Since Iraqi has not published year by year figures on Saddams' dead, I gave you an estimate for 2002 based on available figures
And I gave you back the CIA estimates on the death rate in Iraq for 2002. It was lower than that of the US.
It was you who went off onto the tangent of how his earlier killing somehow didn't really count, 'cause he was 'our guy'.
It's amazing to me how people miss the point. The Administration didn't care then how many people Saddam killed and there is no reason to believe that the current Administration cares now how many people Saddam killed. Cheney and Rumsfeld belonged to both Administrations. Further, if that's not enough, there is no evidence that the Administration cares how many Iraqis are dying now or who it is that kills them. There's no indication that they ever cared whether or not Iraq descends into civil war.
If that's not enough, look at the policies of the Administration around the world. We certainly are not terribly troubled of the thousands are currently being raped, murdered, or displaced in Darfur. The Administration was quite happy to change their position on Chechnya for the Russian vote on 1441. Before 1441 the Russians were persecuting their own people. To get the Russian vote for 1441 we agreed to call the Chechens terrorists. It doesn't matter that the Russians have killed or displaced 1/2 of the the Chechen population [1.1 million]. It doesn't matter that 35,000 Chechens are starving in Grozny.
Take India....this is how we summarize human rights in India....
The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens.
Here's how we describe in some detail the human rights situation in India.
Significant human rights abuses included: Extrajudicial killings, including faked encounter killings, custodial deaths throughout the country, and excessive use of force by security forces combating active insurgencies in Jammu and Kashmir and several northeastern states; torture and rape by police and other agents of the Government; poor prison conditions; arbitrary arrest and incommunicado detention in Jammu and Kashmir and the northeast; continued detention throughout the country of thousands arrested under special security legislation; lengthy pretrial detention without charge; prolonged detention while undergoing trial; occasional limits on freedom of the press and freedom of movement; harassment and arrest of human rights monitors; extensive societal violence against women; legal and societal discrimination against women; forced prostitution; child prostitution and female infanticide; discrimination against persons with disabilities; serious discrimination and violence against indigenous people and scheduled castes and tribes; widespread intercaste and communal violence; religiously motivated violence against Muslims and Christians; widespread exploitation of indentured, bonded, and child labor; and trafficking in women and children.
These abuses were generated by a traditionally hierarchical social structure, deeply rooted tensions among the country's many ethnic and religious communities, violent secessionist movements and the authorities' attempts to repress them, and deficient police methods and training. These problems were most visible in Jammu and Kashmir, where judicial tolerance of the Government's heavy-handed counterinsurgency tactics, the refusal of security forces to obey court orders, and terrorist threats have disrupted the judicial system. In the Northeast, there was no clear decrease in the number of killings, despite negotiated ceasefires between the Government and some insurgent forces and between some tribal groups.
and we summarize that by saying The Government generally respected the human rights of its citizens.
Message 20575392
The bottom line is that the people in this Administratoin never cared how many people Saddam killed and they don't care how many people are killed by our "friends".
Within the US we have a Constitution that requires us to apply the law equitably. If the law is not applied equally, there is no justice. On an international basis there needs to be at least a minimal appearance of moral consistency. We didn't go into Iraq to save the Iraqi people. We went into Iraq to disarm. Of course, when it turned out there was nothing to disarm, that wasn't important any longer. The consistency demonstrated by this Administration is that "justice" is wholly arbitrary. And the whole world knows it.
Bush accepts only those opinions that serve is rhetorical purposes, whether it's Tenet, Rumsfeld, Wolfowitz, Chalabi or Alawi. If they give him a one liner that he can repeat he accepts their opinion. If they don't they are promptly dismissed.
jttmab |
