Iraq to Donate $94 Million to Poor Americans
January 15, 2001 9:32 AM   Subscribe

Iraq to Donate $94 Million to Poor Americans Interesting propaganda. But more interestingly - disregarding the donor, would the US ever accept such a donation? (How could we admit a need for charity at home when we send billions in aid abroad?) And what's next? We're not of a mindset to accept foreign meddling. What about UN relief efforts? International peacekeeping forces?
posted by Tubes (14 comments total)

 
Bwaha-haha! That wacky Saddam, I tell ya.
posted by tiaka at 9:58 AM on January 15, 2001


(How could we admit a need for charity at home when we send billions in aid abroad?) And what's next? We're not of a mindset to accept foreign meddling. What about UN relief efforts? International peacekeeping forces?
Really? Iraq has needed urgent medical and infrastructural aid for 10 years but the US, UK and EU continue to prevent voluntary aid agencies from helping Iraq. This approach hurts civilians and no-one else.
The only way to get aid to Iraq is through the Iraqi government. That's a superb way for the *allies* to achieve the stated aim of undermining Saddam's stranglehold on power.
Oh, and UN relief efforts are continuing worldwide despite the millions of dollars owed to it by the US.
posted by shakabu at 10:47 AM on January 15, 2001


Shakabu, there was an agreement just last week to pay up our UN debt, in return for a very sensible reduction in the percentages of the budget the US is expected to shoulder.

I'm curious how these funds are to be disbursed. I doubt it's to be given directly to the US government, probably to a private charity, maybe even a religious one. Some of the only contact they've had with the West has been through churches, the Vatican, the NCC. (And this would interestingly enough parallel the efforts of Dubya to make religious organizations the focus of what are now government programs ...) Then you get to the frozen assets problem.
posted by dhartung at 11:12 AM on January 15, 2001


Also to be noted: despite the cries of the peaceniks in our country that our boycott is starving children etc, Iraq is sending some 10 thousand dollars to every family whose son becomes a "martyr" among the Palestinians. If they can afford this to continue a war than they can also take care of the "starving" in their own country. Charity indeed begins at home.
posted by Postroad at 11:24 AM on January 15, 2001


Um....silly question, but if Iraq has 94 million bucks kicking around, why aren't they buying non-embargo related items with it? Sort of a mondo version of the occasional story you hear about a homeless person dying in the street with wads of cash all over him...
posted by DiplomaticImmunity at 12:07 PM on January 15, 2001


Postroad,
Firstly, the Iraqi administration are sending 10,000 dollars to martyred Palestinians. The Iraqi administration have not represented the people of Iraq for 20 years. They represent the interests of Saddam Hussein and his ruling Baa'th party.
Secondly, Iraq is not at war with any other state, merely with minorities within its borders.
Thirdly, *peacenik*- Ha!
Dan, D'oh! Thanks for the link. Humble pie in fridge to see if the agreement survives W's transition.
posted by shakabu at 12:08 PM on January 15, 2001


The Iraqi administration have not represented the people of Iraq for 20 years. They represent the interests of Saddam Hussein and his ruling Baa'th party.

In other words, it's a rather ordinary sort of government.

When exactly was it that the U.S. got the stone tablet handed down from on high explaining the mission to convert all governments on the planet into capitalist democracies?

-Mars
posted by Mars Saxman at 1:33 PM on January 15, 2001


America....

enslaved Africans
slaughtered Indians
dropped the A-bomb on the Japanese
put Japanese-Americans in prison camps
Slaughtered Korean Civilians
Massacred Vietnamese civilians
bombed Cambodian civilians
dropped depleted Uranium weapons on Iraqi civilians
supports the illegal Israeli regime which has displaced a people, and continues to murder unarmed civilians
enforces drug laws selectively, especially against minorities and the poor
executes minorities and the poor at a vastly higher rate than whites or wealthy people

yeah, we're the "go to" guy when it comes to Democracy, justice, and human rights.

posted by cell divide at 1:49 PM on January 15, 2001


The sanctions policy for Iraq is an example of how the US expects to neutralize what it considers to be recalcitrant countries in the post cold-war era. That is in the absence of a competing super-power.

Iraq has been cubanized.
posted by lagado at 2:24 PM on January 15, 2001


Iraq has been cubanized.

And Fidel Castro sees the tenth US president during his rule take office next weekend. Good job Saddam's not in the best of health.
posted by holgate at 2:38 PM on January 15, 2001


Obviously, this is a move, however confusing, by Saddam to deflect attention from his country onto the US, which is arguably one of the worst when it comes to dealing with poverty.

The reason Iraq, Bonsia, El Salvador, Haiti and Indonesia were all put under US military rule is because they refused to be forced under international trade laws. They refused because no developing economy has ever exported itself into prosperity. Haiti, for instance, exports more rice than it keeps, but vast number of Haitians are starving. They export food that could go to feed their starving citizenery because of the economic changes agreed to when the IMF bailed them out — after years of US destabilization.

We didn't invade Iraq because he was killing people. America was suporting Saddam when he committed his biggest atrocities against the Kurds and Iran.

Contextual reference: Chomsky vs. George I on the Gulf “War.” (~4:00 4mb mp3)
posted by capt.crackpipe at 2:51 PM on January 15, 2001


cell divide I think that you made a valid point that U.S. has in the past, and certainly continues, to violate people's basic rights. We should acknowledge our past problems.

However, with that being said, we must see that was in the past and that should not stop us from trying to be better democracy, and perhaps more importantly, strive to make sure the principles of the Bill of Rights and the Constitution a reality. Just because he have failed to live to the promise of an American Democracy doesn't mean can't try to make it real. No country is perfect, all countries are guilty of violating the rights of citizens or subjects.
posted by Bag Man at 4:30 PM on January 15, 2001


What? In the past? Usurping soverign nations self-reliance is the raison d'etre of oppressive neo-liberal institutions like the WTO and IMF.
posted by capt.crackpipe at 5:24 PM on January 15, 2001


If they can afford this to continue a war than they can also take care of the "starving" in their own country. Charity indeed begins at home.

Well doesn't that cut both ways?

In the past? One word -- Colombia. I think this is a very cute and shrewd move on Saddam's part. The US has its own dirty hands, abroad and at home.

Geez, let's get off Iraq's back, already.
posted by locombia at 5:49 PM on January 15, 2001


« Older A corporate MetaFilter?   |   Entropy Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments