sj2
|
|
response 9 of 81:
| 
Aug 27 20:13 UTC 2003 |
I wouldn't blame the current lack of infrastructure in Iraq on Saddam
entirely because I was in Iraq before the first Gulf war. Back then,
they had clean water supplies, a reliable electricity grid, good roads,
enough hospitals and other civic infrastrucuture. So even after
stuffing his pockets, Saddam spent enough money on modernising Iraq.
The sanctions blocked the import of basic things like Chlorine for
water purification. There is a list of non-military infrastructure that
was systematically destroyed by the allied bombing. Allied intelligence
was also well aware of the crippling implications the sanctions would
have on the Iraqi civic infrastructure. However, all that was ignored.
Even if you ignore the fact that the destruction of Iraqi civic
infrastructure resulted from sanctions, where do you think the required
billions are going to come from now??
I again recommend that you read the report prepared by RUPE.
To me, the most shocking part of the report was:
On May 12 1996, US Secretary of State Madeleine Albright was asked by
Lesley Stahl of CBS television: We have heard that half a million
children have died (due to sanctions). I mean, that s more than died in
Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it? Albright replied: I
think this is a very hard choice, but the price, we think the price is
worth it.
|
sj2
|
|
response 15 of 81:
|
Aug 28 10:50 UTC 2003 |
Re #11, The civic infrastructure in Iraq prior to the first Gulf war
WAS put in place by the Saddam regime. In the early 80s, Iraq wasn't a
very modernsed nation. Baghdad itself didn't have proper civic
infrastructure. It was Saddam's regime that significantly modernised
Iraq.
Ofcourse, its not Chlorine gas but Iraq's sanitation systems required
special equipment and chemicals that were banned by the UN embargo.
(See the snip from the report below).
Russ, it does sound heartless because in the decade of the sanctions,
half a million Iraqi children died from malnutrition and disease.
The sanctions were indeed put in place by the UN but it was the US and
its allies that blocked any relaxation in sanctions.
US opposes lifting of Iraq sanctions
Iraq-USA, Politics, 4/24/1998
http://www.arabicnews.com/ansub/Daily/Day/980424/1998042437.html
Re #11 and #14, I guess you didn't read the above mentioned report so
let me post bits from it. *WARNING* - This is a very long post.
From "Behind the Invasion of Iraq"
---snip---
The bombing of Iraq began on January 16, 1991. Far from restricting
themselves to evicting Iraq from Kuwait, or attacking only military
targets, the US-led coalition s bombing campaign systematically
destroyed Iraq s civilian infrastructure, including electricity
generation, communication, water and sanitation facilities. For more
than a month the bombing of Iraq continued without any attempt to send
in troops for the purported purpose of Operation Desert Storm ,
namely, to evict Iraqi troops from Kuwait.
That the US was quite clear about the consequences of such a bombing
campaign is evident from intelligence documents now being
declassified. Iraq Water Treatment Vulnerabilities , dated January 22,
1991 (a week after the war began) provides the rationale for the attack
on Iraq s water supply treatment capabilities: Iraq depends on
importing specialised equipment and some chemicals to purify its water
supply... With no domestic sources of both water treatment replacement
parts and some essential chemicals, Iraq will continue attempts to
circumvent United Nations sanctions to import these vital commodities.
Failing to secure supplies will result in a shortage of pure drinking
water for much of the population. This could lead to increased
incidences, if not epidemics, of disease. Imports of chlorine, the
document notes, had been placed under embargo and recent reports
indicate that the chlorine supply is critically low. A loss of water
treatment capability was already in evidence, and though there was no
danger of a precipitous halt , it would probably take six months or
more for the system to be fully degraded .
Even more explicitly, the US Defence Intelligence Agency wrote a month
later that Conditions are favourable for communicable disease
outbreaks, particularly in major urban areas affected by coalition
bombing... Current public health problems are attributable to the
reduction of normal preventive medicine, waste disposal, water
purification/distribution, electricity, and decreased ability to
control disease outbreaks. Any urban area in Iraq that has received
infrastructure damage will have similar problems. (S. Muralidharan,
Frontline, 12/10/01; Thomas J. Nagy, The Secret Behind the Sanctions ,
The Progressive, September 2001 [the online version of this article
provides links to the original documents.])
In the south of Iraq, the US fired more than one million rounds (more
than 340 tonnes in all) of munitions tipped with radioactive uranium.
This later resulted in a major increase in health problems such as
cancer and deformities. While the US has not admitted any linkage
between its use of depleted uranium (DU) shells and such health
problems, European governments, investigating complaints from their
veterans in the NATO attack on Yugoslavia, have confirmed widespread
radiation contamination in Kosovo as a result of the use of DU shells
there.
The US tried to limit the definition of humanitarian goods to food
and medicine alone, preventing the import of items needed to restore
water supply, sanitation, electrical power, even medical facilities.
Among the items kept out by American veto, on the grounds that they
might have a military application, were chemicals, laboratory
equipment, generators, communications equipment, ambulances (on the
pretext that they contain communications equipment), chlorinators, and
even pencils (on the pretext that they contain graphite, which has
military uses). (Arnove, p. 17) The US and Britain placed holds on
$5.3 billion worth of goods in early 2002 alone. (MERIP, p. 8) Even
this does not tell the full impact, since the item held back often
renders imports of other parts useless.
In 1998, the UN carried out a nationwide survey of health and
nutrition. It found that mortality rates among children under five in
central and southern Iraq had doubled from the previous decade. That
would suggest 500,000 excess deaths of children by 1998. Excess deaths
of children continue at the rate of 5,000 a month. UNICEF estimated in
2002 that 70 per cent of child deaths in Iraq result from diarrhoea and
acute respiratory infections. This is the result as foretold accurately
by US intelligence in 1991 of the breakdown of systems to provide clean
water, sanitation, and electrical power. Adults too, particularly the
elderly and other vulnerable sections, have succumbed. The overall
toll, of all ages, was put at 1.2 million in a 1997 UNICEF report.
The evidence of the effect of the sanctions came from the most
authoritative sources. Denis Halliday, UN humanitarian coordinator in
Iraq from 1997 to 1998, resigned in protest against the operation of
the sanctions, which he termed deliberate genocide . He was replaced
by Hans von Sponeck, who resigned in 2000, on the same grounds. Jutta
Burghardt, director of the UN World Food Programme operation in Iraq,
also resigned, saying that I fully support what Mr von Sponeck was
saying.
---snip---
|