Why did France and Russia oppose efforts to topple Saddam

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Krusher
yes you did miss something.  Its naming four benificiaries of what looks to be bribes.  It didnt say they all work for the current goverment.

In Russia, the payoff chain reached right into the "office of the Russian president." President Vladimir Putin's Peace and Unity Party also got vouchers,

as did the Soviet-era Prime Minister Nikolai Ryzhkov

and the Russian Orthodox Church.

Nationalist leader Vladimir Zhirinovsky shared in the largesse.

It's not "naming four benificiaries of what looks to be bribes". It's a lie. A person who wrote it doesn't know anything about Russia.

What the hell is "Putin's Peace and Unity Party"? What did "crying bolshevik" Ryzhkov get the money for? What did Orthodox Church do to earn the "bribes"? Zhirinovsky is Hussein's personal friend, so I can expect some presents from him, but his party is too small to inflience legislation, and it's no surprise for me that they take bribes for voting in Duma (parliament).

With such "argument" the whole article is just a figment of some sick imagination stuck in McCarthy times. It's probably enough for American truck-drivers, but for anyone who knows something about current political sutuation in Russia it's a nonsence.

I really enjoy America going Soviet way. Soviet people were supposed to believe everything that is printed in the newspapers. Freedom to Angela Davis!

[Westy]

"I am more interested in why the UN can be corrupt from the top down and still be considered credible."


 Yeah right. More of that finger pointing stuff.  It's not Bush' fault. He's only doing what Clinton started!  The US isn't corrupt and discredited but  look at the UN!

 Perhaps if one were to understand how "corrupt  from the top down" and discredited the US is now then one might be able to get a good idea on how the UN could be too?

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Gixer
"Why did France and Russia oppose efforts to topple Saddam"


Because rightly like the rest of the world they realised that it was a bad idea to do so with force.

Unfortunetly England with it's poodle PM didn't follow suit.


...-Gixer

We should heve continued sanctions which UNICEF said killed only 2 million innocent Iraqis over the 12 years.

an average of only 166,000 innocent deaths per annum.

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
We should heve continued sanctions which UNICEF said killed only 2 million innocent Iraqis over the 12 years.

an average of only 166,000 innocent deaths per annum.

The "letter from Iraq" posted here, written by "American Marines" said they are killing Iraqi citizens by thousands daily. And I have serious doubts that humanitarian situation was improved by occupants. So far they hold the whole civilian population of El Fallujah surrounded, not letting them out, bombing them with cluster bombs. This can not be called an improvement, eh?...

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by Boroda
The "letter from Iraq" posted here, written by "American Marines" said they are killing Iraqi citizens by thousands daily. And I have serious doubts that humanitarian situation was improved by occupants. So far they hold the whole civilian population of El Fallujah surrounded, not letting them out, bombing them with cluster bombs. This can not be called an improvement, eh?...

According to  http://www.iraqbodycount.net/ (not exactly a pro-Bush site) between 8,958 and 10,810 civilian deaths.

According to a USAToday newspaper account,

"It's a pure guesstimate," said Dan Goure, a military analyst at the Lexington Institute. He said the Pentagon issued the number to convince Iraqi fighters that the battle was lopsided and they should put down their weapons.

"It may never be known how many Iraqis were killed by coalition forces," Goure said. "It would have to be over 10,000 uniformed Iraqis and more if you include the irregulars."

According to http://lunaville.org/warcasualties/Summary.aspx

as of Ap 27, 841 coalition military casualties.

If you double the USA today estimate, add the worst case scenario from IBC.net, and the coalition casualties, you come up with 31,614.

31,614 < 166,000

can the case be made that military intervention has saved 130,000 lives?  It appears so.

[straffo]

I'll make this post simple and understable by all :


Apple < Oranges don't you think Holden ?

[Holden McGroin]

Please clarify Straffo,


Which dead people do you consider apples and which dead people do you consider oranges?

[straffo]

I don't compare the deads .

I was just pointing that :
you compare a statistic made by UNICEF and so concerning children with a statistic concerning adult probably wearing a AK47 or a RPG.

So it's IMO Apple and Orange

[Boroda]

Originally posted by Holden McGroin
can the case be made that military intervention has saved 130,000 lives?  It appears so.

If you really believe that military invasion followed by foreign occupation can "save 130000 lives" - there is something wrong with you. Occupants can't even fix oil pipelines, and I doubt they bother to repair civilian infrastructure. They prefer to starve innocent civilians in El Fallujah instead, bombing them "to stone age" as a humanitarian bonus.

This is what civilized countries are against.

[Holden McGroin]

Boroda, I was just quoting the statistics as I found them and I found them from sources not entirely freindly to the policy of military action.

Find some information that shows that the deaths in Iraq are more this year than last or that the invasion policy is more murderous than sanctions.  

I have looked extensively and have yet to find information contrary to the thesis I put forth a few posts ago.  I am eager to hear of your progress.

[straffo]

Right I can't wait to see the UNICEF stats for 2003



Btw is there still any UN agency in Iraq ?

[Holden McGroin]

Originally posted by straffo
Right I can't wait to see the UNICEF stats for 2003

Btw is there still any UN agency in Iraq ?

I concede Straffo, the facts and statistics you cite in your last argument are totally devastating to my thesis.  (Imagine a little rolleyes emoticon here)