English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

Between these two presidents, more than a million Iraqs dead!

2006-12-30 17:59:15 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Politics & Government Politics

Clinton may not have started the embargo, but he had the power to stop it. He chose not to, and continued on with the genocide of the Iraqi population.

2006-12-30 18:09:57 · update #1

11 answers

the oil for food program was started by HW Bush, AND IT KILLED OVER 1,000,000 Iraqis, many too young to even know in fact that they were Iraqi.
check your facts

2006-12-30 18:03:10 · answer #1 · answered by dstr 6 · 3 4

Actually you are correct about the number of children who died in Iraq because of the embargo.

My only issue is you go after Clinton! The UN started the Embargo shortly after Kuwait!

670 (25 September 1990): Iraq-Kuwait (PDF).
Strengthens and clarifies the embargo; confirms that it applies to aircraft. France and the USA disagree on whether 670 requires 661 approval for flights without cargo. Paragraph 12 of the resolution also invokes the possibility of unspecified "measures" against states that evade the sanctions regime. This paragraph seems to have been directed against Jordan and Sudan in particular. It caused disquiet within delegations, as the United Nations Charter has traditionally been interpreted as only permitting the Security Council to impose such measures against the state responsible for a breach of or threat to the peace.

As Clinton did not take over the controls of the White House until Jan 1993, it was impossible for Clinton have anything to to with the initial sanctions and embargo!!

Wasn't George Herbert Walker Bush president in 1990?

Much of the embargo on food and medical supplies were lifted during the Clinton administration! Clinton has no power to walk into the UN Security Council and stop the embargoes!

Do your homework before you bash Clinton!

2006-12-31 02:12:28 · answer #2 · answered by cantcu 7 · 2 1

The real problem with the sanctions is that they target the wrong people: the poor, young, elderly and otherwise infirm members of Iraqi society. In the past 12 years, as many as 1 million to 2 million Iraqis may have died as a result of the sanctions, many of them children under the age of 5. This is more than were massacred in Rwanda in 1994, and on a par with the Armenian Holocaust of 1915-1919. UNICEF officials estimated in 2000 that 5,000 to 6,000 Iraqi children were dying each month primarily due to sanctions. That is equivalent to a World Trade Towers-scale calamity -- in a nation of only 18 million -- every month for the past decade or more.

http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/opinion/68931_santionop.shtml

2006-12-31 02:17:06 · answer #3 · answered by bebe 4 · 2 1

AGREEMENT ON OIL-FOR-FOOD: An oil-for-food programme began at the end of 1996 after the United Nations and the Government of Iraq agreed on the details of implementing resolution 986 (1995), which permitted Iraq to sell up to two billion dollars worth of oil in a 180-day period. The ceiling on oil sales was eased during 1998 and finally lifted in 1999, enabling the programme to move from a focus on food and medicine to repairing essential infrastructure, including the oil industry.

http://www.un.org/Depts/oip/background/inbrief.html

2006-12-31 02:09:34 · answer #4 · answered by dole 1 · 1 0

Why do you even pretend to care about the Iraqi people? I just read (and answered!!) your question about the "dancing" people in Michigan. It was so racist, so anti-Arab, that I could hardly breathe while I typed my response!

So, your "care" is just a ruse to make liberals look bad. (You were hoping, maybe, that a million or two Arabs died?)

But, to your question: where do you get your figures? Is this true?

2006-12-31 02:31:38 · answer #5 · answered by Joey's Back 6 · 0 0

ARE YOU FOR REAL?Do you believe everything that comes out of Rush's Fat, Lying Junky Mouth,is really the TRUTH?There is somethings that are worse than being a Liberal,and the worst of all is being a brainless,Conservative SHEEP!If you are getting all of your politics from Rush ,Hannity & Combs,and Bill o'really(pun intended),then you are being fed PROPAGANDA!You are being catagorized as a SHEEP!Listen to NPR,or PACIFICA radio for the real news! The rest is just entertainment for the NEOCONS,who don't want feel guilty for the screwing over of Middle America!AND THEY ARE SCREWING US OVER ALL RIGHT,AND IN ABOUT 2 MORE YEARS EVERYBODY,EVEN THE BRAIN DEAD SHEEP ARE GOING TO KNOW!!!!!!!!!!

2006-12-31 02:20:14 · answer #6 · answered by studdmuffynn 5 · 1 1

like we care about Iraqi children. hell how many American kids go hungry and die everyday. bet you never thought about that. now did you. this is why I say we need to stop worrying about other countries problems and start with our own problems first.


but to answer your question people blame bush for sending our troops over there on a lie and now they are dying for a lie.

2006-12-31 02:12:40 · answer #7 · answered by Jecht 4 · 1 2

I'm not a lib. but i thought Clinton was a good president. he had are economy in the good, 8 million in the good. look where bush has us now.

2006-12-31 02:05:07 · answer #8 · answered by loretta 4 · 2 2

2 thumbs down and no answers! guess they don't want to discuss that! Does that mean we should bring Bill & Al up on war crimes and hang them with Saddam? I do seem to recall Bill ordering air strikes against iraq while he was in office! One time he supposedly hit a baby formula factory.

2006-12-31 02:02:30 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 3 2

clinton started no embargo against iraq. clinton could not on his own end security council actions.

nonalcohol. do you recall republican reaction to clintons actions?

joey.
http://www.ilaam.net/War/IraqEmbargo.html

2006-12-31 02:08:02 · answer #10 · answered by kissmy 4 · 3 1

fedest.com, questions and answers