Related Information to Post War Iraq

Post War Iraq - Page 38

Why is taking so long for the US government to provide with the basic necessities these people need? because I remember very well that one of the reasons was to provide a better life for this people, so far, nothing really 'big' have been done (and no, I'm not talking about politics and getting rid of Saddam) I'm talking about basic issues such as food, shelter, security and so on.

Iraq War Post

There is still a war going on over there. The task before them is huge.


A Year On, 'Everyone Is Torn'
NEWSWEEK's Melinda Liu, who braved the bombing of Baghdad, returns to see what her Iraqi friends say now
https://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4570592/
The numbers say life is getting better. Roughly $3.5 billion in infrastructure projects are underway, and others worth an additional $18.5 billion are planned. Unemployment is fully 40 percent lower than it was before the war. Iraq now has 250,000 mobile-phone users, compared with zero before Saddam's fall. Nevertheless, people have been impatient from day one. "Iraqis wanted things to be better straightaway," says Andy Bearpark, the Coalition Provisional Authority's operations and infrastructure chief. "They asked, 'Why can't you provide electricity 24/7 right now?' People have even accused us of stealing electricity and sending it back to Texas."

Post War Iraq History & Civil Business Politics

The problem is that the US and international media are so biased about this issue that they will not report on the progress that has been made.

I have read a few articles, as well as blogs by people who are actually there (or their parents or spouses) that report on the actual conditions.

Electricity is provided to, essentially, the entire country. All the schools are open. Food is readily available in the marketplace for all to purchase. While medical supplies are still a bit scarce, that situation is improving. Consumer goods are available in the marketplace - with electronics and appliances being the most popular. Entrepeneurship is booming. Manufacturing (yes, small scale) is booming. International investment is booming.

None of these things were true before March 2003.

The problem is that the country is extremely poor after three decades of Saddam's rule. But it is improving rapidly.

Page 38 Iraq War Post

I'm sure that all here are as sick and disgusted with the things that happened in Fallujah as I am. However, there are a lot of people, even in the US, who rejoiced that those 4 men were killed. On the Democratic Underground, a popular forum, several people were ecstatic.

Take a look at this. To see what a real "mercenary" has to say about the situation.

Iraq War Post

Iraq was not a poor country because of Saddam. It's oil reserves are in the top 3 of world. What created the pauvrety in Iraq was the 10 year US led economic sanctions

Post War Iraq

You have GOT to be kidding. Yes, the US led the sanctions, but Saddam kept them in place. He profitted heavily from them, as did the UN leadership, France, and Russia.

He could have had them lifted at any time, and Bill Clinton would have gladly done it to look the hero to the world. But it wasn't in his (Saddam's) interest to do so.

Post War Iraq - Page 38

I must disagree, the US had no intentions of lifting the sanctions on Iraq. If Clinton wanted to or if Bush wants to be a hero, they could have started with lifting the sanctions imposed on Cuba.

In both cases, the conditions imposed by the US are the same ie; removal of the leader of the country and complete american control. In the case of Iraq, oil was also major incentive . Now, how can any self respecting country/leader accept such conditions? Its blackmail

Surely you are not going to come up with the humanitarian pitch, 500,000 people killed in Ruanda in a few months , were was every body.... no oil in Ruanda.

Post War Iraq Politics Business Civil & History - Page 38

Actually, a lot of us have been asking the same question ever since the first day of fighting there. Bill Clinton knew about it and refused to do anything. The UN forces were there, on the ground, and refused to do anything. In fact, they refused sanctuary to the people being murdered. The Secretary-General of the UN knew about it.

You're right. There wasn't oil. That is why the UN wasn't interested, especially France. But then, I didn't see Canada doing much about it either.

No, the US didn't have any intentions to lift the sanctions. There was no evidence that Iraq had complied, in any way, with the 17 UN resolutions, each threatening dire consequences, including invasion, if Iraq did not comply. That is why I said that Saddam could have had them lifted at any time, just by complying with the UN resolutions. But it wasn't in his interest, or in the interest of the UN, France, Germany, or Russia to do so. Each of these entities was profiting from the sanctions, at the expense of the Iraqi people.

We never asked for, or wanted, control of Iraq, or Cuba. Remember the little matter of basing nuclear weapons 90 miles from the US? How about the fact that Saddam Hussein used WMDs on the Kurds and Iranians? He claimed to have these weapons in the late 1980's, and there was no evidence of them being destroyed. The Prime Ministers of France, Canada, and Germany all believed, in March 2003, that he had WMDs. During Clinton's reign of power, those same countries claimed that there was imminent danger of Saddam using those weapons against his neighbors, Europe, and even North America.

At the same time, you are right, there are elements in the US that want control of those countries. Unfortunately, they are on both sides of the political spectrum, and they control a lot of power, including much of the media. They only disagree on how to wield that control.