Take your pick from the following regarding “alternative solutions to end this stalemate”.
I’m just quoting 1 out of the many:
" ‘If Saddam were to be removed, it should be by M16 or the CIA’ "
"Bella Freud
The way this question is constructed is grotesque. It gives credibility to an argument, which no one in the current debate has accepted as valid, reasonable or authentic. It is deliberately changing the goal posts to abstract this specious concern about human rights from Blair’s war rhetoric and present it to us as our dilemma.
The majority of people on the anti-war march have been against Saddam’s human rights abuses and for justice in the Middle East an awful lot longer than Blair’s hypocritical five minutes.
The other problem with how this question is designed is that it tells you, you have to either be a policy expert or you have to shut up. The UN is set up for collective security. Let the inspectors get on with their job, without being bullied. "
THOUSANDS of Iraqi children are likely to die if there is a Gulf War, according to an unpublished report. The study says the situation could be far worse than either the 1991 Gulf War or the Afghan conflict, because sanctions mean many of Iraq’s 13 million children are impoverished and dependent upon state rationing. The in-depth report, carried out by an international study team last month, says war would seriously disrupt food supplies and lead to famine in some regions of the country.
In a chilling prediction of the effects of war, the study said: water levels are less than half the normal levels following a devastating drought and a breakdown in the supply system would be catastrophic for the civilian population; hospitals have less than three to four weeks of medical supplies and, in the event of a humanitarian emergency, clinics would find it difficult to provide even the most basic medical care to patients; in a worst-case scenario, war would result in around 1.4 million refugees. As many as 900,000 would seek to cross borders, while another 500,000 would be trapped within the country; due to the fragility of the food supply system, an outbreak of war would put up to 10 million people immediately at risk up to 50,000 civilians would be killed if there is a ground assault, while anything up to 200,000 civilians would be wounded.
The independent report was carried out by an international team of experts in January and was funded by humanitarian groups in Canada, the US and Norway. It was led by the internationally renowned Dr Eric Hoskins and involved 50 visits to households and hospitals, without the accompaniment of Iraqi officials. The report emphasises that despite signing up to international treaties such as the Convention of the Rights of the Child, the international community has often ignored the well-being of children.
Labour foreign affairs spokesman Michael D Higgins said that these treaty obligations must be respected: “The structure of human rights and international law came about after World War II, after the nadir of Auschwitz and Dachau. To set all that aside and go back to war as a strategy would be an immense reversal.”
Awam ki Awaz, Thank you, That’s an excellent link to some thirty diverse responses to the ‘if not war, then what’ question posed by some. The Guardian interviewed individuals cutting across the political spectrum - die-hard Liberals like Tony Benn as well as one or two Tories i believe.
Seminole, Let me address your argument bit by bit. >>…without alternative solutions…<<
Let weapons inspections continue. You might want to read the piece by Kamil Mahdi (an Iraqi exile) and Hans von Sponeck. They offer extremely rational alternative solutions.
>>When Saddam apologists blame only the US and never Saddam…<<
We have discussed this previously, i think.
>>1. Iraq has failed to comply with 18 UN Resolutions<<
i am sorry but you neglected to mention the open-ended nature of each of these UNSC Resolutions, with their ever-shifting goalposts vis-a-vis Iraq’s obligations to disarm. Even when Iraq has now agreed to allow weapons inspectors into the country, to the extent that even palaces are open to unannounced inspections - your country will still lead an aggression against Iraq! Is this the incentive offered when a country cooperates ?
>>2. Iraq is continuing the “Arabization” of non-Arab lands by forced displacement of Kurds and others<<
You seem to forget where Turkey fits into this equation, and we seem to be forgetting how indignant and fearful many Kurdish opposition groups have been vis-a-vis the US plans for a post-Saddam Iraq. Is the love affair between the US and Kurds in decline? Will the US assure its Kurdish friends that the ~$30bn in “aid” the US has pledged to Turkey does not signify a blank check to the latter to continue repressing Kurds?
>>3. Iraq continues to murder, torture and otherwise make disappear citizens that don’t agree with the dictator<<
ah yes. All the US’s Arab allies do the same. How concerned are you for individuals residing in Saudi Arabia who suffer from “murder, torture”?
>>Hussein is re-directing food and money that should be going to the starving people to other places<< Please provide a non government-affiliated reference as evidence for the above statement of yours. i would appreciate it. Thank you in advance.
“Conflict could very well have disastrous consequences for Iraqi children,” Bellamy said. “Malnourished children, unimmunized children, children who are displaced from their homes – all these children are at very high risk.” She noted that children make up half the population of the country.
