Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

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 : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: carranza2 who wrote (53910)	10/22/2002 12:32:42 PM
From: JohnM	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The suggestion that the US and the UN are somehow responsible for Iraq's travails, without laying a bit of responsibility on Saddam, who is responsible for slaughtering his own people, is one of the most incredibly hypocritical bits of journalism I have ever witnessed. Let me suggest that you should join LindyBill at your nearest newspaper/magazine store and pick up a copy of Harper's. As I read the piece, there are the following lines of discussion. 1. Did the US (and, occasionally Britian) vote as it did in closed committees to veto aid relief to the Iraqi population? The author claims the US has exercised some veto rights to keep these proceedings secret, but she obtained the minutes from sympathetic committee members. Standard journalism. Can those votes be verified. She further argues that when the US votes became public, the US immediately reversed it's position, voted to make the aid, then reverted back once public attention disappeared. Was that true? It would be very interesting to find out. 2. If the voting record, as reported here, is reasonably accurate, why might the US have done so. I've offered two reasons that can be defended, however weakly. Are there others? 3. If you wish to dismiss these kinds of arguments out of hand, no one can stop you. But, in my view, it's important to look, precisely, at the arguments that are counter to the present view-of-the-day, before dismissing them. 4. It would help if we could find an online version of the essay but that seems unlikely for at least a month or so. It would also help if tek could solicit a response from Pollack, however brief, as to his understanding of these arguments.