A fairy tale that will warm the heart...

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
I posted this as a response on page 8 or so on an unrelated string. But I think this response deserves its own thread. The title above is sarcastic. This thread is about the Iraq war. What people believe about this war resembles a fairy tale more than reality. For example:

...Here we have the US, mired in debt and a sense of international obligation...

The US invaded Iraq out of a sense of international obligation??? Now that's hilarious.

Invading the Sudan to end the ethnic cleansing in the Darfur region would be an example of international obligation.

Back in 2002/2003, when the US was priming us for invading Iraq because of their non-existant WMDs, non-existant links to terrorist organizations and Iraq's humanitarian problems (resulting from American imposed economic sanctions until Iraq cooperated and produced its non-existant WMDs) a civil war was raging in the Democratic Republic of Congo. While the news was spoon feeding us stories about Iraq's atrocities during the 1980's (while Iraq was an American allie and the US was defending Iraq's atrocities at the UN), the DRC civil war had claimed its 3 millionth victim.

Since you obviously believe fairy tales, I'm going to share one with you.

Once upon a time there was town which had an apartment building and a jewelry store. One day, a fire broke out in the apartment building. The community leaders knew about the fire but did nothing because it was in a poor neighborhood. Instead the community leaders focused on the rich owner of the jewelry store. The leaders told stories about the owner's possession of illegal automatic weapons and links to the mafia. As the leaders told the community that that the evil owner was plotting to murder them as they slept, people in the apartment building were burning and jumping out windows. A few people in the community tried to point out that the apartment building fire was a more serious problem, but they were ignored. A few people demanded proof that the jewlery store owner actually possessed illegal firearms and links to the mafia before taking action against the owner, but their demands were drowned out by the majority who demand the evil jewelry store owner prove he didn't possess illegal arms and links to the mafia. Since proving a negative is a logical impossibility, the leaders were able to spin a lack of evidence to look like evidence of guilt. Most of the people never caught on that proving a negative is a logical impossibility and believed in the owner's guilt despite a lack of proof. Instead they demanded their leaders send the firemen and police into the jewelry store and lynch the evil owner.

As the firemen used their axes to break into the store and police traded shots with the owner, some jewelry store employees were inadvertently hacked and others were inadvertently shot. During the confusion, some employees stole jewelry and raped fellow employees. Eventually the firemen broke into the store and the police captured the owner, but they did nothing to stop the employees stealing and raping. Instead they began beating store employees as the community leaders helped themselves to the rest of the contents of the jewelry store.

Over time, some of the people began to notice their leaders wearing jewelry from the store. They became more become skeptical of their leaders' motivations and their original claims about the owner. These people demanded proof. All the leaders could prove was the owner used to own illegal weapons (confiscated years ago). But the leaders were able to describe legal firearms in a way to make them sound like illegal firearms. The leaders were never able to prove the owner had links to the mafia, but they did find evidence that once a jewelry store employee ate in the same restaurant as a member of the mafia. The leaders claimed that it didn't matter that everything they said previously was based on false information (lies). The owner deserved to be lynched because he was a bad man. He treated his employees poorly. (At least that was true, but what the leaders didn't say was that the owner treated his employees about the same as other store owners in the neighborhood, but those owners weren't a problem because they made regular campaign contributions to the leaders' re-election campaigns.) The leaders said they had acted out of a sense of community obligation.

Since most people are gullible, most believed their leaders yet again, despite overwhelming evidence that their leaders had lied and were lying again. The majority of the community who believed their leaders' explanations (lies) re-elected them.

That brings us to today. That apartment building fire? It eventually burned itself out, but its still smoldering. The jewelry store? As a result of the damage caused while apprehending the jewelry store owner, a new fire has broke out in the ruins. Firemen and police try their best to extinguish it, but the fire is now completely out of control, threatening to engulf the neighborhood or maybe even the entire community.

But majority of the community feels good about itself because they lynched a bad man and re-elected leaders who act out of a sense of community obligation. A happy ending... Because what's important isn't truth or justice, but feeling good about ourselves.

The End... or maybe the beginning... actually I don't think this story has a ending, oh wait a minute, it ends when the fire burns the town to the ground... But at least it leaves us all with a warm feeling...
 

