The Iraq Thread

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Akira @ Jan. 22 2003,06:39)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Its not about propoganda or media control. For a large part, in the US people will watch what they want to watch, they will read what they want to read.

But beyond the "freedom" of it, as Tex was saying, is the all important "demographic." People watch programs that agree with their all ready held viewpoint. You want to watch something that generally bashes Democrats? Watch FOX. Want to watch the news and say you watched the news without really watching the news? Watch CNN. Same with papers and magazines.

The point is it is quite hard to blind America with propoganda. There is too much free flow of info, and if people don't like what they hear...they turn it off.<span id='postcolor'>

The only difference that freedom of speech makes is that people are allowed to have and talk about different views. The real thing is however the great masses, who will always remain sheep and be susceptible to propaganda.

But that isn't all. A lot of propaganda is actually just some form of wishful thinking. You don't want to think bad things about yourself and your country.

For instance there is a silent agreement in US media, never to show dead Americans. When they showed the rubble of the WTC, they never, not once showed any mutilated bodies or body parts. At the same time they have no problems displaying dead mutilated people from other countries.

Most of the mainstream media also has political ties. This bias becomes very transparent in some cases. Tex mentioned the Clinton-Lewinsky case. It is a very good comperative example. Clinton was persecuted for something that is nobody else's business. Who he fucks is his own private business. Yet there it was a big scandal. At the same time Bush's history of cocaine and alcohol abuse didn't make many headline news. There was certainly not a scandal while the violation is much more serious then cheating on your wife.

Also, as sombody said earlier - News is becoming more and more entertainment. Commercial news channels must get as many viewers as possible to ensure thier economic survival. This leads that they show things that people want to watch and less on real facts. People like to think that they are good and that their country is good so that's what the media shows. This is on a level above political differences. Even those that really dislike Bush and take every opportunity to criticize him are far from criticizing the country itself.

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Jan. 22 2003,02:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">It's not in Iraqi airspace, it's a no-fly zone.  They're enforcing it.<span id='postcolor'>

Airspace above Iraq is Iraqi airspace.  (I can't believe I have to explain something like that.)

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Jan. 22 2003,02:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why don't you research it some to find out why it's there?<span id='postcolor'>

I know why.  It was established well after the Gulf War when the US was trying to convince Hussein's opponents in Iraq's northern and southern regions to rise up against him.  The US and UK (not the Gulf War coalition) set up the no-fly zones to protect the opposition forces from Iraqi air attacks.  However, the opposition was weak and easily crushed by Iraq's ground forces.  The opposition forces still feel betrayed by the US for encouraging them to rise up, without following through on promises of real support.

Why did you think they were there?

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (FSPilot @ Jan. 22 2003,14:10)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Some defected Iraqis get hounded by the media about what happened in Iraq.<span id='postcolor'>

This may come as a shock to you, but the easiest way for any Iraqi to get citizenship abroad is to claim he/she would be killed if returned.  And the media is all too eager to believe these stories.

[Bernadotte 0]

Soon after 11 Sept 2001...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We have been the cowards, lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That's cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building -- say what you want about it, it's not cowardly.

-- Bill Maher on his talk show Politically Incorrect<span id='postcolor'>

...soon after that...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There are reminders to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do, and this is not a time for remarks like that; there never is.

--Whitehouse spokesman<span id='postcolor'>

...soon after that...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Politically Incorrect celebrates freedom of speech and encourages the animated exchange of ideas and opinions.

-- ABC Spokesperson<span id='postcolor'>

...soon after that...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">General Motors, Politically Incorrect's biggest advertiser in 2000 (accounting for roughly $6 million of the show's $47 million ad budget), dropped its commercials from the program. Sears, FedEx, and Schering-Plough also pulled their ads. Network affiliates raised a ruckus, with 17 of them refusing to air Politically Incorrect. All told, the incident resulted in an estimated $ 10 million loss for ABC.

