6 - After Gulf War I, liberals complained that sanctions were killing over 50,000 kids a year (when instead Saddam was diverting oil-for-food revenues for bribes, palaces and military materials). But when Bush wanted to invade Iraq, liberals suddenly wanted to give sanctions all the time necessary to work. Isn't that hypocritical?
7 - Using the 50,000/year dead child figure, liberals claim that we've killed 10-12,000 Iraqis during the conflict. However, we also don't have starving kids any longer. By my calculations, we're about 45,000 lives ahead. Do you disagree?
8 - Do you find contemptable Michael Moore's depiction in Fahrenheit 9/11 of Iraq prior to the invasion as one big happy campground?
To: Perlstein
5 - During the Cold War, liberals condemned the United States for coddling dictators in pursuit of an anti-communist agenda. Now that George Bush has taken out one of the most brutal dictators of our time, the liberals could care less. Isn't that hypocritical?
-----
Great that Saddam is gone, but the question is whether it will be worth the cost--the cost, say, of turning Iraq into an Al Q breeding ground.
-----
6 - After Gulf War I, liberals complained that sanctions were killing over 50,000 kids a year (when instead Saddam was diverting oil-for-food revenues for bribes, palaces and military materials). But when Bush wanted to invade Iraq, liberals suddenly wanted to give sanctions all the time necessary to work. Isn't that hypocritical?
-----
You are aware, of course, that the source for the oil-for-food charges is Ahmed Chalabi, the spy for Iran and convicted bank defrauder, that Bush made his point man in Iraq?
You mistake an important part of the liberal argument. Sanctions DIDN'T work. They didn't hurt Saddam. And not because of oil-for-food. Because sanctions are a terrible instrument for changing an enemy's policy. Do you disagree?
------
7 - Using the 50,000/year dead child figure, liberals claim that we've killed 10-12,000 Iraqis during the conflict. However, we also don't have starving kids any longer. By my calculations, we're about 45,000 lives ahead. Do you disagree?
----
Don't have starving kids any more? For the second time I have to refer Freepers to the Brookings Institute's Iraq Index, especially its numbers on food production. The numbers mostly come from the Pentagon.
And it was generally children dying from rotting from diarhhea because of inability to santize water that was the gravest human rights problem with the sanctions--not starvation. Sewage ain't doing so good in Iraq to this point, however, as the Iraq Index indicates.
-----
8 - Do you find contemptable Michael Moore's depiction in Fahrenheit 9/11 of Iraq prior to the invasion as one big happy campground?