What it was like in Iraq before....education, women's rights, culture.

[madfloridian]

It seems many have not heard that this was a cultured society with a high literacy rate. Many of the new folks might like to read a little about this country before Bush I built them up as our middle east guardian....then had to tear Saddam down.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/weekend/story/0,3605,232986,00.html
Squeezed to Death
by John Pilger
Half a million children have died in Iraq since UN sanctions were imposed - most enthusiastically by Britain and the US. Three UN officials have resigned in despair. Meanwhile, bombing of Iraq continues almost daily. John Pilger investigates

Saturday March 4, 2000

SNIP.."Wherever you go in Iraq's southern city of Basra, there is dust. It gets in your eyes and nose and throat. It swirls in school playgrounds and consumes children kicking a plastic ball. "It carries death," said Dr Jawad Al-Ali, a cancer specialist and member of Britain's Royal College of Physicians. "Our own studies indicate that more than 40 per cent of the population in this area will get cancer: in five years' time to begin with, then long afterwards. Most of my own family now have cancer, and we have no history of the disease. It has spread to the medical staff of this hospital. We don't know the precise source of the contamination, because we are not allowed to get the equipment to conduct a proper scientific survey, or even to test the excess level of radiation in our bodies. We suspect depleted uranium, which was used by the Americans and British in the Gulf War right across the southern battlefields."

And from the Hindustan Times a little about the high level role of women in Iraq until after the 1st Gulf War....courtesy of us.

http://www.hindustantimes.com/news/5983_945519,004300140003.htm
SNIP:.."...let us look at the situation of the women in Iraq to understand the background. Iraqi women were once among the most highly educated and professional women in the Middle East. As early as 1920 the Iraqi women moved to gain more rights and a better education. They demanded to be recognised as full citizens, insisted on and defended their freedom from having to wear a veil in public, as per Islamic tradition. Aswa Zahawi founded the Women's Rising Group, which began publishing ‘Leila’, a journal promoting education and employment rights for women. All these efforts paid back, resulting in them joining the job markets by the late 1920s and early 1930s, making them pioneers in the Middle East.

Women have played important roles throughout Iraq's modern history. It was in the early years of the secular Baathist regime that women's status and rights were formally enshrined in legislation and treaties. In 1970, the new constitution nominally made Iraqi women and men equal under the law. Say what you may for our man Saddam Hussein, but under his rule, women's literacy and education improved, and restrictions on women outside their homes were lifted. Women won the right to vote and to run for political office, and they could freely drive, work and hold jobs traditionally held only by men...."END SNIP This was under Saddam Hussein

Now that we are there, women's rights are being threatened. They are being forced to wear veils, and the jobs that exist must go to the men...the ones that exist.

I guess it is the schoolteacher in me that gets upset when I see the total ignorance of some Americans about other cultures. We are becoming like the person in the white house....uncurious.

[FlaIndie]

1. Saddam was moderate, but a moderate tyrant

While some other regimes in the area--okay, most--were more intolerant than Saddam was, we can't forget that this is the same guy who committed atrocities against his own people, Iranians, and Kuwaitis. Nobody, except for Sunnis and some of his allies, should be sad to see him go. It was like the unpopular--but now known true--comment by Dean before the Iowa primary: it's great that Saddam is captured, but it doesn't make us (or the troops) any safer.

If we want to complain about the way Bush handled the war, fine. The sense of lawlessness and utter contempt for international law spread down through the ranks and the burning of bridges with foreign leaders led to there not being enough troops on the ground, which is the main reason we see an increased amount of crime and lawlessness there.

As for the embargo, who is more responsible for the welfare of Iraq and its citizens? I would venture to say Saddam, who would rather have 2-dozen billion-dollar mansions than to use Food-for-Oil money to actually feed the people. But I can see the point in that the system did give Saddam a tighter grip on the food supply than in the more open market they had prior to Gulf War I.

I just can't see any reason to even pretend that Saddam being out of power is a bad thing. Only the way it was handled/mangled was bad.

[CaTeacher]

3. At one time things were actually

pretty progressive in Iraq.

But let's not kid ourselves, life under the sanctions was HELL. For many years these people have been suffering (at our hands).

I have friends in the middle east--over the years tales came back to me of families going hungry due to the sanctions. Mothers out trying to sell their meager possessions (even the children's toys) just so that they could have enough food to survive. Difficulties getting basic medicine and health care. It has been a horrible situation during the sanctions.

Things are definitely better now--just because we were torturing them every day with the sanctions. At least now, we are not actively keeping food and medicine from the people.

[FlaIndie]

4. my point in my post

was that the sanctions never kept the food and medicine from the Iraqis; Saddam did. The sanctions really only gave him the power to do so because he had full control over everything once sanctions were in place and food and medicine could easily be controlled because it was all coordinated through the Ba'athist party, who dealt with the UN.

I wish there was some way to do away with Castro to get the same result. While Cuba is better off than Iraq, with sanctions in place, only the hardline supporters can live high on the hog there.

Everything you do is a win-lose situation when it comes to getting tough on regimes.

[madfloridian]

5. Go after Castro, too? So you advocate regime change by us?

Is that every country? Just a few? What standards should be used before we invade.

Oh my, I have so many questions.

[H2O Man]

8. "so many questions".....

and so many of us agreeing with you. Why Cuba? If we're going to go after governments that are oppressive, why not start with China? North Korea? The United States? Why Cuba?

[madfloridian]

17. Glad some agree. Many do not. We are too non-questioning.

We are not asking enough questions of our government. We are allowing our candidate to slide by without asking the hard questions about imperialism and we are not insisting on an answer.

[jdj]

48. NO. I don't want to hear any more until Saudi Arabia is liberated.

I am sick sick sick of hearing about tyrants and brutal dictators when our pretzeldent's fuck-buddies are the most repressive regime on the planet.

[FlaIndie]

10. I said I wish there were.

I mean, obviously we could if we wanted to, but internationally it would be condemned, more so than the Iraq war. Most countries don't even have an embargo against Cuba; just the U.S.

Living in Florida, most people here would like to see Castro out. It isn't just the refugees. I'm not advocating we actually take Castro down. We tried that over 40 years ago. But like with Iraq under Clinton, when he signed the Iraq Liberation Act, it should be the U.S.' mission to support the toppling of Castro when the situation arises. The U.S. should not instigate the situation.

[madfloridian]

12. Totally disagree. How does Castro hurt you in Florida.?

When did forcing our desires on other countries become ok? What is happening here in the US? This is scary to me.

When did it become the thing to do to topple dictators? If that is what you want, why not do it to the really bad guys overseas?

This is alarming.

[FlaIndie]

19. I'm not saying we topple him

We should tacitly support (and perhaps provide help to) any rebellion that would overthrow Castro and pursue a U.N.-approved new government when it happens. That is what happened in Haiti earlier this year when J.B.A. had to resign due to the rebels reaching the capitol.

Bush I screwed up the first Gulf War by only verbally encouraging those who rose up against Saddam. Had they won (a lot of Sunnis would have died, no doubt), there would never have been sanctions and the coaltion could have stepped back in and provided aid and made sure the three main ethnicities stayed out of each others way as an interim gov't was forged.

Bush II's one accomplishment in Afghanistan was helping the Northern Alliance topple the Taliban (with NATO support) and installing a pro-Western interim president. Okay, he only did this after we were attacked by the Taliban's bosom buddy Osama. But he made the mistake of moving his toys further over into the sand instead of finishing the job and things are still bad there in every city outside of Kabul and Kandahar, where NATO and the US are stationed.

