Of course they would be. We all would be. Will bombing Iraq further towards the stone age put us on a course to peace and stability for the people of Iraq? Not likely at all. If you expect these people to praise us as their liberators and just forget that we instituted the programs that led to so many needless deaths, if you expect them to forget the piles of dead we expect them to climb out from under to embrace us, I fear you may be mistaken. Our aggression is only breeding the next generation of extremists.

A few more thoughts on Iraq:

Every attempt by the Bush Administration to link Iraq to international terrorism has failed. A 2002 study by the State Department ("Patterns of Global Terrorism") found no association between Iraq and terrorist groups. A 2002 CIA report demonstrates that Baghdad has been consciously avoiding actions that could antagonize the US.

"Look at instances of leaders in other countries who are gross violators of human rights but who serve U.S. interests. Are they branded by the U.S. government as monsters, which they would be by the first definition, but not by the second? To take a single example: Suharto of Indonesia presided over killing at least half a million Indonesians and some two hundred thousand East Timorese, but not only did Washington not denounce him as a monster, it provided him with arms and diplomatic support (and even provided his army with names of communists to wipe out)"

"Two of Hussein's atrocities deserve special mention. In 1975, the United States which, together with Iran and Israel, had been aiding a Kurdish revolt in Iraq, abruptly cut off its support for the Kurds when the Shah of Iran, Washington's close ally, struck a deal with Iraq. As Baghdad turned its full wrath on the Kurds, many of the latter sought U.S. assistance in obtaining asylum. In closed-session testimony, Secretary of State Henry Kissinger explained why the U.S. rejected their appeal for help: "covert action," he declared, "should not be confused with missionary work" (Select Committee on Intelligence, 1/19/76 [Pike Report] in Village Voice, 2/16/76, pp. 85, 87n465, 88n471; William Safire, Safire's Washington, New York: Times Books, 1980, p. 333)."

"MYTH
Iraqi soldiers ripped Kuwaiti babies out of incubators when they invaded Kuwait in August 1990.

FACT
In October 1990, members of Congress listened to the powerful testimony of a 15-year-old Kuwaiti "refugee" named Nayirah. In tears, Nayirah described how she had witnessed Iraqi troops steal incubators from a hospital, leaving 312 babies "on the cold floor to die."

When the Senate voted to give support George Bush Sr.’s war--by a margin of only five votes--seven senators recounted Nayirah’s story in justifying their "yes" vote. The president himself repeated the story several times.

There’s just one problem: It wasn’t true. Nayirah’s false testimony was part of a $10 million Kuwait government propaganda campaign managed by the public relations firm Hill and Knowlton. Rather than working as a volunteer at a hospital, Nayirah was actually the daughter of the Kuwaiti ambassador to Washington.

"We didn’t know it wasn’t true at the time," claims Brent Scowcroft, Bush’s national security adviser. But, he admitted, "it was useful in mobilizing public opinion."


There is no credible evidence linking Saddam Hussein or Iraq to Al Qaeda. In fact, the ruling class in Iraq is very secular compared to most of the region and it has been widely suggested that bin Laden has no love for Iraq due to it's secularism. As far as Iraq paying families of suicide bombers in Israel/Palestine, this has more to do with Iraq's issues with Israel than it does an ideological support for terror. It is detestable, but not indicative of widespread support for global terror in itself.

Hussein is cruel and sadistic despot. This we all know. That we helped him become this way is not quite as common knowledge. That we perpetrate crimes, circumvent the UN (which we claim to be punishing Iraq for) and perpetuate a mass slaughter of their people is not a common sentiment either. But it remains true and something we need to address and correct if we are to have any sort of moral integrity in this world.

Now on to our own record of terror.....

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

Post-script on Iraq

Just a final few observations I missed.

About the Iraqi people being better off, I'd like to mention that before 1991, Iraq had one of the highest literacy and education records of the Arab states. It also had a very progressive public health system and very modern approaches to infrastructure for health, education and delivery of state services. All this is now in ruins and it wasn't Saddam who did it, it was us.

