From: Samantha Atkins (samantha@objectent.com)
Date: Mon Sep 30 2002 - 20:51:54 MDT
Dehede011@aol.com wrote:
> In a message dated 9/30/2002 12:28:59 PM Central Standard Time,
> samantha@objectent.com writes: "Again I point out that no less than
> Madeline Albright agreed publichly with these facts. That is a bit
> difficult to sweep under the rug." And then rephrases her basic
> argument, "This is one of the worst cases of floating oblivious on a
> certain river in Egypt that I have seen. If President after
> president declares this is US policy and acts accordingly then exactly
> where is there wiggle-room on this? The president is "not just one
> person". He acts and speaks for the country in that office."
>
> Samantha,
> What we have is what you found reported in the media. I remember
> when the media reported it a different way. I remember that after the
> Gulf war the media reported that Sadaam was being left a route to
> finance the medicines, etc his country required. Later it was reported
> that he had chozen to spend his money on weapons not on children, the
> elderly and the ill. No one is arguing with your number of deaths but I
> for one am not accepting guilt for what he did.
> Ron h.
>
Well, again, some of those in authority and most in the know
except this "guilt" or better, responsibility. News is truly
slanted many different ways. However, it is very, very widely
agreed that the sanctions have hurt the country tremendously and
have a serious negative impact on medical supplices and
sanitation. That was not Saddam's doing as far as I can tell.
It is not "his" money that is at issue. Here you assume that
other probably biased reports are the "Truth" and that therefore
it was all his doing. Does that seem any more reasonable to you?
Do you believe we should think about the consequences of our
actions and policies, past and present, on the people of Iraq?
- samantha
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Nov 02 2002 - 09:17:22 MST