[Vladimir]

20. And we can all see

how great a shape Haiti is in now...

[FlaIndie]

24. nice one-liner

but the people there will be better off than with the crook Aristide in power. It was already officially the poorest nation in the western hemisphere. I work with a couple of Haitians and they don't think anything of him being removed. The economic system kept only a few people wealthy and 90% in poverty. Kind of like Bush if he had his way. ;)

[Vladimir]

25. Oh I wasn't making Aristide

out to be a hero... I am a communist after all. Its just that the unedifying spectacle of Western colonial powers bringing democracy to the savages got sickening to me a long time ago...

[FlaIndie]

28. It's got a lot to do if they want it or not

I saw on CNN's Crossfire the other day, Tucker Carlson even said the Iraqis weren't culturally attuned to democracy. That flies in the face of Bush's saying a year or so ago that people who said that were nay-sayers. Well, outside of the Kurdistan area of Iraq, it is largely true.

Spanish culture (though it will vary from nation to nation) is certainly more tolerant of freedoms and against the religious rule that is in place in most mid east countries. Weren't we all glad that Spain picked a more leftist government that knew that fighting in Iraq actually had nothing to do with the war on terror (esp. considering they had a terrorist attack right before the election)? When they showed Fahrenheit 9/11 in Cuba, people were amazed an American could actually take such a stand against the government. I can't say for sure that most Cubans want him out, but all those who escape--and many have relatives left behind there who just cannot get away or are nationalistic enough to stay--would probably be in favor of it.

And it does have an affect on the U.S. because of all of those refugees who do come ashore. It isn't enough to start a pre-emptive war (very little is), but we should support a resistance that would bring equality and economic balance to the supposed worker's nation.

[Vladimir]

29. Culturally attuned to democracy?!

In what sense are they not attuned? Is that like the British not being culturally attuned to democracy because they have the House of Lords? I can't imagine what you mean...

As for Cuba, do you really think Castro would be in power now, so many years later, if he didn't have grassroots support in Cuba? I mean, its not like this is North Korea we are talking about, with the world's 4th largest army or something. The reason that there is no popular uprising in Cuba is that vast numbers of Cubans support the current government...

[FlaIndie]

32. well, look at the last election

Castro got 100% of the vote. There is only one party. MAYBE he would have won, but nobody is allowed to even challenge him. Saddam was also the only guy on the ballot and you'd have to be kidding me if he could draw support outside of Sunni areas. Shi'ites make up the majority of the population and would have probably picked some nutjob, sorry to say. Maybe it isn't democracy they wouldn't be attuned to as much as it is equality.

Like madfloridian states, things are bad now with the religious majority unofficially controlling the streets.

Going back to the original topic of this thread, things are better in Iraq now, things are worse in Iraq now. Things are getting better, things are getting worse. It really depends on who you talk to. The Iraqi soccer team is tearing it up in Athens and don't have to worry about being torn up literally if they lose but can't even practice in their own country due to the violence.

[madfloridian]

39. But unless they directly threaten us, they are NOT OUR business.

That is the point you are missing.

[TankLV]

44. We should not have gone into Iraq in the 1st place because of bush*s lies.

Everything else doesn't matter.

bush* trashed world peace with his "I'll attack anyone I damn please, fuck you all" attitude.

Saddam was successfully contained. He was a threat to no one but his own people.

NO ONE else but bunkerboy and the repukes would have agreed to go after him if all it was was because he was a "bad" person. NO ONE.

We should get out NOW as quickly as we can.

It was never "right" and staying only postpones the inevitable collapse and civil war that will come - with possibly Islamic dictatorship.

Thanks to george!

[jdj]

53. The topic of the thread was that Iraqi women were under secular law

before, and now they are increasingly under sharia law.

Part of the reasons (lies) this war was touted was to "liberate" Iraqi women. Because this admin knew that people didn't know Iraqi women were some of the most free in the muslim world. Not they aren't. How is this progress?

[FlaIndie]

60. okay, I will say women are worse off in Iraq now in general

...right now. The whole resentment I had was that the original post put Saddam in a relatively positive light, when he is a butcher. Nobody should be sad to see him deposed. Right now things are bad, but hopefully that will be remedied. The key is having a rule of law that promotes equal rights and people who will enforce it. I don't know right now if either will happen because our government can't do anything right internationally.

No, the war was not worth it and people need to stop accusing me of being Shrub fan. Had things been handled correctly 13 years ago when Saddam had violated international boundaries and invaded Kuwait if we'd deposed Saddam with the 1.6 million people in the Gulf War coalition instead of the 160k mostly-US coalition and setup a viable government, things would already be better in Iraq. At least that is my opinion.

[jdj]

62. "Nobody should be sad to see him deposed."

I think you should ask the families of the dead about that and see what kind of answer they get. I would unequivocalby NOT give up the life of a family member to this end.

There is a right way and a wrong way to do it. Do I think it was worth over 900 American soldiers' lives??? Hell no. I'm sad as hell, and I'm mad as hell. John Kerry said "How can you ask a man to be the last man to die for a mistake?" and I say 'How can you ask a man to be the FIRST many to die for a mistake?'

So many of us knew this was a bogus scam a lie and a racket before it ever got rolling.

[FlaIndie]

66. I agree

The ends were good, but the means were not. People died on both sides in an unnecessary war. That doesn't mean Saddam was a good guy. That is my one argument. The guy was progressive in female rights and education. So was Stalin and the Bolsheviks. They tought people, fended off the Nazis, then killed tens of millions of their own people.

[Pastiche423]

65. The intent of MadFloridian's post

was that prior to the US interference in Iraq, the Iraqi women were educated, held good jobs and had freedoms.

The same can not be said about the Iraqi women now.

[Vladimir]

77. All this going on about

Saddam as the bad guy ignores context completely. Was Ghengis Khan bad? Sure he was. What about Tamburlaine the Great? He was a nasty piece of work too. Would removing one and installing the other have been seen as progress? Well gee now, I don't know. The answer would probably depend from person to person, because certain groups would be more likely to suffer under one and other groups more likely to be persecuted under the other. So would a reasonble person necessarily be happy to see Ghanghis Khan deposed? Why, yes of course - unless his replacement was Tamburlaine, or Attila the Hun, or Ivan the Terrible, or Vlad the Impaler or... you get the picture. Moreover, it is positively counterproductive to go on about how happy you are that Ghenghis was deposed, and how evil he was, becuase this gives a reasonable person the impression that things have somehow gotten better!

Now let us relate this contextualising back to the topic, i.e. Iraq. In Iraq, the ocupational powers, meaning the "Coalition of the Willing" are responsible for all the "civilian" deaths which occur due either to:

1) Their direct action

2) The breakdown in law and order

3) A lack of public services

These deaths now total, by a very conservative estimate, at around 12,000. That is from Iraqbodycount.net, and only relates reported deaths since the end of "major combat operations". The Pentagon, if I recall correctly, puts the figure for the whole war at around 30,000. No matter, this is not far off the rate at which they were being killed during Saddam's time, and at one point we were going at a 20% greater rate. And certainly compared to the latter stages of Saddam's regime, what is going on now is mass murder. We have replaced Ghanghis with Timberlaine, but we keep saying how bad Ghenghis was. This makes it seem that Timberlaine is somehow better, when he is not!