Iraqi state violence has been directed at the Kurdish population for a very long time. Curiously we said nothing when they were butchered in the 30's, the 70's and the 80's. Only when Saddam became the enemy did we cry foul. And let's not forget the Turkish war of repression against it's Kurdish population, very similar to Iraqs. What have we done to comabt the Turkish regime on this matter? Increase foreign aid spending and military sales to Turkey. We also stood by and watched as Saddam murdered Kurdish refugees we promised to protect and moreover denied them weapons we captured from Iraq with whcih they could fight back. Iraq succeded in crushing a Kurdish rebellion right under our noses and with our complicity post-gulf war, and the Turks made incursions into Kurdish areas of Iraq to commit similar atrocities, all under the watchful eye of US and allied forces in the no-fly zones. Which, by the way were not introduced as part of any initiative by the UN, but rather a unilateral decisiion by the US, UK and France.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

State Terror

Now onto a brief history of state-sponsored terror.

We cry out about Saddam killing his own people. How cruel. How unthinkable. But just as the Kurds are people of Iraq, the Native Americans were people of America. This fact did not buy them any reprieve from mass slaughter, biological warfare (the intentional distribution of diseased blankets) and concentration camp style "residential schooling" right up into the 1960's. North America was built on genocide and terror.

And who could forget dropping the atomic bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki, deliberately targeting areas populated by civillians with a death toll we will be counting for generations.

But if you want more recent examples there are many very instructive cases.

Take for example chemical weapons testing on US soldiers. Many were exposed without knowledge or consent to agents like Sarin, VX, Mustard Gas, Tabun and many others. The Pentagon will not fully reveal the extent of the tests, but many soldiers have suffered bizarre illnesses and deaths in the years after the tests. In all it is estimated that 5000 or more were exposed to the tests. And this is what the Pentagon is willing to ADMIT.

But on to more direct examples of US style state terror.

Indochina. Chemical defoliants used to unmask the enemy destroy thousands of acres of crops, resulting in starvation. This is revealed to be an ulterior motive, to starve out the Viet Cong. As well we have Project Phoenix, a CIA/Green Beret program of insurrection and assassination conducted in North Vietnam. Villages suspected of supporting the NVA were sytematically exterminated. Suspected NVA conspirators murdered. Prisoners were tortured for information, then often dispatched with a quick bullet to the head.

Bombings and insurrections carried out in Cambodia, whose legality is up for serious debate, result in the deaths of estimated hundreds of thousands, directly from bombings and as a result of loss of critical infrastructure due to the bombings.

Widespread reports of rape, murder, torture and village razings slowly filtered back to America, bolstering the anti-war movement.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

The Horror of East Timor

Then we can look at the example of our dear friend President Suharto of Indonesia. Many compare his crimes to those of Hitler and his battle for control of Indonesia and East Timor has been cited as one of the worst slaughters since the Holocaust.

Did we move a muscle to stop him? Of course not. He was "very progressive" according to Washington. Willing to open Indonesian markets and state services to global competition and American investment (something Enron's Kenneth Lay readily exploited and it is said he was very close with the Suharto family). So when he began murdering his people, we increased foreign aid to his regime. We also increased military aid, giving him great deals on guns, fighter jets, helicopters, bombs, missiles. Then we trained his military officers. And all the while an estimated 1 million Indonesians died. Then when he wanted to invade East Timor, we gave him the thumbs up and looked the other way, increasing our spending and arms dealing yet again. And he went on to kill hundreds of thousands of East Timorese in some of the most brutal massacares this side of Auschwitz. With OUR weapons. OUR training. And worst of all, OUR complicity.

But it certainly was profitable for the US. After all, Indonesia had an insatiable need for all manner of weapons systems in order to continue their slaughter. In a matter of a few weeks, 60,000 were killed, equal to casualties inflicted by the Nazis on the eastern front. And the killing continues to this very day.

