More good news about Iraq.

[The once and future king]

Apparently the choco ration is up to 37 grams.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
Apparently the choco ration is up to 37 grams.

[/ QUOTE ]

How much choco did the average Iraqi family enjoy before Saddam was deposed?

I recall reading, perhaps a decade or so ago, that the average Iraqi family could afford to eat one chicken per month.

I'm not being being facetious or anything, I just don't know the answer. How much of that do you think was due to the sanctions?

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I recall reading, perhaps a decade or so ago, that the average Iraqi family could afford to eat one chicken per month.



[/ QUOTE ] I'm not being being facetious or anything, I just don't know the answer. How much of that do you think was due to the sanctions?

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't know either, but my guess is not much: because even with the sanctions, Saddam found ample money to build lavish palaces, to fund his military, to erect many giant statues of himself, and to bribe corrupt U.N. officials.

You don't think the sanctions had much of a deleterious effect on the population? Everything I've ever read about them has said that they were worse off after the sanctions than before, especially with oil for food being a pile of [censored]. I don't really think it makes a difference if Saddam was rich himself. Tyrants won't change their ways in the face of a suffering population. He had a lot to do with it, admittedly, and I'm sure he could've alleviated the suffering caused by the sanctions if he used resources fairly. Anyways, I think that kind of proves my point a little bit. The sanctions didn't really harm him; he let the population take the brunt of it, which could've been expected.

Even Albright admits the effects of the sanctions on the population:

"When asked on US television if she [Madeline Albright, US Secretary of State] thought that the death of half a million Iraqi children [from sanctions in Iraq] was a price worth paying, Albright replied: “This is a very hard choice, but we think the price is worth it.”"

[MMMMMM]

timotheeee, sorry but this has been discussed at enormous length in the archives and in multiple threads and I'm not about to rehash it all in depth again now.

You expressed a wondering as to the extent. So did I, although I think it was probably not a great deal. Also my understanding was that the sanctions purportedly did more harm regarding drinking water, and to children, than to general food availability.

By the way I don't think the sanctions were a good idea. I also think Saddam used them for political gain and could have helped his people instead of doing what he did. And in more cynical moments I suspect that he preferred to let those children die in order to make a political issue in order to get the sanctions lifted.

Anyway that's just my take and I don't have any inclination to reopen the debate in this thread. You might want to search the archives over the last few years though if you have a keen interest in this.

[The once and future king]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
Apparently the choco ration is up to 37 grams.

[/ QUOTE ]

How much choco did the average Iraqi family enjoy before Saddam was deposed?

I recall reading, perhaps a decade or so ago, that the average Iraqi family could afford to eat one chicken per month.

[/ QUOTE ]

You obviously missed the literary reference in my thread, which makes your reply very though unintentionally funny.

[MMMMMM]

Yes I missed the reference. Would you care to elaborate?

[The once and future king]

Watch the film 1984 and all will be revealed.

[MMMMMM]

[ QUOTE ]
Watch the film 1984 and all will be revealed.

[/ QUOTE ]

It's very likely that I read the book before you did: we read the book in junior high school, but that was over 30 years ago and I'm afraid my memory isn't that perfect. So, what's the reference to choco?

BTW, the same teacher also had us read Catch-22 and Lord of the Flies. Good junior high school reading, I guess.