Not a very smooth dodge of your previous position. Namely that the war will kill more than sanctions.
It still may.
Quote:
I think you overestimate world impact. Easy to be a doomsayer when you don't know anything substantial about the subject at hand.
And I think you underestimate it. So how does that make you right and me wrong? I'm certain the majority of Americans aren't as close minded as you. Your "I'm right, f*ck everyone else" attitude simply reflect the arrogance of the current U.S. regime.
Sanctions kill? Really? You mean, Saddam isn't a bad guy, it's the sanctions that are doing all the killing?
Sanctions kill. And Saddam kills.
They are not mutually exclusive.
Quote:
Wow. First you'll quote Iraq's opinion on the sanctions. Wow. Tell me, does this make ALL of Iraq's official positions valid for an argument? Because if we can use Iraq's official position to help support a point, well, I think all of your arguments aside from this one were just flushed down the crapper.
I never said they were right or that you should trust it, I merely said that's what they say. The UN released a report in 1995 that sanctions killed 500,000. I guess if you want to ignore that...
Quote:
Second, you quote an article that says this: "The US and UK governments made it clear early on that they would block any lifting of sanctions as long as Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein remains in power."
So, the Sanctions are killing civilians or are the US & UK responsible? No, of course the US isn't responsible, and I imagine since the UK is backing us in the war they're off the hook too.
Of course the US and UK are responsible. They are part of the UN that pushed for the sanctions.
You are willfully ignoring my posts, I said:
Saddam & the UN (including the US) are complicit in the sanctions slaughter.
You should try remedial reading courses. I'm surprised you haven't learned your lesson yet. Well, I'm not really surprised.
DMB:
Quote:
Likewise...Isn't that obvious?
Have I not said that the US has done many naughty things and that we are partly to blame for 12 years of slaughtering sanctions? Apparently I write that stuff in some code that you and bunge can't read. Here I was thinking it was in English the whole time...
Quote:
Yes, one favouring aid packages, wars of propaganda to correct hatred, freeing prisoners of conscience so that they can continue their work and linking human life. I opt for it.
Has Canada ever promoted a plan that would give freedom to the Iraqi people?
What in God's name does "freeing prisoners of conscience" mean?
It's no surprise that millions of people die off while the UN gums itself up in diplomatic doublespeak like that.
Quote:
It is an assertion of power that is intended to quell the opinion or ideaology of another set of people, which WILL be counter productive:Trade, image of collective/individual will suffer.
Yeah, we're trying to quell Saddam's idealogy of oppression, torture and political murder. We are BASTARDS!
satchmo:
Quote:
It still may.
All-right, I'll be keeping count.
Quote:
And I think you underestimate it. So how does that make you right and me wrong? I'm certain the majority of Americans aren't as close minded as you. Your "I'm right, f*ck everyone else" attitude simply reflect the arrogance of the current U.S. regime.
I'm not saying everyone else is wrong. I'm saying you've displayed a pretty astounding ignorance on the subject and therefore your opinion on what its impacts might be is, shall we say, lacking in authority.
I guess when you're among friends who also don't know anything about the actual situation such theoreticals are fine and dandy. But for those of us who have been studying this thing we have different guidelines, like truth and fact.
Saddam's failure to comply led to those deaths, not the sanctions (of the US or the UN).
We agree. I have no qualms about blaming Saddam. At worst the U.N. & the U.S. didn't react well enough to his failures. When I blame the U.S., it's only in opposition to those that are dumb enough to actually blame the sanctions. I'm showing the extreme opposite view from there point of view. Both are completely ridiculous.
But I will claim that if the sanctions themselves are to share any of the blame, the U.S. shares 1000 times as much as the sanctions themselves. Neither of the two are as bad as Saddam though.
Now Matsu, I need your help convincing the hawks that the sanctions didn't kill or I'll have to keep saying that the U.S. is more to blame than the sanctions. Or better stated, the U.S. is the cause for the failure of any part of the sanctions process that we could have controlled.
So bunge, I guess it's OK for Saddam to gas Kurds?
Of course not. I'm in favore of any action to stop genocide, be it Yugoslavia, Africa or the Mid East. The no-fly zones had put an end to any possible Kurdish genocide though (well, not including Turkey.)
Saddam & the UN (including the US) are complicit in the sanctions slaughter.