[jdj]

87. And don't forget the terraists, and fighting the war on terra

and WMD's, and Niger uranium, and all the utter and complete bullshit sold to the public to get them behind this war, which killed many more innocents than 9/11 which is what this war is supposed to be a response to which it isn't because Iraq wasn't involved in 9/11 in the first place which makes the entire dicussion moot...I mean if almost 1000 more americans are dead (soldiers), then how the hell are we safer?

[Vladimir]

89. You are not safter, but that was never the point

Even Afganistan, taken to completion (as some people argue should have been done) would have made you no safer, becuase the root causes would have remained. As long as the third world is manipulated and exploited for the ends of the West, there will be more Bin Ladens out there. And indeed, even if the exploitation were to stop tomorrow, the ill feeling would remain. I am not, as you can see, an optimist in these matters... after all, my country sucessfully revisited 100 year old scars after the most prosperous 40 years in its history, with well known results...

[jdj]

91. I know that, but that's the slogan on the nightly news.

It's the selling point, and if you don't believe it you're a communist eunuch or something.

I don't think the west is the only bad guy, but we do seem to love to help all the little thug mafias that spring up anywhere when it benefits our ends.

I think it's in our primitive nature for thug mafias to crop up everywhere, and fighting this is our absolute greatest challenge. It will be the only sign for me that there has been evolution instead of sideways mutation with regards to our separation from chimpanzees.

[Vladimir]

92. There are days when I wonder

whether even to call it sideways mutation is to be charitable...

[jdj]

93. Well there was that article on here a few weeks ago

where there was a monkey started walking upright after a virus.
Makes you wonder.

[madfloridian]

37. Oh my lord, "culturally attuned to democracy? What does that mean?

Where are you getting this stuff? The middle east is not exactly famous for being democratic, and it is not our job to do it for them.

Iran was making progress, at least the people are/were becoming more pro-western and more open to ideas of democracy.....so we are probably going to invade them next. Or at least bomb the hell out of them. Why did we do Iraq? I forgot.

Let's see, 70,000 troops being "recalled". Wonder where they are headed?

Supposition of course, but that phrase "culturally attuned to democracy" is purely insulting to any people.

What a confused bunch of people Americans seem to be now. The resident of the white house lied his butt off about Iraq, but people keep saying they are better off? My head is about ready to pop with all the spin.

Castro, Saddam, Aristide, Chavez...we worry so much about them....and we don't even have a way to recount our own damn votes in this so-called Democracy.

[jdj]

54. "'where are you getting this stuff?"

Um, straight out of the elephant's mouth (Tucker Carlson).

[madfloridian]

55. Yep, complete with bowtie.

:hi:

[jdj]

64. I think that is repuke code for

I'm a flaming homosexual trapped in the party of fag-bashers by birth, money and religious affiliation.

[Vladimir]

82. People who talk about cultural attunement

to democracy would do well to remember that, to give but two examples, Spain and Greece were dictatorships until very recently. Most of the Balkans have only had liberal democracy for some 10 years now, although Yugoslavia was arguably pretty democratic under Tito (though not in a western sense of the word). For that matter, the UK still has an unelected house of representatives. When it comes to democracy, cultures to me seem fairly blind... part of the porobelm is that people refuse to learn for experience that you cannot just go around installing democracy. If the grassroots support is not there (in the form of popular movements and parties), it will crumble again as soon as you pull out, and you will probably leave more of a mess than you found.

[madfloridian]

27. Are the people better off now? Tinoire, where are you?

This person thinks the people in Haiti are better off now. How bout some input here?

Like the Iraqis are better off? With civil war between the factions in the offing and a no win situation?

[Pastiche423]

33. Don't know where Tinoire is

but I miss her and her well researched posts very much.

As to if the people in Haiti are better off...

An except of an email from an American presently in Haiti:

I have been absolutely shocked at how much worse the situation is on the ground here than I ever could have imagined just reading about it from the US. We have met with dozens of people who are in hiding or who have had family members killed or houses burned. We have visited political prisoners and attended demonstrations calling for the return of democracy.

One thing that I have been struck by is the level of anti-Bush sentiment here. If Haitians could vote in our elections we would have no problem getting rid of George Bush."

There is something that has been troubling me greatly about some of the posters on this board. They spout imperialistic comments about Chavez, Aristide, Castro, etc while sporting Kerry/Edwards images. Do Kerry/Edwards support those comments?

[FlaIndie]

34. Imperialism?

Who here says we should colonize the nearby countries whose current political and/or economic instability affects our border security and economic security in heavily-immigrated areas? John Kerry in the Democratic debates said that Aristide had a lot of problems. It is up to the world's largest super-power to help make sure things stay in control once the old government is toppled and get a legitimate government (Aristide hadn't been legitimiately elected since the early 90s) in place, WITH the help of the U.N., who can show that it is not just us acting unilaterally.

[Pastiche423]

45. Thank you for proving the point of my concern.

[FlaIndie]

49. Kerry and Edwards said a lot of what I said

From the LA debate:

KERRY: Here's what I'm telling you. Here's what I'm telling you. This administration set up an equation. They have a theological and a ideological hatred for Aristide. They always have.

And they approach this so that the insurgents were given -- empowered by this administration, because they said to the insurgents, "If you... Until you reach an agreement with Aristide and the government about sharing power, we're not going to provide aid and assistance."

So we empowered them to simply veto any agreement, which is what they're still doing with respect to a power-sharing in another government.

What this president ought to have done is to have given them an ultimatum: Either we're going to restore the democracy, have the full democracy in the region -- notwithstanding that I think Aristide has some problems, and I do.

And I think there have been serious problems in his police, the way they've managed things. But our engagement should have been to try to restore the democracy, to bring those people together. That's what president...

From the NY debate:

Senator Kerry, President Bush has made it clear that the United States will be part of an international force going to Haiti. You've been critical of that action. Tell me what your beef is with what the president's doing.

MR. KERRY. He's late - as usual. This president always makes decisions late, after things have happened that could have been different had the president made a different decision earlier.

Q. Senator Kerry, what would you have done in this situation?

MR. KERRY. Well first of all, I never would have allowed it to get out of control the way it did. This administration empowered the insurgents. And it empowered - look, Aristide -

Q. How did it empower the insurgents?

Senator KERRY. I'll tell you precisely how. But first let me say this, President Aristide has made plenty of mistakes. And his police have run amok and other things have happened. I understand that. But the fact is that by giving to the insurgents the power to veto an agreement they effectively said unless you two reach an agreement on the sharing of power we're not going to provide aid and assistance.

So he empowered the insurgents to say no, we're not going to reach agreement. And they continued to battle, continued to have no services provided in Haiti, and then it started to spiral downward. So the result is that you almost inevitably had the clash that you have today. And innocent Haitians, the people of Haiti deserved better than that over the course of the last years.

Q. Senator Edwards, could we ask what you think of this? Did you agree with the president's decision? And - you've been critical in the past of his policy towards Haiti.

MR. EDWARDS. Yeah, that's because he's ignored Haiti the same way he's ignored most of the countries in this hemisphere. We have - this is a country that's extraordinarily unstable. I think this is the 33rd government that they've had. One of the poorest nations, if not the poorest nation in the world. They - we should have been engaged over a long period of time in a serious way. Not - at least through diplomacy - not to allow this to get to a crisis situation where it now is.

I do believe that now, that now the proper thing to do is for America to be part of the United Nations force to secure the country. That is the right thing to do.

