Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
LordBalfor - thanks for the article. Chris Hayes and The Nation are lefties. He presents sanctions from the POV of lefty groups and pacifists. He uses (but at least acknowledges questions about) discredited Lancet death counts. He minimizes the UN corruption. And his bottom line is dumb and dumber:
Quote:
First, sanctions cannot be an indefinite means of "containment," Lopez and Cortright say. They should only be imposed when there are clearly defined incentives and a willingness on the part of the parties to give and take.
Second, and most importantly, comprehensive economic sanctions create such hardship for the innocent that they violate fundamental principles of justice.
1 - sanctions can only be applied if both countries are willing? Dumb.
2 - economic sanctions are always illegal? Dumber.
To me, the article reads as a indictment of sanctions. He mewls for inventing 'smart sanctions' that don't hurt anybody - kumbaya.
IMO sanctions should be considered to be blockades, and therefore Acts of War (but when the UN does it, it's okay, because then it's peaceful). They are indiscriminate and deliberate acts used to force a nation to compliance.
well if conservatives are still for the iraq war and think big bad saddam had wmds then dont take my taxes and charge me for some worthless, useless war, conservatives always complain, "i dont want no liberal taking my tax money for health care, etc...," well then dont take my hard earned tax money for your useless wars...
lkm370 - it's a deal, if you can guarantee that only you will die in a terrorist attack, until then you've got to provide for the common defense, it's a rule.
lkm370 - it's a deal, if you can guarantee that only you will die in a terrorist attack, until then you've got to provide for the common defense, it's a rule.
LAMO, are you wishing me dead?, wheres the compassiontive conservative?,i dont mind paying taxes for national defense and millitary, but not some useless war that i didnt approve of, the iraq war costs the average america 2,000 dollars in tax money a year, i would rather that money go to health care or new roads, schools, ect...
and please tell me how invading iraq prevented another terrorist attack
My friend, even if the "looney left" got GW to say he went over to Iraq solely for oil, you'd be convinced that it was because a "looney left" was holding a gun to his back.
Isn't it amazing though...that the country that is raiding and looting other countries for WMD is the country that has the most nukes in the world? Fancy that.
Oh wait, I must just be sleepwalking because I'm a "looney Left"...and yet you're the one who can't explain why you oppose gay rights
I dont have to explain to you why I oppose gay rights, I did that in an earlier post and of course the gays come after like a swarm of bees.
I dont like it, have the right to not like it and have the right to voice what I feel about it.
It's wrong period! How about that.
Looting, uhmm to loot you have to take something, what did we take acutally?
Children are playing in the streets lady, something they have never got to do since this killer took over. ALL because of us.
Good things have happened and because you are a lefty you will never see it even if it is put right in front of you.
Looting is what the people did during the LA Riots if you remember. Now that was real looting.
Having an "intent" to build WMD in the future is one thing.
Actually having them (as claimed by Bush administration) is another.
Having demonstrated plans to use them in an attack on the United States...instead of a strategic deterrent against their neighboring enemy Iran... is yet quite another.
Found WHAT ? WHERE? Have you ever taken the time to learn the difference between belief and reality?
Sure, GWB claimed there were WMDs, NONE have been found, yet he's "dead on right"? Just another confirmation that the States of Delusion and Denial are red ones.
Having an "intent" to build WMD in the future is one thing.
Actually having them (as claimed by Bush administration) is another.
Having demonstrated plans to use them in an attack on the United States...instead of a strategic deterrent against their neighboring enemy Iran... is yet quite another.
Not true. Saddam had to prove there were no WMD and WMD programs.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
