In These Times

Latest Comments view all 13

• • 15 Jun 06
  • 5:35 pm

  You GO Cara! http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v284/Knaustin/icon_cheerleader.gif

  Posted to Anarchist Cheerleader Elected

• • 10 Mar 06
  • 2:47 pm

  Let's get back to basics here. The goal here is to basically, make other people be nice to their own people and keep them from getting WMD's and blowing up themselves and the rest of the world, without going to war constantly because going to war could, ultimately cause us to blow ourselves up and possibly (probably) the rest of the world anyway, right? In the case of the Iraqui's, sanctions didn't work for two reasons. The sanctions were targeting the wrong people or things and, after the misery the sactions imposed FINALLY made it up the ladder to where they …

  Posted to Were Sanctions Worth the Price?

• • 10 Mar 06
  • 4:56 pm

  I was basing my "Be Nice" comments on this statement in the article: sanctions seem the only viable means of deterring regimes that seek nuclear weapons or engage in gross human rights violations. And addressing sanctions vs. war in general for achieving the above goals, using the Iraqi situation as an example, as the article was. You wrote: the sanctions were purely to destroy a people and a country we were always intending to steal. This is a very valid point, and perhaps I do need to "wake up" as you say, but I think you are generalizing when you say …

  Posted to Were Sanctions Worth the Price?

• • 10 Mar 06
  • 8:26 pm

  Graeme- If the sanctions worked so quickly, why were they still going on eight years after they began? Is it because we changed our goals from disarming Hussein to dethroning him? You say - "he destroyed all of his usable WMD stock within a few months of the 1991 war, as the UN quickly discovered. " Why didn't anyone tell us? This writer says: "Hussein was so intent on deceiving the weapons inspectors that he refused to acknowledge he had been disarmed" And from what this article states, the sanctions had gone on eight years before Sadam began to comply, but …

  Posted to Were Sanctions Worth the Price?

• • 10 Mar 06
  • 9:01 pm

  "This is why I disagree so strenuously with this statement: " You seem to be disagreeing so strenuosly you are contradicting yourself. First you say that the sanctions worked quickly and now you say, "They weren’t “viable” in Iraq because as noted above they didn’t succeed in disarming Hussein (or succeeded very quickly and then were left in place anyway, as disarming him clearly was never their real goal)" From what I am reading here tonight, they did succeed but he lied about not having them AND the US decided they wanted him out, (the goal was changed in midstream) so …

  Posted to Were Sanctions Worth the Price?