Think Progress

The new Iraq.

By Nico Pitney on Jan 26th, 2006 at 10:38 pm

The new Iraq.

One-fifth of Iraq’s population now lives in poverty, up since the 2003 invasion, according to an IMF/United Nations study.

  • Print


72 Responses to “The new Iraq.”

  1. No Freedom! says:
  2. Marie says:

    Not quite on topic but….it does concern bin Laden’s tape
    Check this Raw Story article:
    http://www.aljazeera.com/cgi-bin/news_service/middle_east_full_story.asp?service_id=10544
    I am curious to know others’ thoughts, particularly considering the jokes some of us were making here last week. Were we right?

    January 26th, 2006 at 10:47 pm
  3. Hop says:

    Hows that new Bush DEMOCRACY workin’ for ya now?

    January 26th, 2006 at 10:47 pm
  4. James says:

    I think you should make it a bit more shocking.

    20 PERCENT OF IRAQIS LIVE ON LESS THAN ONE DOLLAR A DAY. That’s the ‘international’ (taken from article) definition of poverty.

    This study DID NOT take into account the effect that pre invasion Iraq price controls had in terms of access to food plus the large amounts of just freebie food that was being passed out.

    Gas is up – way up.

    The study also doesn’t mention that the costs of goods in Iraq has gone up alot – as in all of them. They have, more or less, a market economy in a sort of war zone. Mmmm, lovely effect on prices.

    So the one dollar would buy less today than it did preinvasion. If you did a proper study i.e. one that took into account changes in price levels relative to income, the picture would be even worse.

    January 26th, 2006 at 10:52 pm
  5. SpudgeBoy says:

    That couldn’t have anything to do with the fact that:

    CNN
    May 12, 2005
    Report paints grim picture of Iraqi life

    (CNN) — In the wake of the U.S.-led invasion of Iraq in 2003, the country still struggles with high unemployment, inconsistent utility services and widespread poverty, a joint survey from the Iraqi government and United Nations indicates.

    Iraq’s unemployment rate was 10.5 percent of a population of 27 million people, the report found. When the figure of workers who had given up looking for a job — discouraged workers — was included, the unemployment number increased to 18.4 percent.

    Of course we have seen this number at 43% and 70%. So if you take soemthing inbetween the highest and the lowest. You can estimate that the true unemployment rate is pretty damn high.

    But, even if you take tthe 18.4% that is one out of ever five people out of work. That is horrible.

    January 26th, 2006 at 11:17 pm
  6. Ron says:

    Based on the available GDP data and data on oil production and exports, most observers agree that economic growth took off in when Iraq nationalized the Iraq Petroleum Company in 1972, and subsequent to the first oil shock in 1973, oil revenues began growing dramatically. Oil production went from 1.3 million barrels per day (mbd) in 1965, to 2.3 mbd in 1975, to 3.5 mbd in 1979, and per capita national income increased correspondingly, from 104 Iraqi Dinars (291 US$) in 1970 to 826 Iraqi Dinars (US$2,313) in 1979. This presumably led to a parallel increase in household income, as the government launched a series of major development initiatives. This period of rapid economic growth also saw significant rural-urban migration. The rural population decreased from 42% to 31% of the total between 1970 and 1980, and the growth of employment in the public sector and in state-owned enterprises, both of which indicate that households’ incomes were increasing.

    Annual Household Income

    n The median per capita household income during the year 2003 was found to be 366,000 Dinars (around 255 US$).

    n The median per capita household income for the first half of 2004 was 207,000 Dinars (US$144).

    Variation of Income Across Location

    n Median per capita income in urban areas was 382,667 Dinars versus 328,455 Dinars in rural areas

    n Median per capita income in the Northern governorates (Dahouk, Erbil, and Sulaimaniya) was 26% higher than that in the Centre.

    n The higest per capita income was recorded in Basrah governorate at 456,333 Dinars.

    Pre-Saddam years were better.

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/iraq/currency-reform.htm

    January 26th, 2006 at 11:22 pm
  7. Max-1 says:

    IS THE USA NOT A MAGNET

    FOR THE INCREASED INSUGENCY???