Ninety percent of Indonesia's arms at the time had come from the United States under a treaty requiring that they be used for self-defense. The United States did impose a six-month arms embargo, but in secret. In fact, it was so secret that the Indonesians never heard about it. They read about it later. However, they did know that Henry Kissinger, during the period of the six-month "embargo," initiated new sales of arms, including deadly counter-insurgency equipment for use in East Timor. The United Nations, at once, strongly condemned the invasion and ordered Indonesia to withdraw immediately -- but without any effect.

The US knew very well what was going on in East Timor. But did nothing to help and in fact assisted in the slaughter by supplying weapons, training and it's power in the UN.

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

The Horror of East Timor

To categorize the killings as mere killings does no justice to the inhumanity of it.

From a talk on East Timor, December 9, 1995 Miller Theater, Columbia University, New York City:

"My name is Constâncio Pinto and I'm Timorese. My name is a Portuguese name, actually, but I am not Portuguese. I am Timorese, holding a Portuguese passport. In 1975, at this time, December 9, I was heading towards the mountain with my parents, all of my family, bombarded by Indonesian army with the United States M-16, F-16 fighters, tanks and warships. Two days before that, December 7, 1975, thousands of people were laid down in Dili, East Timor's capital, without [unclear]. Men and women, children were smashed into the rocks. Women were raped in front of their families, their husbands, their boyfriends. Men were killed in front of their family, their wives, and their children.

As a result of that, 90 percent of the population in East Timor fled into the jungle. For three years, we lived in the jungle, suffering for all kinds of suffering, perpetrated by Indonesian military. We were bombed by the Indonesian army every day. Almost every inch of East Timor's land was bombed by F-15 airplane, Bronco OV-10, tanks and warships. For three years, we suffered from diseases, hunger, and killings -- mass killings. I'm not talking about one or two people who were killed because [unclear] accidentally killed. I was talking about people who were killed deliberately by the Indonesian military, and not only thousands of them lie down every day, throughout the country. I saw with my eyes people killed in front of me, people who died of starvation, and I slept together with them. "

So, in 1978, we were arrested and I found that the situation would be better than in the jungle. We were brought into the village and ended up at the concentration camp. I was in one of the concentration camps in [unclear] village. We were not allowed to circulate in order to get food to eat. Every Timorese received three cups of rice to eat for six days. And only rice; nothing else. And, as a result, thousands of people dies of starvation and disease -- died of diarrhea, dysentery, and other illnesses.

"In addition to this, hundreds of people, thousands of people were arbitrarily arrested, disappear and killed. Again, men were killed in front of their families, their wives, their children. Women being raped in front of their husbands and their children. And all of this, the Indonesian army tried to terrorize the Timorese in order to be able to continue with the struggle for the self-determination and independence. However, in spite of all kinds of suffering, the Timorese, we never gave up the struggle. And today, it's 20 years of the struggle against Indonesian occupation. "

"Today I spoke about torture. I described how they torture me. They kicked me and beat me and punched me. This is not only the strategy that the Indonesian army used in East Timor. There are many other types of torture, like slash people's faces and bodies with razor blades; people's fingernails pulled out; their toenails pulled out, and their ears were used as ashtray. This is kind of -- some kind of a torture. Some people were thrown into the water and pick up from the water and continuously electrocuted. Some people were thrown from the helicopter. This story -- maybe, if I tell you -- maybe you don't believe that -- how a human being can do certain strange things to other human being. But this is a reality; what's happened in East Timor."

 

[Dr. Gonzo]

The Horror of East Timor cont'd

"We were talking to an old man in the street. He reached up and pointed -- said, "the Gestapo!" We saw that the army had arrived. They pulled up on trucks, got down holding American M-16's across their chest, sealing off the only exit route. Then we looked and saw, marching up the road -- the same route by which everyone had come -- a long column of Indonesian troops, dressed in brown, holding American M-16's in front of them. The Timorese were hemmed in by the cemetery walls, a few at the back could peel off, but most had no escape. I thought at the time: "Well, we'll just go stand between the soldiers and the Timorese; prevent any trouble. The soldiers will see us; obvious foreign journalists. The only choice would be to shoot us; stage a massacre in front of us. Either one would cause an international incident." So I thought that we could prevent it.