You should try remedial reading courses. I'm surprised you haven't learned your lesson yet. Well, I'm not really surprised.
You see, remedial reading courses can't stop you from blatantly lying though. You can write that 'Saddam & the UN (including the US) are complicit in the sanctions slaughter' as if they're equal partners, but that's a lie. I mean, you know it's a lie, but you have to support that position or your argument falls to pieces. So, you throw out a line like that with no support, no backing, no intelligence, and pretend that it's accurate.
That's a lie.
That's OK, I'll tell you it's a lie and you'll come back and tell me to reread it.
Your argument holds absolutely no water. Your argument has more holes than a Thai brothel.
So since we all know that the blame can't be equally shared among the U.N., the U.S. and Saddam, why don't you reformulate your argument and make an honest attempt at actually resolving an issue rather than protecting a point of view?
So since we all know that the blame can't be equally shared among the U.N., the U.S. and Saddam, why don't you reformulate your argument and make an honest attempt at actually resolving an issue rather than protecting a point of view?
That last post was one of the most empty exercises in destraction-rhetoric I've ever seen. That was blatant, excellent work.
Blame for the sanction slaughter is shared between Saddam and the UN (of which the US is an integral part). I suppose if you want to place the sanction blame on someone other than Saddam and the UN that's your business, I won't lose any sleep over your own self-delusion.
So I'll ask you:
Who is to blame for sanctions?
Do you think the sanctions are a bad thing?
Please answer those two questions.
Quote:
Do you blame the gun, or the one that shoots it? Do you blame the car, or the drunk driver?
I guess you're implying that the US is 1000 times more to blame than the UN because the US pushed sanctions for so long through the UN? Am I right in assuming that's what you're saying?
Your shrill anti-American idiocy is reaching new heights. It's really painful to read in a way but it's even more fun to give you more rope to hang yourself with.
That last post was one of the most empty exercises in destraction-rhetoric I've ever seen. That was blatant, excellent work.
As usual you can't formulate an argument so you droop into the ad hominem attacks. If it really was 'one of the most empty exercises in destraction-rhetoric [you]'ve ever seen', then cite why.
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
Blame for the sanction slaughter is shared between Saddam and the UN (of which the US is an integral part). I suppose if you want to place the sanction blame on someone other than Saddam and the UN that's your business, I won't lose any sleep over your own self-delusion.
What on earth are you talking about? I clearly stated in a post to Matsu who I feel is to blame and why. Why don't you read that post, then come back and edit yours because in the context of this thread it makes no sense.
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
So I'll ask you:
Who is to blame for sanctions?
Do you think the sanctions are a bad thing?
Please answer those two questions.
I have to tread carfully here, because you'll accuse me of avoiding the question if I answer to accurately. I think it's best to answer the questions together.
Who is to blame? That's a loaded question. The U.N. created the sanctions and I don't think they are a bad thing. Are they poorly implemented or poorly supported? Yes. That's the fault of the U.S. I'd say the U.N., but it's specifically the U.S. veto that's causing many of the problems. So technically it's the U.N.'s fault because the U.N. allows a U.S. veto, but realistically it's the U.S. veto that's caused a lot of hell.
Generally speaking, sanctions and inspections both are a better way to solve the problem than war. In practice, they weren't much better.
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
I guess you're implying that the US is 1000 times more to blame than the UN because the US pushed sanctions for so long through the UN? Am I right in assuming that's what you're saying?
The U.S. is 1000 times more to blame than sanctions. You use a blanket statement like 'sanctions kill'. I'm saying sanctions don't do anything. The implemention of the sanctions have wreaked havoc though. That has nothing to do with sanctions though.
Quote:
Originally posted by groverat
Your shrill anti-American idiocy is reaching new heights. It's really painful to read in a way but it's even more fun to give you more rope to hang yourself with.
Again, pull out the ad hominem attack. I couldn't care less, but if you're going to make a claim, support it. I'm anti-American? Show us all how. You can't of course, because I'm not. My shrill idiocy is so clear to you simply because even to someone of an average intelligence, Albert Einstein looked like a fool not a genius.
Comments
Not a very smooth dodge of your previous position. Namely that the war will kill more than sanctions.
It still may.
I think you overestimate world impact. Easy to be a doomsayer when you don't know anything substantial about the subject at hand.