Sparrow

Council Member
Nov 12, 2006
1,202
23
38
Quebec
No you are sadly not wrong. This is unfortunately happening every day. People as a whole are gullible and so niave that it is scary. But this is the way to NWO and they sure know how to work it. The only way to fight this is to speak out, and of course some people will say we are crazy. Posting the above you have joined the crazy people's club and here is another member. The comments to this post will be interesting to read.
 

Colpy

Hall of Fame Member
Nov 5, 2005
21,887
847
113
69
Saint John, N.B.
I posted this as a response on page 8 or so on an unrelated string. But I think this response deserves its own thread. The title above is sarcastic. This thread is about the Iraq war. What people believe about this war resembles a fairy tale more than reality. For example:

The US invaded Iraq out of a sense of international obligation??? Now that's hilarious.

Invading the Sudan to end the ethnic cleansing in the Darfur region would be an example of international obligation.

Back in 2002/2003, when the US was priming us for invading Iraq because of their non-existant WMDs, non-existant links to terrorist organizations and Iraq's humanitarian problems (resulting from American imposed economic sanctions until Iraq cooperated and produced its non-existant WMDs) a civil war was raging in the Democratic Republic of Congo. While the news was spoon feeding us stories about Iraq's atrocities during the 1980's (while Iraq was an American allie and the US was defending Iraq's atrocities at the UN), the DRC civil war had claimed its 3 millionth victim.

Since you obviously believe fairy tales, I'm going to share one with you.

First of all, let's get one thing clear.......IF the Americans invaded the Sudan, the very SECOND the first set of American combat boots hit the ground, you and most of your cronies on these boards would be crying "Imperialist monsters!" "No blood for oil!" "Murderers".

You don't give a fiddler's damn about the people of Darfur, the Palestinians, the Lebanese, or the Iraqis. All you give a hoot about is your own lovely little structures of self-delusion..........anything that supports your already-reached conclusion that the Israelis are genocidal Nazis and the United States is the greatest evil on earth wins your approval......no fact or logic necessary.

You have forgotten a number of things:

1. The Americans are the people PUSHING for international intervention in the Sudan.........they are a little too busy elsewhere to take it all on themselves.

2. The old Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein was guilty of numerous acts of genocide, both against the Kurds, and against the Shia.

3. The Americans HAVE acted on "international obligation" before.......in Somalia and kosovo just off the top of my head, and where did it get them? It certainly gained them no credit.

4. Any suffering in Iraq betweem 1992 and 2003 can be laid solely at the feet of Saddam Hussein.......who (despite the sanctions) managed to build a couple of dozen palaces worth billions of dollars.......thanks to the corruption of the United Nations.

5. Many of the problems in Iraq now are the result not of American wickedness, but of American idealism. They expected the Iraqis to jump towards an open, democratic society, and they badly underestimated the strength of tribal hatred. They were literally not willing to continue a regime of oppression to keep the peace. Their mistake.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wallyj

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
1. The Americans are the people PUSHING for international intervention in the Sudan.........they are a little too busy elsewhere to take it all on themselves.

1.1 The Americans started this fire. That makes them responsible to clean it up. America's friends like Canada should pitch in and help clean up, but Canada should not try to put out the fire with gasoline. Canada should help bridge diplomatic gaps and eventually keep the peace, if this war ever gets to that point. Until then Canada should reserve its military. Canada is alrady overstretched fighting the real war in Afghanistan where there isn't any oil.

2. The old Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein was guilty of numerous acts of genocide, both against the Kurds, and against the Shia.

2.1 The time to act against genocide is at the time it happened. Using this as a reason to justify seizing control of a country's oil wealth makes it a diversion to obscure the truth, not a reason.

3. The Americans HAVE acted on "international obligation" before.......in Somalia and kosovo just off the top of my head, and where did it get them? It certainly gained them no credit.

3.1 Yes, but that was in the good old days before the Bush doctrine. Why didn't the Americans elect Al Gore???

4. Any suffering in Iraq betweem 1992 and 2003 can be laid solely at the feet of Saddam Hussein.......who (despite the sanctions) managed to build a couple of dozen palaces worth billions of dollars.......thanks to the corruption of the United Nations.

