|
Message |
| Posted By: |
UT |
| Date: |
15-Apr-2003-17:24:00 |
| Subject: |
Just another post about the war...NOT |
The cyberforum I've been a member of the longest is the Bruce Cockburn mailing list, because I love the man's music, but also because I love the people there. We got yer Christians, we got yer atheists, we got yer token Buddhists, we got cynics and we got blissninnies. And they someone all seem to get along with a minimum of flamage. Go figure.
The post below showed up today, a dialogue between a UK Bruce fan I've never met but who is an expert on war and the history of war and a Toronto Bruce fan I have met, who managed to write one of the best documents on Iraq, the causes of the suffering of its people, and the potential effects of this war in terms of even more suffering that I have ever read. A little background on the author: Sheila is a housewife in maybe her early fifties, a tad overweight, who has home-schooled her kids and usually sticks to posting funny stuff. Here she outdid herself:
>Saddam is a nasty, murderous dictator. He commands a vast internal
>security apparatus that is killing his own people. I have many
>friends at work who are active in the antiwar movement, and they
>agree that Saddam is an offence against humanity. While WMD are
>currently in short supply his secret police torture chambers are in
>abundant supply. As we chat here, Iraqis are coming forward to show
>the scars they have suffered by mealy being suspected of crimes
>against the state.
It is posts like this that only make my anti-war position stronger.
You have made me go back over the info I have compiled about Iraq and
here are some things I think people should bear in mind before going
off the deep end about Saddam Hussein's evil doings. Imho, there is
more than enough evil on both sides of this coin to keep the Devil
happy for eternity.
Before economic sanctions made Iraq one of the poorest of the poor
countries, that is previous to 1990 and despite the Iran/Iraq war and
the fact that Iraq had been under the rule of Saddam Hussein for 11
yrs., Iraq was one of the most prosperous countries in the Middle
East. On average, Iraqi citizens enjoyed good food (most eating on
average 3,372 calories/day compared to the minimum of 2,100
recommended); 95% adult literacy (Iraq won the UNESCO prize for
literacy three years running); 92% had access to safe, clean water;
93% had access to a medical clinic or hospital; education and welfare
were free with Iraqi's welfare system being one of the most
comprehensive and generous in the Arab world. Iraqi's aid programme
was generous and a source of pride to the Iraqi people. They were
also proud of the role they played in the power balance of the Middle
East. Economic rights were a priority, however civil liberties were
not. The current poverty in Iraq was not due to Husseins "murderous
ways" but a direct, and evil, result of UN sanctions.
After the Iran-Iraq war there were several things that could have
been done to avoid the situation that has occured today. Once it was
discovered that Hussein had gassed the Kurds, a resolution was
drafted and put before the US congress. It was called something like
The Genocide Prevention Bill. It passed congress within 24 hrs. The
main point of the bill was that the US would stop all aid, trade and
the selling of arms to Iraq. It was vetoed by Reagan because he felt
it would punish American companies unfairly. Indeed, trade between
the two countries increased over the next year. Despite warnings
from the Pentagon, the US sold helicopters to Hussein justifying it
by saying they would be used as crop dusters, and that the
helicopters could not be modified for military use and then acted
horrified when the helicopters were fitted with guns and used to
straif the Kurdish rebellions. The US encouraged the Kurds to rebel
against Hussein's regime and then abandoned them. As if that wasn't
enough, no one intervened when Iraq moved tanks into the areas where
the rebellions occured in spite of that being a direct violation of
the ceasefire. The Kurds, justifiably, felt not only abandoned by
the US, and the UN but victimized. Had the Kurdish rebellion had the
full backing of the US, Hussein would have been ousted and we
wouldn't be having this discussion. Hence, all the stuff that
happened in the past is material and valid. Because Hussein saw that
no one intervened and that the West and Europe largely did nothing to
curb him, he took the bull by the horns and kept up his evil ways,
which is why his is still the "evil dictator" everyone calls him.