And I think you underestimate it. So how does that make you right and me wrong? I'm certain the majority of Americans aren't as close minded as you. Your "I'm right, f*ck everyone else" attitude simply reflect the arrogance of the current U.S. regime.
Sanctions kill? Really? You mean, Saddam isn't a bad guy, it's the sanctions that are doing all the killing?
Sanctions kill. And Saddam kills.
They are not mutually exclusive.
Wow. First you'll quote Iraq's opinion on the sanctions. Wow. Tell me, does this make ALL of Iraq's official positions valid for an argument? Because if we can use Iraq's official position to help support a point, well, I think all of your arguments aside from this one were just flushed down the crapper.
I never said they were right or that you should trust it, I merely said that's what they say. The UN released a report in 1995 that sanctions killed 500,000. I guess if you want to ignore that...
Second, you quote an article that says this: "The US and UK governments made it clear early on that they would block any lifting of sanctions as long as Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein remains in power."
So, the Sanctions are killing civilians or are the US & UK responsible? No, of course the US isn't responsible, and I imagine since the UK is backing us in the war they're off the hook too.
Of course the US and UK are responsible. They are part of the UN that pushed for the sanctions.
You are willfully ignoring my posts, I said:
Saddam & the UN (including the US) are complicit in the sanctions slaughter.
You should try remedial reading courses. I'm surprised you haven't learned your lesson yet. Well, I'm not really surprised.
DMB:
Likewise...Isn't that obvious?
Have I not said that the US has done many naughty things and that we are partly to blame for 12 years of slaughtering sanctions? Apparently I write that stuff in some code that you and bunge can't read. Here I was thinking it was in English the whole time...
Yes, one favouring aid packages, wars of propaganda to correct hatred, freeing prisoners of conscience so that they can continue their work and linking human life. I opt for it.
Has Canada ever promoted a plan that would give freedom to the Iraqi people?
What in God's name does "freeing prisoners of conscience" mean?
It's no surprise that millions of people die off while the UN gums itself up in diplomatic doublespeak like that.
It is an assertion of power that is intended to quell the opinion or ideaology of another set of people, which WILL be counter productive:Trade, image of collective/individual will suffer.
Yeah, we're trying to quell Saddam's idealogy of oppression, torture and political murder. We are BASTARDS!
satchmo:
It still may.
All-right, I'll be keeping count.
And I think you underestimate it. So how does that make you right and me wrong? I'm certain the majority of Americans aren't as close minded as you. Your "I'm right, f*ck everyone else" attitude simply reflect the arrogance of the current U.S. regime.
I'm not saying everyone else is wrong. I'm saying you've displayed a pretty astounding ignorance on the subject and therefore your opinion on what its impacts might be is, shall we say, lacking in authority.
I guess when you're among friends who also don't know anything about the actual situation such theoreticals are fine and dandy. But for those of us who have been studying this thing we have different guidelines, like truth and fact.
Originally posted by Matsu
Saddam's failure to comply led to those deaths, not the sanctions (of the US or the UN).
We agree. I have no qualms about blaming Saddam. At worst the U.N. & the U.S. didn't react well enough to his failures. When I blame the U.S., it's only in opposition to those that are dumb enough to actually blame the sanctions. I'm showing the extreme opposite view from there point of view. Both are completely ridiculous.
But I will claim that if the sanctions themselves are to share any of the blame, the U.S. shares 1000 times as much as the sanctions themselves. Neither of the two are as bad as Saddam though.
Now Matsu, I need your help convincing the hawks that the sanctions didn't kill or I'll have to keep saying that the U.S. is more to blame than the sanctions. Or better stated, the U.S. is the cause for the failure of any part of the sanctions process that we could have controlled.
Originally posted by Matsu
So bunge, I guess it's OK for Saddam to gas Kurds?
Of course not. I'm in favore of any action to stop genocide, be it Yugoslavia, Africa or the Mid East. The no-fly zones had put an end to any possible Kurdish genocide though (well, not including Turkey.)
Originally posted by bunge
it's only in opposition to those that are dumb enough to actually blame the sanctions.
Dumb groups like the UN itself?
But I will claim that if the sanctions themselves are to share any of the blame, the U.S. shares 1000 times as much as the sanctions themselves.
Why?
Originally posted by groverat
You are willfully ignoring my posts, I said:
Saddam & the UN (including the US) are complicit in the sanctions slaughter.