4.1 There's lots of blame to go around. From 1991-1996 Hussein played the hide the weapons game. But the people on UNSCOM were clever and its pretty to hard to hide industrial sized buildings. By 1996 UNSCOM had found pretty much everything. The the US began the lets move the goalposts game. You hit that, well now you have to hit this... By 1998, it was common knowledge at the UN that Iraq had met the requirements for lifting the sanctions, yet the US kept threatening its veto. But the UN wasn't pushing too hard to lift the sanctions despite the millions of people suffering daily. The diplomats were too busy profitting from the situation. Surprisingly negotiations to lift the ban dragged on as some people suffered and some people got wealthy. By the end of 1998 Iraq noticed UNSCOM had stopped looking for WMDs which didn't exist and had been infiltrated with spies. Their complaints were ignored, so they stopped cooperating. The US and UK used that as an opportunity to use the fresh intelligence from their UNSCOM spies to take out Hussein's conventional weapon systems. The warning was given to UNSCOM and they left. The US/UK bombed Iraq from one end to the other killing hundreds of Iraqis. Iraq never let UNSCOM back in. The UN, the American/UK governments and the people on UNSCOM all played a part in thoroughly discrediting the disarmament process so that it cannot be used against North Korea or Iran. Those leaders might think it was just an attempt to de-claw them and infiltrate their country with spies.


5. Many of the problems in Iraq now are the result not of American wickedness, but of American idealism. They expected the Iraqis to jump towards an open, democratic society, and they badly underestimated the strength of tribal hatred. They were literally not willing to continue a regime of oppression to keep the peace. Their mistake.

Americans believed they could sell $hit as Shinola. They were right! Most people can't tell the difference.

I can’t see a difference, can you see a difference?

I went to Timmy’s to get a coffee this morning, and needed something to tide me over until brunch. There are signs all over for their yogurt and berries, so I got one. I love berries, and I like yogurt, and I thought the odds of anyone being able to **** that combo up were pretty slim.

Slim they may be, but the company that packages this shiite came through with flying colours today in the “we can **** something simple up, just watch us” category. In the pic above, the inset is how the ads and the corporate website portray their breakfast snack. Can you see a difference? I can’t see a difference. Apparently, neither could anyone at Tim Horton’s....

the rest:

The yogurt was a sickly-sweet vanilla, and the one word I can think of to use for the “berries” was “glop”. As you can see, the “berries” look kind of like someone took a mouse, turned it inside out, and dropped it into a cup of fluff. This glop has no texture, and a vague raspberry taste combined with a very strong freezer burn taste. Yum! The “blueberries” were like chewing on tripe - they were dried out husks with a distinct leathery texture (think unsweetened, stale raisins). Nasty, nasty, nasty.

http://kev.needham.ca/?p=583
 
Last edited:

#juan

Hall of Fame Member
Aug 30, 2005
18,326
119
63
Colpy wrote:

You have forgotten a number of things:

1. The Americans are the people PUSHING for international intervention in the Sudan.........they are a little too busy elsewhere to take it all on themselves.
If they are so busy, maybe they should have stayed out of Iraq.

2. The old Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein was guilty of numerous acts of genocide, both against the Kurds, and against the Shia.
Saddam would not have been as bad as he was, if it hadn't been for all the help he got from America and others.

3. The Americans HAVE acted on "international obligation" before.......in Somalia and kosovo just off the top of my head, and where did it get them? It certainly gained them no credit.
Why should the Americans get credit for doing something dictated by "International obligation"?

4. Any suffering in Iraq betweem 1992 and 2003 can be laid solely at the feet of Saddam Hussein.......who (despite the sanctions) managed to build a couple of dozen palaces worth billions of dollars.......thanks to the corruption of the United Nations.
That is simply not true. Sure he built palaces, but the problem was the things he couldn't buy because of the sanctions. Funny you should talk about the corruption of the UN, when it was the U.S. navy that ran the Food for Oil program.

5. Many of the problems in Iraq now are the result not of American wickedness, but of American idealism. They expected the Iraqis to jump towards an open, democratic society, and they badly underestimated the strength of tribal hatred. They were literally not willing to continue a regime of oppression to keep the peace. Their mistake.
Did you expect the Iraqis to love the coalition for all the bombing and killing that was a big part of this so called "liberation"? Should the Iraqis have embraced the puppet government? Why should they trust any Americans? After all it was the Americans who gave them Saddam Hussein.
 

