Political activism, Islamic style

[Mycroft]

[quote]Iraqi Group Holds 2 French Journalists Hostage

DUBAI, Aug 28 - An Iraqi militant group has kidnapped two Frenchmen and given the French government 48 hours to end a ban on Muslim headscarves, Arabic television station Al Jazeera said on Saturday.

The channel aired a brief video showing two men standing in front of a black banner bearing the name of the Islamic Army in Iraq. One man told the camera: "I would like to tell my family that everything is OK." [quote]

Wow, that's optimism! He's being held captive, an implied threat of murder, and he says everything is okay?!

Quote:

The journalists -- who work for Le Figaro and Radio France International -- were declared missing on the same day that Italy said freelance journalist Enzo Baldoni was also missing and that his driver had been reportedly killed.

Baldoni was taken hostage by the Islamic Army in Iraq and on Thursday, Jazeera said the group killed him because Italy refused to heed a deadline to withdraw troops from Iraq.

So Italy has troops in Iraq, so we can sort of expect them to react this way to Italians, but to the French?! What do they do, grab someone and then figure out who and what to blackmail for their lives?

Quote:

A French Foreign Ministry spokesman in Paris said: "We have nothing to say. We are trying to analyse the information we have learned the same way you did."

Hmmm, I wonder how this analysis will go?

I know, let's talk to the UN and see if we can get a strongly worded condemnation!


Editied to add link:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...2004Aug28.html

[epepke]

Russians, now French. Next it will be Germans.

You know what it means. A lot of people will have to smoke a lot more dope to remain stupid.

[corplinx]

Terrorists attack targets of opportunity. They see a weakness and they take it.

I offer the Spanish train bombing as an example. Spain wasn't exactly the UK as far as US allies in Iraq go. I think its likely that terrorists realized that a train bombing in Spain would be successful so they did it.

[Mr Manifesto]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mycroft

I know, let's talk to the UN and see if we can get a strongly worded condemnation!

Better still, let's get an army and invade Iraq!

Oh, wait...

[Mycroft]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
Better still, let's get an army and invade Iraq!

Oh, wait...

Or we could be like the French and appease them.

Oh, wait...

[Mr Manifesto]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mycroft
Or we could be like the French and appease them.

Oh, wait...

Or we could be like the Americans and support them with weapons and other types of assistance until it's no longer politically expedient to do so.

Oh, wait...

[BPSCG]

Why don't we just ask them what they want, and when they tell us, give it to them. Then they'll let the hostages go and we'll all live happily ever after. That's always worked before. The sweet voice of reason always works when dealing with cutthroats. We just need to make them understand that what they're doing isn't nice.

I'm pretty tired tonight, so there may be some tiny flaws in the above argument, but I'm sure y'all will point them out to me...

[NoZed Avenger]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
Or we could be like the Americans and support them with weapons and other types of assistance until it's no longer politically expedient to do so.

Oh, wait...

Yes, you realised your mistake here -- you were STILL talking about the French. Or Germans. Or possibly the Russians.

[Jocko]

Quote:

Originally posted by NoZed Avenger
Yes, you realised your mistake here -- you were STILL talking about the French. Or Germans. Or possibly the Russians.

Impossible. Otherwise he would have added something on the subject of illegal oil contracts facilitated by their UN cohorts. But I guess he can't be blamed for forgetting about that bit... God knows the French and the UN already have.

[Mike B.]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
Or we could be like the Americans and support them with weapons and other types of assistance until it's no longer politically expedient to do so.

Oh, wait...

Actually the French were the second biggest supplier of weapons to Saddam, right behind USSR/Russia.

[Mike B.]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jocko
Impossible. Otherwise he would have added something on the subject of illegal oil contracts facilitated by their UN cohorts. But I guess he can't be blamed for forgetting about that bit... God knows the French and the UN already have.

Don't forget the cute double game thay some countries in the EU are fond of playing.

Give indignent moral lectures to the US about "supporting dictatorships" then lift arms exporting embargo to PRC over US objections. High-Tech weapons the PRC will use to threaten democratic Taiwan get lots of money.

(This happened recently, and strangely The Don, EJ Armstrong, Chaos, MM, etc. were all quiet about it.)

[Mycroft]

http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp..._government_dc

Quote:

Chirac Sends FM to Mideast to Win Iraq Hostage Release

PARIS (Reuters) - French President Jacques Chirac sent his foreign minister to the Middle East on Sunday to try to win freedom for two journalists held in Iraq (news - web sites) by militants demanding France end its ban on Muslim headscarves in schools.

"Today, the whole nation is united because the lives of two Frenchmen are at stake," Chirac said in a televised address on Sunday evening.

