Skip to comments.
Iraq's Odious Debts
The Wall Street Journal ^
| Wednesday, April 30, 2003
Posted on 04/30/2003 6:31:41 AM PDT by WaveThatFlag
Edited on 04/22/2004 11:48:49 PM PDT by Jim Robinson.
[history]
President Bush told cheering Iraqi Americans Monday that the United States would defeat not just Saddam Hussein but "the dictator's legacy." In Baghdad, Iraqis meeting to discuss the formation of a new government agreed that one of the worst parts of that legacy would be Iraqi debt.
(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...
TOPICS: Business/Economy; Culture/Society; Editorial; Foreign Affairs; News/Current Events; Russia
KEYWORDS: debt; iraqifreedom; odiousdebt
To: WaveThatFlag
When the populace has absolutely no power over its leader, it shouldn't incur responsibility. Those loans were essentially personal loans directly to Saddam and the governments who lent him money as he built arsenals and palaces knew the money wasn't reaching the Iraqi people.
2
posted on
04/30/2003 7:13:08 AM PDT
by
Tamzee
(I wondered why somebody didn't do something. Then I realized... I am somebody! - Anonymous)
To: WaveThatFlag
Hm. I've never heard of the 'Odious Debt' concept, it sounds quite valid.
I would dare to say that just because Saddam is a despot doesn't mean everything Iraq purchased would fall into that 'Odious' categore.
If the debt was for something which violated a UN sanction, not that I'm a big fan of the UN, mind you; then I would say that it should not be paid.
If the debt, however, was for somethign which was allowed, such as permitted weapons systems, construction projectts, etc., then the debt would be valid.
After all, Iraq, regardless of who is gonna run it, is still going to need roads, electrical power stations, food, water, and even a military. Hey, if the Russians loaned a billion for part of some big infrastrucutre job, they ought to be allowed to collect. If the French sold Saddam a restricted anti-aircraft missile platform, they should be stiffed.
One thing is for sure, though; the US should -not- be looked to as the one to pick up the tab. Let the new Iraqui government pay for the legitimate debts. Let 'em pump some oil and pay off their bills. After all, if the purchases were for legitimate purposes, and hopefully they wern't destroyed during the war, then the Iraquis should be willing to pay. I dont' think that is unreasonable.
http://www.boycottliberalhollywood.com - Tell 'em what you really think!
To: WaveThatFlag
This concept may actually be good in the long-term. When you loan money to petty tyrants, you run the risk of losing that money when the tyrant gets pushed off his throne, from within or without. It will certainly make creditors think twice about who they loan money to.
4
posted on
04/30/2003 8:00:09 AM PDT
by
Fudd
To: Tamsey
If the Russians contiune to play hardball, we can write over some of the Soviet debt still owed to us over to the new Iraqi regime.
5
posted on
04/30/2003 8:17:51 AM PDT
by
WaveThatFlag
(Run Al, Run!!!)
Disclaimer:
Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual
posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its
management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the
exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson