WHAT IS UP WITH IRAN

[falias]

<< Take it like this. Person1 has a gun pointed at the head of Person2, Person1 says "if you move I´ll shoot you", Person2 moves, Person1 shoots Person2. Person1 is the trade embargo, Person2 is the Iraqi people. Who is it to blame the gun was shot? the one holding the gun or the other one?
>>

 

[Rison]

Thanks AndrewR, you know what's going on. Thank God you're not an arab apologist. why is it that most europeans are arab apologists? can you answer that, czar?

 

[falias]

because they are not brainwashed and self-absorbed.

 

[Czar]

<< Thanks AndrewR, you know what's going on. Thank God you're not an arab apologist. why is it that most europeans are arab apologists? can you answer that, czar? >>


Maybe because the average european knows more about the world than the average american, no offense.

Anyway, you here brand everyone who deosnt agree with you as an "arab apoligist", branding is not going to strengthen your point.

 

[falias]

.

 

[Cyberian]

Who is enforcing the sanctions on Iraq? I thought it was the UN.
Is there a way that Iraq could get these sanctions lifted?

 

[shurato]

Maybe IRAQ should spend less money on their millitary and development of weapons of mass destruction and more on their own people then.

 

[UltraQuiet]

Andrew R- you have stated the truth. That is in fact what is going on.

Czar, Novon, falias, syzygy- you have absolutely no concept of geo-politics at all. Your posts are obviously based in pure ignorance.

 

[Czar]

OK, questions for those who support the sanctions on iraq..

What purpose does it serve?
Who are we trying to help?

 

[GmanBat]

I've hearn a number of news stories and interviews that talk of the young people of I ran that are PRO-WEST. They are sick of the mean old men that run them. Look for an uprising within the next 5-10 years and a secular government replacing the religious state.

 

[novon]

<< Maybe IRAQ should spend less money on their millitary and development of weapons of mass destruction and more on their own people then. >>


ditto for the US.



<< Andrew R- you have stated the truth. That is in fact what is going on.

Czar, Novon, falias, syzygy- you have absolutely no concept of geo-politics at all. Your posts are obviously based in pure ignorance. >>



thanks for the insight oh wise one!



<< I've hearn a number of news stories and interviews that talk of the young people of I ran that are PRO-WEST. They are sick of the mean old men that run them. Look for an uprising within the next 5-10 years and a secular government replacing the religious state. >>



True indeed, even our beloved Anand is half-Iranian.

 

[ToBeMe]

<<

<< Czar, I never said to kill anyone. Just sanction anyone that trades with Iran. they'll have to make a choice between iran and the most powerful economy in the world. >>



Because of the sanction on Iraq over 1.25 million Iraqis have died, over 500.000 of those were children. This is just because of the trade sanction. These numbers are from the UN, not Iraq. Take them as facts. >>


Yeah.....you're right! BUT....did ya' check out others stats????? They were also dieing in droves before the war or sanctions as were their people! Why????? Same reason they would even if the sanctions were lifted........Saddam would spend it on military & mass destruction weaponry!

 

[Czar]

<< Yeah.....you're right! BUT....did ya' check out others stats????? They were also dieing in droves before the war or sanctions as were their people! Why????? Same reason they would even if the sanctions were lifted........Saddam would spend it on military & mass destruction weaponry! >>


True, but Iraq is like Afghanistan. Before the US started bombing Afghanistan people were dying of hunger there, but there were aid workers there who managed to supply food to few million people there. During the bombings there were no aid workers there, the US was supplying food for about one hundred thousand people. The point being is that before the situation was bad, but it just got worse.

 

[Czar]

<< OK, questions for those who support the sanctions on iraq..

What purpose does it serve?
Who are we trying to help? >>



Because no one seems to care


What purpose does it serve?
To stop Saddam from building up his army.

Who are we trying to help?
The Iraqi People


Then comes more questions

Does it stop Saddam from bulding up his army?
No

Who is suffering because of the embargo?
The Iraqi People

So in the end, the point for this embargo is gone. It has been tryied and it did not work. Its time to end it before more people die in the name of the embargo.