    January 26th, 2006 at 11:25 pm
  8. Desi says:

    Marie, if the bin laden tape isn’t a fake, then bin laden works for bushco. The timing is just insanely perfect, no?

    January 27th, 2006 at 12:09 am
  9. Desi says:

    I just read an AP release over @ yahoo stating that the income gap between the haves and have nots has increased. They were certain to mention that the organizations that conducted the research were liberal leaning . . .

    January 27th, 2006 at 12:11 am
  10. Sharon Cox says:

    No food, water, power and little hope of the occupiers leaving any time soon. All because of a handfull of evil, greedy men a half a world away. This is the Bush legacy. Add to that the thousands of lives lost. And any one critical of the insergents must some time ask them selves, WTF are we doing there. Compound all their suffering and ours here at home and ask, why werent the Saudis and the BenLaudens hunted down.? The ones responsible for a crime should pay for the crime, not the easy target made up by the greedy…Now how about making the people here responsible for these atroceties pay for their war crimes……Well, how about it.? Impeach, put on trial and in prison……Blessings

    January 27th, 2006 at 12:12 am
  11. Gary Ruppert says:

    Yeah right.

    I doubt that Saddam’s kept accurate figures on poverty in his nation.

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:02 am
  12. Clif says:

    Remember Colon Powell, If you break it you own it, well george owns the mess,

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:07 am
  13. Gregor Samsa says:

    It’s sad to see how three years into the occupation, the situation does not seem to have improved. Quite the contrary.

    More than a quarter of total US funds have been swallowed up by security, and in many parts of the country, even the most basic facilities are still missing. ‘Government is not functioning in so many sectors,’ says Oliver Burch of Christian Aid, which has several partner organisations working across Iraq.
    Iraq’s future still going up in smoke

    Does anyone remember all the so-called “good” news that the “liberal” media was ignoring about Iraq?

    I wonder if that talking point is no longer operable. Reality has a way of being maddeningly stubborn.

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:16 am
  14. RightPunch says:

    “Yeah right.
    I doubt that Saddam’s kept accurate figures on poverty in his nation. Gary Ruppert”

    And we have another example of how the partisan brain simply looks for an emotion and a response that is combative instead of processing information that is uncomfortable for them. Gary, I forgive you for your inability to use your reasoning center of the brain, your partisan values have made you handicapped, and for that we must forgive you and give you our pity.

    And Gary in the remote chance that your reasoning center is partially functioning, you might want to consider that the UN administered poverty and aid programs under Saddam. You also must understand that Saddam was a control freak, and that his government kept meticulous records. That’s why the oil for food scandal became prominent news until republicans realized how many republican oil men were tied to it.

    Rightwing governments and politicians like Saddam often keep records that end up being damaging – like the Abramoff and Rove/Libby emails. It’s part of your partisan behavior.

    So don’t worry Gary, even though you don’t have any control over your reasoning brain centers, you should be comforted that progressives do. We’ll help save you from yourself, even if you aren’t mentally strong enough or fit enough to think for yourself. It’s OK, and you can thank us if you ever wake up from the ether.

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:25 am
  15. RightPunch says:

    Gregor,

    The partisan brain never remembers their past partisan viewpoints. Remember how partisan republicans were all anti-deficit? Now they can’t waste money and increase debt fast enough – yet they don’t seem to ever recall they had a different belief system. It’s why I go with ‘RightPunch’ – I’m refreshing Punch alternative to the koolaid served by the average partisan ;)

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:28 am
  16. SpudgeBoy says:

    Yeah right.

    I doubt that Saddam’s kept accurate figures on poverty in his nation.

    Comment by Gary Ruppert — January 27, 2006 @ 1:02 am

    What the fvck does this have to do with Saddam? The report I cited is from a CNN article that was released by the following contributors:

    Iraq’s Ministry of Planning and Development Cooperation and the U.N. Development Program

    See?

    “Released Thursday, the report from Iraq’s Ministry of Planning and Development Cooperation and the U.N. Development Program in Iraq surveyed nearly 22,000 households in the country’s 18 provinces during 2004.”