You should try remedial reading courses. I'm surprised you haven't learned your lesson yet. Well, I'm not really surprised.
You see, remedial reading courses can't stop you from blatantly lying though. You can write that 'Saddam & the UN (including the US) are complicit in the sanctions slaughter' as if they're equal partners, but that's a lie. I mean, you know it's a lie, but you have to support that position or your argument falls to pieces. So, you throw out a line like that with no support, no backing, no intelligence, and pretend that it's accurate.
That's a lie.
That's OK, I'll tell you it's a lie and you'll come back and tell me to reread it.
Your argument holds absolutely no water. Your argument has more holes than a Thai brothel.
So since we all know that the blame can't be equally shared among the U.N., the U.S. and Saddam, why don't you reformulate your argument and make an honest attempt at actually resolving an issue rather than protecting a point of view?
Originally posted by groverat
Why?
Why?
Do you blame the gun, or the one that shoots it? Do you blame the car, or the drunk driver?
I know you have stronger critical thinking skills than this.
So since we all know that the blame can't be equally shared among the U.N., the U.S. and Saddam, why don't you reformulate your argument and make an honest attempt at actually resolving an issue rather than protecting a point of view?
That last post was one of the most empty exercises in destraction-rhetoric I've ever seen. That was blatant, excellent work.
Blame for the sanction slaughter is shared between Saddam and the UN (of which the US is an integral part). I suppose if you want to place the sanction blame on someone other than Saddam and the UN that's your business, I won't lose any sleep over your own self-delusion.
So I'll ask you:
Who is to blame for sanctions?
Do you think the sanctions are a bad thing?
Please answer those two questions.
Do you blame the gun, or the one that shoots it? Do you blame the car, or the drunk driver?
I guess you're implying that the US is 1000 times more to blame than the UN because the US pushed sanctions for so long through the UN? Am I right in assuming that's what you're saying?
Your shrill anti-American idiocy is reaching new heights. It's really painful to read in a way but it's even more fun to give you more rope to hang yourself with.
Originally posted by groverat
That last post was one of the most empty exercises in destraction-rhetoric I've ever seen. That was blatant, excellent work.
As usual you can't formulate an argument so you droop into the ad hominem attacks. If it really was 'one of the most empty exercises in destraction-rhetoric [you]'ve ever seen', then cite why.
Originally posted by groverat
Blame for the sanction slaughter is shared between Saddam and the UN (of which the US is an integral part). I suppose if you want to place the sanction blame on someone other than Saddam and the UN that's your business, I won't lose any sleep over your own self-delusion.
What on earth are you talking about? I clearly stated in a post to Matsu who I feel is to blame and why. Why don't you read that post, then come back and edit yours because in the context of this thread it makes no sense.
Originally posted by groverat
So I'll ask you:
Who is to blame for sanctions?
Do you think the sanctions are a bad thing?
Please answer those two questions.
I have to tread carfully here, because you'll accuse me of avoiding the question if I answer to accurately. I think it's best to answer the questions together.
Who is to blame? That's a loaded question. The U.N. created the sanctions and I don't think they are a bad thing. Are they poorly implemented or poorly supported? Yes. That's the fault of the U.S. I'd say the U.N., but it's specifically the U.S. veto that's causing many of the problems. So technically it's the U.N.'s fault because the U.N. allows a U.S. veto, but realistically it's the U.S. veto that's caused a lot of hell.
Generally speaking, sanctions and inspections both are a better way to solve the problem than war. In practice, they weren't much better.
Originally posted by groverat
I guess you're implying that the US is 1000 times more to blame than the UN because the US pushed sanctions for so long through the UN? Am I right in assuming that's what you're saying?
The U.S. is 1000 times more to blame than sanctions. You use a blanket statement like 'sanctions kill'. I'm saying sanctions don't do anything. The implemention of the sanctions have wreaked havoc though. That has nothing to do with sanctions though.
Originally posted by groverat
Your shrill anti-American idiocy is reaching new heights. It's really painful to read in a way but it's even more fun to give you more rope to hang yourself with.
Again, pull out the ad hominem attack. I couldn't care less, but if you're going to make a claim, support it. I'm anti-American? Show us all how. You can't of course, because I'm not. My shrill idiocy is so clear to you simply because even to someone of an average intelligence, Albert Einstein looked like a fool not a genius.
Am I saying I'm a genius? Nope.