Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction Message Board

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Just the Facts, Ma'am: A Compendium of Liberal Fiction

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next

To: trouthead who wrote (27533)	1/22/2005 3:42:37 PM
From: DavesM	Read Replies (1) of 90947

Number one, Saddam is responsible for more deaths than Pol Pot. Despots like Saddam, Hitler, Pol Pot, or Idi Amin, were removed by the intervention of military forces from outside countries. The only instance that I can think of were sanctions worked was in the case of South Africa. And at least South Africa had the kernel of a democratic government. Did economic sanctions stop Mao? Did economic sanctions hurt Stalin? Fidel? Hitler? Tojo? At any rate, toward the end, only the United States and Britain were even willing to maintain UN Sanctions. Even the French quit. The Arab press, Saddam and bin Laden had the Islamic world convinced that American led Sanctions were responsible for the deaths of over a million Iraqis. Clinton's Secretary of State Albright misspoke, and even said that the deaths of half a million Iraqi children was a worth while cost (of Sanctions) - and not that Saddam was responsible for those deaths (though she tried to correct herself later). Do you think that Bill Clinton is responsible for the deaths of a million Iraqis? In light of the disclosures from the "Oil for Food Program" can you really argue that Sanctions were working?

Report TOU Violation

Share This Post

Public Reply Prvt Reply Mark as Last Read File

Previous 10 Next 10 Previous Next