"John Wallace" > wrote in message
...
> 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?


Hehe. As I said, UN officials blaming the US, besides their allegations
of it being the US fault being untrue, is laughable. Hate to see their
breadwagon cut off, is where their interests were.


>
> >>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.


Read my response. The answers are their. Still and again.


>
> > 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"?


Note the word "I" in my response. Don't see the words "Iraqi people"
anywhere in it. I responded in the same format as your analogy was
constructed.

Show me where I blamed the Iraqi people for the sanctions.


>
> > 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.

Oil/food scam ? Surely you've heard of it ? Btw, you never asked me
before.

Btw, in your example (which is the first I've seen of it, so don't know
where you get the idea of "As I've explained to you....") of where the $
went, you forgot some key players. SH and his cronies, and the various UN
officials involved in the scam, all pocketing $.


>
> > 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.

Wow, where were you during this time ? SH flaunted the *UN* sanctions
for years, basically since the Gulf War ended, and continued to do so after
1997, when the oil/food program came into place.
Anyway, here's two links to some general info. Just basic stuff from CNN
and FOX. Those two are more or less opposites in philosophy, fyi.

http://archives.cnn.com/1999/WORLD/m...nce/index.html

http://archives.cnn.com/2001/WORLD/m...raq/index.html

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,147435,00.html




>
> > 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.

Proof ?



>
> > 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.

Interesting that on one hand in this statement, you complain about the US
leaving SH in power. Yet on the other, you complain now that the US has
taken him out of power.

Anyway, all SH had to do was live up to his end of the *UN* bargain, which
came about because of *his* invasion of Kuwait, which was opposed by the
*UN*, and not corrupt the oil/food program, and the Iraqi's wouldn't have
had to suffer (I won't bother addressing your non-proven numbers listed ).

I've never blamed things on the Iraqis. Show me where I did.


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.


See the links above. For tip of the iceberg starters. Are you seriously
saying the oil/food scam never happened ? You might want to let the Sec.
General know that then, as he thinks it did. (and boy, if anyone should
know....).


>
> > 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.


Evidence ? So far, I've seen nothing but *your* opinions and theories.