The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]
> Does anyone have information which rebuts the following arguments for > Saddam's complicity in the humanitarian disaster: > (1) Saddam refused oil-for-food for five years > (2) Saddam has recently refused Arab aid > (3) Iraqi administrators have consistently delayed ordering protein > biscuits permitted under oil-for-food > > Believe the issue with (1) had to do with Iraqi sovereignty and the > relatively small amounts being tendered. (A collection of communications > between the UN and Iraq for the period 1990-1996 is available as a UN > 'Blue Book'; perhaps this would be helpful?) > > Apparently, (2) stems chiefly from a Barbara Crossette article in the > NYTimes, which contained the assertion but few details. > > In the overall scheme of things, (3) is a relatively minor issue. > However, it remains a sore point among OIP administrators and receives > coverage as a result. > > Any information would be sincerely appreciated. > > Regards, > Drew Hamre Minneapolis, MN USA -- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- This is a discussion list run by Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To be removed/added, email soc-casi-discuss-request@lists.cam.ac.uk, NOT the whole list. Archived at http://linux.clare.cam.ac.uk/~saw27/casi/discuss.html