Sir Bandelot

Yeah Bill!

Perhaps in theory, but I don't know for sure. If food processing machines and medicines are being denied, it's pretty clear what that does. Also if things are being denied that make it impossible for people to work, to have jobs, make money to pay for food, clothing. The crippling of an economy by sanctions could have secondary effects like that. It says that sanctions in the traditional sense are pretty much useless, they harm the wrong people.

It says that sanctions are in some cases equally harmful to a society as if they were being carpet bombed. Only, the buildings remain. Maybe sanctions are even worse, if they achieve mass death but no meaningful objectives. Sanctions must be applied intelligently with some achieveable goal in mind. If the intention of sanctions is to remove the offending countrys ability to pose a threat, they need go no further than that. To use sanctions to attack the civilians is no less harmful than an outright military attack, while the government and army remain in power.

Hindsight is always 20:20. But while the number is bad enough, and perhaps debateable, one wonders what it is they feel they gained in that process, since it didn't affect Saddam or his government. Despite the starvation of his people, he saw to it that he remained in power and well fed.

I think the real point is, what oversight is there in any of this process to ensure that innocent people don't get sent off to some foreign jail to be tortured. If it's just left up to the soldiers, or their commanders on site, with no follow-up, records, visits by someone, government or the IRC, how can anyone legitimize this process. So regardless whether you think torture is warranted to get vital information from a terrorist, who is deciding that. Who decides if a person should be tortured, or when to stop. And are we leaving these people to rot in a cell somewhere, forgotten, their case unknown to anyone. How many are already in that situation now, that we don't even know about it. Those questions need to be answered.

No need to reiterate what has already been said. You have not been reading the thread. But thanks for dropping by...

Interestingly, Albright herself did not dispute the number when it was quoted to her in the interview. So I'm giving her the benefit of the doubt.

Madelaine Albright, when asked during an interview if she thought the deaths of 500,000 Iraqi children by the sanctions was justified simply said yes. When asked by Stahl, "We have heard that half a million children have died [as a result of sanctions]. I mean, that's more children than died in Hiroshima. And, you know, is the price worth it?" Albright replied: "we think the price is worth it." Hopefully there is a special place in hell for people like her.

The Prime Ministers actions speak loudly enough. Maybe people like shakeyhands et al should write a letter of complaint to Stephen Harper.

Agrred but that is still a rather monocular view. What if the people who get tortured thanks to us are not terrorists? The law is primarily made to protect the innocent from getting caught up in a frenzy, that fails to discriminate good guys from bad guys.

Your question asks, is it OK to insult Islam. What do you mean by "OK"? By what standard ok. By law? By the attitude of people in general? Or just ok by me.

Had he won, the media bombardment would be doubly intense. Now he's just one less post-apologetic celebrity for the public to fawn over. But I know, he'll be back next time, as will his marketing campaign.

Nothing like a good kick in the (golf) balls... for the mass media mongers. Thank you God

I think it's done for sales. We tolerate a lot of things in TV commercials. The ploy is, portraying men as dummies. For women, the ploy is, portraying women are walking pieces of ass. That's what sells. You won't hear much complaining from men about that!

Not the only one. He strangled that guy on National Flag Day, I thought that was pretty good. Not too many national leaders would go that far for heckling his speech. You gotta give the devil his due...

That's true, the market goes up and down in a cycle. But are you forgetting the bailout to fix this problem was unprecedented? It did cost the tax payers nearly 1 trillion dollars, and from what I can tell the "problem" was not solved, the risk remains. If the collapse was even real (which one could argue, maybe it wasn't) such plundering of public coffers cannot go on indefinitely. But, good thing they had all that tax money to draw from in this case, eh

The pic is now quite famous. Rumpsfeld made a deal with Saddam in those days. They were good buddies then. US sold Iraq lots of good stuff. "The US provided less conventional military equipment than British or German companies but it did allow the export of biological agents, including anthrax; vital ingredients for chemical weapons; and cluster bombs sold by a CIA front organisation in Chile, the report says. Intelligence on Iranian troop movements was provided, despite detailed knowledge of Iraq's use of nerve gas." http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/dec/31/iraq.politics This was during the Iran/ Iraq war. Clearly, they had no problem with the (active) use of chemical weapons back then. No problem, at all $$$

Whether you consider it a mistake or not, the end result speaks for itself. A collosal failure that nearly brought the whole system down, ala soviette. Nyet, comrade, nyet

Pretty old. You can call me daddy

It's just a marketing ploy, for the target audience. Everybody knows, real men don't eat Danone

It exemplifies how a million small mistakes makes one big gigantic mistake.

We know that. I don't care either, but caring is not necessary for a conversation. I only do it... for the little people

I think they should rename the party to "HPC" - The Hells Angels Party of Canada.

True. Funny thing though, I remember at first our PM says about the bank bailout, "No, we don't have those problems here." Then finance minister Joe Flatulence whispers something in his ear, and Harper turns to the microphone and said "Yes we do." Next thing you know, away we go.

http://www.injusticebusters.com/index.htg/00001/saddam_Rumsfeld.jpg