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]
sent to guardian today
Geraldine Brook's article is full of glaring contradictions.
On the one hand she lament the suffering induced by BOTH the Iraqi regime AND the policy of bombing and sanctions on Iraq. She then goes on to advocate further bombing of Iraq!
The analogy of Afganistan is irrelevant: there a war was started with the specific intention of removing a government and putting in place a more benevolent one. The Gulf War was about the liberation of Kuwait.
What does the author hope to achieve by bombing an already impoverished country? Is she advocating a full-scale invasion to remove Saddam Hussein and install another government? Does she beleive that the governments and indeed civilian populations of countries like the US and UK would be willing to sustain the loss of life needed to do such a thing?
I share the writer's passion to recognise the injustices in Iraq and prevent further ones from happening, but consider her analysis of how to do it to be ill thought out.