But there are very serious issues here. The Haitian constitution, for example, provides that the chief justice is a successor to Aristide. The chief justice apparently is very close to Aristide. I mean we have to put a political process in place, stabilize the country first, then put a political process in place that allows us to move toward a serious democratic election, so that the people of Haiti are satisfied with the result.

Q. Senator, do you have any argument with anything that Senator Kerry just said about Haiti?

MR. EDWARDS. We have a slight difference. I think it is true that, at its best, for the president and the administration this has been neglect. In other words they've paid no attention, they haven't been engaged. At its worst, they have actually facilitated the ouster of Aristide.

Now, he did say that Bush empowered the rebels too much by letting them turn down negotiations for change. If we could have had a fair election, Aristide would have been outsted. Of course, that holds true in Cuba, Venezuela, would have been true in Iraq...

[madfloridian]

57. Yes, and many of us question them as well.

They are NOT taking definitive stands on war and imperialism.

[T Town Jake]

79. You've got to be kidding me...

..."many of us question them as well"...????

Pretty much says it all...

[madfloridian]

86. Many of us life-long democrats.

Nothing wrong with questioning. They both say that knowing what they know now, they would still give this Bush person the authority.

[Vladimir]

75. John Kerry also went on and on about Chavez

and we have all seen what happened there...

It is not up to the US to make sure of jack shit. It is not up to the UN, acting on behalf of the US, to make sure of jack shit. If these agencies want to send humanitarian aid to refugees that is one thing. But leave this democracy building in the third world alone, dammit!!!

[Dangerman]

35. Jeez Loius...

Out goes Saddam and in goes all-out civil war...

The Iraqis sure enjoyed their new-found "freedom".

Suuuuure they do.

[TankLV]

42. Crook?

Got any proof to go with your repuke talking points.

Just because you repeat a lie, doesn't make it true.

Aristide was no "crook", by a long shot!

To say otherwise, is slander and a lie.

[FlaIndie]

56. yes, a crook

He stole the 2000 election in a fashion that would make a Bush bust a nut in his pants. Every other party boycotted the results, which said Aristide garnered 92% of the elected vote. The Organization of American States, the U.S. and the European Union (incl. France) disputed the results.

[Pastiche423]

59. Links to the disputed results, please

[FlaIndie]

63. okay....

The European Union takes note of the announcement by the Provisional Electoral Council of the election of Mr Jean-Bertrand Aristide in the presidential poll held in Haiti on 26 November 2000.
It deplores the fact that the presidential and senatorial elections on 26 November 2000 were preceded by a wave of violence, including a series of explosions which claimed many victims, killing two children in particular.
The Union regrets that the efforts of the Organisation of American States (OAS) did not lead to an agreement, particularly on two vital issues:
– setting up an independent Provisional Electoral Council, representative of the range of opinion in the country;
– addressing and resolving the disputes arising from the contested elections held on 21 May 2000.
The opposition refused under these circumstances to present any candidates, and no international observer mission could be organised.
The European Union stresses the need to respect human rights and democratic pluralism. It urges the resumption of dialogue amongst all sections of Haitian society.
The European Union points out that, following the refusal of the Haitian authorities to take account of the OAS's findings on the elections of 21 May 2000, it initiated the consultation procedure provided for in Article 96 of the Cotonou Agreement in order to seek measures to remedy the situation, but it does not rule out the possibility of readjusting its cooperation with Haiti if no acceptable solution were to be found.
The Central and Eastern European countries associated with the European Union, the associated countries Cyprus, Malta and Turkey, and the EFTA countries Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway, members of the European Economic Area align themselves with this declaration.


http://www.france.diplomatie.fr/actu/articleTxt.gb.asp?ART=10350

Haiti has 4.8 million registered voters, but an alliance of 15 opposition parties boycotted the vote.

A spate of bomb attacks may have kept turnout low
The build-up to the elections was marred by violence including at least 10 bomb explosions.

A 14-year-old boy was killed and 14 others injured in a series of bomb attacks that rocked the capital, Port-au-Prince.

Dozens of people were killed or wounded in previous weeks.

The opposition protested the disputed results of May's legislative elections which, according to international observers, were miscalculated in favour of Mr Aristide's party.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1047539.stm

On Sunday, November 2 Haitians showed up at the polls to elect nine senators and a new president. And the week came to a totally predictable end. According to Haiti's electoral commission, 92 percent of Haitians chose Aristide. But not everyone views Aristide as a democratically elected leader. Haiti's opposition-a coalition of fifteen small parties calling itself the Democratic Convergence-boycotted the vote. The United States and the European Union refused to fund it. The Organization of American States (OAS) declined to send election monitors.
And United Nations Secretary General Kofi Annan recommended that the U.N. mission in Haiti should end , when its current mandate expires next - February. There is currently no American ambassador to Haiti (a decision the embassy spokesman says is not political). And as a result of ongoing electoral disputes, hundreds of millions of dollars in foreign loans t (including virtually all U.S. aid to s Haiti's government) remain frozen.

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Caribbean/Aristide_Again.html

Haiti has long been considered a mess. The latest straw was the May legislative election, declared flawed by the United States, the Organization of American States, the United Nations and Human Rights Watch. Haiti's once and future president, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, out of office because he is barred from serving consecutive terms, has been accused by the world press of living high and undermining the current government, and of complicity in political violence.

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/09/27/MN56655.DTL

[Judi Lynn]

61. Yes, a link to Aristide's theft of the 2000 election would be wonderful.

We're ready to read, believe me.

On edit:

While we wait, here's one I found:

Haiti: US Undermines Another Democracy
by George Friemoth, MITF(snip)
Historically, the US works with Latin American governments made up of landed, wealthy elites supported by military forces trained by the US. In 1995, Haiti abolished its military and became the second in the hemisphere after Costa Rica to do so. The demobilization did not set well with the Haitian elite or the US. Using a strategy that worked well in defeating the Nicaraguan Sandinistas in the 1990 elections, an alliance of opposition parties, called the Convergence, was formed and funded by the International Republican Institute (IRI), a creation of Congress representing Republican party interests. The strategy failed.

In May 2000, the Lavalas party of President Aristide swept the parliamentary elections winning over 80 percent of all the seats. The 27 opposition parties, including the 15 parties in the Convergence, received only about 12 percent of the vote. One Haitian opposition leader who did not want his name revealed, admitted at the time, "Aristide cannot be beaten in democratic elections."
The US reaction provoked a political crisis. Washington cut off all funding for the presidential elections scheduled in November 2000 and, when its efforts to postpone the constitutionally mandated election failed, it encouraged the opposition candidates to boycott the elections.

Using the pretext of a minor technical disagreement regarding the calculation of voter percentage in the May 2000 elections (that pale in comparison with those found in the Florida after our 2000 presidential elections), the US blocked a $146 million loan from the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). The loan had been approved by the IDB, signed by the Haitian government and intended for critically needed health care (AIDS), education (basic literacy) and public works (potable water and impassable roads). Last year, in order to avoid losing the contracted loan, Haiti paid $10 million on the loan it didn't receive.

The IDB loan is part of a blocked total aid package of $500 million earmarked for Haiti by international financial institutions. This is the same $500 million that the international community determined to be necessary for Haiti in 1994 when democratic rule was restored with President Aristide's return from exile. For the last eight years, the US has managed to effectively block funds to the Haitian government while permitting $70 million to flow to the Convergence and, through USAID, to NGOs that support the Convergence.
(snip/...)

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Haiti/US_Undermines_Haiti.html

[Judi Lynn]

71. Where are your links to articles concerning Aristide's theft

of the Presidential election?