Why during the Iran-Iraq war did Rumsfeld make a trip to Iraq to talk
to Hussein? It wasn't peace talks, it was to win Hussein's approval
for a $2-billion oil pipeline to be built by Bechtel, running from
the Euphrates oilfields in southern Iraq westward to Jordan and the
Gulf of Aqaba. All of this is relevant to the war today because it
has all the same players - Rumsfeld, Cheney, Wolfowitz - who were all
instrumental in keeping Hussein in power at a time when it would have
been easy to dispose of him or to prevent him from ever becoming a
threat to anything other than the mice in his house.
Had the UN drafted a document equivalent to the Marshall Plan at the
end of the Iran-Iraq conflict; and had a total ban on the sale of
weapons to Iraq been implemented (this would have been easy since the
five permanent members of the UN were the ones selling them) Hussein
would never have had the opportunity to keep up his evil ways. Of
course this is simplistic but it would have been a good place to
start.
>going on for the last 3 weeks. They do seem to be protecting
>something really, really important;
That whole area, that is the area around H2 and H3 was under
coalition control as of Apr. 3/03. It was probably before that but I
don't have the info handy, I'm just looking at the date on the
newspaper clipping I have in front of me. There could be tough
resistance in pockets around those airfields, I don't know. But it
simply does not make sense to me that they would be fighting to
*protect* WMD's instead of using them. If Hussein or anyone loyal to
him are as crazy as they are made out to be then the only logical
thing for them to do would be to unleash everything they have at
their disposal.
To argue this war on moral grounds is specious at best. You can't
argue that Hussein is an evil man today and ignore the other 18 or 20
yrs. he's been in power, he was just as evil then. Also to try to
say that was then, this is now you would also have to say that the
events of WWI had no direct bearing on the events of WWII. History
is not made in a vacuum. All events have a direct bearing on other
events, just as this Iraq war will have a direct affect on the events
that take place next.
The problem is that there is not one country who can claim moral
highground. Every country has a dirty little secret, whether it was
murdering the citizens of India when it was "the Jewel in the Crown";
murdering students on the lawn of a university; murdering natives at
a barricade; oppressing the native population and refusing to honour
native land claims; oppressing large segments of the population
because they are the wrong colour, the wrong gender or simply because
they are single mothers or poor; the selling of munitions and
biological weapons to an "evil dictator". We are all responsible for
Hussein, because we ignored the situation when it suited us. Not
only did we ignore him, we rewarded him. Saddam Hussein today is the
same one who murdered the Kurds 12 yrs. ago, and the same Hussein who
denied his country civil liberties, and murdered dissenters, all the
while making it prosperous. So if his actions today are evil then
they were also evil 5, 10, 15 yrs. ago.
Imho, the true evil is hidden in the 320-900 tonnes of depleted
uranium left behind after the first Gulf War. It is the rise in
birth deformities starting in 1992, doctors seeing some deformities
that were so grotestque and unusual that they expected to only see
them in textbooks or maybe once in a lifetime. In Basra (that's
right, the place that the British soldiers are trying to restore
order to), radiation levels in plants and animals was *84* times that
recommended by WHO. *****The following describes graphically some
birth defects found in the babies of Basra, if you are the least bit
squeamish don't read***** Babies were born with no eyes, brains,
limbs, genitalia, internal organs on the outside of their bodies.
The increase of cancer rates in Iraq rose 700% between 1991 and 1994.
It was estimated in 1999 that if the cancer rate continued to climb
44% of the population would be affected within 10 years. Cancer
medication was on the list of sanctioned medical materials because it
contained minute traces of radiation. This was all before the
thousands of bombs coated with depleted uranium were dropped this
time around. A little fact that everyone wants to ignore is that
sanctions and the effects of radiation poisoning from the depleted
uranium will kill far more Iraqi's than Hussein did in his whole evil
reign. In fact they will have killed more Iraqi's than Hitler killed
Jews. The saddest part of it all is that long after Hussein is but a
memory, the Iraqi people will still be suffering, and dying, from the
effects of radiation.