-- Prospect Article<span id='postcolor'>

...soon after that, the show was cancelled.

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Jan. 22 2003,04:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We have a little thing called freedom of speech here.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes.  Sometimes it's so little you can hardly see it.

[foxer 0]

1--></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Jan. 21 2003,211)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Sam Samson @ Jan. 21 2003,20:49)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (nopulse @ Jan. 21 2003,20:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Who was it that said the reason why Saddam used chemical weapons on "kurds", was because they were given to him by the U.S or something.  I'm trying to track down that post.<span id='postcolor'>

it's a fantasy.

do you not like americans, or what?

the US doesn't and never has exported chemical weapons like poison gas to anybody.

saddam made that all by himself. with the help of predominantly european companies.

(where did you say, you're from?)

............I'm not gonna pursue this.<span id='postcolor'>

How he US armed Saddam Hussein with chemical weapons

Certainly biased, but the references seem to be valid. Did some cross checking on the articles that are mentioned and it seems to add up. You can check for yourself.

Edit: Btw did you know that USA is one of the few countries in the world that hasn't signed the international ban on chemical weapons?<span id='postcolor'>

Once again i'll post a link...It wasn't just US companies helping.........

THis is an Iraqi list,not an us list

The Iraqi list names 56 suppliers of chemicals and equipment to process them. A majority are based in Europe.

CHEMICALS AND IRAQ

The lawsuit alleges that 31 companies from 11 countries were major suppliers to Iraq:

Germany -- 14 companies

Netherlands -- 3 companies

Switzerland -- 3 companies

France -- 2 companies

Austria -- 2 companies

United States -- 2

Singapore, India, Egypt, Spain and Luxembourg each had one major supplier.

* Twenty-five other companies are named as minor suppliers

[foxer 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Bernadotte @ Jan. 22 2003,11)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Soon after 11 Sept 2001...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We have been the cowards, lobbing cruise missiles from 2,000 miles away. That's cowardly. Staying in the airplane when it hits the building -- say what you want about it, it's not cowardly.

-- Bill Maher on his talk show Politically Incorrect<span id='postcolor'>

...soon after that...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">There are reminders to all Americans that they need to watch what they say, watch what they do, and this is not a time for remarks like that; there never is.

--Whitehouse spokesman<span id='postcolor'>

...soon after that...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Politically Incorrect celebrates freedom of speech and encourages the animated exchange of ideas and opinions.

-- ABC Spokesperson<span id='postcolor'>

...soon after that...

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">General Motors, Politically Incorrect's biggest advertiser in 2000 (accounting for roughly $6 million of the show's $47 million ad budget), dropped its commercials from the program. Sears, FedEx, and Schering-Plough also pulled their ads. Network affiliates raised a ruckus, with 17 of them refusing to air Politically Incorrect. All told, the incident resulted in an estimated $ 10 million loss for ABC.

-- Prospect Article<span id='postcolor'>

...soon after that, the show was cancelled. <!--emo&

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (Tex [uSMC] @ Jan. 22 2003,04:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">We have a little thing called freedom of speech here.<span id='postcolor'>

Yes.  Sometimes it's so little you can hardly see it.<span id='postcolor'>

He going have an NEW HBO show,which is better,coming out in feb...

- On HBO you can cuss all you want,well do anything you want on HBO. Soo the show will be hella alot better.They would probably never cancel you if alot of people watch,see how it hbo is pay to see.Not commercial base like ABC is,so when companies pull away commercial,they wasn't making any money.When that happen ABC had only one option,to let the show cost alot of money,or cancel it.

[Longinius 1]

"And what of what they found in 1998? What do you think saddam did with that?"

I dont know. Neither do you, nor Blix, nor anyone else. All we do know is that the UN inspectors cant find it. That means, either they are not there or they are hidden. That is all it means.

"No, drafts don't involve killing your family. You seem to have a twisted view of reality."

Show me proof of Iraqi families killed because of people refusing the draft.