We went and stood there in the middle of the road -- the road about as wide as the middle rank of seats here. The soldiers came marching up. Never saw the end of the row of soldiers. The crowd was quiet. People were moving back. Had nowhere to go. Constâncio's wife, Gabriela, was in the crowd. She was pregnant with their son, Tilson. The soldiers kept on coming. I thought, "My God, it looks like they're going to go through with this." I couldn't believe it. They marched up into our faces. They enveloped us. We were about fifteen yards in front of the Timorese. They took a step or two past us and raised their rifles to their shoulders all at once and opened fire on the crowd. "

- Allan Nairn, Journalist
covering East Timor

I'll continue with more tonight and we can explore US foreign policy in Latin America, Haiti, economic terror and other dirty little truths....

Where were you, mighty moral America, while these people died? Too busy making money off of arms deals and lucrative investments to hear the screams of over a million dead.

 

[niplust]

Dr.Gonzo - get a life!

This message is about the sheer volume of your comments, not the content.

You must spend all of your time on TERB. It's a great place in small doses but get a life outside of TERB.

Find a publication that will pay you for all this opinion. You are wasting your time here.

Cheers

 

[Avery]

Re: Dr.Gonzo - get a life!

Find a publication that will pay you for all this opinion. You are wasting your time here

AMEN, Brother, AMEN!!!

 

[TravellingGuy]

Keep on posting

I read them all, I thank you for your research and your hard work. If other people don't want to read them they can skip the thread or your posts, its that simple. Those of us that are thirsting for knowledge and opinions that may differ from the regular media are grateful.

 

[onthebottom]

Dr. Gonzo

OTB: You really haven't been paying attention, have you? <sigh> Alright, time for school.

url]http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/2002/paper.htm[/url] )

Dr.

You can save your high and mighty attitude, all you've really proved is that:

You have no life and can spend an infinite amount of time on this

You have access to the Internet

You know how to copy / paste in Windows

Congratulations!

Now I have to waste an hour going over each of your posts and distilling the facts from the fiction and hysterical opinion and propaganda.

OTB

 

[Goober Mcfly]

And remember this, people:

If it's on the internet, it's true!

 

[onthebottom]

The facts

OTB:

I used the modest figure of 3000 a month. UNICEF, conducting a whole lot of on the ground work in Iraq figures on about 5000 per month. The UN estimates are 5 to 6 thousand. The World Health Organization claims sanctions have resulted in 1 million deaths since their inception.

From the press release on the UNICEF report:

"UNICEF, in a widely publicised study carried out jointly with the Iraq Ministry of Health, determined that 500,000 children under five years old had died in "excess" numbers in Iraq between 1991 and 1998, though UNICEF insisted that this number could not all be ascribed directly to sanctions. UNICEF used surveys of its own as part of the basic research and involved respected outside experts in designing the study and evaluating the data. UNICEF remains confident in the accuracy of its numbers and points out that they have never been subject to a scientific challenge."

A clip on another, more modest study:

"Prof. Richard Garfield of Columbia University carried out a separate and well regarded study of excess mortality in Iraq. Garfield considered the same age group and the same time period as the UNICEF study. He minimized reliance on official Iraqi statistics by using many different statistical sources, including independent surveys in Iraq and inferences from comparative public health data from other countries. Garfield concluded that there had been a minimum of 100,000 excess deaths and that the more likely number was 227,000. Garfield now thinks the most probable number of deaths of under-five children from August 1991 to June 2002 would be about 400,000." (Iraq Sanctions: Humanitarian Implications and Options for the Future, 8/6/02, http://www.globalpolicy.org/security/sanction/iraq1/2002/paper.htm )