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
Saddam would not have been as bad as he was, if it hadn't been for all the help he got from America and others.
Still waiting for some proof of this???
Why should the Americans get credit for doing something dictated by "International obligation"?
Well geeze, you find it all to easy to criticize, why not give somebody some kudos when it is deserved. When you were raising your kids, it was their obligation to go to school and apply themselves, but you still gave them kudos when they did what they were obliged to do, did you not?
That is simply not true. Sure he built palaces, but the problem was the things he couldn't buy because of the sanctions.
Myth: The OFFP did not achieve its humanitarian goals.

Fact: In fact, the OFFP enabled the importation of enough food to feed all 27 million Iraqis. During its existence, the average daily caloric intake of the people of Iraq increased 83 percent, from 1,200 kilocalories to 2,200 kilocalories per person per day. In addition, malnutrition rates in 2002 in the central and southern part of the country were half those in 1996 among children under the age of five; in the three northern governorates, chronic malnutrition decreased 56 percent.

According to an article in the November 21, 2004 edition of The Washington Post:
"International aid efforts and the U.N. oil-for-food program helped reduce the ruinous impact of sanctions, and the rate of acute malnutrition among the youngest Iraqis gradually dropped from a peak of 11 percent in 1996 to 4 percent in 2002."
This same article documented that malnutrition rates in Iraq have increased substantially since the end of the Oil-for-Food Program, from 4% to 7.7%.
Between 1997 and 2002, the capacity to undertake major surgeries increased by 40% and laboratory investigations increased by 25% in the center and south of Iraq. Communicable diseases, including cholera, malaria, measles, mumps, meningitis and tuberculosis were reduced in the center/south of Iraq during this period. As of May 29, 2003, there had been no cases of polio in Iraq for more than three years. In the three northern governorates, cholera was eradicated and the incidence of malaria reduced to the 1991 level. Vaccinations reduced measles morbidity considerably.
Preliminary findings indicate that between 1996 and 2002 there was a reduction in the number of underweight children from 23% to 10%; chronic malnutrition decreased from 32% to 24%; and acute malnutrition dropped from 11% to 5.4%. There were also significant improvements made to transportation, water and sanitation treatment facilities, agriculture, telecommunications and education among other infrastructure benefits.
{quote=#juan;771704]

Funny you should talk about the corruption of the UN, when it was the U.S. navy that ran the Food for Oil program.
[/quote]
Myth: Oil smuggling was just one of many problems under the OFFP that the UN failed to prevent.

Fact: The UN had neither the authority nor the resources to prevent smuggling. The UN Security Council oversaw the OFFP, and the UN Secretariat's Office of the Iraq Program (OIP) implemented the Council's work on the ground in Iraq. Specifically, it was the role of the Security Council's 661 Committee to monitor all contracts awarded under the OFFP (all members of the UN Security Council, including the U.S., were members of the 661 Committee). The task of policing oil smuggling fell to the Multinational Interception Force (MIF) - which was led by and predominantly made up of the Fifth Fleet of the U.S. Navy.
The MIF was created following the imposition of sanctions in 1990 and was responsible for preventing smuggling from and into Iraq via the Gulf region. Copies of waivers issued by both the current Bush Administration and the Clinton Administration show that the U.S. was aware that Iraq was trading oil with its neighbors, in violation of the UN sanctions, as far back as 1991. Many observers believe successive U.S. administrations allowed the illegal oil trades to continue because stopping them could endanger the support of Iraq's neighbors for UN sanctions.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Colpy wrote:

You have obviously ignored a few things.

1. The Americans are the people PUSHING for international intervention in the Sudan.........they are a little too busy elsewhere to take it all on themselves.
Sudan has large reserves of oil, natural gas, high grade uranium and huge copper deposites. The U.S. is directly responsible for the trouble, it has funded the rebels in southern Sudan for two decades as well as trained and supplied other combatants in the country. Greed is the reason for thier interest.

2. The old Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein was guilty of numerous acts of genocide, both against the Kurds, and against the Shia.
Saddam was first employed by the CIA in the failed coup of 1958.

3. The Americans HAVE acted on "international obligation" before.......in Somalia and kosovo just off the top of my head, and where did it get them? It certainly gained them no credit.
No such thing as international obligation exists as far as the United States is concerned. Witness the treatys they have ignored or refused to sign, land mines, chemical and biological weapon etc:

4. Any suffering in Iraq betweem 1992 and 2003 can be laid solely at the feet of Saddam Hussein.......who (despite the sanctions) managed to build a couple of dozen palaces worth billions of dollars.......thanks to the corruption of the United Nations.
During this period because of the sanctions the lives of millions of Iraqis were destroyed, hundreds of thousands of men women and especially children were murdered by those sanctions and an entire generation was crippled by disease and internal displacement.

5. Many of the problems in Iraq now are the result not of American wickedness, but of American idealism. They expected the Iraqis to jump towards an open, democratic society, and they badly underestimated the strength of tribal hatred. They were literally not willing to continue a regime of oppression to keep the peace. Their mistake.
They expected nothing of the sort, that was fed to the dummys who swallowed it whole, many of those same dummys still confuse the international right and law of armed resistance with the much inflated issue of tribal hatred. The brutal occupation and theft of resources coupled with dayly obliteration represents the highest form of technocratic oppression. The hydro-carbon junkies don't care if every last Iraqis dies ,:wave:as long as the oil is safe the mission will be successful.
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Colpy wrote: the black parts



1. The Americans are the people PUSHING for international intervention in the Sudan.........they are a little too busy elsewhere to take it all on themselves.
Sudan has large reserves of oil, natural gas, high grade uranium and huge copper deposites. The U.S. is directly responsible for the trouble, it has funded the rebels in southern Sudan for two decades as well as trained and supplied other combatants in the country. Greed is the reason for thier interest.

2. The old Iraqi government of Saddam Hussein was guilty of numerous acts of genocide, both against the Kurds, and against the Shia.
Saddam was first employed by the CIA in the failed coup of 1958.

3. The Americans HAVE acted on "international obligation" before.......in Somalia and kosovo just off the top of my head, and where did it get them? It certainly gained them no credit.
No such thing as international obligation exists as far as the United States is concerned. Witness the treatys they have ignored or refused to sign, land mines, chemical and biological weapon etc:

4. Any suffering in Iraq betweem 1992 and 2003 can be laid solely at the feet of Saddam Hussein.......who (despite the sanctions) managed to build a couple of dozen palaces worth billions of dollars.......thanks to the corruption of the United Nations.
During this period because of the sanctions the lives of millions of Iraqis were destroyed, hundreds of thousands of men women and especially children were murdered by those sanctions and an entire generation was crippled by disease and internal displacement.

5. Many of the problems in Iraq now are the result not of American wickedness, but of American idealism. They expected the Iraqis to jump towards an open, democratic society, and they badly underestimated the strength of tribal hatred. They were literally not willing to continue a regime of oppression to keep the peace. Their mistake.
They expected nothing of the sort, that was fed to the dummys who swallowed it whole, many of those same dummys still confuse the international right and law of armed resistance with the much inflated issue of tribal hatred. The brutal occupation and theft of resources coupled with dayly obliteration represents the highest form of technocratic oppression. The hydro-carbon junkies don't care if every last Iraqis dies ,as long as the oil is safe the mission will be successful.:wave:
 
Last edited:

CDNBear

Custom Troll
Sep 24, 2006
43,839
207
63
Ontario
During this period because of the sanctions the lives of millions of Iraqis were destroyed, hundreds of thousands of men women and especially children were murdered by those sanctions and an entire generation was crippled by disease and internal displacement.
Myth: The OFFP did not achieve its humanitarian goals.

Fact: In fact, the OFFP enabled the importation of enough food to feed all 27 million Iraqis. During its existence, the average daily caloric intake of the people of Iraq increased 83 percent, from 1,200 kilocalories to 2,200 kilocalories per person per day. In addition, malnutrition rates in 2002 in the central and southern part of the country were half those in 1996 among children under the age of five; in the three northern governorates, chronic malnutrition decreased 56 percent.