"They can import all the medical equipment they want unless it could be used to kill people. And you know why this doesn't matter? Because saddam wouldn't give it to his people even if he could import it."

No, they cant. How many times do we have to tell you this before it sinks in? And what is this deal about Saddam giving it to the people? Its not like Saddam orders it on the web and gets in the mail. The sanctions mean NOONE in Iraq can import the goods. It has nothing to do with Saddam importing medicine and handing it out and everything to do with the people not being able to import it to themselves.

"US planes enforcing a no-fly zone is not an attack on Iraq."

And Iraqi gunemplacement defending their airspace isnt an attack on the US.

"They're a US and UK (in other words, a coalition) invention."

So now the US and the UK are the only people in the coalition, thus speaking for the UN and the rest of the world? God save us...

"Some defected Iraqis get hounded by the media about what happened in Iraq."

Yes, and if they defected its not like they have anything at all against Iraq and would mind spicing it up a bit. It might also have a lot to do with trying to get political asylum / citizenship.

"The media isnt' controlled by the government. One of our freedoms is freedom of the press, they can say whatever they want within reason, and they do."

To some extent they are. First of, they use information provided by the government. Secondly, the government can prevent them from writing things that threaten national security or constitute crimes (creating unrest towards a government is usually considered a crime). Thirdly, most newspapers are trying very hard to be as politically correct as possible.

And FSPilot, I am still waiting to hear from you about how the wars with Iran and Kuwait started...

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ Jan. 22 2003,11:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Once again i'll post a link...It wasn't just US companies helping.........<span id='postcolor'>

I never said that. On the contrary. Europe supplied him with a lot of technology, including for his first nuclear program.

The difference is that we don't want to invade Iraq because he might have those weapons. The reason why I pointed out American companies is because you are condemning Saddam for having those weapons while you were the ones who gave them to him. It is the lack of moral consistency that I object to, not the actual weapons shipments (which of course was wrong too, but it wasn't ony USA that was involved in that).

[foxer 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Jan. 22 2003,11:33)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ Jan. 22 2003,11:23)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Once again i'll post a link...It wasn't just US companies helping.........<span id='postcolor'>

I never said that. On the contrary. Europe supplied him with a lot of technology, including for his first nuclear program.

The difference is that we don't want to invade Iraq because he might have those weapons. The reason why I pointed out American companies is because you are condemning Saddam for having those weapons while you were the ones who gave them to him. It is the lack of moral consistency that I object to, not the actual weapons shipments (which of course was wrong too, but it wasn't ony USA that was involved in that).<span id='postcolor'>

Just trying be fair,let other people think what they want.I was never saying US didn't help.I know we did when they was helping us get back at iran for that little embassy thing.I'm sure one day we going go war with another middle-eastern country that is helping us now.

[brgnorway 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

So why do you think Schröder is asking for a UN resolution nr.2 - backed by France? My guess is that the Russians will jump the bandwagon too - especially after signing another new oilcontract with Iraq the other day.

Fspilot reply:

Haven't heard of it.

<span id='postcolor'>

Now you have!

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Germany has declared it will not back a UN resolution authorising war against Iraq, adding its concerns to mounting reservations within the Security Council about military action.

Chancellor Gerhard Schroeder made his remarks at a public meeting of his SPD party, shortly after US President George Bush told Iraq that time was running out.

There has been rising resistance to war from France - a permanent member of the UN Security Council - and other allies, many of whom want UN weapons inspectors in Iraq to have more time to do their work. ..........French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin - whose country is one of the five veto-wielding members of the Security Council - has already said that nothing so far justified military action and he did not rule out a French veto.

China and Russia, also permanent members, say the inspectors should be given more time.