As of 1999, "in all about 1/3rd of the US veterans deployed in the
Gulf war sought help from the Veteran's Administration; in Britain
8,000 of the 29,000 troops are ill and over 400 have died" (Armed
Forces Minister Lord Gilbert) When Amy West, the wife of a Gulf War
veteran, gave birth to a new daughter who was born with a rare lung
condition she set out to discover how many other birth defects there
were, out of 251 new babies born to veterans, 67% had congenital
abnormalities, missing ears, eyes, fingers, or with severe blood
disorders. In August of 1996 the UN Sub-Commission on Human Rights
had designated depleted uranium a WMD along with napalm, fuel
airbombs, and cluster bombs. Yet, here we find out that cluster
bombs and weapons coated with depleted uranium are still being used
in this war.
Think about how many of your soldiers are going to die or become
fathers/mothers to children with birth defects. Think about how that
is going to strain your health care system. Think about the cost, as
insensitive as this sounds, of caring for these children. Do *you*
want to go to Iraq to help rebuild it knowing that you will be
exposed to radiation levels that are off the Richter scale?
Yet we continue to call Hussein evil and paint ourselves as morally
superior, the guys in the white hats, the do gooders, the
"liberators." The danger with playing at being God is that the Devil
has a nasty habit of jumping up and biting you on the butt.
We can't call Hussein's actions evil if we ignore the evil that we
have dropped on the Iraqi people in the form of depleted uranium; or
if we ignore the evil that sanctions have imposed; or if we ignore
the plight of our own veterans suffering from "Gulf War Syndrome"; or
if we ignore the evil we perpetrated on the people of Rwanda; or if
we ignore the suffering of the people in Tibet, or China, or, or, or.
I am not a Hussein supporter, I supported Reagan's bombing of Libya,
and I supported the first Gulf War but I just find I cannot stomach
any more of the rhetoric being flung around about how "evil" Hussein
is. The whole damn lot is evil, and as far as history goes Hussein
won't even be a blip on its radar screen 100 yrs. from now, but we
will still be fighting "evil dictators".
You can tell me I'm arguing semantics or being nit-picky if you like,
Rob, you can even tell me that all of this is invalid, it has no
bearing on what is happening today but to ignore how all of this is
inter-related is to ignore most of history. If we ignore history we
will repeat it. Who said that we ignore the past to our own peril?
If you ask how I can be opposed to Hussein yet still see the good I
will tell you that I can be anti-Bush but not anti-American; I can be
anti-hockey without being anti-Canadian; I can be anti-Chretien but
not anti-Liberal; I can be anti-Blair but not anti-British; I can
dislike a person but still admire them. The fact of the matter is
that nothing is ever black and white, ever. To say that sometimes
it's as simple as we-good, they-bad is tantamount to sticking your
fingers in your ears and shouting, "I can't hear you." Imho, we have
to look at both sides, the good and the evil in order to understand
not only the events in Iraq but the events that are now taking shape
elsewhere. The war in Syria (ooops, hasn't started yet, has it) will
be fought with the same rhetoric that they used to justify the
invasion of Iraq.
"They have weapons...they are abetting terrorism...they are hiding
Hussein..." "The reason we didn't find any WMD's in Iraq was that
they were moved to Syria and Iran." These are all the things that
are going to fall glibly from the mouths of those in the White House.
Syria, like Iraq, will be an easy target, Iran not so easy. But,
hey, what does that matter as long as it keeps them in the White
House and deflects attention away from the foundering economy, or the
tax cuts for the rich. Whatever happened to Enron, btw?
My anti-war stance was/is not an indication that I support Hussein
but more my opposition to corporate greed, Pax America, and the
dumbing down of the people of the world. As Chretien understands,
once you remove one regime, who is next?
>>>>> My view is that this year they would have undoubtedly killed
>>>>>more civilians than this war has killed so far in 3 weeks of
>>>>>fighting.