    All you have to do is read a little and you might gain a little knowledge. But istead you choose to remain ignorant and complacent.

    Either that or you are a paid shill.

    I have to go with paid shill, because nobody can really be a stupid as you are.

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:42 am
  17. Gregor Samsa says:

    SpudgeBoy,

    I think Mr. Ruppert was referring to the article from The Australian. But he is also wrong about that one, since the UN was running hunger, poverty relief, and food programmes in Iraq during Hussein’s rule -as RightPucnh already commented.

    They have all the data needed to compare pre and post-invasion statisitcs.

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:47 am
  18. Gregor Samsa says:

    The partisan brain never remembers their past partisan viewpoints.
    Comment by RightPunch — January 27, 2006 @ 1:28 am

    “Partisan brain”, eh? I like the sound of that… I bet Freud would love that diagnosis. Sounds like a particular instance of Cognitive Dissonance: No matter how much contradicting evidence you present to it, the Partisan Brain will find a way to rationalise it away, look for excuses to validate its behaviour, and accomodate the new data to fit its partisan beliefs.

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:53 am
  19. Gregor Samsa says:

    The really astonishing part is that the brain of a partisan only uses ‘unconscious’ part of the brain that’s generally thought of as the reptile or primitive brain to respond.
    Comment by RightPunch — January 27, 2006 @ 2:18 am

    “Reptile”? “Primitive”? That explains it all ;-)

    Seriously, a while back I read an article that explained how the Republicans had been more successful at “framing” the political discourse at an emotional level; which apparently is how the reptilian brain works -all emotions, no rationality.

    Not surprisingly, it is exactly how the “war on terror” has been framed: Fear, anguish, dread.

    Scared reptiles are dangerous creatures, indeed.

    January 27th, 2006 at 2:42 am
  20. Bobbytoo says:

    welcome all you Rightwing Pimps who’s first physical activity of the day is to hit this Blogsite. We know the bush pimps and whores visit here regularly-how else would they find their counter talking points. The big difference here however is you will find faccists from your own Rightwing family here not from the left. In addition you will find that each and every Rightwinger who Posts here has a severe case of Pimps Herpes Brain Damage

    January 27th, 2006 at 6:10 am
  21. mike says:

    Bobbytoo-

    I think it more for entertainment than actually gathering counter-talking points….and also the new buzz words/terms of the day..like…”Pimps Herpes Brain Damage”…you guys are GREAT….keep up the good work…..

    January 27th, 2006 at 7:25 am
  22. the fly-man says:

    Average house hold? What is left that hasn’t been destroyed? Poverty has devastating mental ramifications also. Didn’t George Tenet say that he thought global poverty was the fuel for the new Islamist radicalism?

    January 27th, 2006 at 7:27 am
  23. thot's says:

    just say thank you massa bush/haliburton/exxon/bp we shure like your freedom.How is American’s doing I heard that america has fallen behind other countries in Health Care ..45 Million american without health care and now that yor new Medicare package is in effect over half of Americans are without heathcare so that figure has gone up Massa Bushco .Holy Duh ! we shure love America’s Freedoms March thru the Middle East We shure love those Naplam Bombs burning up our poor over here Massa bushco.

    We shure love those bombs hitting our neighbors it make for a good night sleep. Massa bushco we shure know your the one to set off two bombs in Iran last week it was your Special Op’s hehe hehe we pray to you Massa bushco

    When in the hell is America going to become America and jail this bas***trd?

    January 27th, 2006 at 8:12 am
  24. Quisp says:

    Good work Chimpy, driving Iraqis from their country.

    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5174352

    Amid Violence and Shortages, Some Iraqis Leave Home
    by Lourdes Garcia-Navarro

    Morning Edition, January 27, 2006 · As the situation deteriorates in Iraq, more and more people are trying to leave the country. People from all backgrounds and socio-economic groups flee to Jordan or other countries where they have family.

