The American invasion of Iraq is essentially a hostile takeover -- financing the acquisition of another country by liquidating the latter's assets. Truly government along modern business lines...
Peter
k hanly wrote:
http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=15&ItemID=3341
Aid Conundrum
by Phyllis Bennis; March 28, 2003
snip
Should oil-for-food funds be released and used to pay for emergency supplies?
No -- international law, specifically Geneva Conventions, requires belligerent --and occupying power -- to take responsibility (meaning pay) for humanitarian needs of civilian population under occupation. Currently that includes most of Iraq. The oil-for-food money is Iraqi money; it belongs to the people of Iraq, and should remain in the bank until there is a functioning government in Iraq to whom it can be turned over.
2) Then how should emergency food, medicine, other needs be paid for? The U.S., the occupying power and belligerent, should pay all costs for emergency care and initial rehabilitation efforts, at least during period while hostilities continue.
etc.
- [PEN-L:36238] Rightwing media and the war, Louis Proyect Fri 28 Mar 2003, 20:53 GMT
- [PEN-L:36237] FW: useful web resources re Iraq, Devine, James Fri 28 Mar 2003, 20:47 GMT
- [PEN-L:36236] reconstructing Iraq, Ian Murray Fri 28 Mar 2003, 20:13 GMT
- [PEN-L:36234] Spreading the cost, legitimizing aggression, k hanly Fri 28 Mar 2003, 19:33 GMT
- [PEN-L:36315] Re: Spreading the cost, legitimizing aggression, Peter Dorman Sun 30 Mar 2003, 21:44 GMT
- [PEN-L:36232] RE: Kathy Kelly report, Devine, James Fri 28 Mar 2003, 18:55 GMT
- [PEN-L:36233] casualty figures, e. ahmet tonak Fri 28 Mar 2003, 19:20 GMT
- [PEN-L:36231] Re: Re: Falling perles, Carl Remick Fri 28 Mar 2003, 18:36 GMT
- [PEN-L:36235] Re: Re: Re: Falling perles, Alan Jacobson Fri 28 Mar 2003, 19:40 GMT