Clarkmeister
04-18-2003, 12:38 PM
In Iraq, sanctions were frequently justified as a combination of two things. First was punishment for the invasion of Kuwait. The other reason was to prevent the regime from having the money to rebuild and re-arm their military. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.
Those are rational enough reasons to me. The question is whether or not the sanctions achieve those goals. That is, do they really "punish" the regime or just the people the regime was oppressing? And does it really stop them from re-arming to the point of being a serious threat? This is also a legitimate question because even at its "peak" in 1990, the Iraqi military was still never a serious threat that the US couldn't easily counter. Those same sanctions, however, have done irreparable harm to the country's people. I'm sure others have links handy (Alger?) so I won't bother, but its been well documented the effect the sanctions had on the Iraqi people, while having minimal effect on the regime.
So my question is why ever institute sanctions? I don't want to hear about the "Oil for Food" program, since we know by experience that whatever regime is worthy of us sanctioning, also is always going to use whatever trade is allowed strictly for their own benefit. Put simply, do sanctions ever do what they are supposed to do? I don't think so, though I am willing to be convinced otherwise.
To use another example, just what is the point of our continued sanctions of Cuba? Is there really a justification at this point?
I'd like to hear from people willing to discuss this reasonably.
Those are rational enough reasons to me. The question is whether or not the sanctions achieve those goals. That is, do they really "punish" the regime or just the people the regime was oppressing? And does it really stop them from re-arming to the point of being a serious threat? This is also a legitimate question because even at its "peak" in 1990, the Iraqi military was still never a serious threat that the US couldn't easily counter. Those same sanctions, however, have done irreparable harm to the country's people. I'm sure others have links handy (Alger?) so I won't bother, but its been well documented the effect the sanctions had on the Iraqi people, while having minimal effect on the regime.
So my question is why ever institute sanctions? I don't want to hear about the "Oil for Food" program, since we know by experience that whatever regime is worthy of us sanctioning, also is always going to use whatever trade is allowed strictly for their own benefit. Put simply, do sanctions ever do what they are supposed to do? I don't think so, though I am willing to be convinced otherwise.
To use another example, just what is the point of our continued sanctions of Cuba? Is there really a justification at this point?
I'd like to hear from people willing to discuss this reasonably.