    January 27th, 2006 at 8:27 am
  25. realist67 says:

    What the trolls refuse to understand is that this is just more of what happens in the US: support the wealthy, impoverish the rest:

    “Developed by Italian statistician Corrado Gini, the Gini coefficient is used internationally to measure income inequality. On the Gini scale, the number zero corresponds to complete income equality, meaning that income is perfectly distributed amongst all citizens: the number one (1) corresponds to perfect income inequality, meaning that only one person has all the income.

    The developed nations that rank ahead of the U.S. in the UN Human Poverty Index have coefficients between 0.24 and 0.36. In 2004 the U.S. had a Gini coefficient of 0.45, worst among all the developed nations in the world and ranking behind even Cambodia (0.40). China currently has a Gini coefficient of about 0.48.

    Additional studies have further shown that the richest 1% of the population in the U.S. has appropriated 94% of the growth in total income since 1973.”

    From: http://www.counterpunch.org/feng01212006.html

    January 27th, 2006 at 8:43 am
  26. Jay says:

    Well, as we all know, freedom isn’t free. In fact, the Bush administrations version of freedom is extremely costly. Costly to the American middle class and poor, to our armed forces and their families, to Iraqi civilians, Afghanis. In fact, the BushCo policies have been costly to the entire world with the very small exception of the aristocratic Americans that are cashing in on war-profiteering, the gutting of business regulation and massive tax cuts for top 2%.

    Freedom and democracy indeed. I can’t think of a more cycnical, hypocritical and downright criminal group of people in American history than the GOP and BushCo.

    BTW, great article about GOP corruption and some of its finer details here:

    http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/story/9183313/the_harder_they_fall/?rnd=1138344521452&has-player=unknown

    January 27th, 2006 at 8:43 am
  27. Michael says:

    The United Nations study doesn’t mean squat. They just want to smear the United States for ruining their little oil for food scandal

    January 27th, 2006 at 8:56 am
  28. bad genepool says:

    MESSAGE FOR ALL YOU TROLLS!!

    Earlier this month I wrote this message and got this reply from I-RIGHT-I:

    “1. To all the trolls on this board. Remember: you heard it here first from ME!!!!!!
    Before long the US will be pumping money and weapons to the Iraqi Sunni muslims it is FIGHTING NOW so that it can act as a COUNTERWEIGHT to the Shite majority and its de-facto alliance with Iran. It will do this so that the Shite minority in Saudi Arabia doesn’t become uppity and dream of greater autonomy, all of which means that over 2,100 of your soldiers will have been killed, and thousands more mutilated, for NO GOOD reason. On the whole, you’re too ignorant about the rest of the world to intervene in a productive manner overseas. You just don’t have the IQ for it, and you must accept that as fact of life.
    So stop attacking other countries. Spare a thought for the children of those soliders who will grow up not having a father or a mother. Apart from sexual abuse is there anything worse than that?

    Comment by bad genepool — January 4, 2006

    B. So stop attacking other countries. Spare a thought for the children of those soliders who will grow up not having a father or a mother. Apart from sexual abuse is there anything worse than that?
    Comment by bad genepool
    Listening to the idiotic musings of poorly raised and educated children like yourself?
    Comment by I-RIGHT-I — January 4, 2006:”

    TODAY Reuters reports that some Iraqi Shiites and other observers believe that the Bush administration is shifting away from its earlier alliance with the Iraqi Shiites, preferring the Iraqi Sunni Arabs. The rationale is said to be a dawning realization in Washington that the Iraqi Shiites would not react positively to a US attack on Iran.

    FROM — http://www.indianexpress.com/full_story.php?content_id=86704

    Given that there is a shift in policy underway (I TOLD YOU SO!!!) how is the death and injury of your soldiers justified????

    What is the use of your brain if you accept everything from the Bush regime as gospel truth?

    January 27th, 2006 at 9:06 am
  29. Jay says:

    Except that the U.N. wasn’t responsible for the Oil for Food Program…..it was a political ploy by the U.S:

    The oil-for-food programme was derived from the US-sponsored Security Council resolution, passed in April 1995 but not implemented until December 1996. During this time, the CIA sponsored two coup attempts against Saddam, the second, most famously, a joint effort with the British that imploded in June 1996, at the height of the “oil for food” implementation negotiations. The oil-for-food programme was never a sincere humanitarian relief effort, but rather a politically motivated device designed to implement the true policy of the United States – regime change.