[FlaIndie]

73. look up

[Judi Lynn]

74. I meant the links which actually indicate Aristide stole the election.

I"ve seen the links you posted.

On edit:

Here's another link:

The latest chapter in Haiti's long agony began with mid-year parliamentary elections in 2000. The constitution requires runoffs when a majority of the total vote is not achieved. The counting method had not been challenged by the opposition or OAS observers beforehand. But afterwards, a US government-financed International Republican Institute operative instigated a challenge of the counting method, providing a pretext for international challenge of the election and an opposition excuse to boycott the December presidential election in which Aristide would certainly have been returned to office.

Fanmi Lavalas offered to rerun the contested elections that fall. The opposition rejected that obvious solution. But the Democratic Convergence — 4-5% of the electorate — which included parties so small Haitian journalists call them "particles," had found a means to occasion US interference and paralyze Aristide's government. It has since refused to negotiate unless Aristide resigns, and has stopped the Electoral Commission from holding elections by refusing to name members. The DC cannot elect a government but it would rule — however, if only by frustrating rule.
(snip/...)

http://www.peaceactionme.org/march4slavick.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

A VERY interesting link on Aristide's election:

My last visit to Haiti occurred in April and early May of 2000. I left there only a week or so before what later became known as the "flawed" elections. Preval was still President, but Aristide was to run again for election in December. When I got home from that trip, I told everyone who asked me about Haiti: "The United states is going to do everything in its power to prevent Aristide's election. But it probably will not succeed because he is so overwhelmingly popular with Haiti's impoverished majority. Therefore, what they will do is everything they can think of to make it impossible for him to govern."

We are now watching the climax of that strategy. The May, 2000, parliamentary elections were challenged on a technicality, declared to be "flawed," and made the pretext for the few people opposed to Aristide to boycott the presidential election later that year, which in turn became the basis for saying that his presidency was not legitimate. In the summer of 2000 the International Republican Institute helped cobble together a political coalition of splinter parties that became known ever after as "the opposition." From the start, it adopted what it called "zero option," which meant that it would not cooperate with Aristide in any way as long as he was in office.

Yesterday (March 1) John Kerry became the first U.S. politician that I have heard who described the US role in Haiti correctly. He said that the US, by telling Aristide consistently that he had to come to terms with the opposition, had in effect empowered them to refuse all compromise. I can't remember if Kerry mentioned it, but the other thing the US did on the political front was to block loans to Haiti by the InterAmerican Development Bank that had been intended mainly for health and education.

It is now clear, as some of us suspected all along, that the US was also engaged in covert operations to prepare for the use of arms against Aristide and for the return of the Haitian Army (FADH), which Aristide had disbanded, against the wishes of the US Government, in 1995 in the most popular move he ever made as President. The recent insurgency is equipped with powerful weapons, has used a land and sea strategy, was trained in the Dominican Republic, is headed by the same military and paramilitary criminals who worked with the CIA in 1991-94, could not have taken place without US Government knowledge, and shows every sign of being an intentional part of US strategy.
(snip/...)

http://www.witherspoonsociety.org/2004/driver_on_haiti.htm

[Judi Lynn]

72. More information on the 2000 election you claim Aristide stole

(snip)
May 21, 2000

After being postponed three times during the last seven months, Haitian parliamentary and local elections are finally held with a turnout of about 60 percent. Voters must fill some 7,625 posts in the legislature, mayoral commissions, and local and rural councils that were made vacant in January 1999, when the congress and local offices were disbanded by President Rene Preval (see January 1999). The Lavalas party of Jean-Bertrand Aristide wins the elections by a landslide, winning 15 of the 19 contested Senate seats and some 80 percent of the seats in the House of Assembly. However the results are challenged by the opposition, the US, and the Organization of American States, which say that Haiti's electoral council did not use the proper formula to calculate the votes. As a result of the controversy, the opposition will boycott the June 9 run-off elections (see July 9, 2000) as well as the presidential elections in November (see November 2000). More significantly, aid donors threaten that they will continue to withhold $500 million in aid if the government does not come to an agreement with the opposition.
People and organizations involved: Jean-Bertrand Aristide, Rene Preval




July 9, 2000

Haiti holds run-off elections for candidates who failed to win a majority of the votes in the May 21 elections (see May 21, 2000). However 10 senators from the party of Jean-Bertrand Aristide who won only by plurality, and not by majority, are not required to run, prompting immediate criticism from the US, UN, the OAS, and the opposition parties. Donor nations and organizations threaten to continue withholding $400 million in aid.
People and organizations involved: Organization of American States (OAS), Jean-Bertrand Aristide




October 18, 2000

The prime minister of Haiti says that Guy Philippe and others are planning to overthrow the Aristide government. Philippe and the other plotters flee across the Dominican border before they can be arrested.
People and organizations involved: Guy Philippe, Jean-Bertrand Aristide




November 2000

Jean-Bertrand Aristide runs unopposed in Haiti's presidential elections and wins with 91.5 percent of the vote. The opposition Democratic Convergence party does not participate in the elections in protest of the May 21, 2000 congressional and municipal elections (see May 21, 2000) which its members claim were rigged. The election turnout is disputed. Though some news agencies report a low turnout of between 5 percent and 10 percent, Aristide?s party, as well as five US-based NGOs—Global Exchange, the Quixote Center, Witness for Peace and Pax Christi—estimate the figure at 61 percent, or 3 million of Haiti's voters. These figures are also supported by USAID-commissioned Gallup polls taken both before and after the elections, but which are suppressed by the US.
People and organizations involved: Democratic Convergence, Jean-Bertrand Aristide, USAID
(snip/...)

http://www.cooperativeresearch.org/timeline.jsp?timeline=the_2004_removal_of_jean-bertrand_aristide

[Judi Lynn]

47. You need to do a lot of reading to get your picture straight

about Haiti.

It would help to start reading about Francois Duvalier, kept as a friendly dictator in Haiti for years and years, as that country suffered desperately.

Aristide, as most people know, in NO WAY is responsible for Haiti's having the dishonor and pain of being the poorest nation in the hemisphere.

Once you've learned a little, you'll see you have embarrassed yourself.

[jdj]

51. It's embarassing people bring up Cuba.

That's transparent tv news spoon-fed-itis.

People believe Hussein and Castro are the only bad guys on this planet. Wish I was so fucking ignorant, I might have a better attitude.

[FlaIndie]

69. oh, Castro is small potatoes

He just happens to be local. The Saudi royal family, who have deep pockets and Bush reaches into them quite often, is far worse.

[jdj]

50. Aristide doubled the minimum wage.

That's why the U.S. deposed him. Period.

[Judi Lynn]

67. You're right. What's the point in building sweatshops there

and paying the people slave wages if the President's going to blow it for the owners and allow the workers to earn more?

THE U.S. IN HAITI
How to Get Rich on 11 Cents an Hour
By Eric Verhoogen
I. "What You Do Is What You Get"

Quality Garments S.A., a clothing contractor in the SONAPI Industrial Park, is typical of assembly plants in Port-au-Prince. The factory is hot, dimly-lit, crowded. The air is heavy with dust and lint. There is no ventilation to speak of. Piles of material--scraps of pajamas, dresses, skirt hems--clutter every aisle and every corner. The workers have sad, tired faces. They hunch over antiquated sewing machines, some more than 20 years old, sewing "Kelly Reed" dresses to be sold in Kmart and Mickey Mouse pajamas for the Walt Disney Company.

