|
U-Know! Forum » Gassing the kurds |
Log In to post a reply
|
|
|
|
| Topic View: Flat | Threaded | |
necropolist 1689 posts |
Sep 12, 2002, 11:54
|
||
|
it seems somewhat strange comment from dalyell - a man who often talks shit, but normally principled shit at least. whilst it is highly plausible/probable that there was some iranian involvement, the notion that hardly anyone died in the attack is far far less so. of course they couldnt retrieve the bodies, its in bloody kurdistan - they don't let many people n there at all, especially not then!
|
|||
|
YerArseInParsley 365 posts |
Sep 12, 2002, 11:58
|
||
|
He was quoting American intelligence reports. I admit it was news to me, but i'll try and find out more.
|
|||
grufty jim 1978 posts |
Sep 12, 2002, 14:04
|
||
|
hey YerArseInParsley; sorry it's taken me a wee while to reply to you, but with a new issue of TWIP (The Week In Petroleum) coinciding with new stuff from Oil & Gas Journal and a new set of reserve estimates from the US Geological Survey, i've been almost completely buried in energy research of late (sad, sad, sad man that i am)... also; anyone see the stuff about the Australian Solar Tower plan? It's a pretty far-out project that could make or break the solar industry. Anyways, all that aside, i'm a little confused about exactly what point Tam Dayell was making regarding the Kurds. Is the point that Saddam may have *only* gassed 200 Kurds? Jeez... that's only 199 more than it takes to become a savage murderer. Or is the point that 200 is actually not too bad... and that Saddam would be horrified at the idea that 8,000 had died, but - of course - doesn't need to worry about only 200. The thing is, i'm not going to claim that Dubya Bush is any better than Saddam (how many innocent Afghans have already died as a direct result of US bombs? And how many Iraqis are dying due to US-led sanctions?). Nor that Saddam's vile acts against his own citizens and those of other nations in any way justify launching a massive war against the people of Iraq (which is really only about grabbing oil reserves anyway). However, i have a real problem with people who adopt a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" attitude (and there's plenty of them). People who see a legitimate foe in the increasing imperialism of the USA, and decide that everyone who opposes it must be OK really, and if they don't seem OK it's all down to US propaganda. I had a long email argument with someone just after the WTC attacks who basically decided that the US "deserved" such attacks because of the effects of its foreign policy. It brought me to the edge of despair that there were so many people (apparently switched on people) willing to basically ignore (even justify) the hateful violence of islamic extremism simply because it was aimed at the USA. My view is very simple. If you use a position of power to cause uneccessary suffering to those who fall within it's scope, then you should non longer hold that position of power. This applies to Dubya Bush, no question. But it also applies to Saddam Hussein, even if *only* 200 Kurd murders are an acceptable number in the eyes of Tam Dayell. Incidentally, i recall reading somewhere (and i could be wrong on this); perhaps on this very forum; that when UN inspectors took the soil samples in the mid-90's which confirmed that mustard gas had been used against the Kurds; that they had to carefully date the samples to rule out the possibility that the gas was left over from the last time the British gassed the Kurds earlier this century. Puts things into perspective regarding Saddam... but it doesn't make 8,000 or 200 or 1 Kurdish murder irrelevant. (i think)
|
|||
|
Popel Vooje 5373 posts |
Sep 12, 2002, 15:07
|
||
|
Grufty Jim is correct when he says that this kind of debate tends to polarise opinions on one side or the other, thus ignoring the fact that both sides may be equally at fault. I would also agree that this isn't merely about statistics, it's about the basic abuse of human rights, and that even if Saddam did only gas 200 Kurds his actions are still inexcusable. But nevertheless, if there is indeed any truth in Dalyell's allegations, surely this confirms what most of us suspected all along - that this impending war is a trumped up political exercise on the part of the US, which has the potential to turn into a modern Vietnam in which thousands will be killed for no moral reason. In addition to protecting oil reserves, I also suspect that the agenda of the US government is to shore up support for Bush, diverting attention away from his poor performance on domestic issues and ensuring he wins another term on the basis of his foreign policy alone. However, whether US civilians will continue to support an ongoing war effort in practice remains to be seen. According to the most recent survey I read, Dubya has the support of just over half the American population, a figure which will either rise or fall depending on the results of the Iraqi invasion.
|
|||
|
YerArseInParsley 365 posts |
Sep 13, 2002, 14:34
|
||
|
First some disclaimers since I'm unfamiliar to you (and with the greatest of respect to Grufty Jim having read many of your previous posts). I'm no friend of Saddam, or Tam for that matter, America isn't my enemy, I doubt I have any enemys nowadays. Love the country, hate the state. I was appalled by the WTC attacks, but no more appalled than the similar crimes you partially list ( and have listed more fully previously). I do feel strongly that the US deaths have received far more and far more sympathetic press coverage. I feel the reasons for this bias are themselves informative, but too obvious to go into. I would accept that one Kurd gassed was one too many. However, Tams allegations make more than one point. Firstly, it was an attack that was perpetrated by both sides, not just one side as is commonly portrayed. This is puposeful propoganda. Secondly, the death count has been exaggerated without being questioned to justify the current ongoing and escalating war against Iraq. This is war propaganda, much like the stories of atrocities commited against Belgian nuns in the First World War. Dehumanising the enemy. I asked some of my friends, reasonably intelligent and informed people, how many people had died in the last Gulf War. Many of them responded with figures of a few hundred or at most a few thousand, either unaware of the hundreds of thousands of Iraqi deaths or unaware that Iraqis count as humans. This is because they are 'informed' people and that is the message our media presents. This is awful, and must be worked against and pointed out by everyone who can maintain their credulity in the face of lets face it, Western brainwashing. The first casuality of war is truth, and veracity has been victimised in the USuk for a long time. Tam may be wrong about the facts, I haven't had time to investigate and probably haven't access to real evidence myself. But I believe the points raised by his questioning are valid, useful and rare.
|
|||
|
YerArseInParsley 365 posts |
Sep 14, 2002, 11:41
|
||
|
Hows the solar tower going ? And why did you say it might break the solar industry? Do you think we'll ever develop 'free' energy? What effects would free energy have on society?
|
| Pages: 2 – [ Previous | 1 2 ] | Add a reply to this topic |
|
|
|
| U-Know! Forum Index | |