Between 1989 and 1998 the estimated number of deaths that were
attributable to embargo-related causes was 1,060,960, - 416,860
were under 5. (Kamil Mahdi-Rehabilitation prospects for the Iraqi
economy)
Here are some interesting things to think about:
the % increase in the wealth gap between the top 10% of American
families with the highest incomes and the 20% of families with the
lowest incomes between 1998 and 2001 was 70%
by 2020 the estimated percentage of crude oil that will come from the
Persian Gulf is 54-67%
percentage of the world's population living in the US - 6%
Percentage of the world's energy resources used in the US - 30%
Iraq is ranked 2nd in proven oil reserves
the percentage of news stories between Sept. 14, 2002 and Feb. 7,
2002 that aired on NBC, ABC and CBS that originated directly from the
White House, Pentagon or State Department - 92%
the percentage of Americans who rely on television as their first
source of news during the war in Iraq - 89%
as of April 5/03, the percentage of US television viewers who said
they wanted a return to entertainment programming - 83%
the entire Iraqi economy = 2% of the annual US defense budget; Iraq's
GDP=$5.7 billion, down from $60 billion before the Gulf War (UN
Report on Current Humanitarian Situation in Iraq);
during the Gulf War the success rate of the Tomahawk cruise missile
was reported at 98%, after the war ended the Pentagon's estimated
success rate was 10%
during the Gulf War the estimated success rate of the Patriot missile
in intercepting Scud's was 100%, after the war the Israeli Defence
Minister estimated the success rate at 0%
one Tomahawk cruise missile costs approx. $750,000, as of April 5/03,
725 had been used
the estimated cost of rebuilding Iraq - $100 billion
the US will spend approx. $7.4 billion on missile defence research
and development this year
the number of times Osama bin Laden was mentioned in international
media between Sept. 11/01 and Sept. 11/02 - 236,202
the number of times Osama bin Laden's name was mentioned from Sept.
11/02 until today - 57,667
there are 16,000 inactive military ranges in the US that have
unexploded munitions that pose a serious environmental hazard
the percentage of weapons entering the global market that come from
American firms - 50%
the percentage of the US military spending that would provide the
global population with basic necessities - 10%
The percentage of Americans who support military action against any
country believed to be linked to 9/11 terrorist attacks, even if
innocent civilians are killed - 77%
estimated global military spending in 2002 - $850 Billion; approx.
50% spent by the US; .00015 spent by Iraq
estimated increase in spending on US national defence between 2000
and 2007 - 50%
the number of French products and companies suggested for boycott on
several web sites - 400
the number of times France used its veto in UN history - 18
the number of times the US has used its veto - 76
the number of American historians who signed a petition last year
demanding the Bush administration respect the US Constitution with
respect to the declaration of war - 1,200
The number of "hits" on the Iraq Body Count web site since the war
began - 1.5 million
the percentage of vistors to the Iraq Body Count web site that were
from the US - 52%
(statistics courtesy of the Toronto Star, who used the following as
their sources: US Department of Defence, New York Times, Opinion
Dynamics Corporation, Factiva Database, Leger Marketing, Center for
Media and Public Affairs, Medact, Pentagon, ZNet, US Surgeon General,
National Geographic, Environmental Protection Agency, UN, WHO,
National Energy Policy, Colorado Campaign for Middle East Peace,
Iraqi Body Count, Advertising Age, The Pew Research Center,
Congressional Budget Office, BBC News, Washington Post, Amnesty
International)
Cheers,
Sheila Wujek
|
|
Responses |
- No responses have been posted -
|
The messages posted hear are those of the specific individual and may not represent the policies of Lila Publishing, the ideas of any other member of this bulletin board community or the teachings of Dr. Frederick Lenz. All copyrights are maintained by respective contributors and may not be reused without permission. By posting on this board you grant Lila Publishing a non-exclusive royalty free license under your copyright to use, store, display and reproduce your messages in whole or in part. All site assets, including these Perl scripts copyright © 1999-2002 Lila Publishing. These Perl scripts may not be directly linked to.
|
Communication Center - Version 3.50
© 1999-2002 Lila Publishing
|
