Subject:
|
Re: "The Propaganda War" from the Economist
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 10 Oct 2001 16:17:30 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
122 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry that was your opinion before the 10th October (the date on the text).
What informed your opinion before then? Why the sudden change of heart in
justifying yourself?
Lets look again at your words:
==+==
I reject that the sanctions are the REASON that children (however many)
died. The sanctions do not prevent the flow of food into the country.
I reject that even if the sanctions actually *caused* the death of even 1
child that it's the fault of the imposers of the sanctions for the deaths.
The *fault* lies with the lawless dictator Hussein, not the US.
==+==
Now look at the *opinion* of the Economist:
==+==
Although sanctions contribute to his country's impoverishment, it is he who
has chosen to restrict the distribution of food and medicine that is
permitted by them, and facilitated by an “oil-for-food” programme, both
directly and by siphoning off some of the resources for himself.
==+==
Two key word groups "Although sanctions contribute to his country's
impoverishment" and "it is he who has chosen to restrict the distribution of
food and medicine that is permitted by them"
From that we learn that the Ecomomists feels that sanctions have lead to at
least some impoverishment - I agree. Further, we are told again that Saddam is
restricting the distribution *of what food there is* - I agree. You are still
wrong. Read the UN data and opinion I quoted, and wake up!
Scott A
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> http://www.economist.com/opinion/displayStory.cfm?Story_ID=806392
>
> Note the subhead: "The shadow of Saddam"
>
> My opinion that the sanctions are not the CAUSE of Iraqi suffering is not
> some sort of lone voice in the wilderness, it's held by others as well.
>
> "The true cause of those deaths is Saddam. Although sanctions contribute to
> his country's impoverishment, it is he who has chosen to restrict the
> distribution of food and medicine that is permitted by them, and facilitated
> by an “oil-for-food” programme, both directly and by siphoning off some of
> the resources for himself. "
>
> and
>
> "Nevertheless, the truth is that sanctions have failed, on two counts. They
> have failed to bring down the Iraqi dictator. And they have allowed him to
> win his own propaganda war, by associating America with dying children."
>
> We should lift the sanctions, but not because we are at fault for anything,
> but rather because they don't work as intended.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: "The Propaganda War" from the Economist
|
| (...) I've given multiple cites. Who are you to question me this way? What informs your opinion of anything for that matter? Foamer. (...) No change of heart. (...) Still feel that way. (...) Still feel that way. (...) Let's review. It is possible (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | "The Propaganda War" from the Economist
|
| (URL) the subhead: "The shadow of Saddam" My opinion that the sanctions are not the CAUSE of Iraqi suffering is not some sort of lone voice in the wilderness, it's held by others as well. "The true cause of those deaths is Saddam. Although sanctions (...) (23 years ago, 10-Oct-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
8 Messages in This Thread:
  
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