According to an article in the November 21, 2004 edition of The Washington Post:
"International aid efforts and the U.N. oil-for-food program helped reduce the ruinous impact of sanctions, and the rate of acute malnutrition among the youngest Iraqis gradually dropped from a peak of 11 percent in 1996 to 4 percent in 2002."
This same article documented that malnutrition rates in Iraq have increased substantially since the end of the Oil-for-Food Program, from 4% to 7.7%.
Between 1997 and 2002, the capacity to undertake major surgeries increased by 40% and laboratory investigations increased by 25% in the center and south of Iraq. Communicable diseases, including cholera, malaria, measles, mumps, meningitis and tuberculosis were reduced in the center/south of Iraq during this period. As of May 29, 2003, there had been no cases of polio in Iraq for more than three years. In the three northern governorates, cholera was eradicated and the incidence of malaria reduced to the 1991 level. Vaccinations reduced measles morbidity considerably.
Preliminary findings indicate that between 1996 and 2002 there was a reduction in the number of underweight children from 23% to 10%; chronic malnutrition decreased from 32% to 24%; and acute malnutrition dropped from 11% to 5.4%. There were also significant improvements made to transportation, water and sanitation treatment facilities, agriculture, telecommunications and education among other infrastructure benefits.
http://www.oilforfoodfacts.org/
 

darkbeaver

the universe is electric
Jan 26, 2006
41,035
201
63
RR1 Distopia 666 Discordia
Squeezed to death



[FONT=arial,helvetica,sans-serif]Half a million children have died in Iraq since UN sanctions were imposed - most enthusiastically by Britain and the US. Three UN officials have resigned in despair. Meanwhile, bombing of Iraq continues almost daily. John Pilger investigates[/FONT]

[FONT=Geneva,Arial,sans-serif] Saturday March 4, 2000
Guardian Unlimited


[/FONT] Wherever you go in Iraq's southern city of Basra, there is dust. It gets in your eyes and nose and throat. It swirls in school playgrounds and consumes children kicking a plastic ball. "It carries death," said Dr Jawad Al-Ali, a cancer specialist and member of Britain's Royal College of Physicians. "Our own studies indicate that more than 40 per cent of the population in this area will get cancer: in five years' time to begin with, then long afterwards. Most of my own family now have cancer, and we have no history of the disease. It has spread to the medical staff of this hospital. We don't know the precise source of the contamination, because we are not allowed to get the equipment to conduct a proper scientific survey, or even to test the excess level of radiation in our bodies. We suspect depleted uranium, which was used by the Americans and British in the Gulf War right across the southern battlefields."
Article continues

<a href="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/click.ng/Params.richmedia=yes&amp;spacedesc=mpu&amp;site=Guardian&amp;navsection=7625&amp;section=103425&amp;country=can&amp;rand=0522023"> <img src="http://ads.guardian.co.uk/image.ng/Params.richmedia=yes&amp;spacedesc=mpu&amp;site=Guardian&amp;navsection=7625&amp;section=103425&amp;country=can&amp;rand=0522023" width="300" height="250" border="0" alt="Advertisement"></a>

Under economic sanctions imposed by the United Nations Security Council almost 10 years ago, Iraq is denied equipment and expertise to clean up its contaminated battle-fields, as Kuwait was cleaned up. At the same time, the Sanctions Committee in New York, dominated by the Americans and British, has blocked or delayed a range of vital equipment, chemotherapy drugs and even pain-killers. "For us doctors," said Dr Al-Ali, "it is like torture. We see children die from the kind of cancers from which, given the right treatment, there is a good recovery rate." Three children died while I was there. Six other children died not far away on January 25, last year. An American missile hit Al Jumohria, a street in a poor residential area. Sixty-three people were injured, a number of them badly burned. "Collateral damage," said the Department of Defence in Washington. Britain and the United States are still bombing Iraq almost every day: it is the longest Anglo-American bombing campaign since the second world war, yet, with honourable exceptions, very little appears about it in the British media. Conducted under the cover of "no fly zones", which have no basis in intern


http://www.gaurdian.co.uk/weekend/story/o,3605,232986.html
 

Blackleaf

Hall of Fame Member
Oct 9, 2004
48,429
1,668
113
The Guardian is a stupid Left-Wing newspaper. It has hardly anyone working for it who is a white male.