 

[Michael]

Czar - And because the bombing continued, it is now getting better. For all the crys of "stop the bombing to save the children", more children will be saved because the bombing was not stopped and now much more of the country is open to foreign aid.

I'm not going to argue about Iraq and debate if there is enough money to feed the people if it wasn't being spent on other things. Iraq is a declared enemy of the United States and seeks the destruction of the united States. Sanctions are the best reaction now, but more needs to be done. Once it is done, aid will reach the people of Iraq as well. The sactions are not the error. Allowing evil to remain in power is the error.

The US is often lambasted for ignoring the rest of the world. Well the Middle East managed to get its attention and the US people now are awake to the consequences of allowing evil and dictatorship to florish.

Michael

 

[Czar]

Michael,
It might get better and it probably will. But the "bombings" on Iraq has been going on for years, the embargo does only kill the civilians but does not weaken Saddams power, it only makes Saddam stronger. People think "short" they usualy dont care to look behind they subject, they just look directly at what is kiling them, they know the embargo is killing them, they blame the embargo, they blame those who withhold the embargo.
I agree more is needed with Iraq, Saddam has to be pushed away, allowing him to stay in power is the biggest error I agree. The embargo is a huge mistake that has been used many times before, but it has never been proven to get you were you want. Look at Cuba.

 

[UltraQuiet]

<< So in the end, the point for this embargo is gone. It has been tryied and it did not work. Its time to end it before more people die in the name of the embargo >>



So right now Saddam is using what little money he has on his armies, won't let UN inspectors in his country, has known ties to terrorists, etc, etc. and your argument is we should lift the embargo and because Saddam is such a great guy he's going to spend all that money on his people. Is that your argument?

 

[Czar]

<< So right now Saddam is using what little money he has on his armies, won't let UN inspectors in his country, has known ties to terrorists, etc, etc. and your argument is we should lift the embargo and because Saddam is such a great guy he's going to spend all that money on his people. Is that your argument? >>


I´m saying that the embargo is obviosly not stopping Saddam, it is only killing civilians. It should be lifted, and not because Saddam "is such a great guy" (no one belives that anyway).

What should be done is lift the embargo, allow full trade to go on except ban all arms trade, UN inspectors should still go and inspect everything as they do now.

 

[UltraQuiet]

<< What should be done is lift the embargo, allow full trade to go on except ban all arms trade, UN inspectors should still go and inspect everything as they do nowText >>



Thats not feasible. How do we stop arms trade if there are hundreds of ships and thousands of trucks going in and out of the country. You can't. So only a few go in and out, you can control those easier. There are no inspectors in the country right now, Saddam won't let them. That is the biggest reason that the US is opposed to lifting the embargo. I'm sorry I do not buy into the argument that the embargo is killing people. Saddam and his gov't are making decisions that are causing deaths. Just like the Taliban knew what it had to do to keep from facing the consequences, Saddam knows what he has to do to get the embargo lifted.

Happy Thanksgiving.

 

[Maetryx]

It doesn't break my heart when our enemies are having a hard time. This notion that we need to surgically target just the mean-spirited people in our enemy's country is ridiculous. When Saddam's artillery units were launching unguided SCUD missiles into Israel, they were not selective. When Iraq invaded Kuwait, they weren't selective. And weapons of mass destruction are by defenition, not selective.

In reality, the United States is the most kind-hearted enemy Iraq has ever known.

