Good News.
http://reuters.com/newsArticle.jhtml?type=worldNews&storyID=2578082
oh it's Wednesday.. UN is relevant today.
It makes sense there is probably a daily line up outside the whitehouse (of the kind you see outside us embassy in pak) of american companies desperate to get into iraq.
Has UN abolioshed dem no fly zones now?
The Americans went on with this war, without the sanction from the security council. Now, why are they asking the UN to lift the sanctions, which remained for the past 10 years while millions were killed in Iraq as an effect of the sanctions. Bloody Hypocrits!!!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Fraudz: *
Has UN abolioshed dem no fly zones now?
[/QUOTE]
what no fly zones? all flies are dead already.
i didn’t expect much from a moron, but this quote by Bush takes the cake: “Now that Iraq has been liberated, the United Nations should lift economic sanctions on that country.” (Source). Maybe the sanctions was what was repressing the Iraqis in the first place.
Now i expect to see much foot-dragging in this issue prior to the sanctions actually being lifted. Funny how you can go to a war without the permission of the UN, but yet you need the UN’s permission to lift a genocidal embargo. Ample amounts of sense there.
OK. So am I to understand that those of you who were screaming against sanctions before the war now think that the UN should keep those sanctions in place because the US has asked for them to be lifted?
Not quite myvoice. The confusion is why the totally irrelevant UN has again become all too relevant all too soon?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Rhia: *
Not quite myvoice. The confusion is why the totally irrelevant UN has again become all too relevant all too soon?
[/QUOTE]
That's pretty ridiculous. The UN still has sanctions against Iraq in effect. The UN can either leave those sanctions in effect or lift them. If they leave them in effect, they can then either enforce them or not. The US has urged the UN to lift those sanctions. If the UN wants to retain any relevance on any matter whatsoever it probably ought to lift the sanctions. The US is already flooding food, medicine, clothing and humanitarian relief into Iraq. I'm quite sure we will continue to do so regardless of what the UN does. The UN will look even more ridiculous than it already does if it maintains sanctions on Iraq while the coalition of the willing rebuilds Iraq.
So there is still is something called UN. Amazing !!!!!!!!!!
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by laeeqkhan: *
So there is still is something called UN. Amazing !!!!!!!!!!
[/QUOTE]
yep. The UN is not too handy when you want to invade a sovereign country, but it comes in pretty handy for these kinds of issues.
i would be interested to learn what type of sanctions precisely the US is in favour of lifting. Will 'dual-use' items, such as chlorine, be prevented from entering the country ? And what happens with the escrow account based in New York and supervised by the Council? Will the jurisdiction of that return to Iraqi hands? And will we put a complete halt towards 'Gulf War' reparations that Iraq has been paying for through its teeth the past 13 years? What happens to the millions of Iraqi civilians surviving - literally - on the food rations from the sanctions' 'oil-for-food' programme?
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by myvoice: *
That's pretty ridiculous.
[/QUOTE]
I'm glad you think so too. The blatant hypocrisy is nothing to be proud of.
Nadia makes a great point, exactly what kind of sanctions will US favour lifting. We can't actually qualify our statement until we find out the whole truth but we can assume it will be highly selective.
^
i can think of one : lifiting sanction on selling of oil-for-food. America would like to sell more oil [to its own companies] but with sanction on, it can't do that. :-)
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
i would be interested to learn what type of sanctions precisely the US is in favour of lifting.
[/QUOTE]
Uh.... the economic ones.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
Will 'dual-use' items, such as chlorine, be prevented from entering the country ?
[/QUOTE]
My bet is that most dual use items such as chlorine will be permitted into the country now that the regime that had an affinity for using them in the wrong way is gone.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
And what happens with the escrow account based in New York and supervised by the Council? Will the jurisdiction of that return to Iraqi hands? And will we put a complete halt towards 'Gulf War' reparations that Iraq has been paying for through its teeth the past 13 years?
[/QUOTE]
If it's not one thing, it's another. Let's get the sanctions lifted first and give the Iraqis a chance to get their government and lives together. Perhaps Kuwait, in the spirit of Arab brotherhood and love, will give Iraq's new government a break on the billions due them. Maybe others will do likewise.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Nadia_H: *
What happens to the millions of Iraqi civilians surviving - literally - on the food rations from the sanctions' 'oil-for-food' programme?
[/QUOTE]
They'll get fat eating more food. I hope they don't get clogged arteries eating too many McFalafels.
I'm no supporter of the sanctions, but one fact still remains (and I'm using this to point out the unfairness of the sanctions regime)....
....the sanctions on Iraq are supposed to stay until Iraq provides proof that it has destroyed all of its WMD. The sanctions are not specific to any particular Iraqi regime. The people currently running Iraq (whoever they are) need to prove to the UN weapons inspectors that all Iraqi WMDs have been destroyed before sanctions can be lifted, unless the UN repeals its previous resolutions on the subject.
The UN was totally ineffective in the disarmament Iraq. Are you saying that means that everything the UN does is ineffective? I don't think that has ever been the US position.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by mAd_ScIeNtIsT: *
The people currently running Iraq (whoever they are) need to prove to the UN weapons inspectors that all Iraqi WMDs have been destroyed before sanctions can be lifted, unless the UN repeals its previous resolutions on the subject.
[/QUOTE]
The government of Iraq was never able to prove it. The US will now do it.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Seminole: *
The government of Iraq was never able to prove it. The US will now do it.
[/QUOTE]
But then why does Bush want the sanctions lifted now, without there being proof that Iraq has disarmed?
The sanctions were not put in place because the Iraqis lacked freedom. They were put in place because Iraq did not prove that it has disarmed.
The Iraqis may now have freedom, but Iraq still has not proven that it's disarmed. Why lift the sanctions?
Oh wait, it's because there's no longer a government in Baghdad that's on unfriendly terms with the USA....
This is why I love Nadia.. she’s always one of the most well mannered guppies, but she does know when to let it rip 
:k:
What I dislike about this is not the act of removing the sanctions - that was long overdue; I dislike the pious attitude attached to this act. This is merely a bureaucratic step.. it would have had to happen. To bill this as some great thing, that we, America, are bestowing our benevolence upon the peace-loving, soon-to-be-democratic people of Iraq, is absurd. As I said, in my opinion, this should have been done long ago. Now it is merely paperwork to be filed on the way to rebuilding Iraq.
It will be interesting to see how this plays out, though. Of course we will probably argue that you can’t give big toys to a government that isn’t mature enough to handle them yet. That will justify, 1) our continued manipulation of the economy of Iraq via the ‘obsolete’ UNSC, and 2) our extended stay directly overseeing Iraq’s day-to-day govt.