<span id='postcolor'>

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/2682313.stm

Oh, and this too. Expect to see more of this in the future - especially after an invasion of Iraq:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/2681315.stm

[Longinius 1]

"It must be added that the quantity of food and medicines "allowed" to Iraq is not more than about a third of what was imported to Iraq before the onset of the sanctions. In other words, the United Nations expect Iraqis to live with less than half the food and medicine intake they had at the time when Saddam Hussein ruled without UN intervention."

Here is a list of the goods that Iraq cannot import because of the sanctions.

http://iraqwar.org/list.htm

I am listing a few examples, for the lazy:

- Axes

- Balls (the kind we use for sports)

- Belts

- Bicycles

- Busses

- Cloth

- Dolls

- Drills

- Filing cabinets

- Glue

- Headphones

- Jackets

- Knifes

- Music CDs

- Paper Clips

- Pens

- Toilet paper

- Water pumps

There was no list of biological and chemical components / machines / medicines. Most likely because it would be quite an extensive list. I am looking for it though.

And, ofcourse, no, it isnt about oil and Iraq gets a lot of funds from the Oil for Food programme.

"Under the oil-for-food deal, Iraq is permitted to sell $5.2 billion of oil every six months. Only 53 percent of the revenue goes to humanitarian aid. The other money goes for such things as funding the UN Special Commission—the body responsible for weapons inspections in Iraq, of which there have been over 9,000--and funding the UN Compensation Commission.

And what is done with the 30 percent of the revenue that goes into the "compensation commission"? On June 25, the UN awarded almost $2.8 billion to several oil companies, including more than $500 million to a subsidiary of Texaco, Inc., for equipment and facilities that were damaged when the U.S. led a 43-day war against Iraq in 1991. These oil companies that make tens of billion dollars a year were paid out of the UN Compensation Commission."

Source: http://www.iacenter.org/usplan.htm

[foxer 0]

And what is done with the 30 percent of the revenue that goes into the "compensation commission"? On June 25, the UN awarded almost $2.8 billion to several oil companies, including more than $500 million to a subsidiary of Texaco, Inc., for equipment and facilities that were damaged when the U.S. led a 43-day war against Iraq in 1991. These oil companies that make tens of billion dollars a year were paid out of the UN Compensation Commission."

What year ?

[Longinius 1]

1999 I suppose, since that is when the article is from. i could of course be wrong though.

[Guest]

I never knew the sacnctions were that bad. This is insane

Complete list:

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote </td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">

Accumulators

Adhesive paper

Aluminium foil

AM-FM receivers

Ambulances

Amplifiers

Answering machines

Armored cable

Ashtrays

Auto polish

Axes

Bags

Baking soda

Balls (for children, for sport)

Baskets

Bath brushes

Batteries

Battery chargers

Beads

Bearings

Bed lamps

Belts

Benches

Bicycles

Books (all categories included)

Bottles

Bowls

Boxes

Brass

Broilers

Busses

Calculators

Cameras

Candles

Candlesticks

Canvas

Carpets

Cars

Carts

Carving knives

Cellophane

Chairs

Chalk

Chess boards

Chiffon

Children's wear

Chisels Clocks

Cloth

Chlorine

Clutches

Coats

Coaxial cable

Cogs

Coils

Colors for painting

Combs

Compressors (for cooling equipment)

Computers and computer supplies

Copper

Cupboards

Cups Desk lamps

Desks

Detergents

Dictaphones

Dishware

Dishwashers

Dolls

Doorknobs

Doormats

Drawing knives

Dresses

Drills

Dryers

Dustcloths

Dyes

Dynamos

Easels

Electric cookers

Electric cords

Envelopes

Eyeglasses

Fabrics

Fans

Fax machines

Fibers

Files

Filing cabinets

Filing cards

Films

Filters

Flashlights

Flowerpots

Forks

Fountain pens

Furniture polish

Fuses

Gas burners

Gauges

Generators

Girdles

Glass

Glue

Gowns

Grills

Grindstone

Hairpins

Hammers

Handkerchiefs

Hats

Headlights

Headphones

Hearing aids

Hedge trimmers

Helmets

Hoes

Hooks

Hookup wires

Hoses

Hydraulic jacks

Ink

Ink cartridges

Insulator strips

Interruptors

Jackets

Jacks

Joints

Jumpers

Kettles

Knives

Lamp shades

Lathes

Lawn mowers

Leather

Levers

Light bulbs

Light meters

Lime

Magazines (including scientific and medical journals)