"Backed up by this national unity, I solemnly call for the release of Christian Chesnot and Georges Malbrunot. Everything is being done and everything will be done in the coming hours and days to achieve this."

Hmm, I wonder what they will do?

[shecky]

Such kidnappings are to be expected in a democracy.

[003998]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mycroft
Wow, that's optimism! He's being held captive, an implied threat of murder, and he says everything is okay?! [/b]

I find this comment to be very sad. I would call it not optimism but courage. Trying to comfort his family while being in such perilous personal danger seems to me like the ultimate act of love and bravery.
That`s the kind of thing that makes me keep my faith in humanity even when reading about his disgustingly stupid and morally corrupt captors.

[Mr Manifesto]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike B.
Actually the French were the second biggest supplier of weapons to Saddam, right behind USSR/Russia.

The French didn't sponsor a coup which put the Ba'athist regime in charge of Iraq, allowing Saddam to take power.

[Ziggurat]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
The French didn't sponsor a coup which put the Ba'athist regime in charge of Iraq, allowing Saddam to take power.

Neither did Bush. But Chirac did help Saddam in his quest to build nuclear weapons with the Osirak reactor. Funny how recent European sins get washed away so easily for you by much older American ones.

[Flo]

Quote:

Originally posted by 003998
I find this comment to be very sad. I would call it not optimism but courage. Trying to comfort his family while being in such perilous personal danger seems to me like the ultimate act of love and bravery.
That`s the kind of thing that makes me keep my faith in humanity even when reading about his disgustingly stupid and morally corrupt captors.

Well, you can't very well put "French" and "courage" side by side, can you ? You know perfectly well that the French are "cheese eating surrender monkeys" ...

Besides, be charitable and allow Mycroft and his fellows French-basher here their daily dose of gloating ...

[Mr Manifesto]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ziggurat
Neither did Bush. But Chirac did help Saddam in his quest to build nuclear weapons with the Osirak reactor. Funny how recent European sins get washed away so easily for you by much older American ones.

Sorry, where did I say that I support France's support of the Iraqi regime? Do you think that I've forgotten about France's attack on the Rainbow Warrior, too? You're very quick with that mouth of yours. Pity about the brain.

PS- how 'old' is the American sin of murdering thousands of Iraqi civilians based on bullsh!t?

[Ziggurat]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
PS- how 'old' is the American sin of murdering thousands of Iraqi civilians based on bullsh!t?

You, along with most "anti-war" people, never calculate the costs of inaction in your arguments. Iraqis were dying already, and would continue to do so indefinitely as long as Saddam (or his sons) were in power. Would you then blame those deaths on US inaction? Or maybe French inaction? No, I do not see how deposing one of the century's worst tyrants can be considered a sin. I guess I'm funny that way, though.

[Mr Manifesto]

Quote:

Originally posted by Ziggurat
You, along with most "anti-war" people, never calculate the costs of inaction in your arguments. Iraqis were dying already, and would continue to do so indefinitely as long as Saddam (or his sons) were in power. Would you then blame those deaths on US inaction? Or maybe French inaction? No, I do not see how deposing one of the century's worst tyrants can be considered a sin. I guess I'm funny that way, though.

Don't make me laugh. People are dying indefinitely right now. And just to add to the comedy, a thug has been deposed to be replaced with... another thug. Call that progress? 'Cause I don't.

[a_unique_person]

Quote:

Originally posted by corplinx
Terrorists attack targets of opportunity. They see a weakness and they take it.

I offer the Spanish train bombing as an example. Spain wasn't exactly the UK as far as US allies in Iraq go. I think its likely that terrorists realized that a train bombing in Spain would be successful so they did it.

The Spanish participation in Iraq was not popular from the start. The bombing had nothing to do with a pull out.

[c0rbin]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mycroft
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmp..._government_dc



Hmm, I wonder what they will do?

Hold on. Don't FM deal with other recognized governments?

If I held a French citizen hostage should I expect French diplomatic visits?

[Skeptic]

Don't make me laugh. People are dying indefinitely right now.

Yes, but you don't care, unless their death can somehow be blamed on the US/israel.

[Mr Manifesto]

Quote:

Originally posted by Skeptic
Don't make me laugh. People are dying indefinitely right now.

Yes, but you don't care, unless their death can somehow be blamed on the US/israel.

Sorry, did you say Ukraine famine?

[Baker]

Quote:

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The Spanish participation in Iraq was not popular from the start. The bombing had nothing to do with a pull out.

So its just pure coincidence that they pulled out after the bombing?