 

[Czar]

<< Thats not feasible. How do we stop arms trade if there are hundreds of ships and thousands of trucks going in and out of the country. You can't. So only a few go in and out, you can control those easier. There are no inspectors in the country right now, Saddam won't let them. That is the biggest reason that the US is opposed to lifting the embargo. I'm sorry I do not buy into the argument that the embargo is killing people. Saddam and his gov't are making decisions that are causing deaths. Just like the Taliban knew what it had to do to keep from facing the consequences, Saddam knows what he has to do to get the embargo lifted. >>


It would be alot harder than the current situation. But what is the long term goal with the embargo? What does Saddam have to do to end the embargo?
I´m sorry that you still dont see a direct link between those deaths and the embargo.
Death By ?Free Trade?: The U.S. and Iraq by Seth Sandronsky
New York Times on Iraq Sanctions: A Case Of Journalistic Malpractice by Seth Ackerman
Scott Ritter on Iraq by Sean Gonsalves

Nearly one million children malnourished in Iraq, says UNICEF
Child malnutrition prevalent in central/south Iraq

And finaly this is the best presentation
http://www.unicef.org/reseval/pdfs/irqu5est.pdf
See the change 1990, if this isnt good enough for a directo proof I dont know what it takes.

 

[Michael]

Czar - The purpose of the embaro is to punish the government of Iraq for not agreeing to UN demands. Basically, it is designed to choke off the flow of money and trade into the country to limit Iraq's ability to expand its military power.

You and others like you like to say that people behind the embargo are not seeing the big picture. Actually, you are not seeing the big picture. Iraq is a military dicatorship where the cadre in power rules through military power and terror. This just isn't Saddam Hussein, he and the army is making a choice to let his people starve rather than join the civilized world.

The link with the statistics on the "malnutrition" show the consequences of Iraq's attempts to conquer its neighbours. The Gulf War resulted in the destruction of much of the infrastructure in the country. Iraq started the Gulf War. They also starved and used chemical weapons on the Kurds and the people in the south of Iraq. Iraq has refused to allow the world to inspect their country to ensure that they are not continuing to develop and keep weapons of mass destruction. The evil men in power are making a deliberate choice to starve their own people in order to hold onto power. That is not the choice of the rest of the world, that is Iraq's choice.

There is pretty good evidence that, even with the sanctions, Iraq has sufficient funds to expand their military power. If full trade was restored, this ability would be maginfied beyond all control. Anyone who cares about freedom and the welfare of the Iraqi people would not be calling for the listing of the sanctions.

Michael

 

[Spagina]

Maetryx, which is why it pisses me off when I see these news reports that 5 Afghan civilians may have died from a bomb. 60 years ago during WWII, we would wipe out entire sections of a city to get to one structure, resulting in massive civilian life lost. Now we have bombs that have the liklihood of killing just a few civilians if it's off-target and we don't have to carpet bomb cities anymore to get to our objectives. Now we got to a point where we bicker and moan, cry for the bombing to stop when one or two die. It doesn't make sense to me, this is war. America probably now has the best military when it comes to keeping civilians out of harm's way. If we were still using WWII era bombers with their unguided bombs, the amount dead in Afghanistan would be in the 4-5 digit range.

On the other debates though, I won't even touch the Iraq debate except to say that we need to grow a set of balls and remove Saddam Hussein from power. I'm not going comment on the trade embargo since I will be flamed to kingdom-come for it by the Saddam sympathizers.

 

[Dually]

<< Iraq has an embargo because of hussein, not the West. He screwed up and is now paying the price. Don't blame us for his peoples' suffering. Saddam is to blame. I'm guessing you're either an Arab or an arab apologist. You obviously don't see the whole picture. Looks like someone needs to take a history lesson. >>

z

I hope you see how dumb your logic is. Iraq is a total dictatorship and his people have no control and if they try anything they die by his orders. He has a big secret police force. So hurting his people because of him when they hate him and have no say is totally bad logic.

 

[UltraQuiet]

<< It would be alot harder than the current situation. But what is the long term goal with the embargo? What does Saddam have to do to end the embargo? >>



The long term goal of the embargo is to ensure that this idiot doesn't have weapons of mass destruction. He has to destroy the ones he has now, verified by UN inspectors and he is not allowed to develop any more. It is very simple.



<< I´m sorry that you still dont see a direct link between those deaths and the embargo. >>



I'm sorry you don't see that Saddam has a choice and he is choosing to let his people die.