And that's the only "intelligent" thing I can say about this topic, I'm afraid. That's because I'm not intelligent enough to talk about it intelligently.
 

earth_as_one

Time Out
Jan 5, 2006
7,933
53
48
From the American program 60 minutes:

Lesley Stahl on U.S. sanctions against Iraq: We have heard that a half million children have died. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?

Secretary of State Madeleine Albright: I think this is a very hard choice, but the price--we think the price is worth it.

--60 Minutes (5/12/96)....

http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1084

If the numbers were wrong, she would have challenged them.

In 1996, when Albright made this statement, Iraq no longer possessed a credible WMD threat. By 1998, UNSCOM and the UNSC knew Iraq had been more or less disarmed and there wasn't anything of significance left to find in Iraq.

Saddam raises the stakes as crisis deepens
Independent, The (London), Aug 6, 1998 by Patrick Cockburn in Baghdad

...Mr Butler said he was mystified by Baghdad's action when resolution of several issues was near. The inspectors were apparently close, in the areas of missiles and chemical weapons, to being able to declare that Iraq had complied with UN resolutions. "We were getting there. If this was a five-lap race, we were halfway into the fifth lap."...

http://www.findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qn4158/is_19980806/ai_n14168344

No mystery. The fifth lap had no finish line.

What Iraq was looking for were measurable attainable objectives which would end the sanctions. Instead all the UNSC told Iraq was that it must let UNSCOM go anywhere at any time and maybe one day the UNSC might lift the sanctions. Another problem was this:

...the United States used the U.N. weapons inspection program to spy on Iraq. Following a background report, Margaret Warner talks with Undersecretary of State Thomas Pickering about the charges.

http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/middle_east/jan-june99/pickering_1-11a.html

The line between legitimate WMD inspections and illegitimate spying became increasingly blurry. By 1998, UNSCOM had become a front for US/UK spying operations. Inspections were no longer about WMDs, but about identifying Iraqs conventional defenses and their command, communication and control structure. That was never part of the agreement and Iraq was right to demand changes.

Meanwhile millions of Iraqis died from easily treated diseases and malnutrition.

Iraqis blame sanctions for child deaths

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Hospitals battle with inadequate equipment[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]By Middle East Correspondent Jeremy Bowen [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]In Iraq's hospitals and slums, and in the homes of many impoverished, once prosperous, families, it is easy to see the human suffering behind child mortality figures released by the United Nations Children's Fund. Unicef says that children under five in Iraq are dying at more than twice the rate they were 10 years ago....[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/418625.stm[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Since 1996 when Albright made that statement that killing half a million Iraqi children was worth it, not a single credible WMD threat has been found in Iraq. I can understand why Iraq faced an arms embargo, but economic sanctions did nothing but kill Iraqis.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]In 2001, both Rice and Powell knew Iraq wasn't a credible WMD or conventional weapon threat:[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]http://www.thememoryhole.org/war/powell-no-wmd.htm [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Yet by 2002 they had comletely changed their tune. Iraq never changed. What changed is the US had already decided to invade Iraq and we were told fairy tales in order to prime us for the invasion.[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Goering was right:[/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
Herman Goering at the Nuremberg trials:
[/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Gilbert recorded Goering's observations that the common people can always be manipulated into supporting and fighting wars by their political leaders: [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]
[SIZE=-1]We got around to the subject of war again and I said that, contrary to his attitude, I did not think that the common people are very thankful for leaders who bring them war and destruction.



[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]"Why, of course, the people don't want war," Goering shrugged. "Why would some poor slob on a farm want to risk his life in a war when the best that he can get out of it is to come back to his farm in one piece. Naturally, the common people don't want war; neither in Russia nor in England nor in America, nor for that matter in Germany. That is understood. But, after all, it is the leaders of the country who determine the policy and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy or a fascist dictatorship or a Parliament or a Communist dictatorship." [/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]"There is one difference," I pointed out. "In a democracy the people have some say in the matter through their elected representatives, and in the United States only Congress can declare wars." [/FONT]

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]"Oh, that is all well and good, but, voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is tell them they are being attacked and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same way in any country."[/FONT]
http://www.snopes.com/quotes/goering.htm[/FONT][/SIZE]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica]

All these years later the sheeple are still just as gullible as they were back then...

Iran's invisible imaginary nuclear weapons for example... Its the same old, same old...
[/FONT]