[Jocko]

Quote:

Originally posted by c0rbin
Hold on. Don't FM deal with other recognized governments?

If I held a French citizen hostage should I expect French diplomatic visits?

I would guess you could expect unconditional surrender. They're due, after all.

[Jocko]

Quote:

Originally posted by a_unique_person
The Spanish participation in Iraq was not popular from the start. The bombing had nothing to do with a pull out.

Right. The bombing unseated the government, and the new government pulled out. How anyone could draw a line through this is beyond me.

Sheesh.

[epepke]

Quote:

Originally posted by NoZed Avenger
Yes, you realised your mistake here -- you were STILL talking about the French. Or Germans. Or possibly the Russians.

In terms of military support of Iraq in the old days, Russia was number 1, France number 2, and China number 3. Everyone else was distant. The US gave about as much military support as Argentina. In the early days of the war, when Iraq was obviously the aggressor, the US gave far more military assistance to Iran. (Remember Iran/Contra?)

Yes, the US did give Iraq satellite intelligence during the Iran/Iraq war. But then only after the tide had turned and it looked as if Iran had a shot at taking Baghdad. The idea that the US played a substantial role in building up Iraq is just nonsense.

[c0rbin]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jocko
I would guess you could expect unconditional surrender. They're due, after all.

"Surrender, my sweet..."

[Jocko]

Damn. Is she French? I don't dare take too close a look here at the office. But the pits looked shaven, so I'm guessing not.

[c0rbin]

Monica Bellucci

IMDB Link

You might have seen her lately in The Matrix Reloaded (2nd flick).

[Jocko]

Quote:

Originally posted by c0rbin
Monica Bellucci

IMDB Link

You might have seen her lately in The Matrix Reloaded (2nd flick).

It bears mentioning that I've never seen an Italian pull out.

Of Iraq, that is.

[c0rbin]

Oh crap, I would have sworn she was french!

Oh well, I don't mind being wrong

In this case it would be difficult for an American to pull out of Italy.

Edited to add: Try this one (work safe, but titillating to be sure). She was born in Paris.

[Mr Manifesto]

Quote:

Originally posted by epepke
In terms of military support of Iraq in the old days, Russia was number 1, France number 2, and China number 3. Everyone else was distant. The US gave about as much military support as Argentina. In the early days of the war, when Iraq was obviously the aggressor, the US gave far more military assistance to Iran. (Remember Iran/Contra?)

Yes, the US did give Iraq satellite intelligence during the Iran/Iraq war. But then only after the tide had turned and it looked as if Iran had a shot at taking Baghdad. The idea that the US played a substantial role in building up Iraq is just nonsense.

Evidence?

[Mike B.]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
Evidence?

"Where Iraq Purchased Weapons 1973-2002
The purpose of this post is to address one of the many mythical claims about the United States popularized by some Leftists who would have us believe that the United States is the cause of most of what is wrong with the world. The myth under examination here is the claim that the United States played an important role in arming Saddam Hussein. The data comes from the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute in the form of a table of the value of arms imported by Iraq from 1973 through 2002. (PDF format)

Figures are trend-indicator values expressed in US $m. at constant (1990) prices.

Note: The SIPRI data on arms transfers refer to actual deliveries of major conventional weapons. To permit comparison between the data on such deliveries of different weapons and identification of general trends, SIPRI uses a trend-indicator value. The SIPRI values are therefore only an indicator of the volume of international arms transfers and not of the actual financial values of such transfers. Thus they are not comparable to economic statistics such as gross domestic product or export/import figures.

...

Imported weapons to Iraq (IRQ) in 1973-2002

Country $MM USD 1990 % Total
USSR 25145 57.26
France 5595 12.74
China 5192 11.82
Czechoslovakia 2880 6.56
Poland 1681 3.83
Brazil 724 1.65
Egypt 568 1.29
Romania 524 1.19
Denmark 226 0.51
Libya 200 0.46
USA 200 0.46
South Africa 192 0.44
Austria 190 0.43
Switzerland 151 0.34
Yugoslavia 107 0.24
Germany (FRG) 84 0.19
Italy 84 0.19
UK 79 0.18
Hungary 30 0.07
Spain 29 0.07
East Germany (GDR) 25 0.06
Canada 7 0.02
Jordan 2 0.005
Total 43915 100.0


I made my own percentage calculations. Also, the original PDF document has the amounts by year but I extracted out only the final total column. Note that post-1990 sales listed under "USSR" probably refers to Russia or perhaps Russia plus former USSR states.