The workers at Quality Garments work 8 to 10 hours per day, Monday through Saturday. When the company has orders to fill, they are required to work Sundays as well. In conversations with the National Labor Committee during the second week of August, several workers told us that they had worked seven Sundays in a row--in other words, more than 50 days straight without a day off, up to 70 hours per week--during the hottest season of the year. We asked the manager of the plant, Mr. Raymond DuPoux, if this schedule was creating a problem for the employees or the factory as a whole. "The problem is mine," he told us, "because I can't go to the beach. So I have problems with my wife."

For their labor, the workers are in many cases paid as little as 15 gourdes per day, or 12 cents per hour. This is well below the legal minimum wage of 30 cents per hour based on the daily rate of 36 gourdes (US $2.40). The workers are paid on a piece-rate system, and production quotas are raised to the point where the majority of workers have no hope of meeting them. One experienced worker we spoke to, for instance, is supposed to sew seams on 204 pairs of Mickey Mouse pajamas in a day, for which she would be paid 40 gourdes (US $2.67); in 8 hours, however, she is only able to complete 144 pairs, for which she is paid 28 gourdes (US $1.87). In Creole, this system is referred to as "sa ou fè, se li ou we," or, roughly translated, "what you do is what you get."

The average worker at Quality Garments earns about 25 gourdes (US $1.67) per day, 73 cents less per day than the minimum wage. The company pays straight time on the weekends, not time-and-a-half as Haitian law requires. Transportation for most workers costs between 6 and 8 gourdes per day, and lunch--a small plate of rice and beans and a glass of juice--costs 7 gourdes. This means that the average worker takes home between 10 and 15 gourdes (67 cents - US $1) per day, or between 8 cents and 13 cents for every hour of work. This comes to less than US $6 for a standard work-week, which provides less than 25% of the minimum needs of a family of five.

It was precisely to eliminate such abuses that President Aristide raised the minimum wage from 15 gourdes (US $1) per day to 36 gourdes (US $2.40) per day on May 4, 1995. In his decree, President Aristide specifically banned the sort of piece-rate abuses that are common at Quality Garments and factories like it. Articles 1 and 2 of the decree read as follows:
(snip/...)

http://www.nlcnet.org/campaigns/archive/Haiti/0196/index.shtml#THE%20U.S.%20IN

[Vladimir]

83. "The problem is mine

because I can't go to the beach"! I am going to file that one away in my memory banks... what a one-liner.

This is why I get so angry when people go on and on and on about how Chavez and Aristide and Castro and Marvin the Martian are all opressing these poor rich businessmen. I mean boo-fucking-hoo.

[jdj]

88. If ever there was an article outlining the human cost of

capitalism and brand fetish and living in Disneyworld, USA, this is it.

[kiahzero]

26. Haiti's a bad example

The recent coup in Haiti was no more valid than the coup in 1992... the only problem was that we were on the wrong side of this one.

[lottie244]

41. No child is left behind in Cuba, and their healthcare is for everyone.

Even in the face of our sanctions and embargos. Just think what a job Castor could have done had the US been an ally instead of an enemy.

[FlaIndie]

46. you can't even get an aspirin there

And it isn't because of the U.S. embargo. Cuba has trading relations with Venezuela and Canada, among others. Who keeps the goods from the people? It is a lot easier to manipulate the poor, especially if you tell them that the big bad US is why they're being held down. Just ask people who flee how prosperous their nation or how great Castro is. They have an average GDP of $2600. It has everything to do with Castro being a dictator and using the resources of the country only for himself. He only gives a portion back to the people. He is evil. He makes George W. Bush look... kind of okay. :o

[Judi Lynn]

70. You could save yourself a lot of time by starting to educate yourself

on the angles and aspects of the embargo and the attendant legislation. Some of us are attempting to overcome our own ignorance by getting a little reading done. It would do you wonders.

The U.S. Embargo and the Wrath of God

(snip)
Back in Washington, the proponents of the embargo insist that needed medical supplies can still get to Cuba. But the 300 page AAWH report, "Denial of Food and Medicine: The Impact of the U.S. Embargo on Health and Nutrition in Cuba," provides startling documentation of dozens of cases in which Cuban hospitals could not secure the medicine and equipment they needed because of the sharp restrictions imposed by the 1992 Cuban Democracy Act.
Dr. Julian Ruiz, a surgeon at Calixto Garcia, recounts his 15-day search last September for a Z-Stent Introducer, a small contraption that he needed to operate on a man with colon cancer. Not one could be found in the country. The manufacturer of the Z-Stent, Wilson Cooke Medical Inc. of Winston-Salem, N.C., refused to sell it to the Cubans. Ruiz' staff, scouring the world, finally found a Z-Stent they could buy in Mexico. By that time, the man's cancer had spread.
Exacerbating the shortages are takeovers of foreign firms by U.S. pharmaceutical companies. In 1995, for example, Upjohn Co. merged with Pharmacia, a major Swedish drug company that had been supplying Cuba with millions of dollars worth of chemotherapy drugs, growth hormones and equipment for its medical labs. Within three months, Pharmacia closed its Havana office and stopped all sales.
That same year, Nunc, a Danish firm that supplied Cuba with materials for HIV and hepatitis screening tests, was absorbed by Sybron International of Wisconsin. Eight days after the merger, Nunc executives notified Cuba by fax: "Much to our regret, we have to inform you that unfortunately our cooperation of many years has to be terminated.... In future, we therefore have to follow the directions laid down by the U.S. Government in relation to Cuba."
Nothing has drawn the Catholic Church and the Cuban government closer together than their mutual opposition to the U.S. blockade of medicine and food supplies to Cuba's people.
"Even in warfare, you don't bomb hospitals and schools," says Patrick Sullivan, the pastor of a church in Santa Clara and the only American priest permanently stationed in the country.
(snip/...)

http://www.thirdworldtraveler.com/Human_Rights/Cuba_embargo.html

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Denial of Food and Medicine:
The Impact Of The U.S. Embargo
On The Health And Nutrition In Cuba"
-An Executive Summary-
American Association for World Health Report
Summary of Findings
March 1997After a year-long investigation, the American Association for World Health has determined that the U.S. embargo of Cuba has dramatically harmed the health and nutrition of large numbers of ordinary Cuban citizens. As documented by the attached report, it is our expert medical opinion that the U.S. embargo has caused a significant rise in suffering-and even deaths-in Cuba. For several decades the U.S. embargo has imposed significant financial burdens on the Cuban health care system. But since 1992 the number of unmet medical needs patients going without essential drugs or doctors performing medical procedures without adequate equipment-has sharply accelerated. This trend is directly linked to the fact that in 1992 the U.S. trade embargo-one of the most stringent embargoes of its kind, prohibiting the sale of food and sharply restricting the sale of medicines and medical equipment-was further tightened by the 1992 Cuban Democracy Act.

A humanitarian catastrophe has been averted only because the Cuban government has maintained a high level of budgetary support for a health care system designed to deliver primary and preventive health care to all of its citizens. Cuba still has an infant mortality rate half that of the city of Washington, D.C.. Even so, the U.S. embargo of food and the de facto embargo on medical supplies has wreaked havoc with the island's model primary health care system. The crisis has been compounded by the country's generally weak economic resources and by the loss of trade with the Soviet bloc.