Magnesium

Magnets

Masonite

Mastic

Matches

Measurings equipment

Mica

Microfiche

Microphones

Microscopes

Mirrors

Mops

Motorbikes

Motors

Mufflers

Mugs

Music cassettes

Music CDs

Musical instruments

Nail brushes

Nail files

Napkins

Notebooks

Oil cans

Oil gauges

Oil lamps

Oscillators

Packaging materials

Pails

Painters' brushes

Paints

Pans

Paper clips

Paper for printing

Paper for wrapping

Paper for writing

Pens

Percolators

Pesticides

Photocopiers

Photometers

Pincers

Pincettes

Pins

Plastics

Plates

Plexiglas

Pliers

Plugs

Plywood

Porcelain

Pots

Potties

Press drills

Pressure cookers

Printing equipment

Pulleys

Putty

Radiators for cars

Razor blades

Razors

Reels

Relays

Riveters

Roasters

Rubber

Rugs

Rulers

Sandals

Sandpaper

Saucers

Saws

Scales

Scoreboards

Screws

Seals

Seats

Shampoo

Sheers

Shelves

Shirts

Shock absorbers

Shoe polish

Shoes

Shoppint carts

Shovels

Silicon

Silver polish

Skirts

Soap

Soap pads

Sockets

Socks

Solder

Soldering irons

Spark plugs

Spatulas

Sponges

Spoons

Stamps

Staplers

Starters

Stoves

Straps

Suits

Sun hats

Swimming suits

Switches

Tables

Tacks

Tags

Telephone cables

Telephones

Tents

Thermomethers

Threads

Timber

Timers

Tin

Tire pumps

Tissue paper

Toasters

Toilet paper

Tongs

Toothbrushes

Toothpicks

Towels

Toys

Tractors

Transformers

Trash cans

Tripods

Troughs

Trousers

Trowels

Trucks

Trunks

TV sets

Typewriters

Vacuum cleaners

Valves

Vans

Vaseline

Vases

Venetian blinds

Ventilators

Videotapes

Voltage regulators

Waffle irons

Wagons

Wallets

Wallpaper

Washing machines

Wastepaper baskets

Watches

Water pumps

Wax

Welders

Wheelbarrows

Wheels

Window shades

Wood

Wool

Wrenches

Zoom lenses

<span id='postcolor'>

[foxer 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Jan. 22 2003,12:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I never knew the sacnctions were that bad. This is insane

Complete list:

[<span id='postcolor'>

I know it can't be all that.Because didn't iraq just give like 12,000 pages of an report about their weapons to UN ? Which also had like 12 cd-rs...

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ Jan. 22 2003,12:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I know it can't be all that.Because didn't iraq just give like 12,000 pages of an report about their weapons to UN ? Which also had like 12 cd-rs...<span id='postcolor'>

The fact that they have sanctions on it doesn't mean that they can't get it at all. There are always corporations and countries that violate them. You can however guess at what price they are forced to purchase these things.

I don't know what deranged individuals came up with such restrictions. Havn't they learned anything from history? Not only are they inhumane, but they also give Iraq a very good reason to try to break through from them, possibly out of desperation by a war.

[foxer 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Jan. 22 2003,12:42)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE"></span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ Jan. 22 2003,12:36)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I know it can't be all that.Because didn't iraq just give like 12,000 pages of an report about their weapons to UN ? Which also had like 12 cd-rs...<span id='postcolor'>

The fact that they have sanctions on it doesn't mean that they can't get it at all. There are always corporations and countries that violate them. You can however guess at what price they are forced to purchase these things.