Given the US's position as largest arms merchant in the world the fact that it ties Libya for 9th place with only 0.51% of Iraq's total arms imports makes it obvious that the United States was not an important source of arms for Saddam's regime, that the US didn't even seriously try to be, and that US arms sales gave the US little or no leverage over Saddam.

In a report published in 1998 Anthony Cordesman places an even lower estimate on US arms exports to Iraq. See page 22 of this PDF which shows the US selling Iraq $5 million in arms in the late 1980s. Cordesman's report has many charts which also show just how far Iraq's economy fell during the war with Iran and afterward.


Iraq seemed to be on the edge of sustained economic development in 1979. It was a nation of 12.8 million people with a per capita income well in excess of $10,000 in constant $US 1994. However, its economy was dependent on oil wealth and construction and infrastructure oriented with massive distortions in the state and agricultural sector.
By 1986, the worst year of the Iran-Iraq War in economic terms, Iraq’s per capita income was down to $2,174, and its population was up to 16.2 million.
By 1991, the last year for which we have hard data on the Iraqi economy in market terms, Iraq’s per capita income was down to $705, and its population was up to 17.9 million. Iraq’s GNP in constant $1994 had dropped from $48.3 billion in 1984 to $16.3 billion.
Iraq’s current per capita income is probably under $1,000. The World Bank estimates that its population will climb from 21.0 million in 1995 to 24.5 million in 2000, 28.4 million in 2005, and 32.5 million in 2010.

US policy in the 1980s favored a stalemate in the Iran-Iraq war. But the US role in ensuring that outcome was very small as compared to the roles played by the USSR, France, China, and other countries in making sure Saddam's regime was not overrun. What intelligence and other assistance the US provided to prevent Iranian victory pales in comparison to the roles played by several other countries."

here

I know it is a very useful meme for the editors of "The Guardian" and others of that ilk to repeat constantly, "THE US ARMED SADDAM!!!"

But sorry...it just aint true...

[Jocko]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike B.


Iraq seemed to be on the edge of sustained economic development in 1979. It was a nation of 12.8 million people with a per capita income well in excess of $10,000 in constant $US 1994. However, its economy was dependent on oil wealth and construction and infrastructure oriented with massive distortions in the state and agricultural sector.
By 1986, the worst year of the Iran-Iraq War in economic terms, Iraq’s per capita income was down to $2,174, and its population was up to 16.2 million.
By 1991, the last year for which we have hard data on the Iraqi economy in market terms, Iraq’s per capita income was down to $705, and its population was up to 17.9 million. Iraq’s GNP in constant $1994 had dropped from $48.3 billion in 1984 to $16.3 billion.
Iraq’s current per capita income is probably under $1,000. The World Bank estimates that its population will climb from 21.0 million in 1995 to 24.5 million in 2000, 28.4 million in 2005, and 32.5 million in 2010.

Wait, you mean Saddam actually impoverished Iraqis?

Obviously he used the .51% of his arsenal to accomplish that. Otherwise, how could it be America's fault?

Manifesto, please write Mike's post down. You've been called and corrected on your blithe "the US created/armed Saddam!" propaganda so many times it deserves a place in your sig line. Just so you don't forget again.

[epepke]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mr Manifesto
Evidence?

http://www.infoplease.com/ce6/history/A0825449.html Iraqi occupation of portions of Iran done by 1982, Iran starts offensive.

http://www.borderlandnews.com/war/st...9timeline.html 1984, US resumes formal relations with Iraq and begins supplying intelligence.

http://www.mideastweb.org/iraqtimeline.htm 1985, Iran still recieving significant US military support.

http://www.zmag.org/zmag/articles/ShalomIranIraq.html 1986, US establishes satellite link to give Iraq intelligence.

[Skeptic]

Quote:

Originally posted by Jocko
It bears mentioning that I've never seen an Italian pull out.

Of Iraq, that is.

Didn't they promptly surrender and swtch sides in BOTH world wars?

[Skeptic]

Romania 524 1.19
Denmark 226 0.51
Libya 200 0.46
USA 200 0.46

Ah, yes. But it was THAT 0.46 that KEPT SADDAM IN POWER. It's all the USA's fault after all.

P.S.

Both Romania and Libya were/are led by loony dictators who would sell an H-bomb to Charley Mason in a second for the right price... but Denmark??? What the...???

[epepke]

Quote:

Originally posted by Mike B.
Given the US's position as largest arms merchant in the world the fact that it ties Libya for 9th place with only 0.51% of Iraq's total arms imports makes it obvious that the United States was not an important source of arms for Saddam's regime, that the US didn't even seriously try to be, and that US arms sales gave the US little or no leverage over Saddam.

Thanks. My numbers were a little earlier, and the US was around #20 then.