    For an entire chronological history of the Oil-for-food Program, please read:

    http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/4550859.stm

    January 27th, 2006 at 9:07 am
  30. Michael says:

    Blah blah blah Bush is bad blah blah blah United States is bad blah blah blah Republicans are bad blah blah blah Democrats are good blah blah blah the right is so dumb blah blah blah the left is so smart blah blah blah lets all post comments that praise eachother for being so smart while we vent our seething hatred for the right on the trolls blah blah blah

    January 27th, 2006 at 9:25 am
  31. bad genepool says:

    #32 Michael — Pls read message #30 and tell us in what respects it misses the target as far as TRUTH is concerned???

    Why should US soldiers be killed and mutilated so that the Bush administration can flip-flop around like dead fish while it tries to find a coherent foreign policy???

    January 27th, 2006 at 9:31 am
  32. Jay says:

    Michael,

    Truth hurts doesn’t it. Romper Room started 5 minutes ago, if you hurry, you won’t miss much.

    January 27th, 2006 at 9:33 am
  33. Blue County in a Red state says:

    #27,28.

    Great articles. Thanks I needed that.

    January 27th, 2006 at 9:34 am
  34. Ron says:

    The 135 000 troops in Iraq are growing weary and are tired of the war itself.

    They are being worn down, bit by bit, little by little.

    Had the United States government not brought Saddam Hussein to power by their covert operations (he was first hired as an assassin way back in the late fifties), they would not be in the pickle they’re in today.

    It will only get worse, and worse it will get.

    Retreat and withdrawal is the only workable option.

    Anything else is a loser, big time. It ain’t too pretty, that’s for sure.

    This war is a cruel joke on Americans and Iraqis, both.

    January 27th, 2006 at 9:37 am
  35. Clif says:

    Bad genepool, michael accidently posted Karls daily diatribe without using the majic decoder ring they get for being a pioneer.

    January 27th, 2006 at 9:38 am
  36. bad genepool says:

    #37 — you’re damn right; the admin is just plain corrupt.

    Must be one of the worse in US history.

    January 27th, 2006 at 9:43 am
  37. Paul in Mexico says:

    The economic picture in the US is no better, in fact it is just as bad.

    Last week bushlandia reported that factory orders were up 5.1 percent, and the economy was booming. This week they release figures showing the slowest economic growth in a bunch of years.

    The figures dont work.

    The Chamber of commerce will tell you that there are OVER 5 million people unemployed in the US, but cant, or wont, tell you the size of the work force. For the unemployment rate to be a mere 4.9 percent the work force would have to be more than the population of the US. An impossibility.

    The CBO reports that if the Bush tax cuts become permanent, as Bush keeps asking congress, the deficits in 10 years will be worse than now, yet Bushie keeps saying the opposite. What a spin, what a lie.

    Every economic figure you see coming from bushlandia has been roasted, toasted and spun like taffy. The deficit figures as askew because they dont show the 1 billion per day that bushlandia is borrowing from China to keep the US government afloat.

    The man is loco, crazy as a loon, his ignorance is exceeded only by his incompetence.

    January 27th, 2006 at 10:37 am
  38. david says:

    HA! I guess we showed all those naysayers in the USA. We did a Fantastic job of liberating the Iraqi’s…from food, water, electricity, living. USA ALL THE WAY!!!!! We frickin’ Rock!

    January 27th, 2006 at 11:06 am
  39. Michael says:

    #33
    You guys are exactly like the people who learn to speak Klingon–except you criticize everyone who doesn’t speak your peculiar psuedo-intellectual / hate bush jargon.

    January 27th, 2006 at 11:22 am
  40. Ed says:

    What do we expect? That this administration will seriously try to relieve poverty in a foreign country when they do nothing but increase its incidence in their own?