Recently four factors have dangerously exacerbated the human effects of this 37-year-old trade embargo. All four factors stem from little-understood provisions of the U.S. Congress' 1992 Cuban Democracy Act (CDA):

1. A Ban on Subsidiary Trade: Beginning in 1992, the Cuban Democracy Act imposed a ban on subsidiary trade with Cuba. This ban has severely constrained Cuba's ability to import medicines and medical supplies from third country sources. Moreover, recent corporate buyouts and mergers between major U.S. and European pharmaceutical companies have further reduced the number of companies permitted to do business with Cuba.
   
2. Licensing Under the Cuban Democracy Act: The U.S. Treasury and Commerce Departments are allowed in principle to license individual sales of medicines and medical supplies, ostensibly for humanitarian reasons to mitigate the embargo's impact on health care delivery. In practice, according to U.S. corporate executives, the licensing provisions are so arduous as to have had the opposite effect. As implemented, the licensing provisions actively discourage any medical commerce. The number of such licenses granted-or even applied for since 1992-is minuscule. Numerous licenses for medical equipment and medicines have been denied on the grounds that these exports "would be detrimental to U.S. foreign policy interests."
   
3. Shipping Since 1992:The embargo has prohibited ships from loading or unloading cargo in U.S. ports for 180 days after delivering cargo to Cuba. This provision has strongly discouraged shippers from delivering medical equipment to Cuba. Consequently shipping costs have risen dramatically and further constricted the flow of food, medicines, medical supplies and even gasoline for ambulances. From 1993 to 1996, Cuban companies spent an additional $8.7 million on shipping medical imports from Asia, Europe and South America rather than from the neighboring United States.
   
4. Humanitarian Aid: Charity is an inadequate alternative to free trade in medicines, medical supplies and food. Donations from U.S. non-governmental organizations and international agencies do not begin to compensate for the hardships inflicted by the embargo on the Cuban public health system. In any case, delays in licensing and other restrictions have severely discouraged charitable contributions from the U.S.<[/ol>
   (snip/...)http://www.cubasolidarity.net/aawh.html
   
   

[Vladimir]

76. No, but they do have

the western hemisphere's 3rd or 4th highest life expectancy. I guess its because they are born resillient or something...

[Vladimir]

14. Why should the US have

anything to do with the toppling of Castro? Why is it any of your business?

[H2O Man]

15. Why? Why take this stance?

What would happen if the USA made a bold move towards peace and friendship? What if we stopped a silly policy of not trading with Cuba, when we trade with China? People can have different views about should we make the first move, and even what that move should entail. But a move towards reconciliation, which would improve the standard of living for people who do not live that far away, might be beneficial.

[FlaIndie]

21. Perhaps when Castro is gone, but not realistic now

For one, even if the grudge is 40 years old, the guy did let the USSR build nukes 90 miles away. We screwed the pooch there when he took over by not aiding him because of the confiscation of US citizens' land holdings there. It's just a big pissing match. I'm not even sure he'd take reconciliation. He dislikes the U.S. and doesn't speak English in public even though he knows it because of this.

Second, that will not happen while he is in power because both nominees for President want to win Florida and they can't do that by offering peace to Castro. Most Americans don't even like the guy and it could be seen as caving in.

[Vladimir]

22. Castro would of course love

a reconciliation. Now the US on the other hand... doesn't seem to want to think twice about it.

On edit: removed certain references to Castro and Kennedy whose accuracy I wondered about...

[jdj]

58. Condi, is that you???

Remember we had our heads buried in the sand of the past and communism on 9/11, too.

[greatauntoftriplets]

18. You go, girl!!!

Ask your questions. Questioning is good.

[madfloridian]

23. I intend to do so. Thank you.

We need to ask questions from ALL our leaders. Every one of them.
:hi:

[FlaIndie]

30. questions are good

But the disagreements are why I am an indie. I can't agree with the party line on every issue. We'll have to agree to disagree on the U.S.' role in "nation-building," because I think it can be a good idea if used properly (read: if Bush isn't doing it). I certainly trust Democrats to wage war only when it is necessary, not when somebody tried to take out my daddy and Haliburton comes a'donating for no-bid contracts to rebuild. I certinaly don't expect to see Kerry's Sec. of State (Max Cleland?) handing out weapons to Saddam and Osama like Reagan's did. x(

[Judi Lynn]

52. It's always the folks with the vaguest perception of Cuba

who do the most anti-Cuban howling. Only time spent doing research, reading, and actual THINKING can change them, and there's the matter of personality which works against that possibility!

A Review of United States Policy Toward Cuba

by David Mercile

(snip)
Cuba has not abandoned its struggle to chart its own future in defiance of the US attempts to reverse history. "A revolution is not a bed of roses ... a revolution is a struggle to the death between the future and the past," Cuban President Fidel Castro said long ago. United States policy fails to reflect upon the significance of the Cuban Revolution, its fundamental ideals, and how relevant the achievement of its purposes remain today. There are several reasons for the failure of US policy. First, most of the Cuban people realize the United States does not genuinely care about their welfare. Second, Cubans recognize that they will forfeit the system of social services that has emerged as the envy of the Third World and one of the most commendable products of the Revolution. Third, there is great fear of the extreme rightist Cuban-Americans who could assume power if they returned to Cuba. No one in Cuba is foolish enough to think that such a government would be even remotely democratic or tolerant of many of the views prevalent in Cuba today. Fourth, possibly the most neglected reason for the failure of US policy, most Cubans approve of the accomplishments of their Revolutionary government, and feel connected to these gains. While accepting neocolonial status might result in new wealth flowing to Cuba, most Cubans are sagacious enough to know they will not be sharing in it.

To the majority of Cubans, integration into the imperialist network would be a political disaster. In 1994, one of the poorer years of the Revolution, 69 percent of Cubans described themselves in an independent US poll as either Revolutionaries, Socialists, or Communists. The United States would never allow a candidate who fit any of those descriptions to come to power in an election. The ultra-rightist Cubans in the United States who claim to desire to bring democracy to Cuba are completely incapable of winning an election there. Their yearning for wealth and power presents the very real danger that Cuba could become another Chile.

Abandoning Cuba's status as a fully sovereign nation would also have a detrimental effect on the social services provided to the people. The report from the American Association for World Health gives extensive evidence pertaining to Cuba's excellent health care system. What other Third World nation can boast of universal health care and an educational system that offers free university education? According to 1997 statistics provided by UNESCO, Cuba's student-teacher ratio was considerably lower than those of the United States, Canada, and the rest of Latin America. As José Martí said, "An educated people will always be strong and free."

Cuba's social progress stretches beyond health and education. The absence of homelessness in Cuba contrasts sharply with the 760,000 people in the US who are homeless every night (estimated by the Salvation Army). Likewise, Cuban drug use and crimes rates compare extremely favorably with the United States, where 1.8 million now suffer in prison.
(snip/...)

http://www.impactpress.com/articles/febmar99/cuba2399.html

[Vladimir]

7. Saddam, Fidel, Chavez, oh my! n/t

[Ms. Clio]

11. The sanctions restricted the equipment needed to repair infrastructure

such as water treatment plants, etc. How did Saddam control that?

Who is living high on the hog in Iraq now? Foreigners? Mercenaries? Collaborators? Those Baathists that are coming back to power?

History will show that this entire escapade was a lose/lose situation and that the U.S. has no business "getting tough on regimes" in the first place.

[madfloridian]

36. Now we just torture them in the prisons.

Since we started in on them under Daddy Bush, the Iraqis have had a rough time.

And apparently some of our doctors and nurses failed to report suspicions of torture. What is happening here?