The most responsible reports are that 227,000 Iraqi's have died in the 10 years since the Gulf war (the lowest of the above). Estimates are that two thirds of these are children. The real question is who killed these people? Sadam had, immediately after the Gulf war, both the financial means (estimates are 30 billion hidden in accounts that the UN has still not found) and stored goods to feed his people. He chose not to and to punish certain groups for their roles in uprisings (mainly Kurds and Shi'ite) he limited the recourses applied to them. The oil for food program was not used by Iraq for a long time because he had no interest in feeding his people. Even recently the UN has complained that Iraq has not placed enough orders for essential humanitarian goods (food, medicine...) and is hundreds of millions of dollars below it's allowed spending on these items.

In an absurd twist of fate, it is widely believed the Iraqi Kurds are now living much better than they ever have under Sadam's rule because the NFZ and certain US reprisals protect them from regimen attacks. The Kurds have 18% of the population, are allowed to spend 13% of the oil for stuff program money and are (compatibly) thriving.

Unfortunately more to come:

OTB

 

[onthebottom]

Ah, the power of half truthes

There is no doubt that Hussein has a callous disregard for his people's hardships and bears some of the responsibility for the situation.

Your claim that Saddam does not use the Oil for Food program is ridiculous. Of course he does. But he can't, as you claim buy whatever he wants with the money. The money is held in escrow and all purchases must be approved. As of July 2002, 5.4 billion worth of goods destined for Iraq are being held up, mostly at the insistence of the UK and US, covering such supplies as water purification systems, sewage pipes, medicines, hospital equipment, electricity and communications infrastructure, and oil field equipment.

But you insist it is Saddam inflicting this on his own people? Please. You are probably right in saying he has and would mis-spend funds allocated to the aid of the Iraqi people. In that case, why argue in support of a program that relies on the generosity of Saddam in order to operate, as the oil for food program does?

Isn't it funny that you rely on a mass murderer who has displayed a callous disregard for the lives of his own people (with our support and our turning of blind eyes) to properly dispense humanitarian aid, yet you will prosecute people who try and personally deliver much needed supplies to Iraqis and circumvent the very obstacle you say is to blame? Your argument needs some work, OTB...

You claim this is all leftists propaganda. So are UNICEF and the UN now "leftist" organizations? What of the WHO? Or how about publications like Foreign Affairs or the New York Times? All are sources of the information I've provided here. Leftist propaganda indeed....

To continue to deny the facts would be outrageous. 3000 or 6000 deaths in any case or in between ammounts to a humanitarian catastrophe that verges on the genocidal, and you sir would tritely dismiss it. To that I can only say shame on you, sir...shame on us all.

Bears some responsibility, your kidding right! He's murdering his people and using propaganda and fools like yourself to shift the blame. I do agree that the sanctions were imposed by Bush (and supported later by Clinton) with the view that Sadam would bend instead of destroying his country. Bush was wrong, Sadam destroyed his own country faster than sanctions would have dictated to control his population against several popular revolts and coup attempts. When the world saw this they proposed the oil for food program which Sadam resisted.

You are correct, I am correct. And if Sadam will limit the aid spent on his people under sanctions what makes you think he will not limit aid after sanctions? All removing sanctions will do is allow him to rebuild his military. Is this a good idea?

I'm not sure what part of my argument needs work. The callous murder will be removed and the UN will dispense aid, that's the argument all along.

I don't think organizations that try and measure statistics are leftist propaganda. I think hacks who interpret those numbers to support a blatantly misguided view of the world that fits their paranoid perspective, I think that is propaganda.

I sir do believe there is a disaster in Iraq, there has been for a decade. The real questions (again) is who caused it SADAM, who could stop it tomorrow SADAM, who will never stop it if allowed SADAM. Eliminating sanctions will not feed these people it will only build a stronger military and WMD program in Iraq and allow Sadam to reward his thugs more generously. Wake up!

OTB