    January 27th, 2006 at 11:30 am
  41. Tracy says:

    #14

    “you might want to consider that the UN administered poverty and aid programs under Saddam.”

    And you actually think that Sadamm allowed all that aid to get to his people? LOL! Does that include the billions he stole and pocketed himself to maintain all of those palaces?

    “You also must understand that Saddam was a control freak, and that his government kept meticulous records.”

    LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!! Does this include his WMD declaration that the U.N. said was bogus? Does this include the records of the dead civilians from all of the mass graves that have been found? I can’t believe you are defending this thug! How about we forget the trial of Sadamm and just reinstall him back into power? Would this right the apparent wrong that you seem to believe that the U.S. bestowed on the Iraqi people? You guys say that you are glad Sadamm is gone, but in the next breath defend the conditions that he subjected his people and then to boot ignore the fact the vast majority of Iraqis TODAY are glad that his is no longer in power regardless of present day conditions in Iraq. So what gives here?

    January 27th, 2006 at 11:46 am
  42. Clif says:

    Tracy please the words that actually show #14 actually defended Sadam, who by the way was Reagan-Bush41’s guy, supplied by Donald Rumsfelds trip in 1983 with anthrax and a whole lot more weapons. But we aren’t supposed to mention that are we.

    January 27th, 2006 at 11:55 am
  43. the fly-man says:

    Well, we can see clearly with the recent Palestinian elections , we foster Democracy as long as you elect people we agree with or stooges who a part of the problem not the solution. ? Is Iran a sovereign nation or not? Is Palestine? Which country listed above has signed the NPT and Israel has not. What about OPEC? Talk about in the next breath.

    January 27th, 2006 at 12:11 pm
  44. cynical ex-hippie says:

    Tracy, why aren’t you pushing to have Rumsfeld tried as an accomplice in Saddam’s crimes?

    January 27th, 2006 at 12:34 pm
  45. Tracy says:

    #44

    #14 said that Sadamm kept meticulous records and wrongfully implied that somehow that there were accurate records on poverty inside Iraq before the 2003 invasion and that the new numbers show that things are MUCH worse now than before the invasion. I will admit that physical conditions are not as good. That’s to be expected however, considering we are comming up on only three years after an invasion and post Sadamm after 30 years of BS by him his Baathist party. The political process and participation however, is entirely new and was completely absent under Sadamm which is why there is a chance today for change in Iraq. If the invasion had not happened he would STILL be in power.

    January 27th, 2006 at 12:46 pm
  46. Tracy says:

    #45

    “…we foster Democracy as long as you elect people we agree with or stooges who a part of the problem not the solution.”

    The result of the Palestinian elections is pretty good proof the the U.S. fosters democracy and lets it work even though the result is frightening by all accounts.

    Is Iran a sovereign nation or not?

    Yes.

    Is Palestine?

    No.

    “Which country listed above has signed the NPT and Israel has not.”

    Only Iran but as we can see that treaty doesn’t mean that much to them at least according to the U.N. Security council.

    http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/

    “Non-nuclear-weapon States Parties undertake not to acquire or produce nuclear weapons or nuclear explosive devices. They are required also to accept safeguards to detect diversions of nuclear materials from peaceful activities, such as power generation, to the production of nuclear weapons or other nuclear explosive devices. This must be done in accordance with an individual safeguards agreement, concluded between each non-nuclear-weapon State Party and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).”

    If Isreal had any designs on using nukes in an offensive way they would have used them along time ago. Israel’s nukes are a deterrant to any nation like Iran who has publically stated their wanton destruction.

    January 27th, 2006 at 12:59 pm
  48. Clif says:

    Having fought in the first Gulf War and capturing Iraqi’s to include their records #14 is right about the way that the Iraqi’s kept records under Sadam

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:02 pm
  49. Tracy says:

    #46

    No one forced Sadamm to gas his own people or use them on the Iranian’s. I didn’t agree with the U.S. when they supplied the materials for Sadamm to make his chemical and biologial weapons but the nation who produces and uses their own WMDs are responsible for their use.

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:08 pm
  50. Tracy says:

    #50

    So as a U.S. soldier you had access to these documents?

