1
   

Stop failing the Iraqis

 
 
Frank Apisa
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2004 07:59 am
Centroles wrote:
so Frank, I take it that you advocate the UN to do what this article states it should now do.

Forgive Iraq's debts

Get involved in the reconstruction process

Offer Iraq whatever humanitarian aid it can provide


Well, first of all, I think the reasoning in the essay was extemely faulty -- and offered a rather simplistic view of the situation.

I cannot help but feel the author was less concerned with the Iraqi people than with making certain political and philosophical points with which I am in sharp disagreement.

That aside, however, the answers to your questions, for me, are:

The UN cannot "forgive any debts" -- it is owed none. It can call on member nations to forgive debts -- just as it called on the United States not to invade.

I'm not sure the "forgiving debts" is an essential part of Iraq's future -- although delaying calling the debts could be. Iraq has immense wealth -- which has been misused and abused, but can eventually be used to pay off debts. In any case, they have no money now, so calling in the debts is absurd -- and delaying them is the only alternative any country has right now.

I certainly think the UN should offer whatever humanitarian aid it can -- and I expect it to do so.

As for "getting involved in the reconstruction process" is concerened -- if I were running the UN, I certainly would not simply become a lacky for the US in order to do that. If the US gives the UN the controls they the UN think are necessary before committing further -- then YES. If the US insists on calling all the shots -- then NO.


I also want to be honest about this.

If I were an outsider -- which essentially is what the UN is right now -- I might be tempted to let the US stew in its own juices for a while -- even if that means the Iraqis have to endure a bit more in the way of hardships.

Remember, the US is claiming the Iraqis are already MUCH better off than they were!

And we always have to keep in mind that ultimate responsibility for Saddam Hussein -- RESTS WITH THE IRAQIS THEMSELVES -- although any reasonable person would acknowledge that the United States, as Hussein's principal supporter for a very long time, also bears plenty of responsibility.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2004 09:16 am
Like Frank, I would also of course conditionalise the "Get involved in the reconstruction process" bit on the degree to which the UN will actually be able to have a say on that reconstruction process.

One can't seriously expect the UN - or any of its member states, for that matter - to pour in money or put lives at stake in a venture that it doesnt have any say over.

Luckily, the US has been making moves to share some of the responsibility in the decision-making process - belatedly - ever since it turned out that, if it kept insisting on its refusal to do so, any "donor conference" would be bound to fail.
0 Replies
 
Centroles
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2004 12:28 pm
fine points frank.

the UN has not yet made any significant humanitarian aid effort.

but the UN has not yet called upon it's member nations to forgive the Iraqi debt.

and right now it seems as though the UN will join in on the reconstruction effort no matter how much freedom Bush gives them.

Reconstruction began a while ago.

Until these things change, we have a right to critique the UN as we have critiqued Bush.
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2004 03:35 pm
So the UN should just ignore the fact that all contracts that have got anything to do with oil, are reserved for US companies only, and simply take care of the rest of the country. Fine, bring the UN in. So long as the FINANCE is provided 100% by the US government. That more troops are brought in from the US to protect the UN workers. But the only country paying for it all should be the US of A. After all, they ARE the ones who blew the country up. They should also be paying damages to all the people who lost mothers, fathers, sons, daughters, cousins, aunts, uncles and friends to US bombs dropped on civilian areas. (An act against international law I believe-but who are the US to obey international law?)
0 Replies
 
Wilso
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2004 03:38 pm
Besides which, ALL conservative ideas are crap anyway.
0 Replies
 
Walter Hinteler
 
  1  
Reply Thu 8 Jan, 2004 04:22 pm
Centroles wrote:
the UN has not yet made any significant humanitarian aid effort.


Generally, the UN doesn't made any humanitarian aid actions. These are done - like in Iraq - by the various concerned UN-agencies.

There website HERE might give you some further help.

For the start, however, I suggest, you try to get an better idea about the 'United Nations' here: About the United Nations
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/16/2024 at 09:03:47