[stellanoir]

2. if you really want to know about this

go to http://riverbendblog.blogspot.com

Take a few hours and read the whole thing.

She's a really eloquent, multi-lingual, high tech pro, 24-5 year old Iraqi, who had a fantastic job and was far better paid than her male colleagues before the invasion/occupation. She hasn't been able to leave her house without two male relatives since then.

She has had a lot to say about women in Iraq. She is one.

[madfloridian]

6. Her blog is eloquent. I weep when I read it.

:hi:

[stellanoir]

9. yeah me too. . .

why can't we put someone like her or Salam Pax (does anyone know what's happenned to him-last I read (through the Guardian) he'd been kicked out of his home and was desparate for work) in charge.

Both are young savvy individuals who have fluent handles on both cultures. But noooooooo, we have to give millions of dollars to a known extortionist (Challabi) and appoint a CIA puppet. I often wonder, aside from Al Sadr, where is the younger leadership in the ME, especially in Israel and Palestine? Sharon and Arafat need successors. They can never broker an honest peace with their histories. Sorry don't mean to derail the thread. Please excuse- am just upset about this.

Resume discussion of the dire plight of Iraqi women now.

[Ms. Clio]

13. Thanks very much for the post, I'm bookmarking it

I have mentioned this to people before, along with the fact that the number one health problem of Iraqi children before the Gulf War was obesity.

But too many would rather cling to their myths and stereotypes.

[madfloridian]

16. Be sure to read the whole Pilger article. It is quite sad.

It makes you wonder what we have become, and where did OUR education system go? People are totally ignorant about the horrible things we have done there.

[LunaC]

31. Iraq, circa March 2001

Yeah, yeah, yeah...."Saddam is evil" they told us yet Iraq seemed to take decent care of its people for the most part.....free health care and education is only a dream for U.S. citizens, and we're supposed to be the "advanced" society.

"Before the six weeks of air attacks known as the Gulf War (which ended in February 1991), Iraq's standard of living was the highest
in the Middle East. Iraqis enjoyed free medical care and free education. Literacy had reached about 80 percent. Most Iraqi youth
were educated up through secondary school. University students of both genders received scholarships to study at home and
abroad.

"Iraq was one of the more progressive Islamic countries in the region. It provided full
rights for women and public education for its citizens who enjoyed a decent standard
of living."

"Despite the years of bombings and the even greater toll on human life taken by the
sanctions, visitors to Baghdad don't see a city in ruins. Much of the wreckage has
been cleared away, much has been repaired.

"In our hotel, there's running water throughout the day, hot water in the morning.
Various streets in Baghdad are lined with little stores, surprisingly well-stocked with
household appliances, hardware goods, furniture, and clothes (much of which has a
second-hand look).

"We see no derelicts or homeless people on the streets, no prostitutes or ragged
bands of abandoned children, though there are occasional youngsters eager to
shine shoes or solicit spare change. But even they seem to be well-fed and decently
clothed. ......large swaths of the city used to be shrouded in complete darkness;
today, there are lights just about everywhere

"People used to feel hopelessly isolated and now there seems to be more hope and
better morale

Sadly though, "more and more children are turning up with leukemia" (a result of
the tons of depleted uranium the U.S. military used and left behind after Gulf War I.)

"The Iraqi leadership could turn US policy completely around by uttering just two
magic words: "free market." All they have to do is invite the International Monetary
Fund and World Bank into Iraq, eliminate free education and free medical care,
abolish the minimal food ration that goes to every Iraqi, abolish the housing
transportation subsidies, and hand over the country's oil industry to the corporate
cartels. To lift the sanctions, Iraq must surrender to the tender mercies of the
free-market paradise....

"Until then, Iraq will continue to be designated a "rogue nation" by those policy
makers in Washington who themselves are the meanest profit-driven, power-mongering
rogues on earth."

http://www.towardfreedom.com/2001/mar01/iraq.htm

[DU GrovelBot]

38. ## PLEASE DONATE TO DEMOCRATIC UNDERGROUND! ##

==================
GROVELBOT.EXE v3.0
==================



This week is our third quarter 2004 fund drive. Democratic
Underground is a completely independent website. We depend almost entirely
on donations from our members to cover our costs. Thank you so much for
your support.

[Judi Lynn]

40. Madfloridian, I haven't read this thread, I'm still reading your links!

I had to thank you before going farther. I'm near the end of the first one, by Pilger. It's superb, and consistant with what I've heard before. It's a damned shame our crappiest citizens have NO idea what the hell has been happening simply because they're too damned stupid, lazy, and selfish to bother trying to try to learn something well within their grasp.

From the first article:

The change in 10 years is unparalleled, in my experience," Anupama Rao Singh, Unicef's senior representative in Iraq, told me. "In 1989, the literacy rate was 95%; and 93% of the population had free access to modern health facilities. Parents were fined for failing to send their children to school. The phenomenon of street children or children begging was unheard of. Iraq had reached a stage where the basic indicators we use to measure the overall well-being of human beings, including children, were some of the best in the world. Now it is among the bottom 20%. In 10 years, child mortality has gone from one of the lowest in the world, to the highest."
(snip/...)

I wanted to tell you I'm tickled to see this written again. I've heard it lots already. Now I can stash it for future reference when it comes up again in a conversation.

[madfloridian]

43. You're welcome. We can really pat ourselves on the proverbial back.

Not. Lots of new folks here today totally unaware.

[Judi Lynn]

68. Oh, jeez! Unaware is the charitable word choice!

I've read selected threads here, and it's as though someone doesn't know we are mostly somewhat acquainted with the facts, and not likely to be misled, or to support a right-wing, fascist view of the rest of the world.

[tkmorris]

78. I'm with you

I don't believe there is anything "unaware" about it. I think it is intentional and organized.

[madfloridian]

84. I agree.

We just can not say it. You are so so right.

[Vladimir]

85. You know, Iraq, Haiti, Afganistan...

they are all proof that the "white man's burden" mentality never went away, even after the experiences of the last two centuries. Its sad really, how incapable we are of learning from our mistakes...

[jdj]

90. 'White man's burden' is just the marketing concept.

The truth behind any of these ops, once it comes out decades later, is what is referred to while it is happening as a "conspiracy theory".

"One man's conspiracy theory is another man's business plan."
Greg Palast

[Disturbed]

81. Damn!!!

I have stopped reading a few boards and posting on them because I got sick of Neo Fascist ignorant people spouting their crap. Now I read it here. Shit!

I suggest that people read "The People's History of the United States" by Howard Zinn before they start posting. The chapter on Iraq and the views about Cuba are enlightening. Of course, I also suggest other books, as well. I recently finished "The Clash of Fundamentalists" by Tariq Ali. It was difficult reading but highly educational. If the Neo Fascists are so crazy about democracy, which of course I know they gdon't give a fig about why don't they work on their ally Arabia?

Can anyone recommend a book or two about Cuba?

[REP]

80. I Know, and I Am Outraged

Iraq at its worst* was better than Saudi Arabia at its best for women and education.

A few months ago on some cable news call-in program, I heard a caller ask if women were better off now, and the reporter admitted that in fact the war had harmed their position in society considerably.

*pre-invasion

[jdj]

94. here, here.

Why people can't get this is beyond me.

Actually it isn't beyond me, it's racism pure and simple, but the racism is so astounding that I stay in semi-permanent denial and keep having to remind myself "oh yeah, it's cuz all them camel jockies is 'zactly the same..."