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:11 pm
  51. Clif says:

    Since I was an US Army officer and was involved with capturing Iraqi documents, I think so

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:19 pm
  52. dano347 says:

    “No one forced Sadamm to gas his own people or use them on the Iranian’s. I didn’t agree with the U.S. when they supplied the materials for Sadamm to make his chemical and biologial weapons but the nation who produces and uses their own WMDs are responsible for their use.”

    Comment by Tracy — January 27, 2006 @ 1:08 pm

    So our use of white phosphorus on the battlefield – which is illegal by the Geneva convention – is what?

    Please consider your next words carefully.

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:24 pm
  53. Clif says:

    Tracy if the artillery were firing the willie pete as we called them into the higher altitude for illumination that’s legal, but if they fired the WP rounds at buildings with people or at people directly that is not, I do know the rules of war as defined by the Geneva Convention. Another hint because WP is almost to extinguish after it ignites because the oxidiser band fuel are both contained in the round, that is the reason they aren’y ever used directly against personnel either military or civilian.

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:32 pm
  54. dano347 says:

    “I didn’t agree with the U.S. when they supplied the materials for Sadamm to make his chemical and biologial weapons but the nation who produces and uses their own WMDs are responsible for their use.”

    Comment by Tracy — January 27, 2006 @

    So nice of you to tell us. Perhaps you could post some letters to the editor you wrote on the subject at the time. Otherwise it reads like you’re riding the fence, and backdating your opinion to sound rational. Prove you said those things at the time – or be branded a revisionist.

    January 27th, 2006 at 1:33 pm
  55. the fly-man says:

    Tracy, thanks for your time. Any suggestions on OPEC? Thanks again.

    January 27th, 2006 at 3:36 pm
  56. the fly-man says:

    This is brilliant. http://www.fas.org/nuke/control/npt/. Great link but what proof substantiates the claim made in Paragraph #4 Quote “There is no confirmed instance of State Party governmental transfers of nuclear weapon technology or unsafegaurded nuclear materials to any non-nuclear-weapon state. However, some non-nuclear states such as Iraq, were able to obtain sensitive technology and/or equipment from private parties in states that are State Parties to the NPT.”
    So on your link page to the NPT Iraq is given exeception. Prove it.

    January 27th, 2006 at 3:45 pm
  57. the fly-man says:

    The next excuse/reason platform we will hear, probably from Ms. Rice will be” We couldn’t compromise the nature of the program”. Blah Blah Blah…. We can’t even tell you what we can’t tell you.

    January 27th, 2006 at 3:58 pm
  58. Tracy says:

    #53

    Since you claim to have fought in the First Gulf War is seems rather suspect that you would have ANY access to the Iraqi govenments documents that were kept in Baghdad considering coalition forces never entered Baghdad in 1991 and Sadamm remained in power after the cease fire was signed. That of course unless members of the Iraqi Republican guard for example, made a habit of keeping government population records on poverty in their pocket on the battlefield. Care to revise your statement?

    BTW what unit were you in?

    January 27th, 2006 at 7:09 pm
  59. Tracy says:

    #54

    White phosphorus is not illegal to use on the battlefield even by the Geneva Convention. Get your facts straight.

    http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/systems/munitions/wp.htm

    Directing them intentionally against civilians is, however if you are trying to suggest that those insurgents and terrorists in Fallujah were civilians…keep trying. If you have evidence that the U.S. intentionally used WP against the civilians in Fallujah that decided to remain even though they were given ample time to leave.

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/US_occupation_of_Fallujah

    January 27th, 2006 at 7:24 pm
  60. Tracy says:

    #58

    The U.N.s concern over Iran KNOWN nuclear program isn’t unfounded and confirmed transfers of technology directly from a nuke country to a non-nuke country is just a formality.

    http://www.washtimes.com/world/20031120-090525-4293r.htm

    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2005/03/10/world/main679282.shtml

    January 27th, 2006 at 8:48 pm
  61. Tracy says:

    #57

    Maybe I don’t understand the gist of your question “what about OPEC”? What do you want to know?