I don't know what deranged individuals came up with such restrictions. Havn't they learned anything from history? Not only are they inhumane, but they also give Iraq a very good reason to try to break through from them, possibly out of desperation by a war.<span id='postcolor'>

if iraq did that then they would have broken the sanctions thing.I would probably think U.S. would point that out,see how we want to bomb them.

[Longinius 1]

And this is probably the reason to have the insane list. So they can say "Look, we know you imported busses and toiletpaper. You are breaking the sanctions, this means war!!"

[Guest]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ Jan. 22 2003,12:44)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">if iraq did that then they would have broken the sanctions thing.I would probably think U.S. would point that out,see how we want to bomb them.<span id='postcolor'>

US has pointed out that all of the time. There have been numerous accusations of sanction violations.

I doubt however that even Bush would try to motivate a bombing of Iraq because they violated the sanctions by importing children's clothing and toilet paper.

[foxer 0]

Why don't more media outlets talk about this import list ?The only thing I have seen about this import list is from cnn,that they can't import water pumps.So they have to drink dirty water.Which causes lots of problems.Now why don't they tell us about this other stuff ?

[DarkLight 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (foxer @ Jan. 21 2003,13:53)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">Why don't more media outlets talk about this import list ?The only thing  I have seen about this import list is from cnn,that they can't import water pumps.So they have to drink dirty water.Which causes lots of problems.Now why don't they tell us about this other stuff ?<span id='postcolor'>

Cuz none of the big guys give a fuck until they can use these kind of stuff to start something like a war...

It's simple actually, nobody gives a fuck about other countries because it's faaaar away. No one cares about war, cuz it's faaaaaaar away.

Fuck all of it...

[Longinius 1]

Because it isnt politically correct? Because it would undermine the authority of the government? Because most people really dont care?

[joltan 0]

Sanctioning everything that could possibly be used as weapons, is not only ridiculous but providing the very justification (not reason!) for a new war, by forcing Iraq to break them and then using this as an example of how unwilling the country is to comply even with the simplest UN demands... Which will help greatly in influencing public opinion in favour of a war when needed.

It's stupid at best. Stupid and incredibly cruel to the people living in that country. And it causes hatred against those responsible for the sanctions (of course this is exploited easily by the iraqi governement) - i.e. mainly the US. You expect a large crowd of happy people to welcome US soldiers in Bagdad? I doubt so.

Of course many things on that list are there for a good reason.

[sarcasm]

Hey, axes were used by the vikings (Denoir should know that!) in their incursions to the british islands, ah, a thousand years ago - a proven weapon of war! Same as with toilet paper, ah, used for, ah... collecting piles of shit to throw them at the enemy (used in sieges for thousands of years), etc. Ha, rip them of their defenses!!!

If you think about it, not allowing those evil scheming iraqi scientists their desk lamps is probably a very clever move - if they can't see their own sketches, how should they be able to build the bomb - and that without having a pen knive either!

[/sarcasm]

[Bernadotte 0]

</span><table border="0" align="center" width="95%" cellpadding="3" cellspacing="1"><tr><td>Quote (denoir @ Jan. 22 2003,12:31)</td></tr><tr><td id="QUOTE">I never knew the sacnctions were that bad. This is insane

Complete list:

(double spaced )<span id='postcolor'>

The great irony is that Hussein, his extended family and friends all reap huge profits from smuggling operations.

For them, the list is not long enough.

And even when the international community realised sanctions don't work, they still did exactly the same thing for Milosevic in Yugoslavia.  Go figure!  

By the way, the US (Colin Powell) originally only wanted to have "smart sanctions" impose against Iraq, which would only have prohibited military hardware.

However, Russia, as Iraq's main arms supplier, complained that this would hurt their business the most.  It was the Russians who insisted on the all or nothing sanctions.

[foxer 0]

Sorry double post...Delete this one..