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]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

!OT Re: [casi] What people are saying about the UN - and the blast

On Sat, 23 Aug 2003 12:22:29 -0300 (ADT) H Sutter <>
>It isn't only the "Arab world" that "no longer
>draw[s] a distinction" between the UN and the US.
>It's the whole world. At least those people in
>it who put humanity above power and money grabs.

Is the humanitarians who see the UN as a mere puppet of the UN, or is it
the people who put power above all who draw no distinction between the US
and UN?

I am confused. I can't figure out who/what the UN is.

>As someone aptly put it: the UN is 'a government
>institution in a capitalist world'. And it's a

Yes, but it is more than that. It the SC, but also the general assembly,
and the people of the world, and the charter, and the US (who can usually
control the SC when it wants). Is the UN the aid agencies? The blue
helmets which must be borrowed from member states? It seems it is all and
none of these, depending on time and viewpoint.

>capitalist world that's on an exploitation
>rampage - prepared to stamp out all human obstacles,
>if need be with cruise missiles. The UN is seen as
>a tool in this quest.
>Dear List,
>In her article, Megan K. Stack of the LA Times
>stops just short of suggesting that the "Arab
>world" was jubilant over the attack on the UN HQ
>in Baghdad. Watch out! You are being manipulated

Is there a time I am not being manipulated?? But as I can't decide who
the UN is, neither can I decide who the "Arab world" is, nor who the
"Iraqis" are.

I hear that the UN was attacked because it is regarded as part of the
US/UK invaders, and there's truth in that -- but they are not identical.
As a tactic to discourage other nations or "outsiders" from being in
Iraq, the bombing looks successful, if that WAS the intent. But that's
not all to the good.

>There is no Us vs Them. It's only like-minded human
>beings struggling against an inhuman neocon/neolib

You are correct. There is more in common among the Iraqi "human beings"
and non-Iraqi "human beings" than among the humans and the monsters of
whatever nationality. Those who love freedom and humanity, no matter from
where, can be of help to the Iraqis, and support self-determination.
Those who hate freedom (what Bush does, as opposed to what he says) are
destructive, even if they are Iraqi.

Perhaps I misjudged, but aside from some criticism I have read recently,
I think Vieira De Mello did have good intention. There were/are others in
the UN who are "human beings". I think I can usually tell the difference,
but bombs never can. But then, most of us are part human and part

Killing -- even killing invaders in self-defense -- makes us a little
more monsterous. Yet, I am not a complete pacifist: I am not smart, or
wise enough to be a pacifist. How then can I criticize others for
defending themselves? How can I condemn those who bombed the UN unless I
can at least relate thorough and practical solutions to the terrorism the
Iraqis suffer under the invaders?

Even assuming De Mello was a very good person, is his becoming
"collateral damage" less justifiable (what a word...) than the dead
Iraqis? It is a rotten situation all around, with perhaps no "good"
answers, but as for the sanctions, the invasion, the corruption of the
UN, the greed, terror, torture, and other Stations of Hell in Iraq, the
blame can be readily put on Bush, the war industries, the greedy
corporations -- "the usual suspects". The question of targets, then,
should take this into account -- not only the softness or the effect.

In terms of public opinion and allies, but also in terms of the "moral
high ground" -- which somehow seems to have an subtle but powerful effect
 -- the closer attacks are on the truly guily parties attacks, the more
effective in the long term, and the less monsterousness is created or
propagated. By way of Abraham's plea for Sodom and Ghemorrah, were there
not 10 righteous men at the UN?

The best thing to hit the internet in years - Juno SpeedBand!
Surf the web up to FIVE TIMES FASTER!
Only $14.95/ month - visit to sign up today!

Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit
To contact the list manager, email
All postings are archived on CASI's website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]