JP wrote:

> I'm raving ? I'm not the one blaming the US for alleged Iraqi deaths
> under a UN Security Council sanction.

Nor am I - it was the two United Nations people who were IN CHARGE of
the operation.

Is it your assertion that you are more qualified to comment on this than
they are?

>>Let's say your local jury (equivalent to the UN) decides you are under
>>house arrest, but that you are to be allowed food and medicine. Now
>>let's say I veto that (equivalent to US and UK) and will not allow even
>>food and medicine to you. Half your family dies of starvation or
>>preventible disease.
>>
>>Are you ****ed at the judge for making the judgement, or at me for
>>applying it far more stringently and killing your family?
>>
>>Don't pin it to the UN sanctions, they were designed not to slaughter
>>people, and that is why the *UN* themselves blamed the US and the way
>>the sanctions were being applied for the genocide.
>
>
> <laughter>
>
> Interesting analogy. Nothing to do with the facts of course, but
> whatever.

In what way is it "nothing to do with the facts"? Come on, put up or
shut up, it precisely represents the situation of the UN sanctions as
would be applied to yourself.

> Btw, I'd be ****ed at myself for putting myself into the situation to
> begin with. Responsiblity for one's own actions; maybe it's a foreign
> concept to you ?

In what way could the Iraqi people achieve this? Explain? The US gave
them a murderous tyrant, then bombed the hell out of them, then starved
them and denied them medicine, then bombed the crap out of them again.
So Einstein, you are in Iraq, no money, not allowed to leave the country
thanks to the sanctions, how would you "take responsibility"?

> Given the scam involved (surprised at that, I was not) the UN blaming
> anyone for anything related to the oil/food debacle is interesting, to say
> the least.

I'll ask you again - explain this "scam", or stop citing it. As I've
explained to you, with facts, ag=fter paying Kuwait, the UN, various oil
companies and other corporations, Iraq was left with $100 per person per
YEAR to provide electricity, water, medicine and food. So what was scammed.

> And, as usual, you need to get your facts straight. The US voted against
> lifting the sanctions, (because SH wasn't adherring to the sanctions terms,
> which the UN itself agreed with)NOT against the oil/food program.

Sorry JP, *YOU* need to get your facts straight. This occurred
immediately after the resolution was passed. There was no time for
Saddam to flaunt the sanctions, because food and medicine were not
allowed from the moment the sanctions were introduced.

> Indeed,
> the US pushed for keeping the oil/food program and ways to make it more
> efficient, i.e., having no sanctions on civilian goods, only those deemed of
> military use. The UK proposed similiar items.

Utter and total rubbish. The US blocked food and medicine, both of which
were allowed by the sanctions, despite the items being proven to have no
possible link to any form of weapons manufacture.

You can keep trying, but I'm not going to let you away with posting such
lies. Back it up with facts and evidence.

> Btw, you still haven't answered my question; who's fault was it that the
> sanctions existed in the first place ?

I answered you this. The US put Saddam in power, and the US left Saddam
in power. You can blame it on Saddam, or you can blame it on the US, but
you can't blame it on the poor Iraqi people who did nothing except die
in their millions. They didn't ask for Iraq, the US put him there. They
didn't ask to be starved, but had no choice in that either.

> Or how about this, the millions of
> dollars that did result via the oil/food program that were embezzled by the
> UN, various UN related offcials, and SH and his cronies, instead of for
> buying food/medicine, etc. as required.........explain how that was the US's
> fault.

Quote me proof of this nonsense, or quit citing it.

> Get your facts straight first, and then we'll worry about me.

My facts are straight, and I post evidence. From you I see only the same
tired old media spin, which you clearly swallow.