    January 27th, 2006 at 8:51 pm
  62. the fly-man says:

    What relative contents were transfered?

    January 27th, 2006 at 8:53 pm
  63. Tracy says:

    #56

    I never posted anything on the subject and I don’t think I have been posting here that long.

    January 27th, 2006 at 8:55 pm
  64. the fly-man says:

    Opec, if it is colusionary in America, why do we deal with them. A Cartel is cartel.

    January 27th, 2006 at 8:58 pm
  66. Tracy says:

    #66

    Considering OPEC produces 60% of the world’s oil…

    http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/nonopec.html

    January 27th, 2006 at 9:38 pm
  67. Clif says:

    #1 Tracy I was with the 3rd Armor Divison, however I was not a tanker.

    #2 Shooting WP at military of civilians is illegal, for the same reason that shooting any person whether military or civilian with the .50 cal round is illegal.

    #3 the members of the republican guards did not normally have documents like this but the Corp HQ’s had many different kinds, and A WHOLE lot of documents were in Iraqi trucks in Kuwait, which I was part of the group that cleared the highway of death just north of Kuwait city after the cease fire was called. And all the vehicles there were Iraqi military and stolen civilian vehicles that the Iraqis were trying to escape from Kuwait city when the US Air Force took them out in what the pilots later described as a turkey shoot. Around 1000 vehicles strung out from Kuwait city to Safrawn.

    January 27th, 2006 at 10:04 pm
  68. Tracy says:

    “#2 Shooting WP at military of civilians is illegal, for the same reason that shooting any person whether military or civilian with the .50 cal round is illegal.”

    It’s not illegal because I have seen AC-130 Spectre gunships fire at running Taliban and terrorists with their 105mm howitzers as well as the 20mm gatling guns in Afghanistan. I have seen video of snipers take out al Qaeda with an M107 .50 cal. What are you talking about?

    “A WHOLE lot of documents were in Iraqi trucks in Kuwait”

    Were there government documents that had Iraqi civilian poverty statistics in these trucks?

    January 28th, 2006 at 3:23 pm
  69. WORFEUS says:

    Bush was right about one thing.

    This is about Good and Evil.

    January 28th, 2006 at 4:09 pm
  70. Clif says:

    Tracy the 105 is an area weapon not a personel weapon, it shoots at an area not a specific person, not that accurate, the same applies to any mobile gatling gun, however it is against the Geneva convention to shoot troops with the vulcan AA gun. any round designed to destroy military equipment is not to be shot at individual troops, and the .50 cal was designed for the .50 cal machine gun which by definition is an area denial weapon, definitions are not mine but Geneva Conventions,

    February 1st, 2006 at 7:44 am
  71. Tracy says:

    #72

    Please cite where in the Geneva Conventions this is stated.

    Look at these because they have been on the internet for a while now. These videos are pretty gruesome.

    #1 .50 caliber sniper does his job
    #2 AC-130U-Gunship-Afghanistan
    #3 Apache Helicopter Strikes

    http://www.mytakeonthings.com/videos.html

    February 2nd, 2006 at 11:09 am

Jump to Top

About Think Progress | Contact Us | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy (off-site) | RSS | Donate
© 2005-2009 Center for American Progress Action Fund
View Most Popular

Advertisement

What We're About

What We're Fighting For
Social and Economic JusticeHealthy CommunitiesMedia AccountabilityGlobal and Domestic Security

What We're Fighting Against
Public CorruptionIncompetent EstablishmentCorporate MalfeasanceRadical Right-Wing Agenda

Featured

image
Subscribe to the Progress Report



imageTopic Cloud


Visit Our Affiliated Sites

image image
Reports

In-depth studies on select topics

Why Bush's 'Enhanced Interrogation' Program Failed
The Sarah Palin Digest
THE ARCHITECTS OF WAR: WHERE ARE THEY NOW?
A TIMELINE OF THE IRAQ WAR

Got a hot tip?
Have a hot news tip? We'd love to hear from you. Use the form below to send us the latest.

Name:
Email:
Tip:
(required)

imageArchives


imageBlog Roll